Shackles Pirate

Pirate's page

1,032 posts (1,382 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 5 aliases.


RSS

1 to 50 of 1,032 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Yar!

Mathius wrote:

... How much would it hurt to go 16 str and cha?

...

What can we do about miss chance and other non-AC related defenses against melee attacks? Blink and displacement and mirror image are not that uncommon.

It doesn't hurt too much. The "build" I posted (in quotations because it has a lot of freedom/flexibility in that you don't need all your feats to accomplish what it does) is based on a RL character I started for the APG beta playtest and continued playing after it's official release into epic levels. He originally only had a 14 Str (base) and was still doing ungodly damage. I put the extreme stats here simply because the request was for "biggest" damage possible, and for this purpose, Str and Cha need to be the highest. Strength does have to be at least 13 though (for Power Attack and Furious Focus).

For miss chance, the feat Blind Fight gives you a reroll vs miss chances (two tries is better than only one).

The incredibly expensive Truesight Goggles are king, if you can afford them. These goggles actually negate any benefits one has from Blur, Displacement, Mirror Image, Invisibility, and more, as it grants continual True Seeing. "The subject sees through normal and magical darkness, notices secret doors hidden by magic, sees the exact locations of creatures or objects under blur or displacement effects, sees invisible creatures or objects normally, sees through illusions, and sees the true form of polymorphed, changed, or transmuted things. Further, the subject can focus its vision to see into the Ethereal Plane (but not into extradimensional spaces). The range of true seeing conferred is 120 feet."

~P


Yar!

Another thing to consider is the PrC Veiled Illusionist.

This PrC has some seriously awesome buffs to Illusion magic, including giving you a chance to foil an enemies Spellcraft check so that they identify a spell of your choice instead of the illusion you're actually casting (seriously, the spellcraft check to identify a spell you can see being cast has foiled more Illusion spells than the save to disbelieve it does, in my experience at least), maintaining your illusions via Concentration as a Swift action instead of a Standard action, making those who disbelieve your illusions have to do so twice, etc. (All a limited number of times, but at least this actually gives you the option to do so at all).

In addition to the Tenebrous metamagic feat, I'm a big fan of the feat Shadow Gambit, but maybe that's just me.

~P


4 people marked this as FAQ candidate.

...Can a creature with multiple Speed values combine those movement types in the same Move Action?

If so, how should the total distance able to be traveled be calculated?

~P


Yar!

*THREAD-NECROMANCY!*

...

I'd like to bring this to light and perhaps get it FAQed (perhaps the first ever bestiary FAQ, as while it's possible for PCs to have multiple speed types, it is significantly more common with monsters).

It also comes up in my games (online and in RL) quite often.

I think it's worth the necro as well, as this thread has some good discussion regarding it.

I'm of the opinion that you can/should be able to combine different movement types in the same move action by figuring out the ratio of different speed values.

For example, if one has a 60' land speed and a 20' climb speed, the ratio is 60:20, simplified to 3:1. So 3' of land speed is equal to 1' of climb speed.

If you're using a 5' grid, it's probably best to round down the last bit of movement. (example: using the above 3:1 land to climb ration, the character moves beside a wall and partway through the single move action smoothly transitions to climbing up the wall (up or along the side, doesn't matter, he's got a climb speed). If he moves 25' on the ground, he can move another 10' on the wall (25' on the ground is equal to 25/3 = 8.33~ ' of climb speed. Cimb speed 20 - 8.33~ = 11.66~ feet of movement left for climbing, rounded down to 10')

So to reiterate the question in an easy to FAQ way... *makes another post with just the question*

...


Yar!

You get knocked prone, you stand up, you take the AoO (he cannot trip you again with this AoO), you 5' step into him, then punch him in the face with your aldori dueling sword.

Rather than running up to him, you let him come to you (so he can't 5'step away, putting himself 15' away from you instead of only 10).

Use the Ready Action to your advantage if you know he's a tripper. Ready an action to Sunder his polearm if you tries to trip you with it, for example. Or get the feat Strike Back so that you can attack him even if he's outside your reach (via a readied action).

If he is not readying an action to Brace against a charge, then Charge him to get up in his face. He has to 5' step back to trip with his polearm, which keeps him close enough for the first things mentions (stand up, 5' step up to him, sword-punch to the face).

Get the Drag Down feat to trip him when he trips you as an immediate action.

Take a 2 level dip into Rogue and for your rogue talent, take Stand Up (Ex): "A rogue with this ability can stand up from a prone position as a free action. This still provokes attacks of opportunity for standing up while threatened by a foe." Then also take the feat Fast Crawl. Now you can make a 5' step while prone (no AoO for leaving his threatened area), stand up as a free action (taking an AoO if he has a non-reach method of attacking, otherwise no AoO as you're outside(inside) of it's reach threatened area), then full attack!

Take a 2 level dip into Ninja and take a rogue talent as your ninja trick, and take Rogue Crawl (Ex): "While prone, a rogue with this ability can move at half speed. This movement provokes attacks of opportunity as normal. A rogue with this talent can take a 5-foot step while crawling." Then take the feat Ki Stand. This does the same thing as the 2 level rogue dip above, but with the added versatility of opting to use a ki point to stand up without provoking at all.

Of course, with Ki Stand you don't need to 5' step while prone at all, so doing this also opens up other choices for Ninja Tricks.

Multiclass into some other class that grants Ki (monk) and get Ki Stand.

Get a ranged weapon to deal with richards who refuse to duel you with honor (in melee, without tripping).

Just some ideas of the top of my head.

~P


Yar!

In your presented situation, it should not have worked.

Not related to your specific situation, there is one thing that I've seen many people forget: the last sentence.

Protection from Evil wrote:
...only functions against spells and effects created by evil creatures or objects...

So a neutral enemy could charm a person protected with Protection from Evil, as could a good aligned adversary, but not an evil one.

...but yeah, Deadmoon and fretgod99 covered the gist of it, though "subject to GM discretion" is always a potential workaround.

~P


Yar!

I'll also throw my hat in for the cause. Especially for it's use in PBPs with keeping track of spells casts and the like.

~P


Pirate Pirate Pirate

Yar!

Evenings and Weekends are when I'm busiest. Theatre work and all that.

*goes back to work*

~P


Yar!

...

*facepalm*

What have I done to this thread?!

*quietly cries himself to sleep when no one is looking*

~P


Yar!

And yet, there has been adamant (and even all caps) declarations that it ends up being x6 vs undead when you crit with it.

I do agree that the Sunblade should follow the rules for adding multipliers together, just as everything else does. My personal beef with it is the parenthetical text. If the end result is x3 on a crit, the parenthetical text is (in my opinion) redundant, completely and utterly unnecessary.

