So, the real problem lies with the inability of GMs to tackle the 15-minutes day of adventuring.
When the casters have spent all their spells, the barbarian all his rage rounds and the paladin all his smites and lay on hands, the good old meat shields and their flanking buddies can shine again ;-)
This wasn't even true in (pre-Advanced) Dungeons & Dragons, and it's certainly not true today.
First off, the actual defining feature of both classes is that they're mundane. Not "versatile" or "enduring", but mundane. This is a problem, because past level 6 or so, everything is superhuman. Fighters and Rogues are stuck with abilities that are measured against some standard of "realism"; meanwhile, real classes get to say "it's MAGIC, I ain't gotta explain shit".
On top of having their core feature literally being "sucking", they have other issues.
The Rogue is trying to do the job of attacking people. Other classes who do that have either Full BAB + bonus from class abilities, or medium BAB plus at least 6 levels spellcasting and other class abilties. The Rogue has medium BAB and terrible defenses.
The Fighter is being sold as an action hero, the warrior of legends. But he isn't. He's somewhere between a hired thug/jobber on the football team, and a helmet-wearing short bus rider. When he's not stabbing things, the Fighter is literally the same as the "filth-covered dirt farmer" NPC class. He can't do the job of any action hero, modern or mythical, you would care to name.
High level play even becomes slightly awkward over it; because Steve and I are buddies, we're equals at the table, but....Steve brought a Fighter to the high level game, and a high-level Fighter is just not a player on that field, he's a tool, brought along and used by the actual characters. I mean, I'm playing a game with the NPCs, and one winning move is "putting my Fighter where he can make a Full Attack on an enemy with most defenses down", but Steve's character can't really contribute meaningfully to making that happen. And that means that I'm making decisions for Steve and his character, and it kinda sucks.
The First Worlder's Summon Nature's Ally feature is pretty explicit that it replaces, not alters, the normal Summon Monster,
Not really.
"This ability otherwise replaces the summon monster ability of a normal summoner." The bolded part makes no sense and is clearly a mistake. It should be either "replaces" or "otherwise works as". Given how the ability references back to the base ability, and how the implications of full replacement are not even hinted at in the fluff, it seems most likely that it's intended to be "otherwise works as".
They will not respond to this or they will errata it because it would make them look thoughtless in errataing the ability score stacking issue.
Oh, it's not an errata, it's a clarification. The rules always worked like this. Just like Flurry of Blows always required two different weapons. We have always been at war with Eurasia.
"The caster level for these effects is equal to the gnome's level."
That would seem to indicate that the effects themselves, rather than the gnome, have caster levels.
If this were true, the gnome wouldn't qualify for Arcane Strike. His Gnome Magic SLAs might, but SLAs don't get feats.
Right?
Wrong, you're inventing distinctions that are not there. Even if we go with your interpretation, the FAQ on SLAs brings the CL home to the Gnome.
Marroar Gellantara wrote:
Also, all SLAs are assumed to be arcane unless noted otherwise. Even divine spell SLAs.
That's not what the FAQs sat. Current state of the rules is that SLAs granted by a casting class are the same flavor as the class, then you go through the wizard/cleric/bard/druid hierarchy from the Bestiary definition of SLA, and if it's still unresolved, it's arcane (unless there's a good reason it should be divine). There was a period of time where the hierarchy was used to determine spell level and version, but anything on an arcane list was arcane, and that produced silly results.
Roles for a Basic Effective Party:
tank
healer
trap guy
magic guy
?
?
(With only 3 players I am 1 short. I prefer not to play a party NPC and I made the mistake of working though a gestalt character creation with my wife one (long) Saturday. For now we need faster action, less strategy and that was my bad. I may have my wife run two characters.)
So, I completely disagree with those roles. There are good works written on the topic, I recommend seeking out "The Forge of Combat" for one well-explained paradigm.
I prefer the paradigm of tasks instead.
Damage - reducing the enemy's ability to take effective actions through doing HP damage to take them out of the fight entirely.
