Mromson's page

Mromson wrote:

I don't think that a company shouldn't be fairly compensated for providing already purchased content in a different format. I merely think that they shouldn't be compensated twice for the same content by holding it hostage against other formats. When I feel that a company doesn't treat me fairly, then I simply don't do business with them, regardless of how much I might love their content, and encourage friends to do the same.

I find this an interesting comment. To me, you're essentially doing what you'd like them not to do: hold something hostage. Your statement seems to be "if you don't do it this way, then not only will I not buy it I'll actively try to get others not to as well."

In any case, from what I recall of these conversations from the past part of the costs for PDFs involve the wonders of the Internet and piracy, of having someone take the version used to print the book and turn it into a full and useful document with bookmarks, with art set and so on. This isn't a five minute deal -- someone has to get paid to do this. Someone gets paid to install the watermarks and other security and I assume someone(s) are paid to monitor the dark places on the Internet where these documents turn up.

Again, this is about wants. You'd like to catch up which is great. RPGs are an expensive hobby, even on the secondary market. When you add in PDFs you run into more money, because those aren't "used" and don't usually turn up on Ebay/Amazon/etc. You just have to decide if you need all/some/none of the books in PDF and how much you want to spend.

I'm not sure if I understand what that comment would hold any particular interest, I mean; if you find a company you dislike, then you're not exactly gonna go recommend said company to your friends - you'll tell them why you dislike them. Pretty sure that goes for everyone everywhere.

And I'm not concerned with the actions of pirates; they're not the customers - but I am. Plenty of companies end up on my s+&~ list for not understanding that.

But yes; RPGs are expensive - though that's mostly due to the relatively small customer base, especially compared to other things. But that also means that my threshold for what is acceptable is much lower, even with products I like - I don't have to catch up, I would like to, but at present that isn't possible out of sheer principle. I can live with that. ;)

Mromson, you may feel that you should get to set the price for the work of Mr. Awesome for the price you listed. But you don't get to price the work of Mr. Awesome. Mr. Awesome (if he self published in all the formats) or his publishing hose gets to set the price. If they want to offer a bundle, great, that's a bonus for you, but you are not entitled to anything other than the specific item you purchased.

You can always scan the copy you purchased to make a digital backup. It won't have the additional features of a .pdf (being able to search the text, bookmarks, hyperlinks, etc.), but then, you didn't pay for that now did you?

In the previous post, where he was listing what he felt he should pay for a publication in multiple formats (which is him setting a price that he feels he should pay), he placed the value for the digital version at $1 ( an underestimate to it's value IMO).

By pointing out that, with a scanner, he could make his own PDF, but lacking in the functionality of a professionally produced version, I was emphasizing the actual value to something he feels he should receive free of charge, or at a MUCH reduced rate, all due to a sense of entitlement.

Such a sense of entitlement is misplaced, however, as by purchasing one format of a product does not entitle you to anything else, unless the seller grants it (such as with Paizo giving a free PDF with subscription purchases).

Additionally, companies that sell items for development...

My apologies, I think I might have poorly phrased at least parts of my examples. Lemme try to rephrase them better (English is my third language :S); I didn't intend to set a price on any given product, I was merely attempting to explain how I view the value of any given product. So for simplicity's sake in the example, I set the price of a given hardcover book to $10 USD (lets set Z equal to "the price set for a hardcopy", which in this case would be Z = 10); This is the price that the creator/publisher/owner decided to set on the given product. Now if I were to purchase this product, the value of the included content that I set in my mind is "$Z USD minus $X USD", where X is the price is the printing cost - the X can be an unknown factor for me, for all I know, the printing cost is $9 USD of that price, or even ~$10 (if I'm buying a blank book or something). Now the price for the .pdf (or .epub, or any other format) should be (in my mind) $10 USD minus X plus Y, where Y is the price of [format] conversion. I obviously assume that the cost of both X and Y includes profit for the company - I'm not asking for freebies, I'm just asking for reasonable prices. The price for the [format] conversion shouldn't be much higher than $Y USD if I already own the hardcopy. I blatantly refuse to pay for the same content twice out of principle (unless I feel that I've improperly compensated the creator/author/company for their product - however, even then, I can often find better ways to support them, than simply "buying something twice" (though that does happen)).

Now if you want a proper example of where my stance begins to get muddy, lets look at what happens if I decide to purchase a CAR. A car involves first and foremost a massive investment in Research & Development, then there are obviously huge manufacturing/logistic costs, which are all included in the company's calculation for what the final price would end up at. So lets say I buy a car. Then later I decide, "hey, this is a great car, I should buy a second one" - I've already paid for the R&D and Manufacturing of my car, so how much do I think I should pay to purchase a second model of the exact same car I already own? Ideally, I would expect to pay "manufacturing costs + profit" for the second car - but in practice, that's a lot harder to do. I could for example (in theory) keep buying the same car for cheaper and sell it on to my friends - but I wouldn't exactly be purchasing the product "in different formats".