Conversely, there have been claims that it is not redundant explanation, but a specific and intentional additional change, making it a x3 crit weapon vs undead, meaning a crit vs undead would actually do x4 damage.

~P


Yar!

...

*POST LABOR-DAY BUMP!!!*

^_^

~P


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Yar!

Some of you know, but I fear that some may be unaware of a simple little fact.

"Rouge" is an actual word. It has it's roots in the french language, translates to "Red". It is most commonly associated with lipstick and/or other cosmetic products. It has also found it's way into naming conventions for both characters (the variations on the Red Thief mentioned above), locales such as the restaurant The Bistro Rouge, or even services such as Air Canada Rouge.

Changing one's avatar whenever they type some derivative of the word RED would by highly obnoxious. Same with Sapphire/blue/aqua/ultramarine/periwinkle/liberty/independence/space cadet/azure/cerulean/zaffre/indigo.

Smurfs, on the other hand, are a recent (as far as language is concerned) invention, specifically meaning a small blue cartoon creature whose own language is made up primarily (but not entirely) of the word "smurf", used to mean just about anything and everything regardless of inflection.

The smurf avatar change is not based on a common typo, nor a word that has been a standard part of a living language since it's gradual inception from previous languages. Rouge is from "[French, from Old French, red, from Latin rubeus; see reudh- in Indo-European roots." Smurf has its origins (as far as I can tell) in animation. It is a silly word with silly associations (it's use as nearly every word in a language used by the creatures called the same word). I may be wrong, but I have yet to witness a typo leading to a smurf. It's inclusion in a post seems to be specific to an actual smurf as we know them. The image of a smurf is rather iconic as well. The uniqueness of the word combined with the iconic image associated with it makes for a silly, light hearted quirk of the forums.

An avatar change for typing rouge would (for most of us here) be nothing more than publicly calling out a typo (in my opinion). The avatar change associated with smurfs is nothing like this. It is light hearted and silly. It is something that adds a kind of quirkiness to paizo without being demeaning or even unintentionally malicious.

Quirks are only endearing if they are small, light hearted, and unique (not overbearing, either in quantity of or quality of, so that one cannot be effectively communicated with anymore). Smurfs is this. Adding rouge/rouge typo admonishment is (in my opinion) crossing the line.

Also (if this gets implemented. This is a hypothetical. I'm not asserting that it will happen), what happens when one types rouge and smurf in the same post? What if more words are added to the list? How do they interact?

Someone in paizo-land will have to write up a code for each possible combination. The smurf code was added in fun, early on in paizonian existence, most likely as a fun side project, a gag, and maybe even as an exercise in familiarizing oneself with forum code. Now that paizo is bigger and busier, the complexity of new codes to implement this idea without breaking things as it interacts with similar code that already exists to do something similar and the inevitable firing of both codes at the same time, such an effort would be, in my opinion, not even remotely worth it. New code that improved the website, they layout, and the ease of which on can interact with are all good, and all serve the company with a motivation to make profits. Such niceties help them make profits. This idea does not (again, in my opinion) help them do this. It would be them "forcing the unskillled typers some education!" in a very passive-aggressive way, while simultaneously reprimanding those who use the actual word "rouge" in a legitimate fashion.

I get that it (the typo version) annoys some of us. What about other common mistakes, like the/teh, weather/whether, their/there/they're, desert/dessert, its/it's, and/nad, the misuse of a/an before a word, etc? Even if it was only for rogue/rouge, I cannot see how any effort to do something like this could be worth it at all for paizo as a company. This company is not in the business of teaching people how to type without making mistakes on their forums via passive-aggressiveness. And I (personally) hope it never becomes so.

Your (in a general sense, not any specific poster) personal need to educate the masses on a typo is not the responsibility of the company that runs this site.

(though I totally understand the pet peeve. I do not like reading typos or words misused either, even though I have made my share of those mistakes myself)

EDIT: O_O

I'm smurfette!

:O

*checks pants*

...still a dude. *phew*

^_^

~P


Yar!

Well then, this... this right here... is a bump.

*bump*

~P


Yar!

We need more info. What level? What buffs are allowed? (ie: self buffs only - buffs from allies/cohorts/other PCs - buffs of a specific duration or longer - only have X number of rounds to buff - no buffs at all - etc)

Also, do you mean DPR that you can focus on a single target if you so desire?

Or do you mean total damage done over any number of creatures regardless of being able to focus it?

Because there are some who follow the later, and will give examples of a 6th level sorcerer doing more DPR than a 20th level non-caster, because a simple little 6d6 fireball, when used to bath in fire a mass of diminutive sized creatures all squeezing into the area of the fireball (and still being individual creatures instead of a swarm), will do an average of 21 damage to every individual creature hit. 25 diminutive creatures per square time 44 squares in a fireball x 21 damage each = 23100 total damage. If the creatures are Fine sized, it jumps to 92400 total damage. At level 6. With an average, run of the mill, non-optimal, Fireball. In my opinion, this example's DPR is still only 21, as any individual target will only take 21 damage (you cannot focus it all onto one creature), but because there was more than one target taking the same number of damage, this method sees the numbers skyrocket. And there are some here who argue that this is a true and valuable indication of DPR. (I disagree)

If you want the later, then a high level caster with a large area of effect spell targeting 100 Fine sized individual creatures per square of every square the spell effects will dominate. The only non-caster that can come close is a Whirlwind Fighter (enlarged as big as possible, with lunge, using a reach weapon or a whip) in the same situation.

If you mean the former (a character that can focus the DPR onto a single target if so desired), then we can talk.

~P


Yar!

It seems the more input we have, the more variations of interpretation we end up with. Do I dare ask for more opinions?

When I first asked this question, I thought there were two reasonable answers. Quickly it turned into three. Now there seems to be four.

Assuming a strength modifier of +2, a critical hit using a Sun Blade (which has a +4 enhancement bonus in this case) vs an Evil Undead creature so far does:

  • 3d10+18 (base damage = 1d10+6)
  • 4d10+24 (base damage = 1d10+6)
  • 6d10+36 (base damage = 2d10+12)
  • 6d10+18 (base damage = 2d10+6)

This really is clear as mud, huh?

~P


Yar!

Despite not being StreamOfTheSky, I will direct you to where this was stated. It is stated in one of the CRB FAQs, located HERE. While it initially relates to Lances with Pounce, it also calls out "...even if you have an unusual combination of rules that allows you to ignore the above limitation...", which is exactly what this combination does.