Control - reducing the enemy's ability to take effective actions through affecting positioning, mobility (or countering the enemy's mobility advantage), or debilitating conditions.
Buffing - increasing party defense and offense.
Healing - This means condition removal, getting people back in the fight, healing ability damage between fights etc. The ability to heal HP damage is incidental to this.
Knowledge (in order of importance)- Arcane, Religion and Planes, then Spellcraft, then other Knowledges.
Given the ENORMOUS pile of legitimate questions raised by the ACG, most of which should be super easy to answer, that FAQ feels like a slap in the face.
Building an effective character is always a challenge. For those looking for a simple guide though this 5-question character building solution will help you build a more effective character in ANY RPG.
Your controversial rogue motivational is actually perfectly valid, but at the same time it underscores the central flaw of your guide.
Your hypothetical Rogue is a master of escaping bonds, evading traps and opening doors. You mention "pick any lock" as a valid design goal for a player character in step one.
All of these thing are sideshows. Minor abilities. Skills. Hobbies. First step should be deciding what your character does, in terms of things that will let you participate in the game.
He plays like a Str 18 reach cleric with a consecrated longspear (Adventurer's Armory). He can channel negative energy to control undead, for a mass Daze, or charge his spear (out of combat) to cause a Daze on the next target hit. He can use Copycat for defense, then trigger his group buff from the Magic domain. He can Summon a Hell Hound as a standard action.
Carrion Crown is the single best AP published, for the first one and a half books.
Reign of Winter is kinda cool.
Jade Regent is about managing relationships with a handful of cardboard NPCs. Skulls & Shackles is about grinding. Kingmaker is about the lords of the land, army-vanquishing heroes, still doing fetch-quests, also about running magic items shops and pretending that 100 trolls marching overland is any kind of challenge at level 10+.
Serpent's Skull is cool fantasy adventure. Once you move from the upper city to the lower city, past level 10 or 12, it becomes stupid though.
Rereading this thread and the Magus FAQ, I see that Skylancer is indeed making shit up. Also, the non-Magus rules for holding charges strongly suggest that your entire body is holding the charge.
We can also clearly see that the UE version is garbled b!&++&%~ nonsense. so can we please just bury that turd and focus on the version thats worth discussing?
Quell the animosity a level or two. Ultimate Equipment is (I believe) the most recently released source, so it should not be discounted.
You're implying that the UE version is not garbled bullshit nonsense. So, please enlighten us to how it works, mechanically, and what those rules represent happening in the game world.
Alternatively we can use a more annoying rule which likely to irk GM's who would disallow it more. 1 level of fighter flurry in full plate and a tower shield.
Please, elaborate on this alternate rule? :D
The monks inability to flurry in armor is not part of the flurry of blows ability, it comes from the proficiencies part of the monk class.
The errata to Adventurers armory does not touch on the scorpion whip, btw. so first printing is fine. So we know how an AA scorpion whip works, mostly. theres still the unresolved feat issue.
We can also clearly see that the UE version is garbled bullshit nonsense. so can we please just bury that turd and focus on the version thats worth discussing?
I know this sounds like a stupid question, but does this apply to Diehard Summons from the Summon Good Monster feat?
Yes. I call it "The Implied Exception Principle", and it's an application of "Specific Trumps General". If an ability does not work at all, because of how it interacts with general rules, an exception to the general rule is implied in the ability. As seen here with Ferocious Summons, it also applies to Summon Good Monster.
The AA Scorpion whip has a clarification from SKR. In short, it follows all the rules of a whip, except it always deals lethal damage, is not useless against armored targets, and have slightly different numbers in the table.
It's still unclear whether it shares feats with a whip, or only proficiency.
The Scorpion Whip entry in UE is garbled nonsense.
Secane, the Vital Strike FAQ is for people who, for various reasons, can't parse the difference between "attack" and "the attack action". I have never had that problem, and the Hooded Champion, completely unlike Vital Strike, does not refer to the attack action.