I don't think that a company shouldn't be fairly compensated for providing already purchased content in a different format. I merely think that they shouldn't be compensated twice for the same content by holding it hostage against other formats. When I feel that a company doesn't treat me fairly, then I simply don't do business with them, regardless of how much I might love their content, and encourage friends to do the same.

You're thinking about this wrong. You're not buying only the "content," you're buying the content in that format. If you want a different format, you need to purchase the content in that format. That's the current reality regardless to what logic you may use to justify your entitlement.

I realize that as a copyright holder, you have the power over distribution. You can dictate explicitly where and how your content is distributed - whether it be via book, or engraved on the backside of a duck. All I can do is voice my opinions and hope for a change, if that doesn't help, then the only alternative is to cease being a customer (or in some cases never become a customer in the first place). I understand the reality of the premise, but I fervently disagree with its result.

That said, my contention here isn't that every hardcopy should come with an accordingly priced .pdf (though I obviously think that this is how it should be) - my contention is that due to the fact that I was essentially late to the Pathfinder party, and I have no reasonable (to me) way of catching up. Take for example The Inner Sea Gods Campaign Setting, one of many products I would more than happily have purchased, however; if I were to add the hardcopy+pdf to my cart, even with the Adventure Path discount that would still cost me ~$58 USD+shipping. That's an absolutely absurd price, especially to a student such as myself - and that's just one (albeit nice) book. Not a deal I'd jump on, if only out of sheer principle. I want to support things I like, but there are limits.

This is like saying "I paid for the movie ticket, so I shouldn't have to buy the DVD, but I still want the convenience of watching it on my tv at home."

That attitude is narrow-minded, uncompromising, selfish, self-entitled b*@%+*#~, plain and simple. Delete this post if you need to mods, but I'm tired of dancing around the point.

Buying a movie ticket involves essentially renting a product - and I sincerely hope that's not what I'm doing when choosing to support a company.

And I sincerely apologize if I upset you (or anyone else) with my posts, that was certainly not my intention. :/

You can read the line from Following Step in 2 ways. I want that to be perfectly clear.

Within the English language, it can be read in 2 very different ways.

If you read it, and only see 1 possible meaning, try again until you see both.

1. The only way you can ever follow an enemy is if you have the Step Up feat.
-or-
2. Step Up only lets you go a total of 5 ft.

#1 is the wrong reading.

That has, and continues to be my point. Both are theoretically RAW. Because the line "You can only take a 5-foot step to follow an opponent using Step Up." does in fact mean both things...

But one of those meanings is clearly false. And the other makes a TON more sense, since you know, it is actually relevant to the Following Step feat in which it is found...

I think I get what you're saying, and I can concede that the wording in the Following Step (combat) feat is meant towards the Step up (combat) feat. However, that doesn't change the conclusion that I've drawn already - unless you're contesting that? Because in either case of the wording, the result still speaks to the explicit concession that "you cannot respond to a 5-foot step without an external component" (such as an explicit readied action - though I dunno if I agree that you can even ready up an action against a 5-foot step).

If you buy a CD, are you entitled to buy the LP and cassette version (let's pretend those are still current formats) for just a few dollars more because you already paid the artist, record company, producer and engineer once?

If you buy a hard back novel, are you entitled to the audiobook for only an extra couple bucks because you already paid the author, publisher, distributor etc once?

For that matter, if you get into an author or a band later in their career, are you entitled to all their earlier works at a discount?

Heck, I once joined a coffee of the month club but I didn't feel entitled to get all the previous month's coffees (before I decided to join) at some sort of discount!

It just is not a reasonable thing to expect and neither is what you want from Paizo.

If you buy a CD, are you entitled to buy the LP and cassette version (let's pretend those are still current formats) for just a few dollars more because you already paid the artist, record company, producer and engineer once?

If I paid for the original content; then yes, I do feel that I am entitled to own the product on different formats for no additional cost beyond the conversion process itself. Because I already paid for the content itself.

If you buy a hard back novel, are you entitled to the audiobook for only an extra couple bucks because you already paid the author, publisher, distributor etc once?

