LordHavelock's page

Crowley the Demon from Terry Pratchett/Neil Gaiman's [u]Good Omens[/u]

Finding some villager whose willing to give you a kitten should be no problem, you just need to have handle animal to train it and make it your friend. On the other hand, not really all that evil to adopt someone's kitten so maybe another direction can be made.

If we're requesting certain magic items . . . Adamantine is my favorite thing in the game. Any weapon or armor made out of I would kill for, and not just in the general sense that we're PCs and even good PCs kill things and take their stuff.

Whew, lots going on in this thread since I last checked, but I think I'm up to keeping up with both threads here and on GITP. I'll be editing my sheet to include the extra skill points and a 25pt buy, then I will begin work on a nemesis: I'm thinking a Neutral Evil Ranger or Cavalier who is sort of a complacent bandit leader and outlaw, content to pillage and rob without attracting too much attention and bringing down the full wrath of the law.

Alternatively, a scholarly sort of good cleric or an inquisitor might be a good fit.

Oh, question as to the pantheon, as IRollTwenties originally had this set in Faerun. Will we continue using that as a base setting or switch to Golarion (given our new venue it only seems appropriate haha).

Also, is there a way I can subscribe to this thread?

Lord Havelock here! Reporting in! I'll have to change up my point buy a little, and I've never participated in a game on the Paizo Official forums but this seems like the best of times to start!

I suppose this is really more of an aesthetics question them. I like your point that the initiative is an abstraction of real time, and considering that everything takes place inside of 6 seconds, it seems to me that there's little time to consider whether or not one is going to charge an opponent or not.

What about the action of readying a spear against the charge though? That's something obvious isn't it? Since it requires bracing the spear against oneself or the ground in order to deal the extra damage. An opponent can still drop their spear and avoid the charge of course, but it seems to me that it should be apparent if an opponent is set for a charge, whatever other actions they take.

I'm not posting to answer your question. I have absolutely no idea.

I'm posting to say, "great question." This same question is something I've been wondering about in the back of my head for a long time. Heck, why would someone charge a guy they just say brace against them? Then again, why would they not be able to see the guy bracing.

Overall, bracing seems like a pretty useless tactic to me. Assuming, of course, that your enemy can see you brace -- and I have no idea why they wouldn't be able to see you do that.

Well the obvious answer is that if all the enemies a bracing for a charge, and have shields, suddenly, my character becomes a whole lot less useful in combat haha. Generally, you charge your opponent who's bracing for he charge either because you don't have a better option, or you're not the only one charging.

Take my character for example; even if I'm charging a character bracing for a charge, it might still be in my best interest to charge if he's got a low chance to hit me, or I really need to kill him, say in order to break the enemies formation so the other damage dealers can get at their rear line.

That kind of ties into the second example, which is if you've got multiple chargers, your opponent only gets to deal braced charge damage to one of them. Even if they have multiple attacks, they only deal the double damage against one with that readied attack.

That's why a braced shield wall isn't a guarantee against a charging force even in the real world. Whether mounted or on horseback, that brace against the charge only real makes a difference for the first line of troops on either side, and if the weight of number is with the attackers, then there's still a good chance they'll be able to make a fight of it.

Still, what I'm asking is whether there's any way for an opponent to set against a charge subtly. Usually, it's not obvious when any creature is reading an action, but in this case, the setting of the weapon for the charge is a physical action that must be taken in order to receive the bonus on the readied action. Is there any way an opponent can set the spear without it being apparent to me that they are doing so?

The GM responded welcome to "Lawful Stupid" Paladins uphold the law to the point of stupidity, and often get killed in the process. Upon doing some research I figured out that generally Palys seem to be abused by pcs who wish to annoy and get away with it, or break the game, and that lawful stupid is a trope that was originally falsely attached.

Lawful Good is hardly, necessarily Lawful Stupid. Now, the Paladins described in Pathfinder are generally considered to be a cut above the usual historical examples (or at least, the very best they could hope to be), if only because the presence of the Gods and the Divine is more apparent in the usual Pathfinder Worlds. That said, there's no rules saying your Pathfinder can't make glib comments, or even swear, if he doesn't feel like it.

In fact, the rules only specifically state the Paladin:

1) never commit an "evil act"- let's restrict this to sadistic acts like murder, or premeditated murder

2)"respect legitimate authority"- that's authority figures recognized by the Paladin's particular order, obey their own laws and have a legitimate claim to whatever position they hold

3)"Act with honor"-this one's a little more vague, but it does specifically prohibit 'lying', 'cheating', 'using poison', so we can logically extend that to not using deceitful means or tactics to achieve ends.

4)"Help those in need"- this one has an interesting little caveat, "provided they do not use that help for chaotic or evil needs", which might specifically apply to your situation. Afterall, your 'hostile' npcs were hardly acting lawfully, or goodly themselves.

5)"Punish those who harm or threaten innocents"- This is the big one. It's basically the elastic clause for the Paladin's Code, and allows him or her a great deal of flexibility. So long as the Paladin doesn't violate any of the other laws of the code, he or she has free reign to take whatever steps are necessary to "punish" anyone they see, or hear, or even hear tell of "threaten innocents". I had a player once who played a Paladin, and he was a righteous, holy terror; a scourge against not just evil doers, but anyone vaguely associated with evil doers. Straight up, hard core, utilitarian values, he could justify just about anything short of burning down an orphanage or kicking puppies for "the greater good" and "the will of the light".

Wait. Wasn't there a serial killer halfling in Baldur's Gate 1 and 2?

I do seem to recall yes . . .

I believe the rule is that any weapon which can be used one handed can also be used two handed, regardless of proficiency (The only distinction is that light weapons don't receive the same strength bonus). Once you are proficient with a weapon, you're free to use as many hands as you have free to wield it, depending on you're preferences.

So, I'm playing a Cavalier/Dragoon character, with the obvious focus on charging into combat astride my noble steed and all that. The obvious weaknesses being where I can take my horse (probably not into the inner court of the king's palace) and any enemies canny enough to set their weapons against my charge will do double damage against me.

My question is this: Is setting a weapon against a charge an obvious action? Obvious enough not require a perception check or combat knowledge of any kind?

My inclination is that it's only too obvious that an enemy is bracing himself for the charge holding his weapon at the ready (given that he's required to act first and ready an action), but I had a stickler GM in the past who wouldn't warn me when enemies had readied their weapons against the charge.

Just looking for a little consensus from the forums in case the issue comes up again. Thanks in advance.