At 1st level, the hooded champion’s can spend 1 panache point when making a single ranged attack
with a bow to make a ranged touch attack instead. The target must be in the bow’s first range increment.
"When making a single ranged attack". That means it can't be used with a full attack. At that makes it a dubious action at level 3 and obsolete at level 6.
Well, I suppose it can be used with Snap Shot or Target of Opportunity.
Speaking of modules and suicidal tactics...I've noticed a lot of tactics notes on NPC caster-types that say "If forced into melee, cast buff X, then cast buff Y, then do Z". And it's ridiculous. It's beyond ridiculous, in a product I'm paying money for, it's offensively stupid. If a caster-type is forced into melee by player characters, he has one, maybe two actions to drastically change the situation, and after that he is dead.
I respectfully disagree. Summoners, Witches and Gunslingers are three really wonderful classes (Witch is my favorite class in PF, so I'm a little biased) and I don't think that banning the whole classes for a couple of broken options is fair.
For summoners, you may want to disallow the Syntethist archetype: it's a rule nightmare, and a little over the top in terms of power. Furthermore its premise encourages to min/max.
If I'm not mistaken, even one of the devs disallowed the archetype in his home game. :P
Synthesists are actually less overpowered than regular summoners. They give up dual actions in exchange for eliminating the Summoners nominal weak spot - the Summoner himself. Turns out, Summoners are not actually that squishy. They were banned from PFS for being a) poorly written and b) being unambiguously better than Monks and Fighters on their home field.
Adahn_Cielo wrote:
For Witches, get rid of the Sleep hex: it trivialize most of the other witch's options, and it basically forces you to rewrite every encounter to up considerably the number of enemies. Witches are strong in locking away an enemy one at a time, usually taking three Full Actions to render someone harmless: Sleep does the same thing, only in one turn. <.<
Agreed.
Adahn_Cielo wrote:
For Gunslingers, just ask your players to justify why do they have a gun: in Golarion, for example, there are only guns in the Mana Wastes, a place a little cut off from the rest of the setting, if I remember correctly.
Come on. If you're going to ban the Gunslinger, just ban it, don't ask the player to come up with an elaborate backstory, and then berate him for munchkinism or disapprove of his character, forcing him to waste effort. That's passive-aggressive bullshit. Conversely, if you allow it, no amount of backstory is going to keep him from obliterating enemies.
Orator makes the wizard incredibly good at getting the ladies, scaring commoners into doing things, and convincing the party he is not evil, as well as knowing a ton of languages.
Orator + Focused Trance revelation (+party member to chitchat for 1d6 rounds) = win at Diplomacy.
We already have this question for a FAQ over here with almost 150 hits. Please FAQ it so we can get an answer. The fact is there is a lot more than just this riding on it.
That question is about people being confused over "sources". The generalized answer, if it ever comes, is that you will be able to add the same stat twice to the same thing, as long as you observe the distinction between replacements and additional bonuses.
Regardless of the answer to the general question, the Sacred Fist AC bonus is just a shoddy slip-up. RAW, yes, they clearly stack. RAI, of course they don't.
15 people marked this as FAQ candidate.
6 people marked this as a favorite.
What I mean is, if an archetype or selectable class ability gives you something that is normally a class ability of another class, you can take the attendant feats.
Examples: Life Oracle and Channeling feats, Hexcrafter Magus and the Hex Strike feat.
The case against is that while these characters have the substance of the required ability, they don't have the correct label.
Examples: [Channeling] feats require the "Channel Energy class feature". A Life Oracle has a class feature called "Revelation", an option called "Channel", which works like a cleric's Channel Energy class feature, but with a different name. Similarly, the Hexcrafter Magus has one or more Hexes, but not the required Hex class feature for Hex Strike - it's called Hex Magus or Hex Arcana.
My first argument is of course the assumption of perfection failure, or, "objection your honor, assumes precision of writing not in evidence".
Archetype: If an archetype replaces a class ability with a more specific version of that ability (or one that works similarly to the replaced ability), does the archetype's ability count as the original ability for the purpose of rules that improve the original ability?
