Please.
Search Posts
Composite Longbow. /thread
Ok so we have this new guy coming in and he wants to play a half-orc/half-elf. mother was a half-elf raped by orc raiding party. How the heck would you do the stats on that. No special modifiers. Either he takes the half-orc traits or the half-elf traits when it comes to character gen/modifiers and the "other half" is flavor text/character background with no relevant in-game bonuses or penalties... beyond the social stigma of probably being viewed as an abomination by both elves and orcs. Run that by your player and see if he still likes the character concept. If he does, great, you still have a balanced race and a plot hook to stick in his mouth. If not, great, he'll choose a less controversial race for his character. Win/win.
Skyrim's character generator is a great idea. I'll give it a shot but I already have Skyrim for the console and don't want to shell out $30-$50 for a game I already own just to port the character generator over to my PC. Dragon Age had a pretty good character generator too and it was free but, again, that didn't work well with my PC.
Wat do? Am I the only one annoyed by the lack of options available for creating one for table top games? I have no artistic talent whatsoever and I dislike using other people's art as my portrait (there are always little details that are overlooked/added and it just feels "wrong" using someone else's imagination for what I imagine my character looking like). I've used Hero Machine for forever, since it's free and I won't spend money on what is essentially a doodle, but its a bit limited and the 3.o version doesn't run very well on my computer. My Google-fu has failed to come up with anything better than Hero Machine for this purpose. Any other suggestions? Paizo y u no have one for table top?
Oh, the rum rations as written would make the crew docile alright... nothing more docile and pliable than a corpse.
Thanks for the feedback. I'll keep you posted if I still haven't received my subscriptions. If I still haven't received them should I bump this thread again, make a new one or do something else?
bump ....again.
bump
AWOL. I received order # 2176850 which was shipped 3 days *after* the missing Order # 2173669. I've repeatedly tried to contact the last post office on the tracking list to no avail (they tell me I should contact Paizo so I'm getting the run around). I understand Gen Con threw a monkey wrench in the shipping schedule but this makes me really worried about my subscriptions since the problem seems to be with the post office and not just a delay in shipping. Help?
Does he know Herolab let's some archetypes stack, that should not stack? Probably. Does that mean he'll think hero lab is wrong? Probably not.
Nah, according to hero lab NONE of the druid domains are valid choices for a cleric of ANY deity (not even the shark domain goes through for Besmara) even if it's within the "portfolio" of that deity. Thing is I'm going to playing a multi-classed druid/cleric so it's unavailability to me shouldn't be denied on the grounds that I'm not a druid since I'm a druid. Another classic example of this being a software issue was that I rewrote the character (in hero lab) but this time I started him as an aquatic druid at first level and then added a level of cleric. Still got flagged. Essentially what hero lab is saying is: "You know that completely legal starting character you made? Yeeeeeah, no."... which is garbage. I think the problem is that there wasn't a list of deities a druid *could* follow that would allow for that domain selection and left it, more or less, to the GM's discretion. That sort of ambiguity doesn't translate well into software.
Pretty much. I'm guessing he thinks the software does a better job of ruling on those things than he does. When I told him that I was planning on doing that for second level he didn't seem to have a problem with it, even thought it was a cool idea, but once Hero Lab rejected the character build he started thinking of reasons why it shouldn't work. Got me thinking that maybe I was missing something. I wanted to run it by you guys to make sure I wasn't cheating or breaking any rules before I made a stink about it.
Good to know... now to convince my GM, lol.
I can see how you'd interpret it that way. I think the writers may have left it to the reader's interpretation on purpose. I didn't take the fact that the ring being physically in his hands to mean that everything that happened in the dream was real but, rather, that was what he was being led to believe. Nyrissa has seduced many different NPCs in similar fashion never really getting her "hands dirty" so to speak so I just assumed it was the case there too. "Nocturnal visitor" I took as a play on words for some other nocturnal sexual phenomena that occurs in young men that shan't be mentioned here...