EDIT: It is iffy if Spirited Charge would work either, as they way it's written is that if you are mounted and you charge you get to multiply your damage. If you are charging, you can't also full attack unless you have the Pounce ability. The reason you can gain the benefits of a charge and full attack with Mounted Skirmisher is that when you are mounted and your mount charges, you "... also take the AC penalty associated with a charge. If you make an attack at the end of the charge, you receive the bonus gained from the charge." It doesn't state that you must charge as well, only that if you decide to attack at the end of your mount's charge, you gain the standard charging penalties and benefits for your attack as well. Using this same reasoning, this is the one and only way to Vital Strike on a charge... it must be a mounted charge, and your mount charges while you standard action Vital Strike (and gain the penalties and benefits of a charge because you are mounted and your mount charges and you made an attack).

Of course, it then goes on to say "When charging on horseback, you deal double damage with a lance". So it is possible that the intent was that you must also perform a charge action, or that the language is interchangeable (in which case anytime it says "you make a charge while mounted" it doesn't necessarily mean that you must make a Charge action, only be mounted while your mount charges)

~P


Yar!

There has already been plenty of advice. However, there is one thing that instantly entered my mind when I read the OP. It is related to the OP's plight, and can only be given justice with a link:

Behold, an excerpt from The Gamers: Dorkness Rising (there is a swear at the 50 second mark).

~P


Yar!

I cannot say how official this is, but pages 16-17 of the book Knights of the Inner Sea contains a description of basic knightly Heraldry, and uses Alain as an example. These pages also separates most of his gear into it's individual components and tells you their proper names.

ie: Standard, vamplate, gorget, besagew, plackard, gardbrace, pauldron, rerebrace, couter, faulds, tassets, yoke, shank, rowel, chausses, sabaton, etc.

His Coat of Arms, as displayed on his tabard, escutcheon, banner, and caparison, contains two parts, divided vertically: The sinister (left side of the coat of arms) displays a modified fret running the full length of the field, while the dexter (right side) displays a Wyvern as the charge (in heraldry, a charge is a dominant emblem).

When a coat of arms is split vertically in this manner, it is often (but not always) a representation of two families united, each half bearing one families Coat of Arms. I'm not sure if this is the case for Alain. Actually, based on his writeup, I highly doubt that is the case.

Regardless, the image on his Coat of Arms is in fact a Wyvern, not a cockatrice. According the Knights of the Inner Sea at least.

As for official heraldry for various Orders? So far I have seen none, and so doubt that any actually exist at this point in time. Most heraldry seems to be either familial or national in nature. Each region in the Inner Sea World Guide has a standard/heraldry to represent each nation, and there are a few examples of known Heraldry in the Knight of the Inner Sea, and there they are all for a family or noble house.

~P


Yar.

To further clarify, as there could be a legitimate misunderstanding here due to Suli appearing in both the ARG and the Bestiary 3, a person who does not have one or the other may be confused.

It is very possible for a person to see the Suli as a player race in the Bestiary 3 and not have the ARG and think, "oh wow, an outsider! The writeup for "as player characters" is rather lacking though, I should check out the Outsider creature type and see the complete picture of what they get... "

In this case, specific must override general. Suli specific traits gained overrides the general outsider traits gained.

Now, the question of "what specifics of the Outsider type to I keep and which ones get overridden by the Suli specifics" is a legitimate one.

Normally every player race was Humanoid, so we know from the Humanoid entry that it states many times "or by character class."

The Outsider entry does not say this. However, Outsiders (when the entry was first published for use with the Pathfinder rules) were not an option for playable races in the base Pathfinder rules (ignoring 3.5 compatibility), so it did not include such clauses. HOWEVER, the Outsider type entry does state this: "An outsider possesses the following traits (unless otherwise noted in a creature's entry)." (bolding is mine) It then goes on to list Darkvision, their singular nature, proficiencies, and the need to breath but not to eat or sleep. These are traits all outsiders gain unless otherwise noted in a creature's entry.

So now we must go back to the Suli entry and see what it says, and if it differs from the basic Outsider traits listed, then we must use the Suli traits instead of the basic outsider traits.

What do we see? Suli do not have Darkvision listed, but they do have Low Light Vision. Ergo, they have Low Light Vision but they do not have Darkvision. They are also of the Native subtype, which further states that they have a dual nature and can be resurrected, and that they do need to eat and sleep. The Suli entry goes on to state "Sulis are defined by class levels - they do not possess racial Hit Dice". And as we know from JJ's post above, that means their proficiencies are also dictated by their class and not their type.

It takes a bit of research and going back and forth, but the answers can be found. Is it clear that this is what one has to do to get this answer? No, it isn't. Hence I do not bemoan RD from asking this question. However, it is there, it just takes effort to find.

~P


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Yar!

Ravingdork wrote:
Nothing in that racial write up says they don't get darkvision as well.

This is a poor argument for any rules issue. This game is based on what one can do according to what the text says you can do. It is not based on what you cannot do according to what the text says you cannot do*.

Note that the Suli has a actual entry in the ARG character section, which states what it can do/what you gain for being a Suli. They have Low Light Vision. Darkvision is not mentioned at all, therefor (just like how humans and half-elves and halflings do not mention Darkvision) they do not have Darkvision.

The bestiary entry for Suli does not list darkvision either. Only Low Light Vision.

Now, the example races for the race building section does include the Suli, and it does mention darkvision there. I posit to you that this single instance is a typo, as the Suli appears in multiple other locations, locations which are significantly more prominent than an example of an optional rules section, and none of these other places mentions Darkvision.

Ravingdork, I am all for your rules questions and the discussions they create, but this position of "it doesn't say they don't get it" (paraphrased) is something I cannot condone.

Everything falls apart once/if that mentality becomes acceptable.

EDIT: * I realize that this is not an absolute, as there are instances where a rule stats circumstances where you cannot do something (ie: limitations on Charge rules), however, these are always called out as such. For the most part, it is assumed one can do only what it (rules text) says you can do, nothing more. (ie: Spell descriptions. Feat descriptions. Racial abilities. etc)

~P


Yar!

KainPen wrote:
...at 13 and that is all had to thinking about was D&D and naked girls lol...

Naked girls aside, are there any other thoughts on this? Obviously there is still a large divide in opinions on this.

To clarify on the second edition rules, the critical hit rules were present but were optional. There were also two versions:

1) Natural 20 = double the dice damage then add your regular modifiers
2) Natural 20 = gain an extra attack

I'm sure there were other critical options from other books back then as well. I do remember my original group doing something completely different, but the exact method my group used way back then doesn't matter right now.

The Sunblade entry is as has already been quoted "...the sword does double damage against..."

