paizo.com Recent Posts by Petrus222paizo.com Recent Posts by Petrus2222023-03-10T23:56:09Z2023-03-10T23:56:09ZRe: Forums: Advice: Advice about a problem player...Petrus222https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ud4k&page=3?Advice-about-a-problem-player#1182017-05-26T19:53:55Z2017-05-26T19:53:55Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Rhedyn wrote:</div><blockquote><br />
<br />
Loose associate of party (she didn't help lift the curse) offers to fix the condition.</p>
<p>You respond by withdrawing your reward from the people who did help you because they associate with this person who offered to fix your new problem in a way you didn't like.</blockquote><p>1. They're pirates. They're not exactly known as the most trustworthy group on the planet.
<p>2. Even pirates, with their loose interpretation of morals, don't necessarily want their mother figures turned into cannibalistic soulless serial killers... Okay, I'm sure some do, but they're probably not on good terms with their mom in the first place so that's a moot point. </p>
<p>3. If someone offers to do that your loved ones, it either means they're full of crap and dangerously delusional, or they're capable of doing it which makes them extraordinarily dangerous and not someone you want around. (i.e. who's to say it won't be done to you non-consensually for the lolz...) </p>
<p>Either way, dealing with a pirate captain, the PCs should be happy they didn't get forced to walk the plank in freshly chummed water because they were too big a threat to the crew. </p>
<p>"You then make said person grovel before you..."
<br />
Pirate in a position of power... it really shouldn't be a surprise that they'd enjoy someone begging for their life. It's kind of their thing. They're pirates. </p>
<p>(And that ignores that the person offering to fix the "problem" basically offered to do it in a pretty terrible fashion.) </p>
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Quote:</div><blockquote>Pirate captain sounds like a complete loon. </blockquote><p>Pirate captains tend to get a lot of latitude in what's normal for them... and that's ignoring the whole, I'll turn your mom into a vampire for the price of her soul.
<p>That's not the sort of offer you just casually drop in someone's lap and hope for the best with. You have to work your way up to that sort of thing.</p>Rhedyn wrote:Loose associate of party (she didn't help lift the curse) offers to fix the condition.You respond by withdrawing your reward from the people who did help you because they associate with this person who offered to fix your new problem in a way you didn't like.
1. They're pirates. They're not exactly known as the most trustworthy group on the planet. 2. Even pirates, with their loose interpretation of morals, don't necessarily want their mother figures turned into cannibalistic...Petrus2222017-05-26T19:53:55ZRe: Forums: Advice: Concerned About Archer Player Taking Point Blank MasterPetrus222https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2u4mq&page=2?Concerned-About-Archer-Player-Taking-Point#612017-01-19T21:13:20Z2017-01-19T21:13:20Z<p>Balkoth, you mentioned that archers don't have a down side right? </p>
<p>Sword and board trades damage for AC
<br />
2H trades AC for Damage
<br />
Archers trade AoO's for ranged attacks as they don't threaten any squares. (Unless they can kick or punch with a gauntlet but that damage is so non-stellar as to be moot... or you can take a bunch of feats to do the AoO at range.) </p>
<p>Long story short, you're overstating the value of PBM. </p>
<p>If you want to "mess" with him, sunder (magic missile) the bow string, keep track of his ammunition, warpword his arrows, use invisible opponents, use mirror imaged opponents, darkness, fog, Create pit him etc.</p>Balkoth, you mentioned that archers don't have a down side right?
Sword and board trades damage for AC
2H trades AC for Damage
Archers trade AoO's for ranged attacks as they don't threaten any squares. (Unless they can kick or punch with a gauntlet but that damage is so non-stellar as to be moot... or you can take a bunch of feats to do the AoO at range.)
Long story short, you're overstating the value of PBM.
If you want to "mess" with him, sunder (magic missile) the bow string, keep track...Petrus2222017-01-19T21:13:20ZRe: Forums: Advice: Name my HammerPetrus222https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2u2lf?Name-my-Hammer#72016-12-14T20:03:50Z2016-12-14T20:03:50Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Pizza Lord wrote:</div><blockquote><p> 'Blunt Talk'
</p>
'Dead Horse Bane'
<br />
'Compromise' </blockquote><p>The diplomat.Pizza Lord wrote:'Blunt Talk'
'Dead Horse Bane'
'Compromise'
The diplomat.Petrus2222016-12-14T20:03:50ZRe: Forums: Advice: Name my HammerPetrus222https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2u2lf?Name-my-Hammer#42016-12-14T19:56:26Z2016-12-14T19:56:26Z<p>Name it "Molly's Reach" and claim that you use it for beachcombing.</p>
<p>And that's probably pretty obscure so just go with Molly (Maul-y.)</p>Name it "Molly's Reach" and claim that you use it for beachcombing.
And that's probably pretty obscure so just go with Molly (Maul-y.)Petrus2222016-12-14T19:56:26ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Startoss style and... melee damage?Petrus222https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2txjg?Startoss-style-and-melee-damage#42016-09-29T21:58:40Z2016-09-29T21:58:40Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Chess Pwn wrote:</div><blockquote><p> yes it applies thrown or melee.
</p>
<a href="http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2sap9&page=12?Pathfinder-Player-Companion-Weapon-Masters#598" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">author of feat saying it works</a> </blockquote><p>Woot!Chess Pwn wrote:yes it applies thrown or melee.
author of feat saying it works
Woot!Petrus2222016-09-29T21:58:40ZForums: Rules Questions: Startoss style and... melee damage?Petrus222https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2txjg?Startoss-style-and-melee-damage#12016-09-29T21:46:18Z2016-09-29T21:46:18Z<p>Does the extra damage from the three startoss styles feats apply to melee damage done with a thrown weapon? (e.g. daggers, clubs, short spears, throwing axes etc.)</p>
<p>RAW seems to imply yes, RAI, I'm not so sure. </p>
<p>Thoughts?</p>Does the extra damage from the three startoss styles feats apply to melee damage done with a thrown weapon? (e.g. daggers, clubs, short spears, throwing axes etc.)
RAW seems to imply yes, RAI, I'm not so sure.
Thoughts?Petrus2222016-09-29T21:46:18ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Slipslinger and startoss stylePetrus222https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2twqk?Slipslinger-and-startoss-style#92016-09-23T20:32:38Z2016-09-23T20:32:38Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">CBDunkerson wrote:</div><blockquote>As a swift action, you can enter the stance employed by the fighting style a style feat embodies. Although you cannot use a style feat before combat begins, the style you are in persists until you spend a swift action to switch to a different combat style...</blockquote><p>That's interesting. The text of "When using (style feat name)..." found in so many of the feats really muddles the above.CBDunkerson wrote:As a swift action, you can enter the stance employed by the fighting style a style feat embodies. Although you cannot use a style feat before combat begins, the style you are in persists until you spend a swift action to switch to a different combat style...
That's interesting. The text of "When using (style feat name)..." found in so many of the feats really muddles the above.Petrus2222016-09-23T20:32:38ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Slipslinger and startoss stylePetrus222https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2twqk?Slipslinger-and-startoss-style#72016-09-23T18:54:11Z2016-09-23T18:54:11Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">CBDunkerson wrote:</div><blockquote> Style feats always require you to 'activate their stance' to gain the benefit, so no the fact that Slipslinger doesn't include that precise text doesn't change how it works.</blockquote><p>Can you show the text that says that? It may be canon, but I can't seem to find it.CBDunkerson wrote:Style feats always require you to 'activate their stance' to gain the benefit, so no the fact that Slipslinger doesn't include that precise text doesn't change how it works.