I have a character in the Skull and Shackles AP. He's a 1st level cleric of Gozreh (god of the storm and sky/goddess of the wave and surf). For second level I wanted to multiclass as a aquatic druid with the Aquatic terrain domain. Hero lab says that the Aquatic Domain is an invalid selection. In Ultimate Magic it stipulates that a druid who worships a deity can take terrain or animal domains so long as it doesn't conflict with that deity's "portfolio" but I'd figure the aquatic domain would be well within the portfolio of the goddess of waves and surf. Is there a rule I am missing or is hero lab shafting me for no reason?
... compared to how harsh the world was for women in the *real* medieval period. Why the fixation on sexual violence? What about all the other violence? I think the idea was to make a harsh fantasy frontier setting and using rape, torture and other kinds of violence is how an author accomplishes that. btw, Nyrissa never actually had sexual intercourse with the boy. He had a dream that they did. Seduction is sort of her MO.
Still nothing on my subscription that shipped out on the 3rd though, strangely enough, the order I placed that shipped out on the 6th just came in today. Edit: my advice to those who have packages that have been shipped is to go to track this package (if you have it) < contact us *on the left hand side of the screen* < tracking inquiries < fill out the info < complain loudly (caps lock ftw). Seemed to work for me but your mileage may vary.
I agree with blackbloodtroll. The Supernatural abilities (like Domain powers)can still be used but spellcasting is out of the question.
LOL, there were only supposed to be two reefclaws? We fought three.... though maybe my GM modified it since there are more than four players at the table...
I just have a problem with the notion that it's "creative". It's not, it's the opposite of creativity to reinterpret and argue about *rules*. Creativity would be to lob a rock or -better yet- an insult at someone to lure them into chasing you into a hedge maze or garden or something and *then* cast your entangle spell. Creativity would be to drape a white sheet over your head, cast faerie fire on yourself and scare away the NPC by pretending to be a ghost. Rules lawyering is what you do when you fail to be creative.
I have an order that's been "shipped" since August 7th and it's still not here.
Out of curiosity, my RPG sub Ultimate Equipment indicated it shipped on 8-6-12. I haven't recieved it as of Friday 8-17-12. It usually takes about 4 days for a shipment to get here. I've been thinking "maybe tommorow" for the last week. Is this something that could have been delayed despite the "shipped date" on my prescriptions and e-mail indicating it would ship by then or has the USPS eaten my book? ^ Ditto. I was just about to start a whole new thread on this.
Hate that. I made the mistake of reading an adventure before I played in it and was soooooooo bored playing I never did it again. I don't know why anyone would do it intentionally and miss out on all the surprises and the reward of finishing a story using your own brain. Spoilers suck. chavamana's advice of talking to the player is solid, but why not have a little fun at the player's expense before you do? Little things you can do that don't require to much effort on your part: Move treasure, encounters, traps and secret doors to different locations but keep them the same. The PCs who haven't read the adventure will have the same amount of fun/difficulty and the out of game knowledge will be all but useless for the player who has. If the PC is "investigating" an area that his out of game knowledge leads him to believe is where loot or a secret door is put a trap there instead... see how many traps he sets off. "Dream sequences" or hallucinations are a nifty little gimmick too. If there's a part that he's expecting to play out a certain way throw a giant curve-ball at him like a lich where there is supposed to be an empty room for example. As an added benefit this lets him know that his metagaming hasn't gone unnoticed, at the very least, he'll keep the metagiming down to minimum since he won't know when you're going to throw your next curve-ball. Example of who this works in game:
Sarf, do you play using minis? I've noticed that combat is a lot tougher *with* them than without. Without minis your PC can, in essence, "teleport" to places that would normally be out of range by simply stating or suggesting that "he/she should be close enough" when a map and minis would clearly show this to be true or not... usually not. Also the reefclaws and other aquatic sub-types take no penalty for using their natural attacks under water. The Gilman wouldn't either IF he was using non-manufactured natural weapons... if he was using a hook he'd be taking some pretty stiff penalties. Also 13HP doesn't quite tell the whole story when you take into account ferocity and poison. The reef claws could take penalties for attacking if they were on land but A) they could attack an adjacent foe *from the water* without taking a penalty and B) would simply circle around until you entered the water again and resumed their attack. Also, most of the locks on the wormwood are good locks (DC 30). The DC to open the lock to the quarter master's room was 30 AND rigged with a poisoned trap (I found this out after I shmoozed the quarter master and she told me about it). Also, according to the AP you are never further away than 30' from anyone on the ship at any given point in time. So A) even if you did manage to pick open the lock to the quartermasters room AND avoid the trap you wouldn't have time to loot it all and B) even if you did you'd have no place to put it and C) even if you did manage to loot it all Scourge would tear the ship apart looking for all the missing stuff and gut whoever was responsible. Not to mention the fact that the default build point for any AP is 15 character points. Bro, your GM is totally taking it easy on you. Maybe he thinks you guys wouldn't have liked the module as written and did his own thing. The only thing that matters is that you're having a good time or not. If not, or if you think the module is too easy tell your GM.
