SpawnLQ's page

10 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS


Rysky wrote:
GreenShaDow wrote:
Rysky wrote:

Heh, okies.

To phrase it another way, why would they make an example in the Core Rulebook that didn’t follow the rules?

I came across this issue as well, and took a bit of exploring to figure it out. There is an obvious issue that needs to be fixed, and will be. When I originally read this, I thought it was a copy/paste of the monk example from the playtest, since Wis originally gave you spell points. Should we read the examples and sidebars? Yes. Is anyone disagreeing with that? No. What should we do when the sidebar example says one thing and the written rules say another? I believe the point that is being made is, this is a mistake and it can be easily confusing for a new player to figure out.

That's the thing, the written rules don't say another. It wasn't an error by listing the wrong thing, it was an error by omission.

This is actually a very good point. It's not that it specifically stated another stat....but because of the omission of Wisdom for spell DC, there are multiple statements of "Your casting ability DC" or something like that...and the only DC ever mentioned in the class rules is your Monk DC based on your primary stat at that point. So with omission, it can actually be implied your primary monk stat DC is used. This better explains the point of my original post i think :)


Rysky wrote:

Heh, okies.

To phrase it another way, why would they make an example in the Core Rulebook that didn’t follow the rules?

now THAT is a great question! Which is actually why I started with my first post response mentioning that it wasn't actually listed in the rules anywhere! Only in that example! :)

And that is the very reason that new players would be confused, because the core rules only talk about Dex or Str, while the sample monk mentions Wisdom, so an inexperienced player can easily get confused.

And the counter argument to that as written, is instead of making a Ki Monk, I will make a Crane Monk variant that I'll pick up some Ki spells for....which nowhere in the Crane Monk example does it mention Wisdom is needed.

There are many people out there (and i'm sure you'll agree) that if it's not plainly stated as an all encompassing rule, will try to exploit those holes to make their characters more powerful arguing how RAW states this or that.

Now we've gone full circle on this argument, thanks for closing the loop! lol :)


Rysky wrote:
Why do you consider the examples to not be rules?

Because in this case, it's a possibility, not a static rule. You would have to follow exactly what the "example" states then and it could not deviate in any way, which would make any other example contradictory to it.

You guys are really reaching for argument material aren't you? lol, that's ok, this is fun i got a couple more hours to kill.

I'm sure everyone got the point of my post, this is just some fun, friendly back and forth at this point ^^


swoosh wrote:
SpawnLQ wrote:
ignore that and still go by the book RAW.
I don't think ignoring what's written in the book is ever RAW, by definition.

I didn't say ignore the base text, they would be following the exact wording in the class description, which does not say anywhere about using Wisdom for Ki. They would ignore the sample boxes that are meant to be possibilities, not rules. I would have thought that was obvious?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

As PossibleCabbage pointed out, there will definitely be mistakes and corrected in print for a new rulebook of this size, which was the whole point of my argument - until they do correct it, it could be interpreted to use a Monk's primary stat quite easily for their Ki. I really don't see how you think one example box of a sample build can be a staple for new players to base a mechanic on, but it's pointless to continue this argument.

Yes, new players can ask around/find experienced people to clarify. They could also stick to RAW. Or they may not care about asking veteran PF players. It may be a big deal to some, and a small deal to others. Most will probably not care.

The whole point of having this book is to teach you how to play and mechanics behind character abilities with as little open interpretation as possible, which it fails on the Monk. Whether you agree if it's a big deal or not is not the point, it's just a fact that we know they are already aware of.

Until they do fix it in print though, I also know people that will play it RAW on purpose knowing it should be wisdom but getting away with not needing to boost the extra stat to exploit it.

That's all I wanted to say :)


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Rysky wrote:

And the example is clear cut and informative.

Note, neither of us are claiming this wasn't a slip up not listing this info outside of the example, it's just not a major one.

That's where i disagree, because no one reads a rulebook and uses claims in an example as a rule. That's silly. It needs to be listed in the main class somewhere. I know people that ignore side bars and example boxes completely, to speed read through stuff.

This is why it's a big problem, it's only a small problem for us that already know how it should be.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Right, you guys are missing the point. Experienced players like us KNOW this. However, leaving it open to interpretation to a new player to figure out that Wisdom is needed for Monk Ki power is the problem, because the ONLY mention is in an example, which anyone reading the guide with no tabletop experience could easily ignore that and still go by the book RAW.


Rysky wrote:
SpawnLQ wrote:
I figured that was the case. But still, pretty big mistake for release, and while experienced players may understand the lack of clarity in print, anyone newer trying to learn it will not. Hopefully they fix it in print to stop a gap in translation of RAW and RAI.
To head that off, the example Ki user in the Monk section specifically calls out needing Wisdom.

You're absolutely right, except it's an example box for a sample build. Just like Crane build recommends Dex primary but you can pick Str if you want, any of the sample builds are just that....examples. I can say I'm building a Crane Monk and learn Ki skills to still use the book RAW. Basing an entire mechanic on a sample build in a side box isn't practical.


Xenocrat wrote:
SpawnLQ wrote:
Just FYI, there is literally nothing in the new book about requiring Wisdom for DC on Ki spells of monks that we could find. It only references the class casting DC which the only DC skill of a monk is Strength or Dexterity. You can have a Wisdom of 3 and still blast people with Ki spells just fine with RAW. I don't know if it was intentionally changed or they forgot to add the changes with removing the wisdom bonus power stuff from playtest.
Mark Seifert, on the development team, reportedly told multiple people who asked him at Gencon that it was a mistake, and monk focus spell DCs are supposed to key off wisdom.

I figured that was the case. But still, pretty big mistake for release, and while experienced players may understand the lack of clarity in print, anyone newer trying to learn it will not. Hopefully they fix it in print to stop a gap in translation of RAW and RAI.


Just FYI, there is literally nothing in the new book about requiring Wisdom for DC on Ki spells of monks that we could find. It only references the class casting DC which the only DC skill of a monk is Strength or Dexterity. You can have a Wisdom of 3 and still blast people with Ki spells just fine with RAW. I don't know if it was intentionally changed or they forgot to add the changes with removing the wisdom bonus power stuff from playtest.