Can you show the text that says that? It may be canon, but I can't seem to find it.Petrus2222016-09-23T18:54:11ZForums: Rules Questions: Slingstaff questionPetrus222https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2tx3e?Slingstaff-question#12016-09-23T16:25:51Z2016-09-23T16:25:51Z<p>Does the "2 handed Thrower feat" work with a sling or slingstaff? </p>
<p>I can't really think of a good reason that it wouldn't but I thought I'd throw it to the boards.</p>
<p>Also do Belts of hurling work with a slingstaff?</p>
<p>I didn't see a FAQ but it's early and the coffee hasn't kicked in yet.</p>Does the "2 handed Thrower feat" work with a sling or slingstaff?
I can't really think of a good reason that it wouldn't but I thought I'd throw it to the boards.
Also do Belts of hurling work with a slingstaff?
I didn't see a FAQ but it's early and the coffee hasn't kicked in yet.Petrus2222016-09-23T16:25:51ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Slipslinger and startoss stylePetrus222https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2twqk?Slipslinger-and-startoss-style#62016-09-18T04:23:10Z2016-09-18T04:23:10Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">CBDunkerson wrote:</div><blockquote> Style feats always require you to 'activate their stance' to gain the benefit, so no the fact that Slipslinger doesn't include that precise text doesn't change how it works. </blockquote><p>Does that mean for djinn style and efreeti style etc. you only get the extra elemental fist while you're in the style? The writing seems to suggest differently.CBDunkerson wrote:Style feats always require you to 'activate their stance' to gain the benefit, so no the fact that Slipslinger doesn't include that precise text doesn't change how it works.
Does that mean for djinn style and efreeti style etc. you only get the extra elemental fist while you're in the style? The writing seems to suggest differently.Petrus2222016-09-18T04:23:10ZForums: Rules Questions: Slipslinger and startoss stylePetrus222https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2twqk?Slipslinger-and-startoss-style#12016-09-17T21:07:27Z2016-09-17T21:07:27Z<p>Reading most of the weapon master style feats they say "while using this style...." But slipslinger doesn't. Does that mean you can use the two styles simultaneously without any special ability to do so? (Only interested in the first feat in the slinger style chain the others from it aren't needed.)</p>Reading most of the weapon master style feats they say "while using this style...." But slipslinger doesn't. Does that mean you can use the two styles simultaneously without any special ability to do so? (Only interested in the first feat in the slinger style chain the others from it aren't needed.)Petrus2222016-09-17T21:07:27ZRe: Forums/Lost Omens Campaign Setting: General Discussion: Misandrists in the setting?Petrus222https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2tjl6&page=2?Misandrists-in-the-setting#802016-04-27T10:03:00Z2016-04-26T19:40:05Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">littlediegito wrote:</div><blockquote>Rather, I think it suggests that dividing roles between the genders is destructive. </blockquote><p>I get the argument, but there are certain roles and differences that are imposed by biology. Males don't menstruate. Women don't get prostate cancer. Men can't lactate without serious hormone treatments. Women can't impregnate other women without a lab and some serious science. Men have ~10x as much testosterone as women do which causes physical differences both good and bad.
<p>Simply put differences exist between the genders. They don't have to lead to hate or devaluing people like Jessica's argument implies they must (particularly in a fantasy world where reality is pretty malleable.)</p>littlediegito wrote:Rather, I think it suggests that dividing roles between the genders is destructive.
I get the argument, but there are certain roles and differences that are imposed by biology. Males don't menstruate. Women don't get prostate cancer. Men can't lactate without serious hormone treatments. Women can't impregnate other women without a lab and some serious science. Men have ~10x as much testosterone as women do which causes physical differences both good and bad. Simply put...Petrus2222016-04-26T19:40:05ZRe: Forums/Lost Omens Campaign Setting: General Discussion: Misandrists in the setting?Petrus222https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2tjl6&page=2?Misandrists-in-the-setting#782016-04-26T19:21:19Z2016-04-26T19:21:19Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:</div><blockquote><br />
<br />
You really are blithely ignoring facts presented to you.</blockquote><p>Not really, I said if your argument is correct, this is the conclusion it leads to, and if you don't like that you need to revisit your assumptions.
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Quote:</div><blockquote>I don't really care if you find one isolated tribe, or some sci-fi social experiment of a society that works the way you imagine it.</blockquote><p>You should. If they've created a working way to address inherent differences without creating hate they're closer to your goal than you are.
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Quote:</div><blockquote>We live and bleed in the real world, and the real world gives constant examples that you can not have equality when you put value and role differences on physical gender.</blockquote><p>The problem here is in how you measure equality. Is it equality of outcome or opportunity?
<p>If you measure it based purely on outcome, you by nature have to limit choice. If you measure it by opportunity, on the surface things may not look equal at all even though it is functionally equal. </p>
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Quote:</div><blockquote>The only way to get out of the trap of the conclusion is to stop buying into the premise. </blockquote><p>Agreed but I'm not so sure you're doing that with Jessica's arguement. It just circles down the same path to where you started from.Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:You really are blithely ignoring facts presented to you.
Not really, I said if your argument is correct, this is the conclusion it leads to, and if you don't like that you need to revisit your assumptions. Quote:I don't really care if you find one isolated tribe, or some sci-fi social experiment of a society that works the way you imagine it.
You should. If they've created a working way to address inherent differences without creating hate they're closer to your...Petrus2222016-04-26T19:21:19ZRe: Forums/Lost Omens Campaign Setting: General Discussion: Misandrists in the setting?Petrus222https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2tjl6&page=2?Misandrists-in-the-setting#672016-04-26T18:48:44Z2016-04-26T18:48:44Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:</div><blockquote>The argument is that enforcing social roles based on physical gender inevitably leads to the misery we've lived through for all genders.</blockquote><p>I'm not so sure that's what was said earlier. The argument was more along the lines that inherent differences unavoidably lead to hate. I don't think they do and no one's offered a good reason why they have to. Just that it's never been done before... and I'm not convinced that's the case either. (Or even philosophically relevant to a fantasy world where reality works differently at the GM's discretion.)Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:The argument is that enforcing social roles based on physical gender inevitably leads to the misery we've lived through for all genders.
I'm not so sure that's what was said earlier. The argument was more along the lines that inherent differences unavoidably lead to hate. I don't think they do and no one's offered a good reason why they have to. Just that it's never been done before... and I'm not convinced that's the case either. (Or even philosophically relevant...Petrus2222016-04-26T18:48:44ZRe: Forums/Lost Omens Campaign Setting: General Discussion: Misandrists in the setting?Petrus222https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2tjl6&page=2?Misandrists-in-the-setting#652016-04-26T18:29:59Z2016-04-26T18:29:59Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:</div><blockquote><br />
<br />
History however has yet to show where this hasn't been the case.</blockquote><p>Okay, lets assume that you're correct and it's never happened in the past and therefore can't be done in the future.
<p>Your/Jessica's argument basically leads to the conclusion that because of inherent gender differences there will always be hatred between the genders. If so, you've basically made a strong case that men should be actively trying to oppress women in order to prevent being oppressed by women. </p>
<p>And maybe I'm an optimist, but I really don't think that's where you wanted to go with that.</p>Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:History however has yet to show where this hasn't been the case.
