Pathfinder Society GM. 33 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 15 Organized Play characters. 
Is this item going to be available to buy in print on the site? I had to work on FRPG day and was unable to get my own copy.
Search Posts
I am 99% certain that I was charged 3 times for this order lol. Not raging but I do want to clear this up. In my order email it says it took 15.96 in store credit(4 PDFs at 3.99 ea). Which makes sense I had 20$ on file for store credit. But I also got another email saying I was charged for 3 of the same PDFs at 11.97. There was a bank charge from Paizo that corilates to that date and cost. And it looks like I got charged again today for the missing PDF. Can you please take another look at this order?
I seem to be missing Starfinder Society Roleplaying Guild Scenario #1–04: Cries From the Drift PDF from my download page. I got all the other PDF but not this one.
Gearing up for a SFS game and I want to know if vehicles are considered "sturdy". If not it seems that making a custom built vehicles will have less HP than the over the counter type.
177. Android Ace Pilot mechanic who is trans-vehicle. He uses his stealth Droid to drive a custom built exploration buggy. He thinks of himself more as the car and thinks of his actual body as 'the mechanic'.
Ignore my second question. I ran the game today and figured that one out. BUT! now I have a new question. How do you all suggest tracking distance? I thought about breaking out a map and writing up a 20 square track but I think it would have to be only a one lane track. So that makes me feel like the playsers are playing sorry rather than MarioCart. IDK what do you think?
During the race: Since the players have the ability to remotely control the race car, can the driver use Aid other on the character piloting skill and can other players do Aid other for shooting?
Also it references players can take control of an allied car but it doesn't say that players can influence the other drivers. Talking to the other drivers looks like a dead end action.
Star flumphs would be BRILLIANT! A non-humanoid race is really what a sci-fi setting needs.
Is a serpentfolk enemy able to be targeted by my charm person due to the bloonline abilty, but still immune to it because of its immunity to mind effects? Though this question would also come up with the undead, verdant, and plagueborn bloodlines and those creatures immunities. I am researching Serpentine Boodline right now. I would have to say serpentfold are not an eligible target for Charm Person because they SPECIFICALLY say "Immune mind-affecting effects" which overrides the general rule of the Serpentine Bloodline. Not all Monstrous Humanoids are immune.
The way I read this spell it seems to be more useful to use as the person being pursued and using survival to obscure your tracks.
We have an item that is attended even though it isn't in physical contact, so it isn't even contact that is possibly required, just proximity. Ioun Stones. I agree. Ioun stone maybe an exception to the perception of "attended". As its anchored in a fixed orbit around a characters head. If I'm not mistaken isn't there already published rules to snatch a ioun stone in PFRPG?
If that were the case, a weapon wouldn't be " attended " if you wore gloves. You aren't "touching" the weapon directly. So no shenanigans allowed, touch is transfered through attended objects to make others attended. Don't you love the ambiguity of the English language? Let's be frank. For the purposes to identify if an is attended I have ruled in the past that if you are actively holding an object, such as a dagger in your teeth, a potion in a Tieflings tail or a sword in your hand(glove or not). You are actively aware of your possession of the object otherwise you would drop it. You are attending to this object so it is not dropped. The opposite is true for objects that are being worn passively. You are not paying attention to the sword in your scabbard or the heirloom necklace around your neck. This would thematically leave room for players and NPCs to attempt to snatch these objects with a steal combat manuver. I would not consider a plate someone is sitting on actively attended unless they were holding onto it to make sure they don't fall off.
You could argue that the suitcase on the floor next to you at the airport is attended. But for the purposes of the steal combat manuver a suitcase on the floor next to you is fair game.
This is crazy, but I can see why the thread was pertinent after playing at PPC.
I agree, jumping a 10 foot pit would require you to travel 15 feet. If you only jumped 10 feet you'd end up IN the pit. Great question and lots of good debate.
I read on a forum somewhere here to use the most favorable price for the player. This works to efficiate the fun factor.
Here is a blog by SKR that specifically says "For example, just because you have a +5 greatsword doesn't mean it gives you a +5 bonus on dirty trick checks". Per that blog post it seems very contextual(much like dirty trick in general having to invent an action to apply a debuff). It would seem using a +5 greatsword to trip someone would get the +5 bonus because you are actually striking your target. But contextually I wouldn't grant the +5 bonus for smacking dirt off the ceiling to blind your target. The mechanic in the blinding actually being the dirt and not the sword. But maybe applying dirt on your sword and then smacking your target in the face or knocking askew his helmet would get the enhancement bonus. Or maybe just slicing his eyelashes. When I get an eyelash out of place I can't see for anything out of that eye.