But as I've said already, doubling the damage works differently now than it did then. So our new rules must be applied to this item when playing this edition of the game. My question still stands: how?

~P


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yar!

My opinion is this:

I hate it when old posts get scrambled. My post above used to be so clean with quotes and links, and now after two+ years and who knows how many code updates, it's all scrambled with my links within what used to be a quote fighting for supremacy and destroying the layout of the post. *cries on the inside* :(

As for the actual topic at hand, while I still play it as "it replaces the normal Ki Pool", I do also wish for an actual answer, as the wording (or lack thereof regarding any mention of the normal ki pool) still lends itself to having two separate ki pools.

*wishes he could hit FAQ again*

~P


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Yar!

There are a few things to consider regarding the mounted Cavalier that make it more viable. As the saying goes "It's not the size that matters, it's how you use it!" ... aka: bigger isn't always better.

Halfling
Cavalier (Order of the Sword)

Strength: 18 base - 2 race + 5 levels + 5 inherent + 6 enhancement = 32
Charisma: 17 base + 2 race + 5 inherent + 6 enhancement = 30
All other stats: who cares (for this purpose anyways. On a 15 point buy, 7 in all others gets you enough for the above 17 and 18)

Recomended Traits: Fate's Favored, Axe to Grind

Must Have Feats:

  • Power Attack (+18 damage)
  • Furious Focus (no PA penalty on your one and only attack a round)
  • Mounted Combat
  • Ride-By Attack
  • Wheeling Charge (charge through allies + make turns during a charge)
  • Spirited Charge
  • Risky Striker (halflings only, +12 damage vs larger foes)

That only takes up about half of your available feats by level 20, not including your bonus teamwork feats, so there is lots of room to play with. If this is a solo game, I recommend Leadership for a buffing cohort.

Gear:

  • +5 Courageous Furious Valiant Lance. This is a +8 weapon, so there is room for things like Holy/Flaming+Corrisove/Shock+Bane/etc.
  • Belt of Giant Strength +6
  • Rhino Hide
  • Champions Banner (increase level by +4 for Challenge bonuses)

~Mount: Riding Dog~
Strength: 13 base + 4 (level 4 bonus) + 6 animal companion advancement + 3 levels (I always put one point to int for the expanded feat potential) + 5 inherent (wishes) + 6 enhancement = 37

Recommended Mount Feats:
either

  • Nimble Moves, and
  • Acrobatic Steps
    OR
  • Improved Unarmed Strike
  • Dragon Style

Nimble Moves + Acrobatic Steps lets you ignore up to 20 of difficult terrain and lets you 5' step in difficult terrain.

IUA + Dragon Style lets you completely ignore all difficult terrain but only while charging (which you're going to be trying to do all the time anyways)

Other worthwhile feats for your mount:

  • Cartwheel Dodge (immediate action move when you make a reflex save)
  • Wind Stance (20% concealment vs ranged attacks when you move)

Mounts Gear:

  • Horsemaster's saddle (bonus to ride checks, bonus to acrobatics checks, gives your mount every teamwork feat you have)
  • Belt of Giant Strength +6

What does all this give you? Well, without buffs from allies and/or cohorts, you get the following:

You can function easily in dungeons.
You can charge through allies.
You can charge through difficult terrain.
You can charge in non-straight lines (turning while charging! yay!)
You gain the following damage bonuses:

  • 2H Strength bonus: +16
  • PA bonus: +18
  • RS bonus: +12 (vs creatures Large and larger)
  • Enhancement bonus: +5
  • Mounts Str bonus: +13
  • Challenge: +24 +1d6
  • Knights Challenge (once per day, replaces normal Challenge): +34 +1d6
  • Rhino Hide bonus: +2d6
  • Elemental or Holy Damage: +2d6
  • Axe to Grind: +1 (as you are charging ahead, most creatures will only be threatened by you when you hit them, so we'll include this)
  • Lance base damage: 1d6, 19+/x3
  • Lance multiplier on a Charge: x4

So against Medium sized and smaller creatures, you will be doing: (1d6+16+18+5+13+24+1)x4+5d6 = 9d6+308 = 317 to 362. Plus you get a free combat maneuver check that does not provoke.
On a Crit it goes up to (1d6+16+18+5+13+24+1)x6+5d6 = 11d6+462 = 473 to 528.

Against Large and larger enemies, it increases to: (1d6+16+18+5+13+24+1+12)x4+5d6 = 9d6+356 = 365 to 410
On a Crit it goes up to (1d6+16+18+5+13+24+1+12)x6+5d6 = 11d6+534 = 545 to 600.

This is before buffs. I recommend the following Buffs (Need the following Allies: Bard, Ranger, Cleric, Paladin or Inquisitor, Suli race)

  • Buffs include the spell Rage (while it gives a +2 to str to you and possibly your mount as well, the Courageous property increases it to +4 for you, making your pre-multiplied damage go up by +4 total (+3 from your increase x1.5, + 1 from your mount))
  • The Rage spell activates the Ferocious property (increasing your weapon from +5 to +7)
  • Inspire Courage (lets say it's from your cohort, to at 17th level gives a pre-multiplied +4 to damage)
  • Weapon of Awe (pre-multiplied +2 sacred bonus to damage)
  • Using Knights Challenge instead of Normal Challenge (add charisma bonus to damage on top of your normal challenge bonus once per day, so 24+10 = +34)
  • Imbue with Elemental Might (From Suli allies only, gives you an extra +1d6 elemental damage)
  • Bestow Grace of the Champion (add Smite Evil to your damage bonus as a Paladin of 1/2 caster level, so potentially as a 10th level paladin, so +10, +20 on the first hit on specific foes, pre-multiplied, of course)
  • An ally wielding a bow with the Greater Designating power on it that hits your target first (this gives you a +6 moral bonus to damage against that target, which increases to +8 because of your lances Courageous property, pre-miltiplied of course)
  • Moment of Greatness (double moral bonus to one roll... including your damage roll. This is best used to turn the +8 Moral bonus to damage from Greater Designating to a +16, pre-multiplied, or course)
  • Ranger Ally with a Bond to his Companions sharing 1/2 his Favored Enemy bonus with you (Instant Enemy to ensure it always works on your target, +5 more damage, pre-multiplied, of course)
  • An item with the spell Divine Power on it at caster level 18 for you to Use Magic Device on yourself (+6 luck bonus to damage. Fates Favored increases this to +7. Pre-multiplied, of course) - (Baring this, Prayer gives +1 luck to damage, so +2 pre-multiplied for you)
  • Imbue with Aura (give you a good aura feature)
  • Litany of Righteousness (debuff on target, only creatures with a good aura (class feature or subtype, not just alignment) get the double damage, hence the Imbue with Aura spell)

I've probably missed a few raw damage buffs, but lets see where the perfect conditions get us at this point...