Okay, lets assume that you're correct and it's never happened in the past and therefore can't be done in the future. Your/Jessica's argument basically leads to the conclusion that because of inherent gender differences there will always be hatred between the genders. If so, you've basically made a strong case that men should be actively trying to oppress women in order to prevent being oppressed by...Petrus2222016-04-26T18:29:59ZRe: Forums/Lost Omens Campaign Setting: General Discussion: Misandrists in the setting?Petrus222https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2tjl6&page=2?Misandrists-in-the-setting#572016-04-26T17:41:11Z2016-04-26T17:41:11Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Jessica Price wrote:</div><blockquote>"Hate" is a strong word there </blockquote><p>You used hateful. It seemed appropriate in this context.
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Quote:</div><blockquote>As soon as you start dealing with permanent, inherent differences—gender, race, etc.—you get hateful rationalizations for the difference in power.</blockquote><p>You're making a statement here, but you're not explaining why it has to be that way. My point is that the rationalizations don't have to be hateful, in fact I think there's strong arguments that some of the differences you mention (e.g. race) aren't inherent differences and shouldn't be viewed that way.
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Quote:</div><blockquote>That's a deeply disingenuous argument, and a silly one...</blockquote><p>Not really. It's directly reflected in your own examples and words:
</p>
"If our society treated those things as if they had value, those attitudes would also be more hateful. The only reason they're not is because women are disempowered..."
<br />
So unless you're going to argue that feminism isn't about empowering women it's pretty straightforward to follow the conclusion that'll be reached. </p>
<p>However I also think that's a shortsighted place to end up. There are ways, even if we haven't perfected them yet, to be different from one another and not have those differences result in hate or hateful attitudes. </p>
<p>"given that feminism opposes restrictions on roles based on gender"
<br />
Depends which version of feminism you're talking about. TERF's and real misandrists wouldn't agree with you on that. </p>
<p>"making it do precisely the opposite of what you're attempting to say."
<br />
Doesn't change that your original point is uncomfortably similar to a weak argument made by MRA's. </p>
<p>"But you already knew that—you weren't arguing in good faith."
<br />
Actually I was. I thought you were being too cynical about the situation. </p>
<p>"I'm done interacting with you. Welcome to my ignore list."
<br />
Well that escalated rapidly.</p>Jessica Price wrote:"Hate" is a strong word there
You used hateful. It seemed appropriate in this context. Quote:As soon as you start dealing with permanent, inherent differences--gender, race, etc.--you get hateful rationalizations for the difference in power.
You're making a statement here, but you're not explaining why it has to be that way. My point is that the rationalizations don't have to be hateful, in fact I think there's strong arguments that some of the differences you mention...Petrus2222016-04-26T17:41:11ZRe: Forums/Lost Omens Campaign Setting: General Discussion: Misandrists in the setting?Petrus222https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2tjl6&page=2?Misandrists-in-the-setting#552016-04-26T16:16:30Z2016-04-26T16:14:26Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Jessica Price wrote:</div><blockquote><br />
<br />
You seem to have missed my point, which is that it doesn't start out as hateful, but people will come to believe that people of one gender are inherently unsuited to the role of the other gender, and come up with a (hateful) justification for why.</blockquote><p>Not so much that I missed it, I just don't buy it. Your argument implies that women will inherently come to hate men because we're unsuited for breastfeeding and giving birth.
<p>Less flippantly, there are too many examples of asymmetric power relationships in the real world that don't devolve into hate on the broad scale for it to be inherently unstable.(e.g. parent and child, teacher and student, professor and student, doctor/nurse and patient, officers and soldiers etc.) </p>
<p>And all that ignores that we're talking about a fantasy world where it's easy to hand wave reasons why it could be stable.
<br />
E.g.: -gender 1 of race XYZ literally can't think further than a month in advance for biological reasons therefore gender 2 takes care of leadership
<br />
-they're short-lived mammals but have a 2 year gestation period that is exceedingly prone to miscarriage, therefore pregnant females have to be sheltered and protected to keep the species alive. the males in that society believe that the defense, safekeeping and happiness of their females is the highest virtue they can pursue and guarantees their entrance into their version of heaven. (And in that particular fantasy world, it may.)
<br />
-The society lives in a dangerous environment and uses stimulants to keep alert, but only gender can safely take those stimulants</p>
<p>Besides, if that's truly what you believe, it pretty closely mirrors why MRA's argue that feminism leads to misandry, and while I can see how that link can be made, I also think that society can find a way around that trap too.</p>Jessica Price wrote:You seem to have missed my point, which is that it doesn't start out as hateful, but people will come to believe that people of one gender are inherently unsuited to the role of the other gender, and come up with a (hateful) justification for why.
Not so much that I missed it, I just don't buy it. Your argument implies that women will inherently come to hate men because we're unsuited for breastfeeding and giving birth. Less flippantly, there are too many examples of...Petrus2222016-04-26T16:14:26ZRe: Forums/Lost Omens Campaign Setting: General Discussion: Misandrists in the setting?Petrus222https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2tjl6&page=2?Misandrists-in-the-setting#522016-04-26T00:59:10Z2016-04-26T00:59:10Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Jessica Price wrote:</div><blockquote><br />
<br />
But a sexist/patriarchal/matriarchal society without misogyny/misandry is in an inherently unstable state.</blockquote><p>That's a bit of a stretch. Consider a very authoritarian society which also instills a strong sense of duty to protect and nurture one's charges. While an outsider might view the actions of the leader class as sexist, that does not inherently make their actions hateful.
<p>"That is, the people in power are in power because they are somehow inherently better, and the people not in power are not in power because they're somehow inherently not suited to it."</p>
<p>Or that justification could just be a belief that distributed power is inefficient and that they elevate themselves by placing society's needs above their own. (I.e. they follow the leader rather than their own selfish needs/wants.)</p>
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Quote:</div><blockquote>So while you can theoretically construct a society that's matriarchal or patriarchal without misandry or misogyny, such a construction is artificial and unlikely to last unless you have some sort of benign, probably magical influence that's propping up the society and scouring out negative attitudes to the gender not in charge.</blockquote><p>Nah. If the power in society is sufficiently centralized, the vast majority of the gender in charge will be relatively powerless. At which point it's less of a gender thing than it is a kyriarchy thing that just happens to be sex based. (As opposed to power that's based on gender.)Jessica Price wrote:But a sexist/patriarchal/matriarchal society without misogyny/misandry is in an inherently unstable state.
That's a bit of a stretch. Consider a very authoritarian society which also instills a strong sense of duty to protect and nurture one's charges. While an outsider might view the actions of the leader class as sexist, that does not inherently make their actions hateful. "That is, the people in power are in power because they are somehow inherently better, and the...Petrus2222016-04-26T00:59:10ZRe: Forums: Advice: Build ideas?Petrus222https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2tmbi?Build-ideas#52016-04-24T18:42:53Z2016-04-24T18:42:53Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">UnArcaneElection wrote:</div><blockquote>Mad Bomber Alchemist is another possibility. </blockquote><p>I like that. Wear armor, use the mutagen to up dex and then attack touch AC from range (and preferably from hiding.)UnArcaneElection wrote:Mad Bomber Alchemist is another possibility.
I like that. Wear armor, use the mutagen to up dex and then attack touch AC from range (and preferably from hiding.)Petrus2222016-04-24T18:42:53ZRe: Forums: Advice: Build ideas?Petrus222https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2tmbi?Build-ideas#22016-04-24T17:59:19Z2016-04-24T17:59:19Z<p>Honestly you're better off going Wizard or Arcane Sorceror. With your Dex and Con you want to be as far away from melee as possible.</p>
<p>With regard to race, I'd strongly consider gnome or halfing for the AC size bonus and the bonuses to Dex or Con. </p>
<p>If you go that route, you might look into the sniping rules and see if your GM will let you snipe with spells. There's a neat halfing racial trait swift as shadows that would make that entertaining.</p>
<p>If you go this route, I'd strongly recommend improved initiative as your 1st level feat.</p>Honestly you're better off going Wizard or Arcane Sorceror. With your Dex and Con you want to be as far away from melee as possible.