It depends on how the archetype's ability is worded. If the archetype ability says it works like the standard ability, it counts as that ability. If the archetype's ability requires you to make a specific choice for the standard ability, it counts as that ability. Otherwise, the archetype ability doesn't count as the standard ability. (It doesn't matter if the archetype's ability name is different than the standard class ability it is replacing; it is the description and game mechanics of the archetype ability that matter.)
Now, this FAQ is only discussing archetypes in the context of parent classes that have the class feature in question. But the bolded part is a statement of intent that might be applicable in other cases.
And indeed, Advanced Class Guide gives us the Primalist Archetype of the Bloodrager class, with the Primal Choices feature, which gives you the option of selecting Rage Powers, and then goes on to say that it "does not count as the rage power class feature for determining feat prerequisites and other requirements."
This exception implies a general rule that if you have one or more rage powers, you qualify for feats as if you had the rage powers class feature; more generally, that if you have the ability to use a given class feature, you counts as having that class feature for the purpose of prerequisites and requirements; this extends the FAQ ruling and is consistent with the bolded statement of intent.
Sure. The prohibition against Flask Rogues is in "throw splash weapon", not in touch attacks. Bottled Lightning is not a thrown splash weapon (and is pretty useless for Alchemists), so there's no prohibition against sneak attacking with it.
1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.
2 people marked this as a favorite.
deusvult wrote:
Interesting point, but you're ignoring chronology.
UE came out two years after SKR's clarification to Adventurer's Armory. If UE wanted that clarification to be the rule, it'd be there. And it isn't. And thus his clarification is to a version of the weapon that has been removed/rendered obsolete and is accordingly pointless, with regards to the scorpion whip as presented in UE.
Perhaps they deliberately changed SKR's ruling as of UE. Maybe they didn't and forgot to include it. You'll have to make that decision for yourself.
I was thinking along the same lines. UE invalidates AA, right? Makes sense. But there's not actually any statement to that effect, not in UE, not in any FAQ, not in the Additional Resources for PFS.
"If UE wanted that clarification to be the rule, it would be there" - come on, you know Paizo's editorial standards. Never attribute to hidden agenda what can be adequately explained by sloppe oversights.
We have 3 sets of rules.
1) Unclarified AA rules: One-handed exotic weapon; disarm, reach, trip; if you're proficient with whip, you're proficient with this.
2) Clarified AA rules: It's a whip, except slightly heavier, slightly more expensive, always deals lethal damage, does not have the whip's problem with armored targets.
3) UE rules: It's a light weapon that doesn't have reach or trip. If you're proficient with a whip, you can uncoil the 10'+ length of the weapon that you apparently weren't using.
Ruleset #3 is garbled nonsense. Fortunately, there's nothing forcing you to use it.
Punch isn't a defined game term. In the english language it means a thrusting blow (think hole punch).
In colloquial english, in the context of combat, it means a thrusting blow with a clenched fist. You know this perfectly well, and your dictionary quote is dishonest.
Quote:
So as written it applies to all weapons and you attack with whatever weapon you wish for that one attack. If they meant unarmed attack, they're going to have to scratch out punch and replace it with unarmed attack.
As written right now, the super obvious intent of "unarmed strikes only" is not actually encoded in the feat text. So if you have a RAW GM who also is the kind of person who interprets "RAW" as "semantics is the only valid analytical tool", then sure, go ahead and use it with armed attacks. But stop pretending you don't know how the feat is intended to work, it's just a sad display.
Pummeling style is a unique full-round action, not a modification to a typical full-attack. Just like Vital Strike is its own unique Standard Action, and combines with nothing (or close to it), Pummeling Strike is in the same boat.
But unlike Dead Shot, Pummeling Style "inherits" a Full Attack through the phrase "Make a number of rolls equal to the number of attacks you can make with a full attack". It's not stated or even implied that this means "iteratives only".