No, I'm not. If I purchased a hardcopy of a novel then I'm not automatically entitled to the audiobook of said product, because creating the audiobook is an additional resource that I didn't pay for. I merely paid for the creation of the original content (writing, editing, etc. etc.) - But to answer what I think you meant by that question; "If I purchased a hardcopy of a novel, do I feel entitled to be able to purchase the audiobook for the additional cost of producing the audiobook?" then Yes, I do. I shouldn't have to pay for the same content twice - ie. the price of the audio book should be "Audiobook Price minus the price of the content"

Let me illustrate this. Assume that James Awesome wrote a book The Certificate for Awesome, by James Awesome, and that he's selling a hardcopy of this book for $10 USD, where $2 USD of that price comes from printing expenses (and yes, I know the price number changes based on volume, but this is just an example). James Awesome is also offering an .epub version of his book for $9 USD, where $1 USD of that price comes from conversion expenses. Additionally, there's also an audiobook version available for $18 USD (digital) and $20 USD (hardcopy CD), where $10 USD of that price comes from the involved cost of producing the audio content (and $2 USD comes from "hardcopy CD" costs). Now from this you see that I assume the "value" of producing the content itself (ie. James writing his book) would be about $8 USD. So how much do I feel that I should have to pay in order to get the Hardcopy of James' Book, an .epub file, audiobook, as well as the audiobook CD? My answer is $23 USD; $8 (content) + $2 (hardcopy book) + $1 (epub file) + $10 (audio) + $2 (hardcopy CD). (edit: plus shipping, of course)

Now, note that the author doesn't have to offer any of those extra things, he could just say "here's the hardcopy of the book, take it or leave it" - and that's fine. I'd simply have to convert the content into other formats myself.

Heck, I once joined a coffee of the month club but I didn't feel entitled to get all the previous month's coffees (before I decided to join) at some sort of discount!

It just is not a reasonable thing to expect and neither is what you want from Paizo.

If I joined some coffee of the month club, then I wouldn't feel entitled to the previous month's coffee at any discount, because my position isn't applicable to physical content.

Vic has responded to this exact option in the past. This is from memory with a few of my own thoughts added in. The issue is that making a code in a book causes additional issues:

1) You can't have it as a separate page, because then customers at the brick and mortar stores will take the insert, the response to this is to make it a scratch-code somewhere in the book (issue 2) or to shrink wrap the books (issue 3)

2) Scratch off codes: They can't make the same code for each copy, because then if the code gets out to the internet, then people who have not purchased the book would be getting a super cheap PDF. Having each different, using an algorithm that is tough to decipher, but can connect to the checkout system would be really tough. It would also increase the price to print the hard copies, which means a bigger price to consumers. Considering the biggest percentage is subscribers, so they would never need said code, it makes it hard to appreciate the price increase.

3)Shrink wrap would prevent more sales than it would gain. A big thing in Paizo's products are the interior art, layout, and cartography that are second to none. By shrink-wrapping products, you loose those big selling points to anyone looking to buy something off the shelf at a FLGS.

I know in the past they have said they are open to discussing ideas, but in all of their research, they were unable to find a cost effective way to provide these options. (I think the post I'm paraphrasing was from 2010 or 2011, but based on the amount of market research they have been doing in other areas, if the option was out there, I think they'd have taken it)

Point 1 and 3 are both eliminated by having the store keep the cards behind the counter - no need to shrink wrap the books, and point 2 is a literal non-existant issue (making unique codes is painfully easy).

Marc Radle wrote:

Mromson wrote:

Wouldn't Paizo be using those very .pdf's for printing purposes? That shouldn't cost extra, given that you'd need them for printing purposes. Then again I have no idea how said process goes, so I could be absurdly wrong.

I certainly think that the watermarking policy is absurdly ridiculous, especially after the product has been out for a while. Look at every video game in existence - they're all readily available despite the fact that some companies have gone to absurd lengths in their desire to control published content. What's a simple .pdf going to do against that? I don't really see it as anything but a punishment towards the consumer - "do I really want to see my damn name and email on every freakin' page in every pdf?" Things get out. Period.

From my perspective, if I own the hardcover of a book, then I immediately feel entitled to the digital version of the product as well. I generally don't mind if I'm charged a little premium for either hardcover or .pdf when I already own one version ("for convenience", as they say) - it's when I'm essentially told that I own one or the other, without paying (essentially) double when I get annoyed.

Nope, a pdf created for professional offset printing is VERY different than an optimized, bookmarked pdf created for digital customers. You create each separately and each requires its own amount of time, expertise etc. In my opinion, charging a fair price for the PDF in addition to the physical copy (or offering it as a special subscription premium) is more than reasonable.

Creating all those bookmarked, optimized absolutely is a significant additional step and certainly is worth charging for

Just because something is digital doesn't mean it should suddenly be free. And I strongly disagree with your notion that if you buy the physical book you are entitled to the pdf for free. If you buy a CD should you be entitled to then download all the mp3s from that CD as well for free?