With regard to race, I'd strongly consider gnome or halfing for the AC size bonus and the bonuses to Dex or Con.
If you go that route, you might look into the sniping rules and see if your GM will let you snipe with spells. There's a neat halfing racial trait swift as shadows that would make that entertaining.
If you go this route, I'd strongly recommend...Petrus2222016-04-24T17:59:19ZForums: Rules Questions: Wpn Spec and Splash Weapons.Petrus222https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2tl5l?Wpn-Spec-and-Splash-Weapons#12016-04-08T22:40:07Z2016-04-08T22:40:07Z<p>If a character took weapon specialization (splash weapons), would the bonus damage apply to the target only, or the target and the splash victims too?
<br />
For alchemist bombs the splash does by virtue of the damage being based on the minimum to the target, but for alchemist fire or holy water? It's not so clear to me. (e.g. Point Blank shot FAQ specifically says the damage is only added to the target.)</p>If a character took weapon specialization (splash weapons), would the bonus damage apply to the target only, or the target and the splash victims too?
For alchemist bombs the splash does by virtue of the damage being based on the minimum to the target, but for alchemist fire or holy water? It's not so clear to me. (e.g. Point Blank shot FAQ specifically says the damage is only added to the target.)Petrus2222016-04-08T22:40:07ZRe: Forums: Advice: How to build a character that makes nobody else have fun; or how I learned to not fear power creepPetrus222https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2tit3&page=2?How-to-build-a-character-that-makes-nobody#602016-03-14T23:17:55Z2016-03-14T23:17:55Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Scott Wilhelm wrote:</div><blockquote><p> I found 2 ways to make the other players hate me...</p>
<p>2) This is for PFS: get Scent, Blind Fighting, and carry an Eversmoking Bottle. You will make everybody Blind, including you, but you'll be mostly okay due to Scent and Blind Fighting...</blockquote><p>I don't know that scent would work around an eversmoking bottle. Anyone who's ever sat by a campfire for more than ten minutes isn't going to be smelling much of anything other than the smoke.Scott Wilhelm wrote:I found 2 ways to make the other players hate me...
2) This is for PFS: get Scent, Blind Fighting, and carry an Eversmoking Bottle. You will make everybody Blind, including you, but you'll be mostly okay due to Scent and Blind Fighting...
I don't know that scent would work around an eversmoking bottle. Anyone who's ever sat by a campfire for more than ten minutes isn't going to be smelling much of anything other than the smoke.Petrus2222016-03-14T23:17:55ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Magic weapon bonuses... do they stack?Petrus222https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2sxih?Magic-weapon-bonuses-do-they-stack#172015-09-11T22:24:51Z2015-09-11T22:22:36Z<p>One more:</p>
<p>Holy, axiomatic and bane each grant an extra 2d6 untyped damage against critters that meet the criteria. </p>
<p>Again against said demon: would a +1 holy, axiomatic, bane (demon) sword do an extra 6d6 damage or just +2d6 (assuming that the extra 2d6 from each enchantment doesn't stack.)</p>One more:
Holy, axiomatic and bane each grant an extra 2d6 untyped damage against critters that meet the criteria.
Again against said demon: would a +1 holy, axiomatic, bane (demon) sword do an extra 6d6 damage or just +2d6 (assuming that the extra 2d6 from each enchantment doesn't stack.)Petrus2222015-09-11T22:22:36ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Magic weapon bonuses... do they stack?Petrus222https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2sxih?Magic-weapon-bonuses-do-they-stack#162015-09-11T22:24:57Z2015-09-11T22:09:25Z<p>In a similar vein to the original question consider a +1 furyborn bane (demons) sword:</p>
<p>Furyborn - A furyborn weapon draws power from the anger and frustration the wielder feels when battling foes that refuse to die. Each time the wielder damages an opponent with the weapon, its enhancement bonus increases by +1 when making attacks against that opponent (to a maximum total enhancement bonus of +5). </p>
<p>After the third attack against the demon is the sword at +5 or +3?</p>In a similar vein to the original question consider a +1 furyborn bane (demons) sword:
Furyborn - A furyborn weapon draws power from the anger and frustration the wielder feels when battling foes that refuse to die. Each time the wielder damages an opponent with the weapon, its enhancement bonus increases by +1 when making attacks against that opponent (to a maximum total enhancement bonus of +5).
After the third attack against the demon is the sword at +5 or +3?Petrus2222015-09-11T22:09:25ZForums: Rules Questions: Magic weapon bonuses... do they stack?Petrus222https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2sxih?Magic-weapon-bonuses-do-they-stack#12015-09-13T02:48:11Z2015-09-11T18:38:46Z<p>Bane - "Against a designated foe, the weapon's enhancement bonus is +2 better than its actual bonus"</p>
<p>Furious - "When the wielder is raging or under the effect of a rage spell, the weapon's enhancement bonus is +2 better than normal."</p>
<p>These appear to be untyped bonuses to an enhancement bonus which suggests they'd stack... </p>
<p>So would a +1 furious, bane(demons) sword wielded by a raging barbarian against a demon be effectively a +5 sword against the demon? </p>
<p>My bloodrager would like to know. </p>
<p>Any thoughts?</p>Bane - "Against a designated foe, the weapon's enhancement bonus is +2 better than its actual bonus"
Furious - "When the wielder is raging or under the effect of a rage spell, the weapon's enhancement bonus is +2 better than normal."
These appear to be untyped bonuses to an enhancement bonus which suggests they'd stack...
So would a +1 furious, bane(demons) sword wielded by a raging barbarian against a demon be effectively a +5 sword against the demon?
My bloodrager would like to know.
...Petrus2222015-09-11T18:38:46ZRe: Forums: Hell's Rebels: Who will you worship in Hell's Rebels?Petrus222https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rnfj&page=3?Who-will-you-worship-in-Hells-Rebels#1052015-03-11T19:07:03Z2015-03-11T19:07:03Z<p>Gorum - oppression reduces conflict and breeds complacency among the downtrodden. It's time to put the iron back in their spine.</p>Gorum - oppression reduces conflict and breeds complacency among the downtrodden. It's time to put the iron back in their spine.Petrus2222015-03-11T19:07:03ZRe: Forums: Advice: Bloodrager - ShadowdancerPetrus222https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ryvq?Bloodrager-Shadowdancer#62015-02-09T21:08:46Z2015-02-09T21:08:46Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">TheOddGoblin wrote:</div><blockquote><br />
<br />
Is Shadowdancer really that weak of an option for the character? I do like the idea of Whirlwind Attack eventually being gained. </blockquote><p>More like bloodrager is awesome on it's own. If you want to go shadowdancer for fluff or class abilities do it, but you might regret that choice when you look at what you could have done had you gone straight bloodrager.TheOddGoblin wrote:Is Shadowdancer really that weak of an option for the character? I do like the idea of Whirlwind Attack eventually being gained.
