SGriffit's page

Organized Play Member. 18 posts. 1 review. No lists. No wishlists. 21 Organized Play characters.




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

Hello board! came up today, looked for a while, couldn't find a real thread on it:

Situation:
Im invisible. I move. (for intents of this consider every stealth to beat any perception to detect)
An enemy goes to move through the square I am now in (coincidence).

At some point, he tries to enter my square this is where I butted heads with GM.

from the GMs perspective, although he(the enemy) failed to detect me via normal means, he knows me to be in that square because he cannot enter or end his turn there. So because of mechanics, the enemy can deduce an opponent is nearby because god stops him or tells him he cannot end his turn there.

What I have seen many times in the past, and also what I attempted to do, which was silently let him slip through, forgoing any attack of opportunity so he had no reason to suspect. The response to that was, 'there is no rule that lets you let an enemy pass through your square' which is, technically correct. However, 'there is also no rule that allows for' what the GM claimed either.(which was you "sense" invisible creatures when you try to enter their square, when sensing invisible creatures is explicity what perception is for.)

Is there anything to this? Or is it just another table variance discussion? It seems unlikely that due to a mechanical hole, you can pinpoint invisible creatures without a perception check.

To me, the GMs adjudication implies the creatures involved to have a somewhat '4th wall' understanding of the game's mechanics.

"Gee steve, I can't end mah turn here....must be an divisible guy"
Whack.

2/5

A situation arose in a game that I have not found the wording to support.

The things that matter:
Tier 3-4
TPK with body recovery required.

Now, one of the party members wanted to accept his death and donate his gold on hand to another PC to help him defer the cost of his raise. FAQ and GTOP reviewed, I see nothing that specifically excludes this. To be clear, the question proposed is: Can a dead character opt-in to the pooling resources clause of the GTOP?

The initial decision was 'No' with no source of reference. Upon further inspection I am no longer sure that is the case.

If you say no, please cite some sort of reference.
Thank you


Hey guys, I tried to post this in the class discussion forum for the advanced class guide but for some reason it wouldn't let me add a new thread. This scenario came up in a PFS game today and both the GM and I were stumped. So here goes:

Scenario:
Swashbuckler attempts to use his opportune parry ability. Enemy rolls a natural 20 to hit (modified to an AC of 22). Swashbuckler's parry roll is also a natural 20 (modified to a 28).

Issue:
Natural 20's always hit.

The opportune parry ability reads:
"The swashbuckler makes an attack roll as if she were making an attack of opportunity. If her attack roll is greater than the roll of the attacking creature, the attack automatically misses."

So, I see two outcomes here.

One- It's a natural 20. You get hit. Suck it up wussy.
Two- since the modified attack roll of the parry is higher than the modified attack roll of the attack, the attack gets parried as normal ignoring the fact that it was a natural 20.

If you agree with outcome two, would you also agree if the parry attack roll wasn't a natural 20 but still higher than the modified natural 20? (I.E. a 15 modified to a 23)