Thanks, Marc, you...

I have to rephrease my original statement. What I meant when I said that I feel entitled to the pdf version when I already own the hardcover is; when I purchase the hardcover edition of any given product, I feel like I've already paid for the content inside said book - I've paid all the writers, artists and everyone else involved with creating the content that said book contains, then I've also paid to have said content printed professionally. Now, by my logic, if I've already paid for the creation of said content, I should be entitled to the .pdf version of said content, and only pay the premium for the pdf conversion process, and not for the content itself; because I've already paid for it. As I've stated earlier; I don't mind paying a little extra for the various versions (even though I do feel entitled to some of them), what I mind is paying twice for the same content.

Mromson wrote:

My gripe is that I was late to the party, I didn't discover Pathfinder until recently, and now I have no way of catching up - beyond essentially paying double for every product that came before my discovery. And I'm being offered no way to catch up at a reasonable price. I don't think that's fair, and I also don't think good business model where you try to cling to the older consumer base, instead of trying to expand.

Well, consider the reverse position. Long time subscribers arguably have a right to feel "Hey, I've put up my cash month after month for years to support this game, and some guy who shows up last week gets the same benefits? How is that fair?"

I think Paizo's efforts to expand their customer base include not alienating the brick and mortar retailers, and broadening their original product lines to include regular card sets, flip maps, card games, audio, pre-painted figures, pawns, etc. (Incidentally, that's something I've complained about more than once, as I feel the ever growing number of different product lines takes time away from QA in editing products or maintaining FAQs/updates after release.)

Yes, and I think it's extremely unfortunate that they've created a subscriber-only entitlement to pdfs. Ideally, each book would come with a coupon code that would heavily discount the pdf version of the given book (that would certainly also keep the retailers in the fold). However, I'm not sure how I feel about the long time consumer base in this instance - I mean, surely they subscribed to both support the company, as well as to recieve the product (at a discounted price). What would it matter to them if others were offered a similar (perhaps slightly worse) deal? It was either originally worth it to them, or it wasn't.

Given the reality, though - I get that Paizo feel that they need to "sweeten the pot" beyond mere discounts to entice people into a subscription model. I just wish that they found a reasonable way for newcommers to catch up without paying double for the same content.

blahpers wrote:

Not getting the PDF version of a book purchased in hardcover form is probably my only nitpick with Paizo. I'm sure there are business reasons why simply providing the PDF for free would be infeasible (though the Vic Wertz post linked above was entirely unconvincing), but every time I have to lug a library through a convention center to a PFS event, I'm going to get a little grumpy.

And, no, I'm not buying the same book twice.

It is not free for Paizo to make the .pdf, so I don't see why they should offer it for free (save out of incentive packages like the subscription bundles, where the value of the subscription itself makes up for the cost of digital production). .pdfs do not just appear magically when the book is published, fully formed and functional. You have to convert all of the layout/text files into the .pdf; you have to make sure it does it correctly, which is harder than you think when you've got a lot of graphics, layout extras, text, fancy fonts, etc.(anybody remember the "buttery knives" in the first Adventurer's Armory .pdf?), you have to add in the hyperlinking (like all that beautiful, beautiful tab navigation in Ultimate Equipment); you've got to make a "lite" version that is still properly functional; and you have to add in the watermarking encryption, because pirates are a#~!&*~s. There's probably other stuff they do as well that I am not thinking of because my abilities with Acrobat Professional are only so good (though I'll be taking a class soon). This requires at least one person who is good at digital production to oversee this process and add in the extra coding/technical stuff, and Paizo has to pay that person a living wage for the time and expertise spent on this process. Not to mention for the licenses for the necessary software. So again: not free for them, no reason for it to be free for us.

As it is, Paizo's .pdfs are extremely reasonably priced for the content, layout, and quality they deliver, especially the $10 rulebooks (which...

Wouldn't Paizo be using those very .pdf's for printing purposes? That shouldn't cost extra, given that you'd need them for printing purposes. Then again I have no idea how said process goes, so I could be absurdly wrong.

I certainly think that the watermarking policy is absurdly ridiculous, especially after the product has been out for a while. Look at every video game in existence - they're all readily available despite the fact that some companies have gone to absurd lengths in their desire to control published content. What's a simple .pdf going to do against that? I don't really see it as anything but a punishment towards the consumer - "do I really want to see my damn name and email on every freakin' page in every pdf?" Things get out. Period.

From my perspective, if I own the hardcover of a book, then I immediately feel entitled to the digital version of the product as well. I generally don't mind if I'm charged a little premium for either hardcover or .pdf when I already own one version ("for convenience", as they say) - it's when I'm essentially told that I own one or the other, without paying (essentially) double when I get annoyed.