More like bloodrager is awesome on it's own. If you want to go shadowdancer for fluff or class abilities do it, but you might regret that choice when you look at what you could have done had you gone straight bloodrager.Petrus2222015-02-09T21:08:46ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Great Weapons One HandedPetrus222https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rysl?Great-Weapons-One-Handed#52015-02-09T20:21:14Z2015-02-09T20:21:14Z<p>Not quite what you're looking for, but you could do a large dwarven waraxe two handed with a -2 penalty to hit.</p>Not quite what you're looking for, but you could do a large dwarven waraxe two handed with a -2 penalty to hit.Petrus2222015-02-09T20:21:14ZRe: Forums: Advice: Bloodrager - ShadowdancerPetrus222https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ryvq?Bloodrager-Shadowdancer#22015-02-09T20:18:55Z2015-02-09T20:18:55Z<p>If you want to optimize, then don't go Shadowdancer. Drop Wpn Focus for power attack and dodge for furious focus. </p>
<p>Also don't drop the level 1 bloodrage ability. You want to cause problems for casters and the arcane blood line is the way to do that. There aren't many ways of increasing concentration checks and you've found one. </p>
<p>Step-up should be in your future. </p>
<p>BUT that's only if you want to optimize. Your character will probably do just fine with your current progression. (and I kind of wonder about taking whirlwind attack with your guy down the road if your encounters often use lots of mooks.)</p>If you want to optimize, then don't go Shadowdancer. Drop Wpn Focus for power attack and dodge for furious focus.
Also don't drop the level 1 bloodrage ability. You want to cause problems for casters and the arcane blood line is the way to do that. There aren't many ways of increasing concentration checks and you've found one.
Step-up should be in your future.
BUT that's only if you want to optimize. Your character will probably do just fine with your current progression. (and I kind of...Petrus2222015-02-09T20:18:55ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: rope dart weapon + distancePetrus222https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rx99?rope-dart-weapon-distance#22015-01-28T01:18:15Z2015-01-28T01:18:15Z<p>Because the dart is linked to the rope, most GM's would probably rule that you can either retrieve it as a free action and throw no further than 15' or 20' or you can throw it further and not be able to get it back because you had to let go of the rope. </p>
<p>Accordingly returning is a waste of time for this weapon unless you intend to throw it far and only once a round. </p>
<p>Distance is an interesting idea. Some GM's might be open to the rope magically extending and others would say distance just lets you throw it further (e.g. it gains magical loft)... but again, you're letting go of the rope attached to it so you can't use a free action to pull it back. </p>
<p>Remember the description is a metal spike attached to a 12' rope. Normally enchants don't actually change the physical structure of the weapon, (e.g. a distance arrow doesn't sudden extend 200' it just travels further)... that said some GM's might be open to it for the rope dart for flavor.</p>Because the dart is linked to the rope, most GM's would probably rule that you can either retrieve it as a free action and throw no further than 15' or 20' or you can throw it further and not be able to get it back because you had to let go of the rope.
Accordingly returning is a waste of time for this weapon unless you intend to throw it far and only once a round.
Distance is an interesting idea. Some GM's might be open to the rope magically extending and others would say distance just...Petrus2222015-01-28T01:18:15ZRe: Forums: Advice: Is the Trip Weapon Feature useless?Petrus222https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2r5kf?Is-the-Trip-Weapon-Feature-useless#482014-06-12T22:55:55Z2014-06-12T22:55:55Z<p>Has there ever been any ruling on tripping flyers? </p>
<p>In one nasty encounter tailored to the party, my trip/disarm maneuver master faced a flying barbarian with a great sword and a weapon cord. </p>
<p>The DM ruled that he was immune to being tripped (even though he was hovering only a few inches off the ground) and the wpn cord nullified the other half of my specialties but I always thought that was an overgenerous interpretation of flying.</p>Has there ever been any ruling on tripping flyers?
In one nasty encounter tailored to the party, my trip/disarm maneuver master faced a flying barbarian with a great sword and a weapon cord.
The DM ruled that he was immune to being tripped (even though he was hovering only a few inches off the ground) and the wpn cord nullified the other half of my specialties but I always thought that was an overgenerous interpretation of flying.Petrus2222014-06-12T22:55:55ZRe: Forums: Advice: The most powerful Monk?Petrus222https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qhd8&page=6?The-most-powerful-Monk#2812014-02-13T01:17:35Z2014-02-13T01:17:35Z<p>4 Fighter (Weapon Master) / 16 Monk (MoMS/Drunken Master/Qigong)</p>
<p>The four levels of weapon master net you light armor proficiency (Brawling armor), wpn training (gloves of dueling) and wpn specialization... a total of +6 to hit beyond BAB and +7 to damage on your unarmed strieks.</p>
<p>With MoMS you take dragon and snake for offense and defense/offense and what ever other styles you want. </p>
<p>Drunken Master gets you ki points if you want to use them, but I find that conserving my immediate actions for snake is a better use of them than spending on ki abilities (beyond buffing barksin before battle.)</p>4 Fighter (Weapon Master) / 16 Monk (MoMS/Drunken Master/Qigong)
The four levels of weapon master net you light armor proficiency (Brawling armor), wpn training (gloves of dueling) and wpn specialization... a total of +6 to hit beyond BAB and +7 to damage on your unarmed strieks.
With MoMS you take dragon and snake for offense and defense/offense and what ever other styles you want.
Drunken Master gets you ki points if you want to use them, but I find that conserving my immediate actions...Petrus2222014-02-13T01:17:35ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Crane Wing Errata in latest printingPetrus222https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qlnd&page=44?Crane-Wing-Errata-in-latest-printing#21852014-02-06T19:49:54Z2014-02-06T19:49:54Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Aelryinth wrote:</div><blockquote>Everyone is complaining about the nerfing of Crane Wing, but nobody is complaining about how it utterly stomps on Vital Strike, <b>and all Standard action attacks, or all monsters with only one attack.</b></blockquote><p>Meanwhile the kobold with a javelin snickered quietly to the short bow holding goblin...Aelryinth wrote:Everyone is complaining about the nerfing of Crane Wing, but nobody is complaining about how it utterly stomps on Vital Strike, and all Standard action attacks, or all monsters with only one attack.
Meanwhile the kobold with a javelin snickered quietly to the short bow holding goblin...Petrus2222014-02-06T19:49:54ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Crane Wing Errata in latest printingPetrus222https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qlnd&page=39?Crane-Wing-Errata-in-latest-printing#19142014-01-31T22:53:22Z2014-01-31T22:53:22Z<p>Jason, a new mechanic that could a long way to addressing some of the issues would be the ability to sacrifice an iterative attack for an effect. Full BAB PCs and monks could drop their lowest attacks (that weren't likely to hit anyways) for things like additional saves, moves, SR or DR, initiative, physical skill check bonuses etc. </p>
<p>(e.g. Drop an attack to go 2 higher in the initiative order has some potential.) </p>
<p>It seems to me that would be fairly easily balanced either as a feat or better as a combat maneuver... maybe call it Multitasking or the like. You could also make it scale based on the BAB of the attack sacrificed, (i.e. a +5 attack sacrifice would be proportionately level influential than sropping an attack normally made at +20 BAB). </p>
<p>It'd let PC's have a little more flexibility across the board, but favoring martials.</p>Jason, a new mechanic that could a long way to addressing some of the issues would be the ability to sacrifice an iterative attack for an effect. Full BAB PCs and monks could drop their lowest attacks (that weren't likely to hit anyways) for things like additional saves, moves, SR or DR, initiative, physical skill check bonuses etc.
(e.g. Drop an attack to go 2 higher in the initiative order has some potential.)