(1d6+19+18+7+14+34+1+12+4+2+20+16+5+7)x4+6d6 = 10d6+636 = 646 to 696 (this is before applying the doubling from Litany of Righteousness)

On a crit: (1d6+147)x6+6d6 = 12d6+954 = 966 to 1026 (again, before applying the Litany doubling)

...

One hit. Highly maneuverable. Works in dungeons. Can charge through allies and can turn during the charge. Again, only one attack.

...

*ahem*

...

...halfling cavaliers rock. ^_^

~P


Yar!

Forget the multiclassing. This is true for a single class Cavalier as well. Challenge is a swift action. The Tactician ability is a progressive ability, starting at Standard, then upgrading to swift at 9th level.

pre-9th level he could start combat by giving his allies a boost with the Tactician ability and declare an enemy the target of his challenge. If not a surprise round, he could them move into a better position as well.

At 9th level and thereafter, he can no longer do this. He can only boost his allies OR declare a challenge, but no longer can he do both. Yes, he can do other things (like make a partial charge in a surprise round), But this is a team game. Sometimes we want to be able to be team players rather than the most badass solo player who happens to be on a team.

Why is the option for a Cavalier to buff his allies with his insight of battle field tactics (the Tactician ability) and declare a challenge on an enemy in the same round only possible before 9th level, and becomes impossible after 9th level?

Maybe I'm beating a dead horse, but this really bothers me.

~P


Yar!

Except... we have a new rule that informs us of how to calculate these things. A new rule that changes how things used to be done.

Here is a hyperlink.

Here is a quote:

Combat Rules, Damage, Multiplying Damage wrote:

Multiplying Damage: Sometimes you multiply damage by some factor, such as on a critical hit. Roll the damage (with all modifiers) multiple times and total the results.

Note: When you multiply damage more than once, each multiplier works off the original, unmultiplied damage. So if you are asked to double the damage twice, the end result is three times the normal damage.

Exception: Extra damage dice over and above a weapon's normal damage are never multiplied.

This is a current rule that supposedly applies to all instances of multiplying damage. Why does it not apply to the Sun Blade when it "doubles" (aka: multiplies by a factor of two) its damage? While the Sun Blade has existed in previous editions, the rules that tell us how it interacts with the game world has changed. Thus, how the Sun Blade functions in the metagame (mechanics, crunch) has changed, despite having virtually the same text. The static bonuses DO get multiplied now. Multiple multipliers multiply the off the original now (ie: x2 + x2 = x3). While it's good and interesting to look back at previous versions, we cannot use their functionality because the rules for how to apply these things have changed.

Of course, even with the multiplying damage rule applied, there is some discrepancy in interpretation due to the bracketed text. Some still hold that it changes the actual crit multiplier, while others hold that it is simply a redundant (and as we can see from this thread, confusing) explanation of the rules I linked to above.

On the other hand, I can now see how one could come to the x6 damage vs undead claim. I do not agree with it, but I can see now how one can come to that conclusion.

~P


Yar!

Rocky Williams 530 wrote:
It works exactly the way your GM thinks it should work...

And what about GM's who wish to follow RAW but are confused as to what the intended function of this item is supposed to be? One who then comes here looking for insight? I'm sure they know they can just make it up, but they came here for something more than that.

Maybe they are in a group of friends who are also rotating GMs, and this item came into play and a table argument erupted from varying interpretations (there are 3 distinct interpretations in this thread already). The current GM made a call at the time to keep things moving, but as a responsible person and out of respect for his friends combined with the issue of the others being GMs as well, followed it up with "To keep things moving, for now it is like this... but I will ask on the paizo forums to see if we can get a clearer answer, and then we'll go with that."

Is he really wrong for doing this? I think not. Please don't dismiss rules question in the rules forum.

~P


Yar!

Quote:
... bard13/cavalier9 ...

Well, it also comes up for Inquisitor1/Cavalier9, a 10th level character.

And an Inquisitor1/Bard13, a 14th level character.

Most commonly, this happens with a Bard1/Cavalier4/Battle Herald 5+, that's also a 10th level character. Battle Herald, a PrC that is basically all about this combination.

Bard and Inquisitor can be exchanged with Monk (using ki) and Paladin (smite evil) and you still get this. These examples are also by no means exhaustive. I've sure there are other options/combinations I've missed.

There are people who play these class combinations, who also play past level 9... so this issue does come up. It's frustrating when - while playing by the rules - you become unable to do something you were once able to do, because you got "better" at it. o_O

Sure, it's a real upgrade if you are single classed and/or never use some of these abilities... but that is not a mandatory limitation of class selection.

I personally see no issue with allowing more than one swift action per round, provided that the rule within the magic section on the limitation for Quickened spells still hold. That is the one where I can see things getting out of control. I don't see it for things like the Tactician, Challenge, Bane, Judgement, Bardic Performance, Inspiring Command, Smite Evil, and other such abilities.

~P


Yar.

Oh wow, there really is NO consensus on this. With such wildly different takes on this, I expected some more back and forth. I mean, how does "Against Negative Energy Plane creatures or undead creatures, the sword deals double damage (and ×3 on a critical hit instead of the usual ×2)" not have anything to do with the rules for adding multipliers?

I'm personally against superfluous text, so I would like to see the bracketed test be something meaningful (an actual change to the crit multiplier) rather than a redundant example of how the rules apply to this scenario. We already have rules for adding multipliers, we should be able to apply them ourselves, not have it spelled out for us every time. This would make a Sunblade Crit vs Undead do x4.

I do see the point about it being example only, and is thus redundant/superfluous text, and thus a Sunblade Crit would do x3.

I still do not see how the "double damage" against undead is a base weapon increase (otherwise it would say "2d10" instead of double). It's a multiplier of the damage, thus it falls into the rules for adding multipliers when you crit. Yet this position is one - vehemently - advocated by some, as we can clearly see above.

I mean, really, which is it? Everyone things their version is the clear and obvious choice. Obviously it isn't as we have such varies opinions on what it actually is. I have my preference and leaning (I prefer x4 crit, but I'm leaning towards intent being x3), but this isn't just about me. It's about actually understanding the rules and making it clear for everyone who read them, from the books themselves, the PRD, the SRD, and to help those with similar questions who visit these boards looking for help.

So I ask again... which is it?

~P


Pirate Pirate Pirate

Yar!