That said, this isn't my prime gripe. I'm fine with subscribing if that means I'll get both hardcover and pdf (to me, I'm basically paying for the base .pdf, then paying extra to have it printed professionally, and finally paying for shipping). My gripe is that I was late to the party, I didn't discover Pathfinder until recently, and now I have no way of catching up - beyond essentially paying double for every product that came before my discovery. And I'm being offered no way to catch up at a reasonable price. I don't think that's fair, and I also don't think good business model where you try to cling to the older consumer base, instead of trying to expand. Some might consider this an unreasonable position, however it is how I feel about the situation - ownership of the hardcover edition should automatically grant you access to the .pdf, instead of being part of some either/or exclusive club.

Mromson wrote:

BigNorseWolf wrote:

Mromson wrote:

TL;DR:

1. Taking a readied action doesn't count as "your turn",
2. You cannot directly follow up an opponent who preformed a 5-foot step without the Step Up feat

No. Just no.

This is why you can't explain the rules without the dm wanting to beat you over the head with the core rule book. They're worried someone is going to try an argument like this.

Huh? Did I get something wrong?

I've always held the philosophy to "always know the rules you're breaking."

You cannot directly follow up an opponent who preformed a 5-foot step without the Step Up feat

By that same logic, you can't 5 foot step after an opponent when it is your turn.

Init count 18: wizard 5 foot steps and casts

Init count 12: fighter 5 foots up...

Nope! doesn't have the following step feet. He can 5 foot step in any direction BUT towards the wizard....

You're also preventing the 5 foot step, which is specifically allowed.

You can take a 5-foot step as part of your readied action, but only if you don't otherwise move any distance during the round.

So yes, it is your turn when you ready an action.

Sorry, but I think you must have misunderstood my post - I was replying directly to the discussion that erupted following my earlier post where I answered the question I initially posed with this thread.

If a player performs a 5-foot step during his turn, then you cannot immediately respond to it with a 5-foot step of your own, unless you have the Step Up (combat) feat. You can respond if you had a readied action prepared against such a scenario, however you wouldn't be responding to it with a 5-foot step (you cannot ready up a 5-foot step, as it isn't an action) - you'd be responding to it with the readied action, which comes with the possibility for a 5-foot step.

As per a direct reading of the rules, the triggered readied action would be performed outside of your own turn (it's interrupting another character's turn - akin to an AoO). But the fact that it isn't your turn in this scenario doesn't change anything.

It's your turn when you ready up an action, obviously - but it isn't your turn when you choose to act on its trigger, just as it isn't your turn when you choose to act on an AoO. The technical difference here would be that an AoO isn't an "action" (per rules), which means you cannot take a 5-foot step during an AoO - however, taking a triggered readied action is an action, which permits you to take 5-foot steps.

I apologize that I didn't make myself clear the first time around. :S And by all means point out any mistakes I might have made - I like being wrong, it means I'll likely be less wrong next time.

Mromson wrote:

TL;DR:

1. Taking a readied action doesn't count as "your turn",
2. You cannot directly follow up an opponent who preformed a 5-foot step without the Step Up feat

No. Just no.

This is why you can't explain the rules without the dm wanting to beat you over the head with the core rule book. They're worried someone is going to try an argument like this.

Huh? Did I get something wrong?

I've always held the philosophy to "always know the rules you're breaking."

Woah, didn't expect this thread to continue.

I'd argue that Remy is right to point out the potential rules discrepancy between the text of Following Step. However to that point, I'll point to the actual text of Following Step

Normal: You can only take a 5-foot step to follow an opponent using Step Up.

The text states nothing about "turns", it simply states that the only way you can follow an opponent using a 5-foot step is by having the Step Up combat feat. And I don't see where it would be wrong: You can ready up an action in response to a 5-foot step, however you wouldn't be following that with a 5-foot step, you would follow it up with an action (under which you'd take a 5-foot step, if legal).

As stated earlier, a 5-foot step isn't an action; it's something you do as a part of an action - thus you cannot ready up a 5-foot step, you can only ready up an action under which you use a 5-foot step.

So per that, the text doesn't break any RAW, it's perfectly consistent with itself. You would follow up with an action, not a 5-foot step.

I would agree with Remy that your turn ends once you've readied up an action, regardless of whether the action is triggered or not, text the pretty much states as much.

TL;DR:
1. Taking a readied action doesn't count as "your turn",
2. You cannot directly follow up an opponent who preformed a 5-foot step without the Step Up feat

While we are on the subject of five foot steps. Can You: Draw a weapon (mv), Take a Five Foot Step (no action), and then attack?