It seems to me that would be fairly easily balanced either as a feat or better...Petrus2222014-01-31T22:53:22ZRe: Forums: Advice: I ask for help in designing the 10 Asmodean PlaguesPetrus222https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qmto?I-ask-for-help-in-designing-the-10-Asmodean#92014-01-31T22:52:52Z2014-01-31T22:45:44Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Nearyn wrote:</div><blockquote>About a plague related to fire, any suggestions? In my head I'm weighing lighting the sky on fire, against lighting the ocean on fire. </blockquote><p>A lack of fire would be worse. No candles, no torches, no warm food, no cooked food, no warmth...Nearyn wrote:About a plague related to fire, any suggestions? In my head I'm weighing lighting the sky on fire, against lighting the ocean on fire.
A lack of fire would be worse. No candles, no torches, no warm food, no cooked food, no warmth...Petrus2222014-01-31T22:45:44ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Crane Wing Errata in latest printingPetrus222https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qlnd&page=39?Crane-Wing-Errata-in-latest-printing#19032014-01-31T22:22:34Z2014-01-31T22:22:34Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Rogue Eidolon wrote:</div><blockquote><br />
<br />
Huh? Given the choice between an easy-to-hit guy and a hard-to-hit guy either with or without images, you claim the images on the hard-to-hit guy make someone <i>more</i> likely to want to attack him? If that's the case, <b>I think your monsters are run in a very different way from the baseline standard that I have ever seen.</b> In general, images dissuade people from trying to hit you, not the other way around.</blockquote><p>Not really. When the BBEG and his minions are deciding who to attack it's often dependent on their damage output and their likelihood of depleting the PC's resources. If the choice is between the magus or ninja cleaving into you/your troops for lots of damage or a caster in the back who's using control spells or is focused on something else, that decision isn't always straight forward.
<p>(Kill the DPR PC or the healer isn't a straightforward call all the time.)</p>Rogue Eidolon wrote:Huh? Given the choice between an easy-to-hit guy and a hard-to-hit guy either with or without images, you claim the images on the hard-to-hit guy make someone more likely to want to attack him? If that's the case, I think your monsters are run in a very different way from the baseline standard that I have ever seen. In general, images dissuade people from trying to hit you, not the other way around.
Not really. When the BBEG and his minions are deciding who to attack it's...Petrus2222014-01-31T22:22:34ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Crane Wing Errata in latest printingPetrus222https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qlnd&page=38?Crane-Wing-Errata-in-latest-printing#18932014-01-31T22:33:18Z2014-01-31T21:52:49Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Throne wrote:</div><blockquote><br />
<br />
Basically, you have to balance around the high-end of optimisation.</blockquote><p>I guess my point is that this nerf isn't even that:
<p>MI and high AC is equivalent to or better than old CW and high AC.
<br />
MI and low AC is dramatically better than old CW and low AC.</p>
<p>And both of those statements ignore the pre-reqs to get to be able to use each ability [u]and[/u] the limitations of CW against range. </p>
<p>In short, MI out classes old CW across the board. If the former didn't need to be nerfed, than arguably the old CW definitely didn't.</p>Throne wrote:Basically, you have to balance around the high-end of optimisation.
I guess my point is that this nerf isn't even that: MI and high AC is equivalent to or better than old CW and high AC.
MI and low AC is dramatically better than old CW and low AC.
And both of those statements ignore the pre-reqs to get to be able to use each ability [u]and[/u] the limitations of CW against range.
In short, MI out classes old CW across the board. If the former didn't need to be nerfed, than...Petrus2222014-01-31T21:52:49ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Crane Wing Errata in latest printingPetrus222https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qlnd&page=38?Crane-Wing-Errata-in-latest-printing#18902014-01-31T21:46:22Z2014-01-31T21:46:22Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Rogue Eidolon wrote:</div><blockquote><br />
<br />
I think I found the root of the disconnect. You believe that a near-miss that pops an image is damage mitigation for <i>mirror image</i>, as you said here</blockquote><p>Arguably it is. From an spent action standpoint, the attack was used to deplete the mirror images. That's mitigation of damage to the party. (i.e. the monster could have attacked someone else and may well have been tempted to if they weren't hitting because of AC alone... attacking the mirror image is still a depletion of party resources. Maybe not the best depletion possible, but I'd rather the GM have to make that decision than not.)
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Quote:</div><blockquote>In fact, that is inarguably not the case.</blockquote><p>You missed a subtlety. If every attack hit the PC with Mirror image <i>and</i> caused damage, none of the images were hit. (I.e. they're still there next round... doesn't really matter though as the other arguments are far stronger than this one.)
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Quote:</div><blockquote>Crane is most effective for a tanky character. If you don't compare it for that kind of character, then the comparison is meaningless...</blockquote><p>Depends how you define effective. Run the numbers on mirror image vs crane vs neither for someone with low AC. Mirror image is dramatically better than crane from a mitigation standpoint.Rogue Eidolon wrote:I think I found the root of the disconnect. You believe that a near-miss that pops an image is damage mitigation for mirror image, as you said here
Arguably it is. From an spent action standpoint, the attack was used to deplete the mirror images. That's mitigation of damage to the party. (i.e. the monster could have attacked someone else and may well have been tempted to if they weren't hitting because of AC alone... attacking the mirror image is still a depletion of...Petrus2222014-01-31T21:46:22ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Crane Wing Errata in latest printingPetrus222https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qlnd&page=38?Crane-Wing-Errata-in-latest-printing#18872014-01-31T21:30:50Z2014-01-31T21:30:50Z<p>"Hmm, I don't think your comparison between them is a fair one, if we are assuming the high AC condition. To wit—"</p>
<p>Why assume only the high AC condition? It falsely limits the comparison to a narrow range that isn't representative of the total possibilities.</p>
<p>"-If you're buffing before an assault/ambush it's not a wasted standard action.</p>
<p>But if you're trying to tank a large number of attacks with it, you will lose all your images pretty often."</p>
<p>I'd argue that those attacks were still tanked regardless of whether by AC or with 5 pt misses. True the 5pt misses limit the damage mitigation potential, but by your own math mirror image on average still mitigates more attacks than crane wing even at high AC. </p>
<p>"You will then need to recast it over and over again, and that takes a standard action each time."</p>
<p>What if you don't recast it after buffing? If most fights are only 2-4 rounds, then that one casting probably lasted 2 rounds or so depending on positioning etc and the need to recast it may not actually be there. Damage mitigation by killing the monster faster is still mitigation.</p>
<p>"No, if there's a large number of attacks, then it's pretty likely that you will lose plenty of the images to near-misses and maybe one or two to deflections."</p>
<p>If it completely failed to prevent damage none of the attacks were misses or near misses, meaning the spell is still in place next round. (Bad luck to have that happen to be honest, but possible nonetheless.)</p>
<p>"Mirror image gives a % chance to avoid being hit that isn't 100%."</p>
<p>Against the first attack each round it's close enough. Even with only one image you're still looking at having to hit AC followed by a 50% miss chance. At high attack rolls (eg needing 16+) even one image is equivalent to 87.5% chance of damage mitigation... more images just raise that up. At lower AC's the mitigation instead comes from the multiple images, but it's still mitigated and dramatically so in comparison to just AC alone. </p>
<p>"Crane works against <b>some maneuvers</b> and can combine with <b>Deflect Arrows</b> (and at higher levels, freedom of movement if you have some support) to pretty much prevent the only maneuver left that really matters (grapple)."</p>
<p>You've just given a couple of examples that emphasize how much better mirror image is than the old crane wing. The fact that you need an additional feat and/or a spell to replicate the same effects of mirror image is pretty telling, especially on top of the CW pre-reqs and limitations. </p>
<p>"-Mirror image is a class ability available to arcane casters and ninja. It's not a 4-5 feat investment like the old CW/CR it is to other PCs.</p>
<p>It also costs a 2nd level slot or a ki point every time, and you likely have to put it up on a round-by-round basis if you're going to tank a large encounter with many attacks by yourself."</p>
<p>And if the alternative is having been killed by the attacks, most people will cast the spell/spend the ki. Also keep in mind that for the casters, they have options to switch it out if an encounter doesn't require it. There are times when crane users would probably love to have dragon or snake or skill focus instead but they don't have that flexibility with feats. </p>
<p>"However, if all the attacks miss by 5 or less and pop an image, then the casting of the spell didn't matter at all."
