NinthMusketeer's page

Well I'm sure there are a lot of small things and rules interpretations that aren't coming to mind right now, but here are some of the bigger ones I have.

Counterspells: To counter a spell, you must ready an action to do so. Assuming the readied action is triggered, you must successfully identify the spell being cast with a spellcraft roll, then use up a spell of the same level or higher. (I found the actual counterpsell rules so difficult as to be near-useless, this fixes that.)

Languages: Intelligence modifiers do not grant bonus languages, instead you must take linguistics. Upon putting the first rank in linguistics you gain a bonus language, after that you gain another bonus language at each increment of an effective +10. Thus if you would normally (only permanent bonuses taken into account) roll linguistics at +20, you would receive three bonus languages, one for having a single rank in the skill, one for +10, and one for +20. (I found it way too easy to pick up mass amounts of bonus languages, plus this makes the skill matter a little more.)

Mundane Ammunition: I don't make anyone keep track of non-masterwork, non-magical, non-special material arrows, bolts, or bullets. The cost of obtain them quickly becomes trivial and then it's really just a pain. The exception is if a player is firing off a very high amount of ammo in a short period with no way of recovering it (say they were trying to shoot down every seagull on the coast) then at a certain point I tell them they are low on ammo and the next natural 1 on an attack roll means they are out.

Something I don't see mentioned here is that players may not want to optimize. Though I don't think its the case here, as a general rule, the idea of natural selection weeding out the weaker characters can kill the fun. Maybe the players didn't WANT to play hyper-optimized characters, maybe they wanted to play THEIR characters. In such a case, it is better for the system master (and GM) to play down to their level. It really depends on what players (or the majority of players) want though, as has been said, many players want more optimized characters but don't know how, but that doesn't automatically mean that pushing up the power level, by whatever means, is always a good idea.

We don't like to talk about what happened to the 4th though 8th Musketeers...

Ok Driver, lets say a Monk carries his unarmed strikes. Lead blades still does not work, as the Monk's size has not changed, and his unarmed damage is based directly off his size. RAI? Maybe, or maybe not. RAW? Certainly.

As for the agenda, it seems to me that YOU have an agenda. It looks like you didn't post on these forums to get the community's opinion on the matter, you posted because you believed you were right and wanted others to agree with you.

I'm not saying this is true, I'm saying that's what it looks like right now. If you start making posts that are more respectful and have detailed, logical arguments in them, than maybe you will get a better response.

Furthermore, as has been established more than once here, strong jaw not only works RAW but also provides a significantly larger bonus.

Well I did a bit more research...

Strong Jaw Says: "Each natural attack that creature makes deals damage as if the creature were two sizes larger than it actually is."

Lead Blades Says: "All melee weapons you are carrying when the spell is cast deal damage as if one size category larger than they actually are."

Looking at this, I will have to go back on what I said. It seems that lead blades does not work, because as you said the damage is based directly on the size of the monk.

However, because the wording on strong jaw specifically calls out the creature as counting as larger, I think it does work, as it would make the entire monk count as larger than normal.