No worries mate! You care about party effectiveness and homogeneity. That's a good thing. Not abrasive at all (in my opinion) :D

I dare say my reply may have been seen as abrasive. *feels sheepish*

So far it seems (to me at least, in my quick overview of everyone's current sheets) we are doing a fairly decent job of being both self sufficient and simultaneously filling in each others gaps. I'm sure something may come up we didn't anticipate and we will have to improvise in order to deal with it (isn't that part of the fun?), but from the looks of things, that will probably be a rare occurrence. *knocks on wood*

also: A GAME POST!!!! and right when I have to leave for work too. *pouts*

~P


Pirate Pirate Pirate

Yar.

I was just saying what Sir Orrin would do when those situations come up. He can fly. He can't teleport. In a solo game he would do the above to deal with those limitations.

No need to make spell selections based on just my response. Once everyone else replies, we can truly weigh the merits of Mass Fly vs Plane Shift. But until then, you can mark me down as on vote to Plane Shift being more useful.

Or, if once everyone posts we see that we have both bases covered, that extra spell known (or extra scrolls) could go to something else, something more corner-case utility or simply something fun.

At the same time, we do have access to see all of our character sheets. *goes to snoop around other peoples spell selection and natural abilities*

EDIT: after a very brief refresher on everyone's characters, I see that Nagato is a high level Druid, so not only can she wild shape into anything that flies, she has full access to the entire Druid spell list. That covers flying easily and minor forms of teleportation within a plane, but not much for inter-planar. Katja is a dragon and has Fly on her spell list, so flight is a non issue for her. She also has lots of teleportaions spells and Plane Shift known, so she has all bases covered. Validk is a wizard, so has much of the spell freedom of Nagato, but with an even larger selection of spells. As long as they have an idea of what will come the next day, they can both customize their spells known for that day, though it does look like Validk's carrying spellbook does not have much for planar travel, but does have fly and various teleports for non-planar travel. Jacob has a good mix of teleportaions, planar travel, and flight spells known. Sir Orrin can fly at will so long as he's mounted, but cannot innately teleport or plane shift. Ralph seems the least mobile, with nothing (that I could see) granting flight for himself.

EDIT 2: haha, if Ralph weighs less than 4800 lbs, Carolinus could grip him with his talons and ferry him through the air, bomb-dropping him on enemy targets. If Ralph weighs less than 1600 lbs, Carolinus can do so without getting slowed down! :O

In short, I think flight is fairly well covered. Plane shifting and teleportation partially so as well. ^_^

~P


Pirate Pirate Pirate

Yar!

tumbler: is there anything we can do to help? Image creation/editing? Other?

*wants to be good & helpful*

~P


Pirate Pirate Pirate

Yar!

While Sir Orrin himself cannot fly, his mount - Carolinus - can, thanks to THIS wonderful item. (so by extension, as long as he's mounted, Sir Orrin actually can fly)

If he needs to travel the planes on his own, he uses his Knowledge: Planes (and Carolinus' knowledge:Planes) to find natural portals and goes on an epic journey of exploration to find them and go through them. But if time is of an issue, he would call upon friends (you guys), or if worse comes to worse, hire a spellcaster (Caster Level x Spell Level x 10 gp + material component costs = spell casting for gold).

~P


Pirate Pirate Pirate

Yar!

I am ready to start. All of Sir Orrin's crunch is finalized, and the general arc of his backstory has been completed a while ago as well. The only thing missing are the more detailed tellings of specific events in his history, but we do NOT need to wait for that. :D

~P


Yar!

*ahem*

WOOOOO-HOOOOO!!!! ^_^

That is all.

*dances awkwardly when he thinks no one is looking*

~P


Yar!

That is all sorts of awesome! While some of the details of Sir Orrin's backstory and pre-game interactions with other characters need to be fleshed out and added to Sir Orrin's sheet, I feel like I'm ready to begin nonetheless. Also, a very big Thank you!

:D

~P


Yar!

So... no one knows? Or perhaps everyone thinks they know and do not care about ambiguity or the fact that others thinks something radically different, as can be seen in this thread by the few posters already here having given radically different answers (3d10 and 6d10, while I think it should be 4d10)? Or maybe few people have actually seen this thread? (and in that light... *bump*)

~P


Yar!

Overlooked... yeah, I glossed over and completely missed that language in the Bardic Performance. That is good news for multiclassed bards! However, that language doesn't exist in the Cavalier Tactician ability. When it upgrades, it's text reads: "Using the tactician ability is a swift action."

(italics mine)

So multiclassed Cavalier/Inquisitors are still in an awkward vortex of mutating action economy.

~P


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

Yar!

This isn't so much a rules question as it is a design philosophy question (and semi-rant)...

Swift Actions link

Swift Actions wrote:
A swift action consumes a very small amount of time, but represents a larger expenditure of effort than a free action. You can perform one swift action per turn without affecting your ability to perform other actions. In that regard, a swift action is like a free action. You can, however, perform only one single swift action per turn, regardless of what other actions you take. You can take a swift action anytime you would normally be allowed to take a free action. Swift actions usually involve spellcasting, activating a feat, or the activation of magic items.

Hypothetical: I'm a multiclassed Inquisitor/Cavalier. I can activate my Judgement ability as a Swift action, and I can buff nearby allies with my Tactician ability as a Standard action, and I can still use my Move action to move, draw a weapon, etc.

I level up a bit and now I'm an Inquisitor # / Cavalier 9. My tactician ability gets stronger and faster! Huzzah! Now it can be used as a swift action... Wait WHAT!? Before this I could use both the Tactician ability and my judgement ability in the same round, and now that I'm better at it, I can't? I want to be able to buff my allies, and as I get higher level and supposedly better at it, I actually get slower/worse at it? *facepalm*

This isn't the only case where an ability "upgrades" and "gets faster/easier to use" by becoming swift actions instead of Standard or Move, which actually ends up makes it harder to use. Bardic Performance, for example, start off as Standard, the upgrade to Move, then finally to Swift. A multiclassed Bard/Inquisitor starts being able to activate a Performance and a Judgement in the same round no problem, but as he gets "better" at it he eventually becomes unable to do this anymore. A multiclassed Bard/Cavalier starts off being able to start a Performance and issue a Challenge in the same round, but as he get's "better" at doing this, he becomes unable to do it.

Yeah yeah, these are corner case scenarios. Who cares? Well, I do. Anyone who plays characters into the teens of levels probably will as well. I get not wanting a high level caster being able to cast 3 quickened spells in a round, I can even understand wanting a single classed Inquisitor after level 5 having to spend two rounds to get the bets of his abilities (first round to swift action judgement, second round to swift action bane), but this "only one single swift action per turn" really hurts in scenarios where the ability in question starts off as a Standard or Move action and "upgrades" later on (really, a downgrade if you have other swift action abilities that you can no longer use at the same time with the "upgrade" but you could before).

