Monkhound's page

Hi all,
I'm a bit confused about some of the Lore skill checks that have been requested in scenarios recently, specifically with regards to geographical indications. Player Core defines allows these lore skills as follows: "Lore about a specific settlement (Absalom Lore, Magnimar Lore)". Alternatively it allows Lore skills related to a specific Plane.

Yet I've seen various scenarios asking for country wide, or even continent wide lore skills, which players would not be allowed to have as they are not specific enough.

Is there a point to adding these disallowed lore skills in scenarios? For starters nobody would be allowed to roll these, and secondly it gives the impression these lore skills are allowed. And maybe only relevant to writers, it's kind of a waste of word count space.

Hi all,
I would like to request a clarification from the Paizo team about the General Feat Untrained Improvisation. I've seen a few threads about it, but no answer from Paizo.

In general it's a decent feat allowing you to attempt Untrained skills with a better modifier due to the character being a jack-of-all-trades. Where the clarification request comes in, is how this interacts with Lore skills. In general, compared to the broad knowledge skills (Arcana, Religion, etc.) Lore DCs are usually against a -2 DC for an unspecific lore (such as Fiend Lore) and -5 against a specific lore (such as Demon Lore). As written, there seems to be nothing preventing a high Intelligence character with Untrained Improvisation from attempting all the Recall Knowledge skills against the DC of specific lores.

Is this intentional? How should we handle this?

Hi all,

It looks like a fun scenario, but what's the idea of the final encounter in the high tier?

Tactics: Use the same as subtier 5-6.

You get a lot of fun 5th and 6th level spells that are not supposed to be used, and the wall of 3 skeletons with 42 HP each is not going to stop anyone with a +5 to hit. Both the attack and the defense of the enemies (both the seriously weakened gnome and the skeletons) is way below what should be expected at knoll 8-9.

Am I missing something, or is this a case of editing gone wrong, in which case, how to proceed?

Hi everyone,

I just read through the scenario and it looks intriguing, with a nice martial arts feel. I had a few questions though.

1- Trials 1 through 5:
The idea is nice, love it. A problem I see is that the skill checks may be somewhat on the easy side, resulting too easily in half the party succeeding at it.
Other remark: Would taking 10 be allowed on the trial checks? Personally I wouldn't allow it in these cases, but this could be argued about by others.

2- Trial 6:
Awesome combat design. I love the idea of an NPC using Combat Patrol this way :D
The question I have is whether it's legal to push opponents over the edge with Pushing Assault, since technically one could argue about the "safety" of falling off the spire.

3- BBEG
A qlippoth :D

Hello everyone,

I have a question concerning my character build.

Class: Savage Technologist (built as PFS Legal)
Relevant feat: Quickdraw
Relevant weapons: Double-barreled Pistol, Gladius, Earthbreaker

Currently (level 5), while raging the character fights with a double-barreled pistol and a gladius during the first two rounds of combat, before switching to the earthbreaker because ammunition in the gun runs out.
Upon reaching level 6, the character receives an iterative attack.

The question is whether, while performing a Full Attack, the final action in the sequence below is legal, and if it is, if there are additional penalties apart from the -5 from it being an iterative attack.
1- Deliver the main hand attack with the gun
2- Deliver the off hand attack with the gladius
3- Drop both items as free actions
4- Draw the earthbreaker as a free action (Quickdraw)
5- Deliver the iterative attack with the earthbreaker