talmerian's page

I am not sure how to apply the +2 from this shield in some cases. "The wearer of this shield gains a +2 bonus on Reflex saves against effects that originate or burst from a point outside his own square, as though he had cover. It does not protect against spread effects."

So this would protect against a fireball, sure. But what about cones, those originate from outside the square. Walls can be placed in an occupied square, or can fall onto someone from an adjacent square but they don't burst or originate really.

Honestly, I could not find a definition for "spread effect" so am not sure what it "doesn't" protect against, I think it would be things based on Fog Cloud (Stinking Fog, Incendiary Fog...etc.)

Drat and bebother, I didn't realize this was the PF2E forum. Apologies for my error.

I resurrected this thread because it is the only discussion of this item, internets you are welcome!

Seriously though...

I am not sure how to apply the +2 from this shield in some cases. "The wearer of this shield gains a +2 bonus on Reflex saves against effects that originate or burst from a point outside his own square, as though he had cover. It does not protect against spread effects."

So this would protect against a fireball, sure. But what about cones, those originate from outside the square. Walls can be placed in an occupied square, or can fall onto someone from an adjacent square but they don't burst or originate really.

Honestly, I could not find a definition for "spread effect" so am not sure what it "doesn't" protect against...

Hi, I love your maps and donated a few months ago. My group is finally getting to Logrivich's clock tower. I noticed the JPGs (which seem the best for use in Roll20) have the bottom of the map clipped, so the second floor is missing the final row of squares and the wall (no label either) and the Top floor cuts off with 3 squares missing and no label.

Am I having some issue specific to my computer? I am downloading from http://www.kingdomofmorrain.com/pf-tsh-logrivichs-clock-tower-JPG.jpg

Thanks so much for these! We are enjoying them greatly!

A +1 Longsword has a +1 enhancement bonus, enhancement is 'magic.' A magic stone (or magic weapon) should be able to hit anything that requires magical enhancement to hit - so yes Shadows (and most incorporeal).

I was not aware of that, I thought Paizo was involved...never realized that was a different group. Thanks!

So, I just discovered Pup Shape (School transmutation (polymorph); Level druid 3, sorcerer/wizard 3, witch 3) and, since my Cohort is a Foo Dog (Magical Beast, Extraplanar), investigated protecting him from the spell - using Spell Immunity.

The short description on the SRD Spell List(s) says, "Transforms a single animal or magical beast into a younger and cuter version of itself...etc." So, I was concerned.

However, the spell description allayed my fears: http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/p/pup-shape

The Target is listed as "one animal"

The text says, succintly, "You transform the subject animal into a Small magical beast (or a magical beast one size category smaller than the original creature, whichever is smaller)"

So, this spell cannot affect my Foo Dog, since he is not an animal, but is a magical beast.

I was wondering about some past uses of the spell so looked here in the forums and, unequivocally, everyone is saying it can affect Magical Beasts.
Has no one read the spell? Or is the spell as listed on the SRD incorrect? Or am I reading the spell description completely wrong?

talmerian wrote:

Just studying up for a resurgence of my 15th level cleric. Looking at 8th level spells I came across Vinetrap, linked from here

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/spell-lists-and-domains/spell-lists-cleric#p8

However, the description of the spell places it as a 5th level spell, only its inclusion in the 8th level list hints at an 8th level spell. I am positive we will be using the spell description, but figured this should be an easy fix...although please let us know if the spell is supposed to be 8th level.

They already did.

They do post the link to the errata, but the spell is still in the Cleric/Oracle 8th level list (link in OP). If I am a 9th level cleric, I'm not looking in the 8th level lists for spells, I still have 6 levels to go before even noting Vinetrap exists.

The errata touches more on the mechanics of the spell.

So, they haven't...and to be completely unambiguous, they haven't corrected the placement of the spell on the SRD, where it is included as an 8th level Cleric/Oracle spell even though the description has been updated to include Patrick Reine's errata, and - I believe correctly - places the spell at 5th level.

Just studying up for a resurgence of my 15th level cleric. Looking at 8th level spells I came across Vinetrap, linked from here

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/spell-lists-and-domains/spell-lists-cleric#p8

However, the description of the spell places it as a 5th level spell, only its inclusion in the 8th level list hints at an 8th level spell. I am positive we will be using the spell description, but figured this should be an easy fix...although please let us know if the spell is supposed to be 8th level.

If it says +2 to X skill and X skill, skip it. (persuasive)

If it sounds like a feat you would never, ever use, skip it. (endurance)

If it seems like a feat that is way too weak, skip it. (fleet/dash)

Then look through the rest of the feats.