All I can really say is... why? Why are abilities being designed that "upgrade" to the point of not being able to be used as effectively in conjunction with other abilities as they were able to at lower levels.

Thanks for reading my rant.

~P


Yar!

Do you know of "Smarties"?

If so, "When you eat your smarties, do you eat the red ones last?"

(reference songs: 1980's, 1988, 1991, and 1994)

~P


Yar.

Rereading my post, that should have read "the shear number of experiences and adventures it takes to get to level 20 is staggering.", not "...level 2 is..."

:/

*facepalm*

Like I said, that's completely based on my experiences of things. In the Kingmaker AP, you can literally spend years between events, whereas in others things can be "go-go-go" all the time, going from level 1 to 18 in a matter of weeks (in game). Most AP's only go up to level 15-18 over 6 books, and each book is often considered an "adventure" as well (though not always). Most of Sir Orrin's background is based on actual adventures I've gone on with the same character with my RL group, bringing him from level 1 to just past 20, which also took about 2 years of gaming every week IRL, and covering all of those various events and adventures.

Just saying, there can be quite a lot behind 25 levels. ^_^

~P


Yar!

Validk Ghujod wrote:
Aren't you glad that lances in d20 don't break when they hit something and can be immediately used the next round?

Yes.

Unequivocally, yes. (though I also made it adamantine and gave it the impervious enchantment as well, just for good measure)

^_^

~P


Yar!

I'm pretty sure the majority of backgrounds will be an ongoing process. As tumbler suggested/implied earlier, flashbacks and/or simply talking about past events in character can be another way to explore and flesh out backgrounds.

Heck, even if your character isn't that old (I think Sir Orrin is young for level 25 at 45 years old, but he's had an intense, combat centered background), the shear number of experiences and adventures it takes to get to level 2 is staggering. At least, in my personal experience, it takes many many many adventures to get from level 1 to 20+ and beyond.

As for the awkwardness of the few rare moments when my lance/banner is on my back instead of in hand, I expect it would be something like a mix of the extra encumbrance of a soldier wearing a a fully loaded rucksack and still fighting (I've heard numbers ranging from 20 lbs to 95, though that is all dependent on what they need for a particular mission, plus their trained to handle that - Sir Orrin's lance is only 5 lbs, but long) mixed with the awkwardness of not knowing how you fit in certain places, like Gandalf trying to navigate Bilbo's home and hitting his hear every few moments, except it'll be a pole scrapping the ceiling instead of his head. On that note, it shouldn't cause too much of a problem even then because Sir Orrin is only 2' 10" tall. A lance designed for someone that sized when strapped to their back would make them probably closer to normal human sized, probably a bit taller. Sir Orrin prefers to always have it in hand though, and while mounted on a 3' tall at the shoulders dinosaur means he's probably fairly used to having to maneuver his lance through areas that Medium sized creatures have to be careful navigating through. But should it happen that he needs to fight with sword instead of lance, this will allow him to do so with about the same level of potential (and potentially hilarious) awkwardness, depending on the environment, of course. (I can imaging at least once getting stopped in my tracks from accidentally impaling a low ceiling and getting stuck, at least in the past. At this level I hope that years of experience, both life and combat, has given Sir Orrin a bit better spacial awareness than when he was green).

~P


Yar!

(heh, alias mixup had me double take your post... all better now I see ^_^)

Kinda sorta yeah. I never actually heard of a Teluja until now. Hurray for learning! But yeah, a Teluja with Carolinus and/or a modified uked-zutsu for me, for the very few rare moments when I'd be fighting with my Sunblade instead of my lance.

And it's also because of the Banner class ability of Cavaliers, the Champion power (from Knights of Golarion), and the Lord's powers that you already know. So I must obey the following in order to for all it's powers to work: " ... carried or displayed by the cavalier or his mount to function", "It has no effect when not mounted properly or when laying on the ground" and "It has no effect unless it is mounted properly and a wielder is carrying the object bearing it."

The 17 different effects in a radius around Sir Orrin listed int he "Boons to Allies/Banes to Enemies" section of my sheet are all coming from my banner (both the item itself and my class abilities based on having a banner). That's a lot of buffs, not just for us, but all of our summons as well, reliant on me being able to keep by Banner up. Anything I can do to ensure that, I want to do. ^_^

EDIT: so the question I guess would be, would something like the Teluja (standard far for lance using Hussars) and/or an uked-zutsu (standard fare for banner using samurai) be part of the standard costs of a lance and banner (like a scabbard would be for a long sword), or something extra?

~P


Yar!

Cool. I simply wasn't sure as only ace and validk said anything about it so far. Sir Orrin was in the Absalom area (Andoran specifically, so just north of the isle) about 15-20 years ago, near the beginning of his adventuring career. Not sure if a mighty dragon in disguise would have cared about an up-and-coming halfling cavalier of the Eagle Knights, but if so (and assuming Katja was in Absalom at that time), there is plenty of opportunity there. I'm also really exited to see what potential hooks you come up with and working those in! :D

I'm definitely curious about The Rose, and how (if) we may have worked together with the Bellflower Network to aid the halfling slaves of Cheliax. ^_^

Also, I'm really tempted to do something horrible: a last minute build change. I'm contemplating removing 1 level of Ranger (skirmisher) and adding one level of Fighter (dragoon) near the beginning of my build (probably level 1). This means I would lose: 4 skill points (probably take them from Handle Animal), 1 point of my Will save, my favored terrain (plains), and the Endurance feat (which doesn't really benefit me much anyways). What I would gain is: +2 to Fort saves, the Risky Striker feat (+14 to base damage per hit but only against large and larger foes, for a -1 penalty to AC), and a bonus feat (thinking about Dodge). Everything else stays essentially the same, though the order that I gained my feats would take a slight rearrangement. What do you guys think about that?

~P


Yar!