That means that Haste effects, Two-weapon Fighting etc are all legit. You may not be making a Full Attack, but the question isn't "what's your BAB?", it's "how many attacks, and at which bonus, can you make during a full attack?". Technically, there's a distinction between a Pummeling Style blow and a Full Attack, but it's a very fine crack that will rarely be relevant.
As for whether the BAB increase from Flurry of Blows applies...the feat doesn't explicitly say that it applies. But if it doesn't, a 6th level Monk will have an attack bonus of $UNDEFINED on one of his attacks.
In other words, two possible interpretations:
1) BAB increase from FoB is not intended to apply. This can be derived from a careful reading of the feat and the class ability. This makes FoB apply partially, and creates attacks with an undefined attack bonus.
2) BAB increase from FoB is intended to apply, and the writer thought that this was obvious and didn't need mentioning.
In the interest of sanity and consistency with Paizo writers' previous writing style, it seems obvious to me that 1) is not the correct interpretation.
It just seems to be an umbrella term for anything that is an attack...is the fact that "attack" is singular having people think that it is a single action, standard action etc. and not something that can be an ASPECT of an action? A lot of the threads I've read border on the bizarre behavior that strict interpretationalists have regarding religious texts....but maybe I'm missing something here regarding melee mechanics? I almost feel that people at Paizo don't make "rulings" on things because they would ignite some sort of holy war, so they just stay out of it and let people spin their wheels in the forums, then let things play out in games as they may.
Are you saying that you still don't understand how Vital Strike works, or what?
Rivalry 2 (While still on good terms with his “friends”, he’s recently grown slightly detached from them due to distance and events. However he still cares about their opinion and often likes to impress them with his skills, particularly fencing but also his ability to drink, gamble and…other associated activities)
Advantages:
Able Drinker (1)
Academy (2)
Ambidextrous: You never suffer an off-hand penalty, no matter which hand you fight with.
Connections: Informant (1), Informant (1)
Languages: Vodacce (Island Accent) r/w (0), Castille r/w (1), Thean r/w (2)
Left-handed (0)
Linguist (2)
Noble (10)
Pirate Trick - Quick Draw (3)
Poison Immunity: Legion's Caress (1)
Poison Immunity: Godiva's Tears (1)
Poison Immunity: Ten-second Beetle Venom (1)
Swordsman’s Guild (3)
University (2)
Notes: Noble Heroes who belong to the Falisci family gain one Free Raise when trying to manipulate others. Finally, they are compulsive gamblers, and must roll Resolve against a TN of 15 to resist a bet.
Horse, War (750g)
Saddle, war (30g)
Saddle bags and blanket (6g)
His horse is currently in Vodacce.
Several sets of fine traveling clothes and courtly clothes (100g) (Only two sets of clothes are with him at the moment.)
Fencing Sword, Quality, Half-Basket Hilt (35g) (Damage: 4k2, Pommel Strike 2k2+1)
Knife, Quality x2 (24g) (Damage: 3k2)
Ornamented Sheathx3 (10g)
Flintlock Musket (20g) (Damage: 5k3)
Flintlock Pistols x2 (40g) (Damage: 4k3)
Gunpowder and Lead [20 shots] (3g)
Power Flasks x2 and Measure (2g 20c)
Bullet Mold and Extra Flint (1g)
Gabriele generally wears his sword, one of the knives, and a flintlock pistol. The other knife and pistol are usually stowed upon his horse (the pistol unloaded, of course). The musket is always stored on his horse and he rarely carries it unless hunting.
Half-Basket Hilt: The sword has a hilt that covers the front and outer edge of his sword hand, making it more difficult to strike with a called shot. It requires one extra Raise to make a called shot to this hand, and the sword does +1 damage when the user makes a pommel strike.
Description:
If not for his manner and clothes, Gabriele would appear average. But something about him tends to strike others as attractive. Perhaps it’s his smile, or the easy way he pays a compliment. To all appearances he’s of average height and build, with only a hint of natural good looks. He tends to wear fine, and appropriate clothes, though they’re almost always tailored to suit a swordsman, even in his court finery. He wears the pin of an apprentice member of the Swordsman’s Guild upon his collar. At his belt is a thin dagger and finely wrought rapier with an ornate half-basket hilt. He also, oddly, often carries a flintlock pistol.