<br />
Unless you're one of those back line squishies who's happy the archers focused on the guy with mirror image so the BBEG would have a clean shot instead of you. </p>
<p>I think the big difference in our approaches is you're looking at the old CW and mirror image in terms of efficiency where I'm looking at it for raw damage mitigation. From my side, mirror image comes out consistently ahead even using your numbers. I just don't see that the rationale for the nerf (from a gaming mechanic perspective) was needed. </p>
<p>(From a business sense it might have made more sense for PFS, but given the flash back on this thread, maybe not.)</p>"Hmm, I don't think your comparison between them is a fair one, if we are assuming the high AC condition. To wit--"
Why assume only the high AC condition? It falsely limits the comparison to a narrow range that isn't representative of the total possibilities.
"-If you're buffing before an assault/ambush it's not a wasted standard action.
But if you're trying to tank a large number of attacks with it, you will lose all your images pretty often."
I'd argue that those attacks were still...Petrus2222014-01-31T21:30:50ZRe: Forums: Advice: I ask for help in designing the 10 Asmodean PlaguesPetrus222https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qmto?I-ask-for-help-in-designing-the-10-Asmodean#22014-01-31T20:09:09Z2014-01-31T20:09:09Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Nearyn wrote:</div><blockquote>... will experience intense nausea and contract disease and pestillence. For those same 3 days and nights, no good outsider, paladin or cleric may in any way suppress or remove their Aura of Good.</blockquote><p>The paladins probably wouldn't be affected if they're immune to disease.
<p>Another fun one would be the plague of truth followed by the plague of lies. </p>
<p>(I.e. the infected can't lie for a week... "Why yes honey that doublet does make you look fat." and then can't tell the truth for a week "Yes sweetie I checked under the bed, but I can't do anything about the monster down there. Sweet dreams.")</p>Nearyn wrote:... will experience intense nausea and contract disease and pestillence. For those same 3 days and nights, no good outsider, paladin or cleric may in any way suppress or remove their Aura of Good.
The paladins probably wouldn't be affected if they're immune to disease. Another fun one would be the plague of truth followed by the plague of lies.
(I.e. the infected can't lie for a week... "Why yes honey that doublet does make you look fat." and then can't tell the truth for a...Petrus2222014-01-31T20:09:09ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Crane Wing Errata in latest printingPetrus222https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qlnd&page=38?Crane-Wing-Errata-in-latest-printing#18772014-01-31T19:59:31Z2014-01-31T19:59:31Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Rogue Eidolon wrote:</div><blockquote> So on expectation, every other casting for four images you will prevent one attack total or two attacks total. Not a very good use of your standard action! </blockquote><p>I'm not sure that's a completely fair evaluation. There's a lot of conditions that the math doesn't take into account.
</p>
e.g.
<br />
-If you're buffing before an assault/ambush it's not a wasted standard action.
<br />
-Even if the spell completely fails to prevent damage this round, it's still up next round with the potential to nullify up to four attacks.
<br />
-Mirror image protects against maneuvers and ranged attacks.
<br />
-Mirror image is a class ability available to arcane casters and ninja.
<br />
It's not a 4-5 feat investment like the old CW/CR it is to other PCs.
<br />
-The additional attacks on the images, even if they just miss and pop the image, are attacks that aren't being sent at back line squishies.</p>
<p>That said even ignoring the above, at high AC's the damage prevented by the old CW and Mirror image starts to converge simply because you're not being hit in the first place, but when your AC is much lower (say 6 or even 10+needed to hit) the damage prevented by Mirror image is MUCH higher. While yes being hit at that low of a roll is a problem, it's not a problem that's actually relevant to determining which method of damage mitigation is better: </p>
<p>At low AC's Mirror image is better and even at high ones, it's arguably equal to or better than crane wing for reasons I outlined above. In short mirror image is better than the old CW at all AC ranges which to me still begs the question was the nerf necessary... (especially when most of the casters can also buff their AC up using shield.)</p>Rogue Eidolon wrote:So on expectation, every other casting for four images you will prevent one attack total or two attacks total. Not a very good use of your standard action!
I'm not sure that's a completely fair evaluation. There's a lot of conditions that the math doesn't take into account.
e.g.
-If you're buffing before an assault/ambush it's not a wasted standard action.
-Even if the spell completely fails to prevent damage this round, it's still up next round with the potential to...Petrus2222014-01-31T19:59:31ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Crane Wing Errata in latest printingPetrus222https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qlnd&page=36?Crane-Wing-Errata-in-latest-printing#17532014-01-30T00:05:07Z2014-01-30T00:05:07Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Quote:</div><blockquote>No, I don't let PC's be swarms for similar reasons.</blockquote><p>You misunderstood. Let me rephrase your argument:
<p>"From the PC's standpoint, it's incredibly frustrating to not be able to use melee tools. You'd get the same frustration from a monster immune to spells - 'Oh, I'll just melee them' doesn't erase the sense of uselessness,"</p>
<p>If you hate feeling useless as a GM do you specifically tailor your encounters for your PC's to avoid having them feel useless (e.g. not using swarms against melee.)</p>
<p>Anyways what exactly happened in your game that made you have such a hate on for the old CW? I just don't understand your vehemence.</p>Quote:No, I don't let PC's be swarms for similar reasons.
You misunderstood. Let me rephrase your argument: "From the PC's standpoint, it's incredibly frustrating to not be able to use melee tools. You'd get the same frustration from a monster immune to spells - 'Oh, I'll just melee them' doesn't erase the sense of uselessness,"
If you hate feeling useless as a GM do you specifically tailor your encounters for your PC's to avoid having them feel useless (e.g. not using swarms against
...Petrus2222014-01-30T00:05:07ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Crane Wing Errata in latest printingPetrus222https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qlnd&page=35?Crane-Wing-Errata-in-latest-printing#17472014-01-30T06:05:38Z2014-01-29T23:39:08Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Aelryinth wrote:</div><blockquote>From the GM's standpoint, it's incredibly frustrating to not be able to use melee tools. You'd get the same frustration from a character immune to spells - 'Oh, I'll just melee them' doesn't erase the sense of uselessness, especially if the character then takes steps with the rest of the party to defend against other tactics.</blockquote><p>I take it you don't use swarms against your PC's for similar reasons then?Aelryinth wrote:From the GM's standpoint, it's incredibly frustrating to not be able to use melee tools. You'd get the same frustration from a character immune to spells - 'Oh, I'll just melee them' doesn't erase the sense of uselessness, especially if the character then takes steps with the rest of the party to defend against other tactics.
