Natharanak Phlegethoth's page

15 posts. Alias of shaventalz.

Sometimes - not always, but sometimes - after refreshing the first page of a subforum, it will actually show a significantly-older set of posts.

For instance -
That's supposed to be the 100 most-recent posts. However, sometimes it's actually posts 1101-1200. Or something else. Right now, I've got a tab open where it's actually the oldest posts (10,101 to 10,136 of 10,136). When I refresh, it will most likely load the correct posts.

I am using an older version of Firefox, so it's possible that this is just a browser issue. Or it might not be. Either way, reporting it.


This may or may not be the right place to put it, but... The group I was originally planning to play with got a 6th, and I'd rather not play the really high-tier stuff with a random group. Plus, the scenario sounds like it would better fit a different character of mine.


I have a GenCon ticket for Siege of Gallowspire, subtier 15-16, Soldier (easier mode). I'd like to trade it for a 7-8 Soldier ticket for the same event. Any takers?

I just found this issue; not sure how long it's existed, but I don't think it's been an issue before this week.

When looking at the Product Discussion forum:
If clicking on the link to view new messages in the thread (something like "(2 new)x"), the tab headers for "Product Reviews" and "Product Discussion" may be hidden. Sometimes also the search box.

I'm able to shift+tab to bring some of the content into view, so it looks like it's just running off the top of the container. It seems to be triggered by the link sending me to posts that aren't the top of the current page; selecting the product directly or going to a new post within sight of the top of the displayed page works fine.

As far as I can tell, there is no notification when one of your posts is moderated away. They just go silently into the memory hole.

Without knowing why a post was deleted, how can a user improve? Was a given post in the wrong forum? Did it fall afoul of some forum guideline? Did the moderator just not like it? And the "good" content of the post could still be useful elsewhere, even if just to keep one's own thoughts straight.

Example #1:
I've apparently had a bug report deleted. Don't know when, don't know why, don't even know what thread it was in anymore. But it no longer shows up in my post history, and the perceived bug is still present.

Example #2:
I've had long, thought-out posts deleted because they were a response to another post that got deleted (sometimes several levels down the chain, even.) The most I've seen is a "hey, we've deleted some posts because several someones are getting angry." Would it not be possible to (in an automated manner) PM each user the contents of the posts? For personal reference, if nothing else.

There are two FAQs on the subject of using two-handed weapons one-handed, especially in regards to extra damage from Power Attack and 1.5x Strength. FAQ #1 and FAQ #2. A quick reading of them both seems to give a contradiction.

FAQ #1 wrote:

Power Attack: If I am using a two-handed weapon with one hand (such as a lance while mounted), do still I get the +50% damage for using a two-handed weapon?


FAQ #2 wrote:

Weapons, Two-Handed in One Hand: When a feat or other special ability says to treat a weapon that is normally wielded in two hands as a one handed weapon, does it get treated as one or two handed weapon for the purposes of how to apply the Strength modifier or the Power Attack feat?

*If you're wielding it in one hand (even if it is normally a two-handed weapon), treat it as a one-handed weapon for the purpose of how much Strength to apply, the Power Attack damage bonus, and so on.

#1 says you do get the extra damage from Power Attack, and #2 says you don't. The FAQs were posted 2 months apart, so it seems unlikely that there were significant changes in the design team between the two rulings.

How should this be interpreted? Is it intended that only the lance gets the extra damage, because it doesn't explicitly say to treat it as a one-handed weapon? Or is one of these incorrect? On a similar note, should effects that let you add 1.5x Strength (like Dragon Style) receive the Power Attack boost?

2 people marked this as FAQ candidate.

As per the PRD entry on DR:

PRD wrote:

Whenever damage reduction completely negates the damage from an attack, it also negates most special effects that accompany the attack, such as injury poison, a monk's stunning, and injury-based disease. Damage reduction does not negate touch attacks, energy damage dealt along with an attack, or energy drains. Nor does it affect poisons or diseases delivered by inhalation, ingestion, or contact.

This language is also found in the CRB, page 561 (6th printing.) I realize it was written before Ultimate Combat, but...

Is this passage intended to let Gunslingers bypass DR?

The intent seems clear, but the wording is such that Gunslingers (or anyone else using a weapon as a touch attack) could make a RAW-based argument that "DR doesn't apply against touch attacks." I don't see anything in the firearms section of UC that would negate this, either, and archetypes like Bolt Ace can do this without even touching the firearm rules. If the intent is that DR does not negate energy-based touch attacks, the wording needs tightened up.


I have a question regarding Act 1.

When approaching the whirlpool (1c), if nobody spots it or the PC on the tiller fails to make the save:


At this point, anyone rowing or at the tiller must

make two consecutive DC 18 Strength checks (Tier 8–9:
DC 23) to steer the boat out of the grip of the current. If
any PC fails at either of these checks, the boat capsizes,
throwing all aboard into the water.

There are four spots for rowers and one for the tiller. I see two ways to read this.

1) All 5 PCs need to make two Strength checks each
2) Only one PC needs to make the checks

Normally, I would assume #1 is correct, because "if ANY PC fails." That seems pretty much impossible for the "normal" party, though. Requiring your Rogue, Wizard, and archer to make DC 23 Strength checks, or the party pays for it...

The second reading would be "anyone may make the check, and someone must", followed by "if someone tries and fails, capsize."

For comparison, 1a asks for checks from basically anyone in the party, and 1b only has a single PC make the check. Even if they fail in 1b, a single PC can make the Strength check to let everyone move on.

What's everyone's thoughts on this?

I have a Wizard with the Scroll Scholar archetype. At Wizard 10, the archetype grants an ability in exchange for a 4th-level spell slot.

I want to give him levels in Cyphermage, which progresses spellcasting from a previous class.

At Wizard5/Cyphermage5, what happens?

Does he:
1) Not gain the spell slot. It was given up in the first level of Wizard.
2) Gain the spell slot. You didn't take Wizard 10, so you never traded it in.
3) Not gain the spell slot, but get the Scroll Scholar's ability. You advance spellcasting, and this took the place of some of that casting.

I suspect the answer is #1, though I would obviously prefer #2.