I would just like to point out that when I play a druid, I am usually FAR too busy EATING THE FACES OF MY ENEMIES AS A T-REX to worry about throwing potted plants at people. ^Doinitrite.
Abusing that poor plant and killing it intentionally IMO is not reverent.And summoning animals to fight for him and get slaughtered is? Also the plant isn't killed. It shrinks back to normal after the spell is over. Taking a Druids powers for something like that is a jerk move and punishing a player for using his head. That's not "using his head", it's the opposite. Powergamer: "I haz potted plant to lob at people so I can cast entangle anywhere." Gamemaster: "You're an idiot. No." PG: "But the rulz sez-" GM: "I AM the rules." OR PG: "I lob my plant at him." GM: "Great, take a standard action to make a to-hit roll. -4 for using an improvised weapon, -8 for range." PG: *rolls an 18* "I hit AC 9." GM: "You miss and since there is no vegetation in any square other than where you poor shrubbery has landed you won't be able to use entangle on him next round." OR PG: "I lob my plant at him." GM: "Great, take a standard action to make a to-hit roll. -4 for using an improvised weapon, -8 for range." PG: *rolls a natural 20* "I hit for 2 pts of bludgeoning damage." GM: "On his action he leaves his square (and you poor mistreated shrubbery) to charge and attack the guy who lobbed a shrubbery at him and you still won't be able to cast entangle on him next round." OR PG: "I lob my plant at him." GM: "Great, take a standard action to make a to-hit roll. -4 for using an improvised weapon, -8 for range." PG: *rolls a natural 20* "I hit for 2 pts of bludgeoning damage." GM: "On his action he stands there dumbfounded by your idiocy. You may now cast entangle on him." PG: "I DO SO." *casts spell* GM: "You've successfully entangled his big toe. He leaves his square (and you poor mistreated shrubbery) to charge and attack the guy who lobbed a shrubbery at him and cast a spell that is currently cutting of the circulation to his toe via. enchanted shrub."
Vikings! Vikings! Vikings!
Yes but doing so destroys the kingdom you're chartered to create. If your going to turn your kingdom into a hovel there are rules for that (Unrest) AND Brevoy would most likely relieve you of your duties effectively ending the AP. It's called KINGmaker not SQUALORmaker. Just because you *can* do something doesn't mean you *should* or that there are no consequences when you *do*.
I'd let you play it though (after you wrote up a plausible character background and came up with a NAME) since theres nothing against the rules in that build. You'd be better off playing a less strong character to avoid the bull's eye I'd have painted on your character though. Of course. I don't like barbarians in general since they tend to be the "kick down the door before even seeing if it was locked" types. That doesn't mean that I'd stop someone from playing one. Some people really like that play style... and I really like replacing the doors with mimics for those who do. If you're the DM you don't get to play the characters that you'd want to play, the players do. And yes, if player's going to min-max, why shouldn't I do the same thing? Not necessarily kill the character outright but play to his weaknesses (like give your Int 7, Cha 7 barbarian a life or death situation where he has to figure out a puzzle or the answer to a riddle or a powerful NPC with a vital clue that needs convincing to part with). Hack 'n' slash can be fun by it's one of many dimensions of a good roleplaying game and it's no fun at all if your barbarian cuisinart isn't challenged by it.
It is power gaming when he specifically manipulates the rules in his favor to make him significantly more powerful than the average hero, or even major boss monsters.That's not powergaming. Uhhhh....
