Vective's page

It is more of limiting the "extra attack" which, in normal-world PF, is generally is relegated to a single extra attack per round. Having the fleet charge ability (or really any of the champion abilities -- as each give an additional attack) grants, effectively, a second extra attack per round, when combo-ed with haste.

This is what makes my GM worried -- and what led him to vow to create a villain with this ability (combined with a few others) to destroy us (don't worry, he will fail). Something about double initiative, yadda yadda.

Ok, here is the conundrum.

I am a barbarian with the champion's ability fleet charge which includes the following relevant language:

"At any point during this movement, you can make a single melee or ranged attack at your highest attack bonus . . . . This is in addition to any other attacks you make this round."

Our reliable wizard has Haste on tap. The language included in haste that is relevant here is:

"When making a full attack action, a hasted creature may make one extra attack with one natural or manufactured weapon. The attack is made using the creature's full base attack bonus, plus any modifiers appropriate to the situation. This effect is not cumulative with similar effects."

------------------------------

My GM believes that the language in haste trumps the language of Fleet Charge. Specifically, that if you use the extra attack from haste, you cannot use the extra attack granted by Fleet Charge.

I feel that the fleet charge language trumps the haste language, especially when considered with the "mythic-ness" of of the ability over the "mundane nature" of a mere haste spell.

What think you, o wise community?

How about limiting it in the same manner as precision damage -- ie, don't gain the benefit in concealment, reduced/no damage to certain types of creatures that just are not susceptible to that damage.

Fluff reasoning could be: Dex to damage is hitting that perfect spot with control (much as sneak attack), and therefore, if that spot just doesnt exist (or is concealed), you can't do it.

I'm wondering what will the mechanic be to gain reputation, or become more good -- for those (hopefully very rare) instances when you just need to murder someone, but you generally want to maintain a high Lawful/Good/High Rep position?

How will this work for those of us who are merely the "buddy" of someone? Will the pledge-maker have a question in the survey to fill in to link us to the deals, either by email or by paizo account (or both)?

Also... if one were to decry violent video games, should one not perhaps make sure that one does not sponsor violent video games?

Case in point: go to Amazon.com and search for "NRA-Gun Club ps2"

I'd direct link it, but don't want to overstep any terms of service about linking, etc.

*edit -- apparently the game is technically non-violent... it just makes people want to become violent because it sucks so much. I appologize for the confusion.

Granted! Candide, one of the best satirical novels of all time, is about a boy who believes that we live in the best of all possible worlds. Then a whole bunch of bad things happen to him to convince him otherwise. It was written by Voltaire in 1759. And now you are sad, because you thought it was a delicious type of French candy.

I wish I had some delicious French candy right now.

Granted. You now have a delicious french macaroon stuffed with a candied duck spleen cream, glazed with frog's blood, and wrapped in sugared tripe.

I wish my job was more exciting.

I've seen lots of 'design an NPC' or 'name an NPC' type rewards on similar Kickstarters. That would seem to be a low-cost high-value benefit.

I can't think of anything with a higher value/cost ratio than signed items, and they wouldn't appeal enough to me to be a significant upgrade.

I am already the "buddy" of someone who bought the crowdforger buddy tier. I would definitely think about kicking in an extra $x to be able to name an NPC -- dependent on the pricing, maybe 2 (also dependent on my free cash after I total up the damaging costs of buying newborn diapers... a cost that I have yet to pay, but will in, oh, about three weeks.)

An issue came up in my weekly game recently involving mirror image and invis.

Background: I am a rogue/caster, I use magic to get position for sneaks, etc.

Situation: I cast a mirror image on myself to protect from ranged attacks as I maneuver. Realizing that the terrain is hampered, and all my opponents have reach (and my tumble is nonexistent) instead of racking up 4 AOOs as I move to flank, I decide to spend a turn and invis myself.

Issue: The GM decides that while I become invisible, my images do not, as they are copies of myself at the time that I cast the spell, and new spells will not affect the figments.

I believe that the figments will turn invisible with me, but because they are invis (as per the language in the spell), they are ineffective until the invis wears off (so that if one of the monsters had see invis, I'd be screwed).

What say you, O crowd of knowledge? Who is right?

In the long run, I think it won't matter (as the GM has dropped hints that the gloves probably have a power to make leathal attacks that count as armed).

Thanks for the idea about armor spikes -- it doesn't have the same thematic overtones as the gauntlet, but from a utility perspective, until I find out about those mysterious properties, the armor spikes will give me the utility I need for close quarters, and still let me use my mysterious gloves.

I'm glad to know I'm not the crazy one here :)

The rationale behind the ruling was not at all RP driven (IE, just can't get the gauntlets on over the gloves).

The rationale given to me was based on crunchy rule determinations, as follows: An opponent cannot disarm someone wearing spiked gauntlets, since you cannot be disarmed, clearly, you are wearing them, therefore they take up your gloves slot and you cannot wear a magical item in that slot.

I am using it as a weapon, since it is a weapon. However, it is a weapon that is worn, in a similar vein to brass knuckles.

The issue arises from that duality.

Forgive me if this has been dealt with already (I checked search... but very briefly...)

I am in a very minor argument with my GM regarding the nature of spiked gauntlets.

Here is the rundown: I run a character that uses a spiked gauntlet. It is not magical, nor even masterwork. It is a backup for when my primary weapon (Glaive) is unusable -- close quarters, disarmed, etc.

Recently, I found a pair of magical gloves, the properties of which are still a mystery to the group. All we know is it grants a +1 deflection bonus, but other powers are locked away as of yet.

GM determined that if I continue to wear the spiked gauntlet, I cannot wear the gloves, because my non-magical spiked gauntlet effectively takes the "Gloves" slot on my equipment sheet.

I believe that the spiked gauntlet is a "Weapon" and would fit over the gloves slot, allowing both to be used simultaneously, just as someone who wears gloves of dexterity can use a longsword at the same time.

Anyone know what the right answer is.... and yes, I know, the right answer is "the GM is right :P" (I've already removed the gauntlets... this is just for my personal edification)

Random musings of a long-time lurker (1st post i think... heh!), regarding Enemy Hammer... (also posting from work, and brain dead at the moment, so forgive me if im nonsensical).

1) Any object within 30 feet. Do you think this includes vertically? IE, say a cavern ceiling 25 feet above? If so, would should you add subsequent falling damage to it?

2) Along the same lines, would throwing someone through a particularly nasty persistent AOE effect/trap trigger that spell or trap's effect as well (ie, prismatic wall, wall of fire, blade barrier, evards, etc)... If so, im seeing all sorts of evilness occurring when my DM gets ahold of that spell hehe.

Food for thought... speaking of which, I need to get some lunch.