Except Endurance is awesome, otherwise every time you get attacked at night no armor and it takes forever for everyone to get there stats figured out without armor, you don't use endurance.

Can a monk have weapon specialization? I thought that was only for Fighters over level 4? Other than that the damage is legit. I agree that the bow seems totally overpowered. Although the OP makes a good point that monks are limited on what they can spend their money and the WBL is for creating characters after 1st level, I am not sure if that is how this character was created, even then the book states that amounts can be moved back and forth if the build requires. I have often argued that my wizard would not be spending 25% on weapons that are barely going to be used.

I was amazed at the ability of a zen archer. I had a second level follower who was one and was quite effective in battle vs CR8 enemies.

Resurrecting this thread so we don't have to go over details again.

So, as I understand it, Thistle Arrows would do damage as an arrow fired from whatever bow (I have a shortbow so 1d6) and then bleed 1hp per round for 1d6 rounds?

Excellen discussion, I was looking this up because I was thinking that blunt arrows would cause nonlethal, bludgeoning is good though. Useful vs. skeletons!

I like rogues. Regrettably liking a class does not make them functionally superior in an area of specialization. And if almost every function of the class can be done by another class...there isn't as much need for it.

SKIP SOME

While you can use Pathfinder as a non-combat game, the modules are designed around a combat-intensive setting. And this is where rogue falls behind. Outside of combat, the only specialty that the rogue (going by core rules only) has that no other class has available is Trapfinding. And trap-intensive adventures are not the norm, going by Paizo offerings.

SKIP SOME

I'm not saying that rogues aren't fun, I play them quite a bit. But I don't expect them to excel. So I don't play them in PFS where you have to be superior in combat and pretty darn good in a couple other areas. In a home game where the GM can...

OK, I thought the idea of this entire industry was to have fun, I didn't realize that excelling as a class meant that your character was good in combat, why not have everyone play fighters then?

I guess its a PFS thing, so I can successfully ignore. Have fun!

As a GM, I have always wanted to work with new players on their character creation. I usually ask them to meet with me before the session or arrive a half hour early so we can work out details. Generally no one arrives at the first session with a fully fleshed out character, or at least one player arrives needing to create their character (don't be that player). Communication is the key. I have usually let experienced players come up with whatever stats they like, I review them and am totally willing to call a munchkin a munchkin. Our general rule is you have to have a zero or a negative in at least one stat(if everything else is awesome, had paladin in game once with a -2 intelligence, didn't harm play at all! (Paladins are dumb!!) No character can be awesome at everything!

It seems I have come late to the conversation. However, I am playing my second Pathfinder rogue and I find the class to be fine. Currently I am running a Half-Orc Rogue Skulking Slayer. We are playing through The Haunting of Harrowstone and he has been rather effective.

I should mention that we do not use point buy, personally I have never been able to wrap my head around it, we roll dice. Granted, I got lucky with this one, my point buy would be around 32 (I used a generator to figure that out. Stats are: STR 15, DEX 17, CON 14, INT 13, WIS 13, CHA 11 not amended by race, I added the +2 to DEX for a 19). So, this is not a pure rogue according to the agreement in the original post.

However, I have played PF since the Beta test and there has been a rogue in every party. The idea of having a party without seems ludicrous. The rogue is not built to dive into combat, unless it is before everyone else to get the flat-footed sneak attack, the rogue is built to wait for the opportunity to do serious damage or to disrupt the enemies plan of attack by not having been included initially.

I believe that the issue that people have with the rogue has more to do with the game being played than the class. I have played a Bard, and yes they handle social better, I have played a fighter and a wizard and a cleric. They have other roles completely. The rogue, when used correctly is not actually part of the party (mine is usually already in the room when the brightly lit and noisy cleric enters). The rogue needs to be the wild card that nobody expects. Hidden and deadly, with one strike to make all the difference. I have witnessed rogues do 40+ points of damage in a single strike (10th level pure goblin rogue from invisibility with a crit on an acid rapier, killing blow on an abyssal giant). That saved the fighter from certain death on the next blow. I have also seen a rogue trade dual weapon attacks with a monk and both of them came out without a hit in the round (5 attacks for the rogue, 8 for the monk; 9th level rogue with 3 levels of fighter, very rogue-y fighter though) that monk was occuppied for three rounds though. So many times as a DM I have tried to kill rogues only to have them survive using some trick, and then bring the rest of the party back into play by pouring potions and distracting the enemy.

I have digressed from the point of this though. If the game is just to be a combatant, rogues lose. If the game is to work as a team to tell the story? Rogues are the best part of any story!

PS: Thanks to most of the thread for not talking about make-up the whole time (rouge).