As is? Nope, I wouldn't at least. First and foremost the character doesn't even have a name. Small thing really, but it goes to show that the focus of the character isn't role playing but mechanics. Second, the Rich Parents trait on a barbarian is questionable, especially on a character with so little background as to not even have a name. Third you're assuming the GM is allowing Eastern Weapons into his game or that the region that would treat the Nodachi as a martial and not exotic weapon speak or use Common. Fourth you don't even have a religion listed yet have the Indomitable Faith trait. Two drop stats too. I'd let you play it though (after you wrote up a plausible character background and came up with a NAME) since theres nothing against the rules in that build. You'd be better off playing a less strong character to avoid the bull's eye I'd have painted on your character though.
We broke our last game session at day 20 or so right before our fight with The Man's Promise. It's been grueling. Almost lost our bard to a combination of rum rations and disease from the rats in the bilges. Almost lost our dwarf Gunslinger to falling out of the rigging. Almost lost our sorceress to falling out of the rigging (-10 hp, Con of 11). Reefclaws almost TPK'ed us, left one party member with a 0 strength who was then flogged for not being able to work. My cleric of Gozreh has been rope bashed unconscious, whipped unconscious and got the cat twice for mouthing off to Scourge AND was thrown in the Sweatbox when I didn't go back to the bilges after being attacked by Scourge's men... even though I didn't kill either of them and managed to escape. I've used every channel and healing spell I had to keep the party alive every single day on our first week (I have the birthmark trait so I always have my divine focus). Some of us don't even have all of our starting gear yet even though the quartermaster has been helpful since day 3. And Kingmaker was NOT easy. It certainly wasn't written up that way anyways. There was a cork-board "graveyard" of at least 20 character sheets who died during that AP along with about 5 or 6 animal companions. LOL the PCs had to create their own secret society so they could introduce new characters when their old ones got ganked. The last part of that AP the party blew through about 10,000 gp in utility items (potions, scrolls and such) just in one encounter and still almost didn't make it. Your GM is definitely being generous. So I'm guessing that if you're breezing through the first part of the AP the rest of the AP will also be a breeze. That shouldn't matter though as long as you're having fun.
3 players is going to be rough. I'd say the 25pt. character build wasn't out of the question since ship to ship combat is going to be very tough and they're going to be a lot busier once they get their own ship. If you don't want to go that route and want to stick to 20pt.builds make sure you're wiling and able to play more effective NPCs than you would in a normal scenario. If your PCs are distrustful you're going to have to try that much harder to get those players like them.
Umm.... No. A Human Paladin will stomp all over that Aasimar Paladin, especially if the competition is at first level where the human can drop his stat into strength, while the Aasimar's CHA and WIS are kinda "meh". You get an extra point in perception and social skills, the human gets a bonus skill rank at every level. Aasimar can cast Daylight 1/day (ooooh, a racial spell-like ability that negates their own darkvision, cool) the human gets an extra feat which can be used for anything, probably an unlimited number of times per day. I take it you haven't done much playing in the Hells. Word to the wise: it's really, really dark. Not to mention evil outsiders (a paladin's specialty) tend to use magical darkness all the time AND the Aasimar net 2 more attribute points than a human. If Wisdom isn't important to your pally you can drop it lower than you could with a human and put it somewhere else. And then there's the resistances. The bonus feat is cool but it ain't *that* cool. Then there's the fact that most sources give the Aasimar a longer life span too. Basically, I have no idea how you've managed to conclude the Aasimar and Humans are on the same power level. They aren't. I could expand on the virtues of the halfling vs. the tiefling as a rogue (halfling luck? racial bonuses to perception, acrobatics and climb?) but they're actually fairly closely matched in that scenario, as opposed to a clear win for the human in the paladin argument. Still not seeing the win in the human at all but the darkness spell like ability + Darkvision is an advantage that the Halfling (without so much as low-light vision) just can't match. The bonus to saves is good but the Spell like abilities are better imo. The svirfneblin is clearly pretty OP, and that's why it's in the back of the book. Their new base drow is actually nicely balanced to the other core races, so you've pretty much got... The svirfneblin as the only solid example of an OP race, and everyone pretty much knew that already. Svirfneblin has been the same since back in 3.0/3.5 when he had a +3 ECL. Two words about the Drow: Spell Resistance.
