KurenaiYami's page

I approve of this endeavor.

1. I do point buy, because I don't like a few bad rolls turning a hero of the campaign into a weakling. I don't even have them roll for hit points, letting them take the average.

2. I have played with the 3d6 many, many times. I do not care for it as I have terrible luck (or lopsided dice), and being a Fighter with fewer hit points and less skill with a sword than the party's Wizard gets tiresome.

I'm all for letting people play their own way, but it's not my style for character generation.

Arma virumque wrote:

The killer feature for me -- as somebody who hasn't GM'ed a game since AD&D, playing with players who are new to RPGs completely -- would be if the product could print character sheets that contain brief rule summaries of each spell or feat possessed by the character. I couldn't find anything like that in the Herolab demo, and haven't tried PCGen.

Herolab can do this. It's an option 'Show Feat / Ability Descriptions', off by default, at the bottom of the tree of tick boxes that you see when you create a new character 'Configure your hero'. At least, it is in the full version.

Thanks for mentioning this! I had no idea my HeroLab did this, and it'll help so much with my players who love to get feats and then forget what they do!

Nope. With just that, you'd have one shot only. Rapid Shot will make it two. At level 6, you'll get another attack as well, from your BAB (as I mentioned before).

Just because you can reload fast enough doesn't mean you can fire that fast.

But how do i know how many attacks i have in in a round?

If you don't have any feats that let you get more (like Two Weapon Fighting), then you get them according to your Base Attack Bonus. When you get a Base Attack Bonus of 6, you'll have two attacks. 3 attacks for BAB of 11, and 4 for a BAB of 16.

Do you guys actually know what I am, or at least an idea? Please help.

Doesn't seem like there's really a way to know what your DM is turning you into. I'm pretty confident you're undead. Maybe he even turned you into an Anti-paladin. You'll likely remain corporeal, as the Nazghul were, so that probably rules out ghost. You may or may not remain intelligent, as I'm not sure how much free will the Nazghul had.

Outside of that, your GM seems to be taking some liberties and making some rules up, as I don't think anything else can actually corrupt a Holy Avenger.

You are going to have to find a robotic exoskeleton and charge it with the power of GreySkull. This will allow you to get 1.21 jiggawatts which will allow you to find the wardrobe that is a passage to Narnia. In Narnia you will find the Matrix of Leadership which will allow you to become a Prime/Cyborg/Vampire/Werewolf/Druid.

Once you've done this you need to find the Master Sword in Bowzer's Temple of Doom (Watch out for the traps!) With the Master Sword you can pretty much go full Voltron and cut everything in half in one swing. But wait at least 25 minutes to decide to use that move.

I love you.

RAW is kind of irrelevant, as it doesn't fully exist.

Interesting. I agree it feels like something's missing, but that's flowing into RAI territory, as it's based off of intuition instead of what's actually down on paper. It feels like this argument is trying to use RAI to invalidate RAW, which makes it a bit messy if you're trying to come to a consensus.

Whether there were words that should have been put in that weren't is definitely an issue, but RAW is interpreting the rules using only the rules we have. After we settle on the RAW at my table, then we get down to what actually makes sense and pull out Rule 0 if need we it.

But for the record, I believe I agree with you in that I would appreciate a line from the developers modifying it.

I have a follow up question for you, though: If you believe the RAW is "irrelevant," and thus could not use that section of the rulebook at all, how do you come to a conclusion as to how it will be played at your table (if it comes up)?

ShadowcatX wrote:

MyTThor wrote:

I'm not even going to say what I think. I will just point out that reading through the posts above, most of which claim some form of "It's obviously RAW," or "it's obviously NOT RAW," that the only thing obvious is that's it's not obvious. In fact, I think it takes a somewhat impressive amount of presumptuousness to say your opinion is the clearly correct one when half the people disagree with you.

Bottom line, show your DM both sides of the argument and see which one he/she subscribes to.

Its not opinion, nor is it arrogance, when it is RAW. RAW, archetypes replace any ability they list. Sohei lists proficiencies. And proficiencies is the only place where it is stated that a monk may not flurry while wearing armor. It may not be clear, but that's the rules.

However, as has been pointed out by myself, the designer has said that this is not RAI. It should be errata'd or faq'd at some point.

Yes, it is arrogance, because everyone else is speaking from their interpretation of RAW, not what they consider to be opinion. "Your opinion is your opinion, but mine is the right one." I didn't say it's wrong, in fact I agree with your reading. All I said was presumptuous was the state that it's "clear" when an approximately equal amount of people feel one way vs. the other. That's sort of the definition of "unclear."

I don't think that it's arrogant to assume that the most reasoned explanation (that takes into account all of the official text) is the correct one, but maybe that's just me.

If the only place that mentioned that monks can't flurry in armor is in the armor proficiency section, and that section is replaced by text that *lacks* that stipulation, it seems pretty cut and dry. The only text that mentions not being able to flurry in armor is no longer part of the class.

That's why the terms RAW and RAI were coined, after all. If one is going to make an argument that ignores some of the text, it can't rightfully be called RAW, as it's ignoring what that W stands for.

If the line under the rules for archetypes was less explicit in what it said it replaced, I could see it being less clear.

Or if people are actually making up the lines from the text they are quoting, as I haven't fact-checked any of it, but I'd assume somebody else would have called them on it by now.

Wait, let me get this straight.

Your DM says that if you cast a spell you cannot perform an attack of opportunity, under the reasoning that you have already used your standard action?

An attack of opportunity is not a standard action. It's a "free" attack you get when your opponents leave themselves open.

Essentially, it's best to think of it as not taking an action at all.

The bestiary packages work just as if you had the books. You pick a troll or your dragon and import them there an everything from the books are good to go, all attacks feats special abilities, everything.

Thanks for the answer!

Since your reply I've bought the Bestiary Bundle, and it looks like it will be an invaluable GMing tool!

I have a question about the Bestiary packages if anybody will humor me.

I've used Hero Lab for Mutants & Masterminds for a while and just started playing Pathfinder. I have about all the content I want for the players to use (Ultimate Combat, Ultimate Magic, Advanced Player's Guide, Core) but how do the Bestiary entries work?

By buying this package, will I be able to simply import a Black Dragon Wyrmling and have it list all of its attacks, bonuses and special abilities? Or is it just a huge addition of templates to slap on PC races?