TurquoiseMouse's page

Tinkerer-specific clarifications will appear in the next update of Campaign Clarifications.

Just curious, as it is over a year later and I can't find them, is this coming?

Sadly, earth and air don't mix for a composite blast. Water might be your best bet for the physical blast.

Element(s) air and earth; Type composite blast (Sp); Level —; Burn 2

You use your air to churn up sand, firing a flensing gust at a foe.

I did a look back at a few pages using the search feature, but could never find a solid answer. What penalties are there for using a buckler while grappling if any?

I am playing a brawler grappler and having a hard time passing the possible +6 AC (and other goodies) up. would it be:

- no penalty as it isn't an attack AND leaves the hands free
- -1 penalty and losing AC bonus because it is an attack
- -4 penalty because, reasons.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Fixed that for you.

I really don't think an FAQ is needed when JJ has already said this much, even though he's not one of the designers.

I dunno, I was told by a few people in my PFS circle that he wasn't really a source to be trusted, and that he wasn't part of the design team, plus he has contradicted himself before as well. I would like something more official i can point to for PFS GMs specifically.

The main ruling i go by is (http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2l7ns&page=298?Ask-James-Jacobs-ALL-your-Q uestions-Here#14851)

However it seems there is still a lot of contention, and I have run into people who say James Jacobs isn't really a solid source for rules rulings. So it seems there is enough confusion around this topic, and has been since it released 5 years ago, that an FAQ should be en route, no?

TurqoiseMouse wrote:

BigNorseWolf wrote:

This doesn't interact with PFS rules. Unless they want to start using the PFS faq as a back door for a more agile and responsive faq process, they're going to have to wait for the design team to get to it through the regular process.

if i am understanding you right, it will hit the main FAQ long before it would come to the PFS FAQ?

They're different things.

The PFS team is generally faster, but far more limited. And this is really in the regular design teams bailiwick.

PFS faq's are MOSTLY for things that interact with PFS specific rules, or that call for a DM's call that would lead to too much table variation. There's also some realy obvious fixes, as well as fixes to the player companion line, which do not get errata'd.

IE, there's no crafting, so alchemists don't get brew potion, so they get extra bombs.

This is something about the eidolon itself: how the eidolon can be used for baggage storage in the regular rules and in PFS are exactly the same so it should go to the regular rules team.

Probably

I am very tired now...

Okay, I will move this over the the main forum, thanks for telling me ^_^

This doesn't interact with PFS rules. Unless they want to start using the PFS faq as a back door for a more agile and responsive faq process, they're going to have to wait for the design team to get to it through the regular process.

if i am understanding you right, it will hit the main FAQ long before it would come to the PFS FAQ?

The only rulings I have found are by James Jacobs (http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2l7ns&page=298?Ask-James-Jacobs-ALL-your-Q uestions-Here#14851), which I have recently been told are not the best source...

There is so much back and forth, so many arguments and disagreements, is there a reason we aren't getting an FAQ, especially for PFS where rules like this are so important?