Persepolis's page

I'd like to talk about how to handle discrepancies between one's own GM style and that of others? I'd like to lay out general parameters and then a specific PFS1 situation.

In general, I find that Org Play GMs take a fairly loose approach to rules interpretation, except for rules specific to organized play. The reason (as I see it) is because a player may have an entire build made around a certain loose interpretation of the rules, and if a GM refuses to allow it, or allows it with serious restrictions, then the players preferred build may be non-viable.

Specific case: A player in my local Org Play community has a PC with a rod of wonder. An important part of his build is taking the rod somewhere secluded in the local town and simply using the wand until he gets a roll of 66—69 [Reduce wielder two size categories (no save) for 1 day]. He relies on this to buff his stealth, ranged attacks and so on.

The player pretends that the many side effects of the rod (fireballs, stinking clouds, summoned rhinos and elephants, etc) shouldn't matter, because he claims that no one is around to be affected by them and he can one-shot the summoned creatures. So he treats as just a matter of rolling dice until he gets what he wants, or even just doing it without the rolls.

He calls this part of his "shenanigans" -- the many ridiculous loopholes that he tries to bring into play. For example he runs a kineticist and insists that he doesn't need line of sight/line of effect to a target because of clause in the ability description that says he can strike a target "anywhere within range." To him this means "whether he can see it or not."

Personally, I despise this sort of metagaming, and if he ever runs that character at my table, the local authorities are going to complain to the local lodge about elephants crushing the town's trees, airburst fireballs scaring the townsfolk, and so on. And the local lodge will tell the PC to desist, with action by the authorities if he persists.

Other local GMs just hand-wave this nonsense, because of the "let players do anything that's technically legal, however outlandish" approach.

How do you all handle situations like this?

I’ve seen a number of guides to building paladins, and most recommend Magical Knack as the single best trait for a paladin.

I understand the importance of making up the paladin’s caster level deficit, so that part is good. But these sites claim that +2 caster level will add “hours” to the duration of the paladin’s buffs, and that this is what makes the knack indispensable.

I’ve looked through the Paladin’s spell list, and the only buff I can find with a duration measured in hours is Greater Magic Weapon, which a paladin really shouldn’t need by the time they’re able to cast it. Is there some vital buff that I’m missing, or is Magical Knack being oversold?

I searched the forum and found lots and lots of threads about Explosive Runes, but I didn't see any that precisely addressed this question.

The spell description states, "You and any characters you specifically instruct can read the protected writing without triggering the explosive runes." To me, this suggests that there's a particular way of reading the runes without triggering them, and that method can be taught even to non-mages. So it seems to be something like a password, a specific gesture, reading them with your left eye closed, or something like that.

Which leads to the question: Can the caster, or someone else who knows how to read the runes safely, deliberately choose to set them off?

Hi all! First post here. I'd like to get your feedback on how I'm interpreting the rules.

I'm building a troll NPC Barbarian 2, and giving him the Lesser Fiend Totem rage power (Advanced Player's Guide p.75)

While raging, the barbarian grows a pair of large horns, gaining a gore attack. This attack is a primary attack (unless she is also attacking with weapons, in which case it is a secondary attack) and is made at the barbarian’s full base attack bonus (–5 if it is a secondary attack). The gore attack deals 1d8 points of piercing damage (1d6 if Small) plus the barbarian’s Strength modifier (1/2 if it is a secondary attack).

This was apparently written for a normal PC barbarian, and not for a troll, so I had to make some modifications. I bumped the gore damage up from 1d8 (medium) to 2d6 (large). I think this is pretty standard.

The table "Natural Attacks by Size" says that Bite, Claw and Gore are all primary attacks. The troll barbarian won't be using any weapons, just his natural attacks. The troll's bite and claw are both primary in the write-up, so I'm making his gore primary as well.

Is that how you all read it?