Yes, you can. ;)

Devilkiller wrote:

I don't think it is reasonable to extrapolate JJ's stance on the Otyugh's AoO into something like, "I can take whatever free actions I want during an AoO". I wouldn't have expected the free action for the release to be allowed, but at least it is something directly related to the grapple which was established via Grab.

For Crane Wing I think you'd have to meet the requirement for using it when you're attacked. Similarly, to make an AoO with a two handed weapon I think you'd have to be wielding the weapon with both hands and threatening so you would qualify to make an AoO with it. That could probably be its own thread though.

Anyhow, I'm glad that somebody from Paizo weighed in even just unofficially.

Wanna throw another wrench into the gears?

Try to make sense of this...

Quote:

At 7th level, a kensai applies his Intelligence modifier as well as his Dexterity modifier on initiative rolls (minimum 0). A kensai may make attacks of opportunity when flat-footed, and may draw his favored weapon as a free action as part of taking an attack of opportunity.

The questions:

How can you make an AoO if you don't threaten?
How can you draw as a free action as part of an AoO?

The biggest one is that first one. Does that even make sense to anyone?? How can you draw the weapon that you needed to already be weilding to qualify for an AoO as a part of taking said AoO? Ugh >.<

Simple, you have to be able to threaten while unarmed. If you don't threaten while unarmed; then you don't provoke AoO.

Mromson wrote:

Chengar Qordath wrote:

Pupsocket wrote:

Mromson wrote:

A spell-like ability doesn't grant you the ability to cast actual spells, so a fighter doesn't meet the requirement for Arcane Strike as he cannot cast Arcane Spells. ;)

*Sigh*. Not only are you wrong, in the discussions about the "SLAs count as spellcasting", Arcane Strike was specifically called out as working.

Sadly, a lot of people answering rules questions don't read relevant FAQs, even when they're linked.

I read the FAQ before replying, no-where in it does it state that the ability to cast a spell as an SLA equates to being able to cast spells of any particular magic domain. If a prerequisite requires the ability to cast "Fireball" and you can do that, then you meet the requirement. However, if the prerequisite demands the ability to cast Arcane Spells, then you do not.

And I meant to say that a SLA spell doesn't equate to a <magic domain> spell.

and did you read the FAQ right below it?

Quote:

Spell-Like Abilities: How do I know whether a spell-like ability is arcane or divine?

The universal monster rules for spell-like abilities states: "Some spell-like abilities duplicate spells that work differently when cast by characters of different classes. A monster's spell-like abilities are presumed to be the sorcerer/wizard versions. If the spell in question is not a sorcerer/wizard spell, then default to cleric, druid, bard, paladin, and ranger, in that order."

For spell-like abilities gained from a creature's race or type (including PC races), the same rule should apply: the creature's spell-like abilities are presumed to be the sorcerer/wizard versions. If the spell in question is not a sorcerer/wizard spell, then default to cleric, druid, bard, paladin, and ranger, in that order.

For spell-like abiities gained from a class, use the spell type (arcane or divine) of that class to determine whether the spell-like ability is arcane or divine. If the class

...

You're right, I didn't read the FAQ below that. I was wrong, my apologies. (Though that is one odd errata)

Pupsocket wrote:

Mromson wrote:

A spell-like ability doesn't grant you the ability to cast actual spells, so a fighter doesn't meet the requirement for Arcane Strike as he cannot cast Arcane Spells. ;)

*Sigh*. Not only are you wrong, in the discussions about the "SLAs count as spellcasting", Arcane Strike was specifically called out as working.

Sadly, a lot of people answering rules questions don't read relevant FAQs, even when they're linked.

I read the FAQ before replying, no-where in it does it state that the ability to cast a spell as an SLA equates to being able to cast spells of any particular magic domain. If a prerequisite requires the ability to cast "Fireball" and you can do that, then you meet the requirement. However, if the prerequisite demands the ability to cast Arcane Spells, then you do not.

And I meant to say that a SLA spell doesn't equate to a <magic domain> spell.

Ok, so if the requirement was to be able to cast "comprehend languages", then he would qualify under http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fm#v5748eaic9qow, but since it's "spells" plural it doesn't qualify, correct?

If a prerequisite requires you to be able to do something, and you can do that something; then you qualify. So if something requires you to be able to cast/use "Comprehend Languages" and you can cast/use it, then you qualify.

The distinction is that a Spell-like Ability isn't a spell, it's an ability that can look like one, but isn't.

A spell-like ability doesn't grant you the ability to cast actual spells, so a fighter doesn't meet the requirement for Arcane Strike as he cannot cast Arcane Spells. ;)

Much appreciated! ;) And I apologize for all the trouble, the webstore is pretty hard for me to navigate. :S

I've tried removing all items from my shopping cart and re-adding them again, and now I cannot even apply the May14 code to it... This is all incredibly frustrating to me now...