I've had this happen to me so many times I can't even begin to count them all. I created a whole dark fantasy world based off of HP Lovecraft complete with maps, societies, monarchs, major NPCs with write ups, factions, guilds, etc. only to have it railroaded by "off-color" characters. I also have a limited number of people I know who do any gaming so banning the players in question wasn't really an option for me either. Best advice: Go with it. Let him rob every store in town... and get hunted down and thrown in jail (or worse) for it. The NPCs may not see him pocket an item but they can put two-and-two together ("First I had that magic ring on display, then Lion-O came in, now it's gone. Hmmm.") Your game isn't Fallout or Elder Scrolls where the NPC's actions are confined to a few predefined, scripted actions. They'll call the guards (who don't really care about his 'civil rights') and make him empty his pockets purely on suspicion. If he's caught -or even simply suspected- have the NPCs chase him around with a torches and pitchforks, or follow him around screaming obscenities and warning other NPCs to watch him like a hawk making sneakiness impossible. Maybe the store he robbed was under Thieves Guild "protection" and are much better at the whole miscreant thing than he ever will be and don't take to kindly to his unsanctioned robbery of people who've paid their racketeering payment. If you're intent on running a serious game but the players aren't the best way to avoid this is to let them do what he wants and then make them wish he hadn't. *When* he's caught have him publicly branded on the forehead as a thief or lose a hand. Don't be afraid to take him down a peg or two. While harsh it does create a more serious tone and at the same time doesn't restrict the players actions with a bunch of out-of-game bickering. Give him all the rope he wants then hang him with it. Rinse/repeat until his new character is more suited to the scenario you hope to run. While this method sidelines any hope of plot advancement (which will also likely get the other players to pressure him away from acting in a certain way, doing your job for you) it's better to let him get it out of his system now than later when the consequences to the plot would be more dire. Do not feel guilty about it either. DMing should be every bit as fun for you as playing is for them. If it isn't because a player is making your life miserable you should take it upon yourself to have fun at that players expense. It's only fair.
Hmmm. That's an interesting question. I'd say that since it's a spell it should be functionally the same no matter what the weapon type is since it's essentially just what the spell looks like that changes from deity to deity. It's function wouldn't change, just it's form, imo. Though, admittedly, I don't think there's anything specific in the rules that say so.
Oscar Mike, I think you missed the point of the ARG. It breaks down exactly how the races are stronger, and gives point systems so you can attempt to balance races, or avoid teams where race will make a difference (a goblin and a drow noble will have very different power levels at Level1, for example). This would be like Pathfinder publishing their formulae for determining class balance, in that it makes the playing field much more even :) Well if you found that to be the case, great. I didn't find that to be the case for anything except the core races. The new races had way more starting umpf than the core races, imo. Try it at home: make a 1st level Aasimar Paladin or Cleric and then make a 1st level Human Paladin or Cleric and compare. Make a 1st level Tiefling Rouge then make a 1st level Halfling Rouge. There's no comparison; the new races have so much more going for them out of the gate then the old races that theres little reason to want to stay with the older stuff (from a purely mechanical perspective anyway). It's the White Wolf/Palladium problem all over again. A new supplement comes out and the new material makes the old material obsolete.
I don't care how powerful a spellcaster is if he's grappled by a barbarian of the same level that mage is so much XP. You can't fire off your Power Word Kill through a mouth full of your own teeth. Conversely, if the spellcaster can keep his distance and knows that barbarian is gunning for him, there's likely to be one less barbarian in Golarion in no time flat. Environment, environment, environment. Also don't forget about monsters! A gelatinous cube is going to be cake for a spellcaster while the martial classes struggle. A pack of drow are going to get eaten alive by the martial classes while a spellcaster's spells bounce harmlessly off their SR. Fighters, barbarians, paladins meet a 2 HD rust-moster. Spellcasters meet a mechanical trap coated with a poison with a high Fort Save. Rouge meet a mob of creatures. Forget about looking at the classes in some sort of PvP kinda of way because that doesn't reflect game balance as I understand it. Alone, you are meat, no matter what your class is. RACE, on the other hand, is much bigger factor. Especially after the Advanced Race Guide. Some races just have waaaaaaay more advantages than others and *that* can threaten the balance of the game. Case in point: look at a Drow's starting traits compared to regular Elf, or a Svirfneblin to a normal Gnome.