I think that's mostly because it's a silly, contrived situation and not a real rider-mount relationship. Silly? Yes! Contrived? This whole game is contrived! Yes! Its still an example. I'll prove it by bringing it to the next PFS game I play in. ;) The only broken part of this example is Mounted Combat and Indomitable Mount feat shouldn't work on other players. Even if you are riding them.
I am pretty much 100% on board with you on this. Also if a mounted character gets hit with a hold person spell the DM then takes control of the mount as the rider cannot unless in some sort of telepathic connection with the mount.
I still haven't seen anyone link the cited document. I will read it if I can find it. I see both sides of the argument. I am not yet swayed with the quoted text as it does not implicitly state that the rider has to take a charge action. Everything that I read says the rider is a part of the charge getting the pluses and negatives and other charge requirements but doesn't say his action also has to be charge. Ride by attack is an interesting argument for this. I have read the Ride-by-attack form post. But I don't see how it would be required for my mount to get his attacks in. Hello I am a forum post about Ride-by-attacks. For reference.
Mind you, I am not saying there isn't room for abuse of the rule. I just don't see them. I just have a hard time believing that I can attack with a lance during a mounted charge and my mount then cannot do an overrun/trample/pounce etc. Right but by your proposed charge rules my mount HAS to stop at my lance range. Which I do not agree with.
Mind you, I am not saying there isn't room for abuse of the rule. I just don't see them. I just have a hard time believing that I can attack with a lance during a mounted charge and my mount then cannot do an overrun/trample/pounce etc.
Deadboy, It actually works better if you treat them both as charging but as a single unit... I don't think it works better. If I give Bob the Barbarian(played by Steve the salesman) a enlarge person potion and an exotic saddle. I can mount my barbarian friend but I cannot make him charge. It makes no difference if you do it with a PC or an NPC. It works better if you treat you mount as its own entity.
I couldn't find the threads you are talking about, if you can toss a link or more good reads in this thread I will read them. But even re-reading the faq you are copying I don't see how this excludes my interpretation.
You actually cannot take simultaneous actions with another character such as rider/mounts. One would have to wait till the other is done with their action to be able to take their own. There is no precedence in Pathfinder that two entities can act simultaneously. But with the interpretation that the rider is "along for the ride" as a part of the charge it actually works mechanically.
No, "Both charge in unison," does not mean both take a charge ACTION. It means that both are a part of a charge. But only the mount is taking the charge ACTION.
Tiger lily is correct. What everyone seems to be getting tripped up as the rider and the mount are still two separate characters. They still get their own actions. My take is that both the rider and the mount are a part of a charge but only the mount is taking the actual charge ACTION. The rider just gets the benefits of and drawbacks of AC and to hit. But the only way the rider would be able to get an attack in with a reach weapon, is if he readies his own action to poke some bad guy with his lance when one gets in range. It doesn't even have to be the target of the mount depending on the wording of the readied action. The mount cannot actually declare a charge unless it can end its movement adjacent to the target(assuming 5ft mount reach). And yes, the mount taking an attack is optional. I can't see myself allowing my pouncing tiger to make natural attacks against an ooze. It's not spring attack because they are two different characters working together. Spring attack is only if one character attacks and moves. Plus Spring Attack is its own full round action that cannot be combined with a charge.
Sure it does, and here is how(someone had to explain it to me too). On your turn make a ride check to control your mount with your knees and then ready an action to attack with the lance when you get in range. Then tell your mount to charge. You're lance attack interrupts the mounts charge when you get in range and after your attack finishes your mount finishes his charge. It only works with a readied action tho.
What type of pet are you going to have? I am going human with my hunter build with undersized mount and I'm riding my medium tiger. My tiger is going to be pouncing everything so I might as well be on his back with a lance when he does his claw claw bite. If you think Human maybe a better option, you can take combat expertise at level 1 and pack flanking at level 3. Or if you forgo the bonus feat for human you can take Eye for talent and give your AC extra INT and take pounce or any feat they are eligible for. With Pack Flanking it maybe worth while to take a dip class that offers sneak attack(like a brawler archetype Snakebite Striker which also stacks with Wild Child)Then you can sneak attack everything as long as you are mounted. Also down the chain if you take Escape Route teamwork feat you can run around on your AC and never provoke AOs moving through threatened enemy squares. That's at least what I'm doing with one of my PFS AC builds.
If my mount is using stealth trying to hide. Does the concealment granted with stealth also confer to the rider?
This has nothing to do with ACs but Keen is not an enchant you can put on a bow :/
I liked them so much I took them as followers for my bard and when we went to Lepidstadt I had the Kin working the town to gather enough money to resurect Aleece and I took her as a cohort. She came back as a Titan Mauler(I know right?). Since she was killed by a giant spider she has a compulsion to kill spiders in all forms. |