I take it you don't use swarms against your PC's for similar reasons then?Petrus2222014-01-29T23:39:08ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Crane Wing Errata in latest printingPetrus222https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qlnd&page=34?Crane-Wing-Errata-in-latest-printing#17002014-01-29T19:41:26Z2014-01-29T19:41:26Z<p>Has anyone clarified yet whether the new crane riposte fighting defensively AoO stacks with the AoO's granted by Snake fang? Seems like they might, but that doesn't seem likely to have been the intention.</p>Has anyone clarified yet whether the new crane riposte fighting defensively AoO stacks with the AoO's granted by Snake fang? Seems like they might, but that doesn't seem likely to have been the intention.Petrus2222014-01-29T19:41:26ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: New crane riposte and snake fang.Petrus222https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qmjg?New-crane-riposte-and-snake-fang#72014-01-29T17:50:13Z2014-01-29T17:50:13Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Devilkiller wrote:</div><blockquote><br />
<br />
As an aside, JB later clarified that only feats which specifically mention Total Defense allow you to make AoOs while using Total Defense. That makes the auto-deflect option in the new Crane Wing a little less attractive since you can't get those extra AoOs from Snake Fang. </blockquote><p>He also revised crane riposte though:
</p>
http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1g1#v5748eaic9rmn</p>
<p>"Update: Page 93, in the Crane Riposte feat, in the benefits paragraph, change the second sentence to read as follows: <b>Whenever you are fighting defensively, and you use Crane Wing to add a dodge bonus against one attack, that attack provokes an attack of opportunity from you if it misses.</b> In addition, when you deflect an attack using Crane Wing while taking the total defense action, you may make an attack of opportunity against that opponent (even though you could not normally do so while taking the total defense action)."</p>
<p>You could almost argue that one AoO is for missing (snake fang) and one AoO is for missing while fighting defensively with Crane wing.</p>
<p>I think clarification is needed from the dev's.</p>Devilkiller wrote:As an aside, JB later clarified that only feats which specifically mention Total Defense allow you to make AoOs while using Total Defense. That makes the auto-deflect option in the new Crane Wing a little less attractive since you can't get those extra AoOs from Snake Fang.
He also revised crane riposte though:
http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1g1#v5748eaic9rmn"Update: Page 93, in the Crane Riposte feat, in the benefits paragraph, change the second sentence to read as...Petrus2222014-01-29T17:50:13ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: New crane riposte and snake fang.Petrus222https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qmjg?New-crane-riposte-and-snake-fang#52014-01-29T17:01:05Z2014-01-29T17:01:05Z<p>I suspect that the intent is that you should only get one, but I think it probably needs clarification. (The vicious stomp/greater trip thing was a lot clearer from day one, but this has some grey to it.)</p>I suspect that the intent is that you should only get one, but I think it probably needs clarification. (The vicious stomp/greater trip thing was a lot clearer from day one, but this has some grey to it.)Petrus2222014-01-29T17:01:05ZForums: Rules Questions: New crane riposte and snake fang.Petrus222https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qmjg?New-crane-riposte-and-snake-fang#12015-08-13T19:31:42Z2014-01-29T15:43:25Z<p>If a MoMS is fighting defensively with the new crane riposte and snake fang, does a miss invoke one or two attacks of opportunity?</p>If a MoMS is fighting defensively with the new crane riposte and snake fang, does a miss invoke one or two attacks of opportunity?Petrus2222014-01-29T15:43:25ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Crane Wing Errata in latest printingPetrus222https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qlnd&page=34?Crane-Wing-Errata-in-latest-printing#16842014-01-29T15:42:00Z2014-01-29T15:42:00Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Aelryinth wrote:</div><blockquote>Challenge 'with melee'. You know, like 75%+ of the monsters in the beastiary.</blockquote><p>What fraction of monsters in the bestiary have access to ranged attacks, maneuvers, spells, the ability to feint or multiple attacks?
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Quote:</div><blockquote>"He's got Crane Wing? Don't melee him...fight him with anything but! There's nothing wrong with that feat!"</blockquote><p>Do you think they should ban golems because they're tough on casters?Aelryinth wrote:Challenge 'with melee'. You know, like 75%+ of the monsters in the beastiary.
What fraction of monsters in the bestiary have access to ranged attacks, maneuvers, spells, the ability to feint or multiple attacks? Quote:"He's got Crane Wing? Don't melee him...fight him with anything but! There's nothing wrong with that feat!"
Do you think they should ban golems because they're tough on casters?Petrus2222014-01-29T15:42:00ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Crane Wing Errata in latest printingPetrus222https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qlnd&page=34?Crane-Wing-Errata-in-latest-printing#16522014-01-28T23:29:10Z2014-01-28T23:29:10Z<p>Aelryinth I think you're missing my point. Pathfinder has a giant tool box of things that bypassed the old crane wing. As a GM it's pretty easy to deal with the "problems" the old CW caused. Not every encounter has to be or even should be purely melee (or purely ranged, or purely spells).</p>
<p>After all if monsters or creatures with semi-immunity to certain types of attacks exist why shouldn't the player's have their own version of it? No GM would argue that fireball's should be banned because water elmentals are vunerable to them and no one would argue that fire elemental should be banned because they ignore scorching rays... in short it was kind of a non-issue except for PFS where there's less flexibility (and even then I'm not 100% sure I understand why they didn't just ban the feat from PFS, or add a bunch of conditional modifiers to what sort of melee attacks could be deflected:
<br />
e.g. size restriction, no incorpeal attacks unless you have some sort of force armor, no deflecting energy damage from a melee attack etc.)</p>Aelryinth I think you're missing my point. Pathfinder has a giant tool box of things that bypassed the old crane wing. As a GM it's pretty easy to deal with the "problems" the old CW caused. Not every encounter has to be or even should be purely melee (or purely ranged, or purely spells).
After all if monsters or creatures with semi-immunity to certain types of attacks exist why shouldn't the player's have their own version of it? No GM would argue that fireball's should be banned because...Petrus2222014-01-28T23:29:10ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Martial characters should have nice things Part I: What should martial characters be able to do?Petrus222https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qm90&page=4?Martial-characters-should-have-nice-things#1572014-01-28T17:42:26Z2014-01-28T17:42:26Z<p>A fairly interesting idea would be to be able to sacrifice iterative attacks. Make it part of a feat chain that lets you do other things when you sacrifice iterative attacks sort of like the critical feats.</p>
<p>E.g.
<br />
Feat tier 1- The Best Defense: BAB +6,
<br />
Sacrifice one iterative attack for +4 AC against one attack.</p>
<p>Feat tier 2- Grounded: Pre-req The best defense, BAB +11 -
<br />
Sacrifice one iterative attack to gain SR equal to 10 + 1/2 level (rnd down) + Con mod against one spell or spell like ability this round.</p>
<p>Feat tier 2- Slow and steady: BAB+ 11, The best defense, Wpn focus Sacrifice one iterative attack for +4 to hit on your next attack. (Not so useful for fighters, very useful for people who flurry.)</p>
<p>Feat tier 2- the best offense: BAB+ 11, The best defense, Wpn focus Sacrifice one iterative attack for +4 to damage hit on your next attack. (Again not so useful for fighters, very useful for people who flurry.)</p>A fairly interesting idea would be to be able to sacrifice iterative attacks. Make it part of a feat chain that lets you do other things when you sacrifice iterative attacks sort of like the critical feats.
E.g.
Feat tier 1- The Best Defense: BAB +6,
Sacrifice one iterative attack for +4 AC against one attack.
Feat tier 2- Grounded: Pre-req The best defense, BAB +11 -
Sacrifice one iterative attack to gain SR equal to 10 + 1/2 level (rnd down) + Con mod against one spell or spell like...Petrus2222014-01-28T17:42:26Z