Uncanny concentration enables you to not have to make concentration rolls for violent motion (pretty handy if you're on board a ship in the middle of a storm) and gives you a +2 on all other concentration checks too. where do you find the Strike/Surge feat? It's not a feat, it's a domain power for the Oceans sub-domain in the Advanced Player's Guide. It's replaces Icicle too so if you kiss your GM's butt well enough he may let you swap the basic water domain power for the Oceans subdomain power.I have it too. And Lopke's right it is pretty awesome. It's ranged bullrush or drag on one target. As a cleric with my second domain power I also took wind blast (wind sub domain power,also APG) which is like a wind-based hydraulic push spell with a shorter range. imma be a bull rushing fool. Edit: ...oh but you're a druid. Druid's start with the choice of one domain power or animal companion via. Nature's Bond. If you choose Water as your domain you can take Oceans, if you choose an animal companion you're out of luck.
I plan on taking a few levels in aquatic druid too even though it's going to nerf my healing abilities. Still though, Warp Wood is a must have, especially in a wand.
*I* am not telling you what you can and can't do—I'm telling you what US Copyright law says.When you buy a book, or a CD, or a DVD, or PDF, or a copy of Microsoft Office, or a portrait of yourself from a photo studio, you are *not* buying the copyright to it unless you're told otherwise, and so you don't get to do anything you want with it.Watch me. I'm not one of your employees, inasmuch, you don't get to tell me squat. If that's a problem feel free to not to sell anything, go broke, and find some other business that allows you to abuse your customers' most basic legal rights. For you I'd suggest government work. I don't need to be told what the law is! I just assume the law intends to screw me over since, 9 times out of 10, that turns out to be the case. They did not attach any caveat. You are beholden to the laws. In this case, copyright laws.Again, I haven't agreed to anything. They've attached some caveat to my purchase and have no basis for doing so.Let's turn that around. What they are saying is (in effect) "if you are intending to copy our PDFs then please do not buy them as that is not allowed". If you then buy them anyway, it's you who has been duplicitous. *sigh* I'm painfully aware that copyright enforcement goons will subpoena me for violating any one of their gazillion frivolous laws. "The man who is swimming against the stream knows the strength of it." ~Wilson I'm only *ethically* bound to observe *ethical* laws. Legalities are a moot point for reasons I've repeatedly pointed out elsewhere in this thread; they're bought and paid for by people who can afford to coax the criminal justice system to do what they want it to. Copyright/intellectual property laws, whose flimsy justifications don't stand up to an ounce of real scrutiny, do far more harm than good; they're bad laws. If I am bound to anything it's my civic responsibility to break bad, unjust or unethical laws. While I STILL agree that this is not the case here with Paizo, it is the case regarding the way those laws are being used in so many other ways and places that Paizo's restraint is comparatively of no consequence when assessing the the merits of the law itself. It's like trying to say 'the Nazis weren't all that bad because one of them rescued my kitten from a tree'.(inb4 someone tries to suggest I'm comparing Piazo to Nazis)
Not the answer I wanted to hear but thanks all the same.
I ordered Skull and Shackles AP #4 in hardcopy form awhile ago (order #2153741) while I got the print copy in the mail, it never showed up as one of my free downloads. I didn't even realize it until just now. I'm pretty sure it's supposed to be there since S&S #3 and #5 both show up and both of those shipped at the same time and in the same order. I know you folks are swamped at the moment but some help would be great.
The targeted area of the spell is also relevant (as pointed out by someone else on this thread). How did the PC know where the Deeper Darkness was going to be cast or that it was going to be cast in an objectionable spot? Yeah I'd say this was all meta-gaming on your PC's part. He *could* have made the AoO if he had known the specifics. Since it's not really feasible that he did, I'd say he wouldn't have, should shut his pie hole and enjoy the deeper darkness. imo.
