Uwotm8's page

470 posts (1,533 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 2 aliases.


1 to 50 of 470 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

It is an extreme assertion. According to the assertion, a level 1/mr 1 archmage can cast wish. Any is any right? You can only do this if you're a fighter. A wizard couldn't. That alone makes it an automatic no.

CL for supernatural abilities tend to be equal to your HD. I don't think that's a RAW rule, but it's how the math breaks down for most any SU ability with a save.

An unfortunate reality is that small wording tweaks could fix a LOT of things! However, we are more likely to see sweeping ruling in FAQs. It's ridiculous, but it's what Paizo seems intent on doing. My guess is they're concerned to the point of paranoia over page counts. That's a new Holy Grail.

I'd like a rule on it better. :) Failing that, guidance on what and when would be good, too.

It's always a good idea to get in the head of your players to know their intentions behind their builds and not just blindly approving one thing or another.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The only question is exactly how long a game has this wizard been playing? What if he left his ability scores intentionally damaged knowing you'd do what you did? What if he's really some 30+ across the board powerhouse just setting you up to be yet another pawn in the cosmic game he's been playing with mortals and gods alike in his now immortal existence because he's really m 10/lvl 20? What if, man... what if...? He's the Trickster I tell you. Perhaps, he's even an actual god himself. >.>

In the Combat chapter and perception skill description, calls for perception checks are referred to but it gives no advice for a set DC or even opposed checks between either perception or stealth. Which is it? There is a mention of aware versus unaware. However, you can be aware of an actor and not aware if their intent is hostile. I would still think a perception check is called for if someone tried to randomly attack you if you had no reason to believe they would before hand.

Actually reading the spell creates a great case for even wizards not tanking ability scores. There should have been at least 2 rounds in that fight and 1 where the wizard could cast.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Check for a bookplate of recall, even an invisible one.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I consider it na complete.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

You need more explosive runes.

Edit: 30 seconds?!?! :)

2 people marked this as a favorite.

The Paizo forums: sucking the wonder out of the Pathfinder fantasy game since 2008.

Just because they have multiple forms of natural attack options doesn't mean only one is primary. It's a classification for penalties. It's not to describe a primary and secondary modes of attack.

Claws are primary attacks. Full BAB. No -5.

Natural Attack Rules

Archae wrote:
gm isn't deciding anything I've played the refusal as an in character thing

The point is eidolons are never mindless slaves to your PC. They're intelligent creatures already.

Eidolons already have free will. They simply recognize you control when they're around so they tend to just do what you say.

Ultimate Campaign, Aspects of Control wrote:
Eidolons: Outside the linear obedience and intelligence scale of sentient and nonsentient companions are eidolons: intelligent entities magically bound to you. Whether you wish to roleplay this relationship as friendly or coerced, the eidolon is inclined to obey you unless you give a command only to spite it. An eidolon would obey a cruel summoner's order to save a child from a burning building, knowing that at worst the fire damage would temporarily banish it, but it wouldn't stand in a bonfire just because the summoner said to. An eidolon is normally a player-controlled companion, but the GM can have the eidolon refuse extreme orders that would cause it to suffer needlessly.

It's still a surprise round. It should be constrained to a single standard.

LazarX wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
Rynjin wrote:

No, these FAQs are pretty clearly to plug up some SUV sized holes in the rules that should have been plugged LOOONG ago.

Next up: Simulacrum?

In my opinion, simulacrum deserves an entire blog post filled with tips and clarifications, like when Jason did that super-helpful poison blog.
Each of the entire simulacrum family of spells, (there's more than one) needs to be looked at from top to bottom. Part of that examination should be the spell's evolution from First Edition onward, and then it needs to be decided what the spell SHOULD give out for Pathfinder, and how many hoops it should take to get it. In the old days you had to have an actual piece of the creature you were going to copy.

Sounds like Unchained territory to me.

The tricky thing is that powerful options don't come in just spells, especially for casting classes. You'd really have to vet all the class abilities as well.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Marroar Gellantara wrote:

Are those spells really a wizard class feature?

Both sorcerers and arcanist can take them. Some even argue that the shaman can have them.

Their lists are class features. Individual selections are restricted all the time even by RAW.

Cuuniyevo wrote:
I was under the impression that this thread was to track the actual duel. I think the combatants and gm should be the only ones to post here until after the duel takes place. Discussing specific tactics and rules should remain in the other thread, to keep at least the semblance of order.

The actual duel is taking place on roll20.

Trogdar wrote:
Sure, but if leadership is a valid option, then there is no reason for the wizard not to take it as it is obviously the best in slot feat. All of the wizards other minions will come directly from class features, which prevents them from muddying the waters.

But best in slot spells are fine, yeah?

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Shasfowd wrote:

But the point of this is to let players be whatever they want, but I don't want it to take the excitment out of the gamee. What spells follow the following rules:

Not a mind-affecting or a death effect
Will immediatley pasify the target

Your goal is not compatible with your restrictions.

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pnakotus Detsujin wrote:
Also, was not the point to have "celestial good beings" as enemies to good or neutral player characters. if you want to smite angels, go play Way of the Wicked

It's rather rude to tell people what games to play if they want this or that as if current APs can't be modified or doing so is somehow wrong. Sod off, mate...