So, I think we can all agree on the basic pre-'crit vs Undead' damage rolls, which are as follows:

Normal vs most things: 1d10+2
Crit vs most things: 2d10+4

Normal vs Evil: 1d10+4
Crit vs Evil: 2d10+8

Normal vs Undead: 2d10+8

__________

Now this is where the discrepancies start to emerge. So far it seems we have the following opinions of the rules:

Crit vs Undead: 3d10+12 <- (this assumes the bracketed text is simply a clarification of the rules for adding multiple multipliers to damage, and is thus superfluous text)
Crit vs Undead: 4d10+16 <- (this assume the bracketed text is a specific increase to the crit multiplier of the weapon, which is then added to the already doubled base damage as per the Multiplying Damage rules)
Crit vs Undead: 6d10+24 <- (this assumes that the first doubling is treated as a new base, and the potential crit then multiplies that value as if it were never doubled in the first place)

So really, which one is it? The actual rules as intended is only one of them, not all three. This ambiguity is for the Sunblade as it is written. I wasn't even considering the Sunblade as a property to apply to other weapons (though if that houserule does get used, clarification on this will only help in those situations as well).

Starglim: I tried to get the lance confusion sorted out HERE a while ago. It got mostly ignored.

~P


Yar!

I'm hoping to keep the banner on my lance. Does a lance come with a scabbard? Does any polearm for that matter? I always thought they were simply carried all the time or held on a (not very portable) rack.

Sashimono are Japanese banners.

Uked-zutsu were like scabbards, kinda, but specifically designed to hold Sashimono poles, sometimes with a Gattari for extra support (uked-zutsu near the waistline on the back of the chest piece and the gattari near the shoulders).

So yes, it's like a scabbard, but designed specifically for poles/banners. Most back scabbards are held in place partially by the weight of the blade inside it (with most of the blade mass being inside the scabbard). This would allow most of what's in it to be outside of it, held upright so all could see the banner. And I'm hoping to have it modified slightly to be able to hold a polearm (lance) as well/instead of a pole (or in the case of a scabbard, instead of a blade).

~P


Yar!

There is an FAQ that specifically answers this, HERE.

Short answer: You get to pounce, but only the first attack gets the extra damage from using a lance on a mounted charge.

~P


Yar!

GMV: I'd love for Katja and Sir Orrin to have shared in some past adventures. Did none of my current exploits appeal to you? Not just the two high level adventures above (magnimar cult and/or the journey to baator), but any of the other ideas in Sir Orrin's backstory I've already posted in the original recruitment thread (HERE) which are also listed in Sir Orrin's background on his sheet (that is: any missions performed in Andoran by the Eagle Knights, Defending the people of Lastwall, Fighting demons at the Worldwound, or the discovering of the ancient city of aberrations near Orv below the town of Sandpoint)? I'm open to additional adventures as well, if none of those appeal to anyone, but those events are critical to the development of Sir Orrin into what he is now, so I'm not going to remove them from my backstory, and any other adventures he's gone on with you guys that are not one of those will be in addition to those. (I'm not saying you have to choose from my past adventures. I am happy to go on more/other adventures as well, and I look forwards to the ideas you guys come up with).

Gobo: The original single item GP limit we set when we were first figuring out character creation rules was 250,000gp item market value. You are still below that with your Giant Rod, and being based on market value means what you paid for it via crafting doesn't make a difference (you're still below 250k), so no worries mate! ...I was about to give objection to it's special purpose being in direct conflict./opposition to all of it's powers (particularly it's special purpose power, which normally only gets used by the item of it's own will and only while actively pursuing/performing it's special purpose), but then I reread your fluff/history of it, and I see you worked in a work-around to that. ^_^

The dex to jump instead of str is an anomaly created by the merging of the jump and tumble skills of 3.x into "acrobatics" of pathfinder. You also don't see many strongmen doing well in high jump or long jump competitions, though no super flexible twigs either. It's really more of a combination of limber strength and technique, which I'm guessing the dev team figured would be best described with dex instead of one or the other or just str, especially as all the other uses of acrobatics were being combined into the same skill with only one stat to modify it. It seemed to make it through both the alpha and beta playtests as well. *shrugs*

tumbler: a quick question. Currently I have a small modification to my military saddle and I'm thinking of putting it on my armor as well. It is something that (I think) is implied to exist from the Banner ability descriptions of the Cavalier and Samurai ("The banner must be at least Small or larger and must be carried or displayed by the cavalier or his mount to function") combined with every description of magical banners needing to be attached to a pole, lance, or polearm to function, and is something that actually exists in real life, but there seems to be no Pathfinder equivalent. The closest thing I could find in the Pathfinder rules is a Shield Sconce. Basically I'm going for a holster for my lance in the style of the uked-zutsu/sashimono holders of Japan, so that in the few rare instances where Sir Orrin would not be using his Lance, he would put it into this, allowing it to remain upright and allowing the banner attached to it to continue to function. Is this permissible? If so, how much should I pay for the modification? 1 gp like the shield sconce? More?

EDIT: and if not, could I have a regular uked-zutsu for a cost, so it will only hold a pole rather than a lance? (in which case I will transfer Sir Orrin's banner form his Lance to a pole and have it always on my back or on Carolinus...though my preference is for it to be on my lance, and have someplace to put the lance when not in use but still keeping my banner bonuses up, obviously)

~P


28 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yar!

The Sunblade states: "Against Negative Energy Plane creatures or undead creatures, the sword deals double damage (and ×3 on a critical hit instead of the usual ×2)."

Is the bracketed note about critical hits an affirmation of the normal rules for multiple multipliers of damage, or is it actually a modification of the weapons normal crit multiplier?

ie: When I crit against an Undead creature with a Sunblade, do I do x2+x2=x3 damage, or do I do x2+x3=x4 damage?

~P


Yar!

Well, I wouldn't say we are really caster heavy or martial heavy at the moment, really. Sir Orrin and Ralph are on the martial side, Jacob and Validk are on the caster side, and Katja is a mix of both (on the simple account of being a dragon, though in play I'm guessing will probably lean towards the caster side)... so really we have a fairly good balance between. I say, bring on the Samsaran Druid! :D

I only just woke up, so I haven't had time to do the "Sir Orrin talks about traveling through the Void" writeup for ace yet (sorry) or read through Ralph's sheet, but as I get on that, I do have one fluff related question:

Who all would have ended up going on the "trip to Hell" mission? Just a curiosity thing really, plus it would be good to know who Sir Orrin saw when he turned around during the break in action.

I also know exactly what would motivate Sir Orrin for an immortality quest. It's something he'd probably go to some of your character to ask about too, though if we're going to start with an explosive "save the world from a spawn-agug" combat, maybe I'll save the asking (if I survive) for in game?

the reason:
At some point between getting lost in the Void and his rescue in Hell, he met his patron god in person, Chaldira Zuzaristan, and they had a fling of sorts. She told him that "if you touch me as a mortal, you will be destroyed... and dying simply will not do! But there are ways to immortality. Seek them out, and ascent heroically to my side!" ...that's right, it's a quest for Love. :p

*ponders*

~P

1 to 50 of 1,032 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>