I'm trying to checkout, however each time I do, I just get sent back to my shopping cart. Could anyone help?

Edit: It's important that this subscription/shipment is sent separately from my other orders.

Mromson, you still undercut the existing business model that way. I could drop my subscription for 6 months, then pick it up again 6 months later and catch up over the next 6 months.

As someone who did indeed have to cancel his subscriptions for almost a year and a half, I know that picking up the pdfs for previously released stuff can be a bit expensive, but that's why I waited for a Paizo special to pick up most of what I was missing. Since you are an AP subscriber, the PDFs and back items already run you 15% less than normal and by using the current special offer you could pick up pdfs and previous hardbacks for an additional 10% off ... and with the amount you would save on picking up both, you would be getting the PDF for next to nothing this month.

It would take you far longer than 6months to catch up from a 6month hiatus if you only get ONE extra "hardcover+pdf" deal per month, which (as per my suggestion) would only be granted if you had multiple subscriptions. So if the requirement was, say, 5 subscriptions, then you'd still pay for 5 different subscriptions, while only getting ONE extra hardcover+pdf deal per month. You'd need to subscribe for "at least" three times longer than your hiatus to catch up, and you'd STILL end up getting a worse deal.

I sincerely doubt such an approach would diminish monthly profits.

Perhaps an improved model should be introduced for those of us who weren't around when Pathfinder first came out. Maybe something along the lines of "If you subscribe to x number of subscriptions, you can have the hardcover+pdf bonus applied to one additional non-subscribed item that you add into your sidecart."

This way the subscription is still the best way to go, but also rewards customers who perhaps weren't around when the products first launched, by allowing them to "catch up" to the rest of the customer base. And if that still isn't enough, remove the adventure path 15% discount for the "extra hardcover+pdf deal per month" deal.

It would still keep subscription as the definitive best (read; cheapest) way to get your product, while giving newcomers a reason to subscribe and stay subscribed to catch up on the backlog.

This was just brought to my attention - Mromson I've given the store credit a poke and it should be properly displaying on your account. You should be good to purchase the PDF. :)

Damon Griffin wrote:

@Mromson: Subscribe now, pay for the hardcover edition of Book One of Mummy's Mask and I'll buy you a gift certificate for the PDF.

You sir, are awesome.

It worked! Much appreciated. ;)

And yes, he is indeed awesome! Thanks ^_^

Aha! i just found this:

"If you've received an e-mail from us letting you know that someone has purchased a gift certificate for you, it has already been redeemed for store credit on your account—just use the store credit as a form of payment at checkout. You can view your available store credit on your My Account page, and you'll also see it as a payment option at checkout."

http://paizo.com/store/giftCertificates

Doesn't work, my account is listed as having no store credit :S

Hi, I was gifted a pdf, however the Gift doesn't show up on my Gift Certificate page. Could you add it to my account, please? ;)

So, you follow the My Account link at the top of the page, and then click on Redeem Gift Certificates on the right side of the next screen, no certificate is listed?

The Redeem a paizo.com gift certificate (https://secure.paizo.com/paizo/account/gifts) page only shows a box that asks for a Gift Certificate Claim Code, and below that is are the Terms and Conditions listed :S

I hadn't previously bought a gift certificate, so there were a couple of missteps, but it should be there now.

I got an email stating that I received a gift - but no gift (or info about it) is available anywhere o_O

An anonymous person has given you a gift on paizo.com.

1 x paizo.com Gift Certificate

Your gift certificate has been automatically redeemed and store credit has been applied to your account.
You may view your gift certificates on your My Gift Certificates page at:
https://secure.paizo.com/paizo/account/gifts

Best regards,
Paizo Customer Service
customer.service@paizo.com

@Mromson: Subscribe now, pay for the hardcover edition of Book One of Mummy's Mask and I'll buy you a gift certificate for the PDF.

Heh, alright - deal. ;) I've subscribed and paid for the hardcover~

I'm thinking about subscribing to Pathfinder Core, Adventure, Campaign, Player and Modules - however I have a problem with the "Hard copy + pdf" part of the deal, particularly the part where I cannot receive physical+pdf versions of older copies that shipped earlier. This puts me in a particularly frustrating position where I feel like I'm being unreasonably punished for not discovering Pathfinder earlier.

Right now, the current Adventure Path is "Mummy's Mask", which I'd love to receive - however the current issue is the second in the series - which means that if I were to subscribe right now, I wouldn't have the first part of the adventure path. That is; I wouldn't receive both the hardcover and pdf version.