The thing is, if either a wizard or sorcerer can do it, then it's more likely any full caster can do it. It's not wizards are powerful. It's casters are powerful. That's the theme. Nothing to see here!

ROFL @ zoidbergs out

Anzyr wrote:
Your call. As I said, I'm already making a concession even using a build, since I don't think they prove much in the first place.

Any character with a sheet is a build. Builds aren't bad at all. To play a character, you need *a* build.

Anzyr wrote:
I hope you realize that I offered to use a Wizard before the rules changed. The GM could have easily told you whether it was legal or not without posting it publicly. I have said all along that I would not be posting the Wizard build publicly, so this change causing me to use a different character should come as no surprise. And despite that I'm still willing to submit a build, just not the one I would have otherwise.

You realize such a hotly contested claim being anything other than public inherently invalidates the test, right? Even if you're 100% correct, there can be zero confidence in it.

Pathfinder Tactics by Anzyr (TM)

Publish it

Anzyr wrote:
Nah, it'd work (unless the enemy has a lot of very specific defenses). But it could be prepared against in the future. The Sorcerer... not so much.

That fails a smell test. I hope you realize that.

Anzyr wrote:
Mostly because the tactics it uses while very effective can be countered. The Sorcerer meanwhile trades cleverness for raw power which makes knowing it's tactics hard to counter.

Is it that it can be countered, or is it more "this seems right for 20 minutes but is actually wrong" kind of things? That's super shady. "Oh noz, it has a defense." Really?

They'll know his secretzzzzz.

andreww wrote:
Posting prior gives too much information to the opponent. Posting afterwards is a reasonable compromise.

It gives no information if released mere minutes before or coinciding with the start.

Marroar Gellantara wrote:
2. Why would a player not put out their build after the duel? Trade secrets? PF/D&D isn't a professional competitive sport, you have no reason for this unless you don't want people to call you out on flagrant cheating.

By the way Anzyr talks, they've got some bona fide Coca-Cola formula trade secret insta-win.

andreww wrote:
Once I have some contestants I will set up a table. Roll20 creates a log of all chat entries and dice rolls which I am happy to make public. I will also make public any questions asked or rules queries about builds asked in private afterwards. My preference would be for any entrant to disclose their build but that is really up to them. Spectators are fine as well provide they don't disrupt things.

If you don't enforce it, it loses almost all credibility. In fact, participants should have to share with everyone else as well as the GM.

Anzyr wrote:
I won't be.

Whoever GMs should post both builds. Would you withdraw if that were a condition?

BigDTBone wrote:
I think the benefit of using roll20 is that spectators can be present and I would fully intend to post my character after. I would actually expect Andreww to require build posting after the contest as part of the game rules.

As great as that would be, if it could be trusted, after the fact promises are cheap.

Bandw2 wrote:

just remember, for any true comparative results we would need to compare two perfect player's fighting to see who comes out on top most often. such that, like chess the first player has an advantage that can push perfect play into someones victory.

I'm pretty sure that would be a wizard, as they simply have more tools available to them.

I'm wholly expecting this to be incredibly hush hush. There will be no independent review. None of the builds will be released. A victor will simply be named which will only result in a lot more chest thumping.

Trimalchio wrote:
running a 1 week game prep time will require way too much adjudication in my opinion and doesn't prevent simulacrum abuse once the wizard begins living inside a maximized timestop all the live long day on some obscure demiplane that is timeless.

Oh, no. This is andreww's show now. All other opinions need not apply.

Anzyr wrote:
I have been right quite a lot in this thread, so that shouldn't be that surprising...

Post a build.

Blakmane wrote:
At this point the debate is becoming childish. Obviously you aren't going to get an interpretation that suits you for every rule, but andreww is about as good as you are going to get for impartiality. You are going to suffer from much bigger problems if 20 vs 15 PB already sets you off. Go ahead and concede already if all you are going to do is filibuster: it is becoming clear both sides of the debate are just as obnoxious as each other.

Oh, bullshit. andreww has already agreed with Anzyr across several posts. He wins by default. The mere premise biases the outcome.

Anzyr wrote:
And first contender spot get!

gasp Didn't see that coming!

andreww wrote:
20pb is part of the rules. As I said feel free to not take part if you don't like it.

So is double WBL for epic pt buys

andreww wrote:

Those are the rules I am setting. Feel free not to participate if you prefer. Gives martial characters tend to be more MAD it actually favours the fighter.

For those interested in submitting a character please post questions here

You want to GM this yet you ignore the rules. Have fun with that.

andreww wrote:
20pb is PFS standard and seems the most common around here which is why I went with it.

It doesn't change the assumption in their APs. PFS is a customized campaign.

Also, RAW - 20 pt buys and up are double WBL.

andreww, 15 point buy is Paizo standard.

Anzyr wrote:
Ugh, please actually read my tactics. I won't be near the Explosive Runes when the Time Stop ends.

AMF is still centered on you and moves with you. It doesn't matter where you are. You still can't cast out of it.


Post a build.


Anzyr wrote:
That is correct since Blessed Book will obviate the writing cost.

Post a build.


He still has to pay the scroll cost to acquire them on top of that. Just the writing cost is free with a blessed book.

Anzyr wrote:
Nah I'd hit the arena with continuous Greater Dispel Magics (at CL 30) until the Fighter was not invisible. At which point the Fighter will be perfectly detectable.

Post a build.


1 to 50 of 470 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>