So here's a situation I encountered in my game that I'm GMing: the PCs had two NPCs with them that they'd been fighting alongside and using the benefits of their spells and attacks and special abilities as allies. One of the NPCs casts deeper darkness and one of the PCs suddenly declares he is going to take an AoO to attack the NPC to disrupt the spell. He claims he can choose who is an ally and who is an enemy on a case to case and swing to swing basis. I didn't argue because I really wasn't sure about it but it sounded metagamey because his PC wouldn't know wtf was going on and I seriously doubt he would generally take a hack at someone who'd been buffing him the round before (and the PC bard had been counting as an ally for performance purposes). At the point where your PC is using an attack of opportunity on a spellcaster he's not really an ally anymore which would instantly cancel any beneficial bard-like abilities. The question you had about meta-gaming is legit too. How did the PC come to know what spell he was casting? Was there a Perception check to notice the spell was even being cast? Was there a knowledge: arcana or spellcraft check involved? If not, then I'd tell the PC to shut his pie hole and enjoy the deeper darkness. If so I'd have that NPC refuse to cast a beneficial spell ever again. Attacking a friendly NPC -even with non-lethal damage- is a good way of turning a friendly NPC into an unfriendly one... doing so in the middle of combat is also a really bad idea.
Let's turn that around. What they are saying is (in effect) "if you are intending to copy our PDFs then please do not buy them as that is not allowed". If you then buy them anyway, it's you who has been duplicitous. Again, I haven't agreed to anything. They've attached some caveat to my purchase and have no basis for doing so. A bar might not be able to dictate what you do with the pint you've just purchased, but if you pour it over the guy sitting next to you and smash the glass, they will probably ban you from coming back. Same principle with Paizo and PDFs. You know, you're absolutely right. In Paizo's case they've decided to ban someone for violating their TOS (something I can agree is an appropriate course of action to protect their investment). Moreover Paizo has NOT violated anyone's property to the best of my knowledge by doing so either. This fact is not lost on me. It's hard to separate the Paizos from the RIAAs & Monsantos when they're both using the same claims (intellectual property) to justify totally different courses of action. In Paizo's case (to the best of my knowledge and to their credit) they haven't sued anyone for having a "bootleg" .pdf or pushed for legislation restricting people's access to the internet... the same cannot be said for those scoundrels at the RIAA and in Monsanto.
So no then? You'd just like it to be true. LOL!
... if anything is skewed here it's the notion that I'm under some positive obligation to protect a business's intellectual property rights when they simultaneously think it's just dandy to violate my private property rights.And they violate them how? If they tell you:"If you want to buy this, you cannot give it to anyone and may not make copies of it", and then you buy it, you have agreed to the terms above. It's that simple. Nobody is forcing you to buy it. It isn't for them to tell me what I can do with my purchase. If they're that concerned about how people will use what they produce then they shouldn't produce it at all. For example: If you respond to this post you owe me your house.
Although I'm not convinced purchasing a PDF conveys property rights (and quibbling over whether that therefore constitutes a sale would be "being deliberately literal in order to be argumentative", right?) If I buy something do I own it? the customers' private property > a businesses' intellectual property. This again? It's called "Hume's Guillotine". In ethics there is a separation between "Is" from "Ought". The argument I've laid out here (and about a million other places elsewhere on teh interwebz) isn't about what "is" at all, but rather what "ought". What "is" stinks and needs to be done away with before it can do anymore harm.
Because the customer is NOT always right. Quite often, the customer is dead wrong, and sometimes, they need to be told that. This is one of those times. Since we're being deliberately literal in order to be argumentative does that mean when the customer is wrong they die? Does the spirit of Adam Smith slay them? Nonetheless, no, YOU'RE wrong and the customers' private property > a businesses' intellectual property. Beware of Adam Smith's ghost! This is the problem with trying to have a rational debate with folks about a contentious matter - someone always comes in with completely skewed, off-base ideas, and valid debate gets lost in the noise. ... if anything is skewed here it's the notion that I'm under some positive obligation to protect a business's intellectual property rights when they simultaneously think it's just dandy to violate my private property rights.
|