Should wait for the Iron Gods adventure path before I subscribe? Because I find the value to be significantly diminished when I have to choose between a hardcopy or a pdf copy - and I certainly ain't interested in paying TWICE for every copy (not to mention shipping, as I live in Europe). Why isn't there an option for new players/GMs to join in on purchasing non-current copies in both pdf and hardcover format without essentially paying double? Purchasing all the previously released material is already expensive enough as it is.

I have a couple of questions regarding readied actions and how they work
1. Can you prepare an action against an attack, and thus act right before the attack occours?

a) Can you ready a spell against an attack, spesifically to avoid consentration checks?

b) Can you prepare an attack against an action, then take a 5-foot step away to prevent said action from ever hitting you?

c) If you prepare an attack against a Charge, can you prepare the action for "when someone tries to strike you", then back up after attacking, thus avoiding the charge altogether?
- I'm assuming no. However, what if you take your 5-foot step into a location that PlayerB wouldn't have a clear charge path to you from his previous position?

2. Can you prepare an attack against a 5-foot step and strike before the 5-foot step is made?

I would also like to know if you can take a 5ft step while staggered?

You can take a 5-foot step while staggered, yes. As long as you meet all the normal 5-foot step requirements. ;)

Alright, I read through the replies and pretty much came to the conclusion that you cannot perform a 5-foot step without either a Prepared Action or the Step Up combat feat:

1. You can take a 5-foot step before, during, or after your other actions in the round. (CORE p189)

• States that a 5-foot step revolves (and is made) around your other actions, and doesn't state anything about using it in an opponent's turn without doing anything else.
  2. Each round's activity begins with the character with the highest initiative result and then proceeds in order. When a character's turn comes up in the initiative sequence, that character performs his entire round's worth of actions. (For exceptions, see Attacks of Opportunity and Special Initiative Actions.) (CORE p178)
  
• States that the only unaltered action exceptions involve AoO and SIA (though not mentioning Free Actions or Immediate Actions)
  3. Following Step Combat Feat ~~~~ Normal: You can only take a 5-foot step to follow an opponent using Step Up. (APG p160-161)
  
• While all the other rules are a little vague at best, this feat's text specifically lists Step Up as the only way one can follow an opponent with a 5-foot step. In other words; I was wrong. ;-)
  

TL;DR: No, you cannot take a 5-foot step unless you're performing an action before, during, or after said step.

Thanks to all who replied, and a special thanks to Ulfen Death Squad who mentioned the Following Step feat ;)

I still like the idea of it, so probably will let my group run with it at some point to see if there are any real balance pitfalls with it.

I was reading up about the 5-foot step and was wondering, can you take a 5-foot step in response to someone else making a 5-foot step, assuming you would be able to do so if this was your own turn?

Example:
PlayerA and PlayerB spent the first round next to eachother and staring eachother down. (None of them have prepared ANY action.)
On round2 PlayerA takes a 5-foot step away from PlayerB, so he can cast something out of AoO range.
> Can PlayerB take a 5-foot step straight after PlayerA, but before he knows what PlayerA wishes to do?

The rules in the Core rulebook don't appear to be very clear on this. They IMPLY that you cannot - however the wording states that "You can take a 5-foot step before, during or after your other actions in the round", so you could imply that "after" or "before" your actions would include your opponents actions.

I know about the Step Up combat feat, however this ruleset wouldn't invalidate said feat, as picking this feat would simply mean you could (essentially) take two 5-foot steps in a given combat round (5-foot step during your turn, then 5-foot step as an "immediate action" during your opponents turn in response to his 5-foot step)

Example:
PlayerA walks up to PlayerB, smacks him in the face.
PlayerB takes a 5-foot step back out of AoO range
> If PlayerA has Step Up, he can 5-foot step up at this point (while forfitting his 5-foot step or 5 ft of movement next turn) otherwise he wouldn't be able to close the distance because he already performed a movement last turn.
>> PlayerB starts casting something~~~~

TL;DR: Can you perform a 5-foot step (assuming you haven't performed any "movement" this round) during an opponents turn?

Thanks for the swift replies! ;)

The Player is ambushed by a Ranger. The Ranger rolled a 9 on his initiative check while the Player rolled a 20.

So the Ranger shoots at the player during the surprise round, before the regular turn starts and it's the Player's turn.

Now I look at the rules and I'm unsure of what the mean. My question is, is the Ranger flat-footed in this scenario, because he wasn't acted in the "regular" round, or is that rule (as written) simply meant for scenarios where the character was able to perform an Attack of Opportunity before his turn was able to start?

Flat-Footed

At the start of a battle, before you have had a chance to act (specifically, before your first regular turn in the initiative order), you are flat-footed.

TL;DR: Are you still considered flat-footed after acting in the surprise round?