Background:
The sword in the boy’s hand trembled. He clearly wasn’t used to holding one. Opposite stood another young man. This one’s sword did not tremble. His stance was relaxed, even arrogant. He was obviously unafraid of the boy. The other young men that surrounded the two were excited. They called the boy a peasant, and claimed he was lucky. The boy didn’t feel lucky. He felt scared. He shouldn’t have spoken back. He should have just done what they said and kept his head bowed. He tried to keep his sword pointed at the other boy. He’d seen a few fights before and that’s what they did. It took but a moment for the swordsman to disarm him. His hand hurt. The other boys cheered. "Go ahead Gabriele, give him a good scar. Make him remember to watch his tongue around his betters."
Gabriele Fausto Fascili has spent most of his life cursing the fact that he is his mother’s first born son. Marcella Villanova was married to Gabriele’s father for less then two years. He was poisoned shortly after his only son was born and Gabriele’s mother was quickly married off to another. He was raised among Villanovans, preparing to one day inherit from his father. Hardly a day went by that he did not wish that it was his brother born to a Fascili.
Marcella Villanova sought the finest tutors for her son, deciding that his education would be as complete as possible. He was taught to dance, fashion, and the ways of court. She made sure her son attended the prestigious St. Lorenzo Academy. A few well placed words, and not a small amount of coin, also saw Gabriele admitted to the famous Dionna University. Even outside of the classroom, she found other boys to educate the young man. Some would say that she bought her son friends, but the fact is that she bought him everything. Her son learned to hunt, find his way around a bustling city, and even a few games of chance. No expense, nor experience, was spared.
When Gabriele learned that he’d be attending the Ambrogia School of swordsman, he was furious. He, of course, had made plans to attend the Villanovan School along with his “friends”. But, his mother insisted. Ambrogia was the most famous, and many considered it the best. Upon returning from the school he was met with quite a few jokes at his expense. In his anger he fought and scarred another young man, whose crime was simply walking down the wrong street and running into Gabriele’s friends. This act now nags at Gabriele, not that he’d ever admit it.
Fulfilling his obligation to the Academy, Gabriele served very briefly in the Vodacce navy. Almost entirely a position in name only, his service was deemed adequate (but certainly nothing exemplary). Upon being old enough to inherit he has returned to his father’s land, though he quickly grew bored with having nothing to do but discuss wine. Several of his family members have noticed that while Gabriele idolizes the Villanova family he’s grown increasingly aware of people calling him a Villanovan lackey behind his back. The family intends to get him more involved in Fascili affairs and hope that this will turn him from his adopted family.
It should be noted that Gabriele has a lot of skills learned outside of the University and Academy. While it may appear that he's something of a dilettante, this is actually not the case. He's simply been taught a great many things and hasn't had time to actually focus on anything (as opposed to purposefully not focusing). His mother has made sure that his education is not simply in scholarly works, but also "practical" things and courtly enterprises. And his "friends" often pushed him into doing things that were...not so intelligent. He's even spent some time as a Whaler, on a dare. And often admits this was easily the most idiotic thing he's ever done. He's proficient, if not well-versed, in the ways of a Vodacce courts, including the art of spying. It is also well-known, though only whispered, that Marcella Villanova is a master of poisons. The rumor is that her son is as well, though this is hardly true. Gabriele has, however, had an immunity to various poisons, including alcohol, built up over the years.
Ten of Coins (Past): You are ambidextrous. You never suffer an off-hand penalty, no matter which hand you fight with, and you receive the Left-handed Advantage for free. Ten of Coins (Present): Your family ensured that your education was the most complete they could give you. You receive both the Academy and University Advantages for free. (Changed to being allowed to buy both for half the normal Hero Point cost.)
Two of Cups (Future): Be careful how you behave around your friends. (Rivalry 2)