I certainly leave slots open occasionally, the issue I am having is more with the magnitude of the Cleric/Oracle spell list. Unlike a other spell casters, the cleric is able to choose any spell, any day. So its more a matter of streamlining the access to the spells. So I can look at all the healing spells or all the combat spells and decide which is best. I love using divination spells to try to tailor spells to an encounter. I just wish there were a better list of all of them, something easier to use than the SRD.

Thanks Carrick, I will check that out.

Reverendfresh, your English seems fine, the problem is that a Cleric has access to all Cleric spells, not just a selection, and copying each one chosen each time is too time consuming for everyone else.

I am playing an 11th level cleric, so I already have access to an extraordinary number of spells. I see the list increasing as I gain in level and am worried about how to manage this at the table.

I have a number of friends who treat their clerics like wizards and write down the spells that they use and just tick them off as they use them. I feel that this ignores an important part of the cleric's ability, that you can prepare different spells according to your needs as you move through an adventure.

However, I am finding this is difficult to manage at the table already, and am only 11th level (access to 5th level spells). Does anyone know of any apps, websites, programs or printouts that can assist with this dilemma?

I was hoping to use the Spellcards set from Blue Banzai but unfortunately it is not very well done.

Apparently this product is simply not being supported anymore. Shouldn't it be taken down then? It seems unethical that people can still purchase this. BTW, I had also found that the security settings will not allow me to print selected pages of the document (ex: the cleric spells I needed for my inquisitor class) to a new PDF that could be more easily used. This is a fail, why is it still being sold? BUYER BEWARE!

Weird, I am pretty careful about that stuff, and looked it up in two places to make sure that I had it right. Thanks for the clarification. Turns out I had not assigned points yet on level up so the question is moot (I now have 10 in both skills). Thanks again!

My character has the feat Animal Affinity. I have put 10 ranks in Handle Animal and 8 ranks in Ride. The feat text states that when one of these skills has 10 ranks, the bonus goes to +4.

Does that mean that since I have 10 ranks in Handle Animal, the bonus for both should go to +4 or just for Handle Animal?

Generally a terrain is considered hampered movement if half or more of the area is hampered. I have always used this as a guide for larger creatures. Grease basically creates a 10 ft square of hampered movement, so if the large creature is halfway on to the area it is affected.

That is how I would rule it in my game...

Grease is one of my favorite spells, I usually summon it right under a large creature.

I am playing a Half-Orc Rogue Skulking Slayer. The archetype has the Extraordinary Ability - Underhanded Maneuvers which states:

At 1st level, when she could normally make a sneak attack, a slayer may instead make a dirty trick or steal combat maneuver with a bonus on her roll. This bonus is equal to her number of sneak attack dice for a dirty trick combat maneuver, or 1-1/2 × her number of sneak attack dice for a steal combat maneuver.

Since this is a sneak attack, does the target of the maneuver get an attack of opportunity on me as I perform the steal or dirty trick?

Sorry to continue the OT discussion, it seems the OP was answered rather handily though (I agree it means that the PC attempting can not use the MI again until 24 hours have passed, another PC could make an attempt though).

Vincent Takeda, in the scroll use rules whenever you use a scroll with a caster level above what you are able to cast you must roll a Caster Level Check and, if that fails, a Wisdom check (nat 1 always fails) to avoid a mishap:

Scroll Mishaps: When a mishap occurs, the spell on the scroll has a reversed or harmful effect. Possible mishaps are given below.

A surge of uncontrolled magical energy deals 1d6 points of damage per spell level to the scroll user.

Spell strikes the scroll user or an ally instead of the intended target, or a random target nearby if the scroll user was the intended recipient.

Spell takes effect at some random location within spell range.

...and more!

These are in the CRB under Scrolls: Activation.

Its a small chance, but has happened to me! I think the mishaps possible would be AWESOME with a Wish spell, as a player and DM I would not want to miss that opportunity for Fantasia-esque story derailment!

OK, so this alters the Feat 'Surprise Follow Through' to become a Rogue Talent. So I don't have to use the Rogue Talent 'Combat Trick' in order to get it as a rogue talent. Thanks for the info everyone! I was having the same mind warp as the OP. I knew that it could not possibly give me the feat...just made no sense at first.

I simply would never allow a four armed PC in my game. That is ridiculous and can only be used to break the rules. I have allowed vestigial limbs (tails usually) to hold items for a swift action use, but never, ever can they attack.

The one player ever that had four arms was only allowed to do so because he agreed that two of his four arms were entirely thematic and were unable to be used to give any extra bonus, ability, attack or assistance. I was fine with that.

I am going to be the obligatory OSG poster.

This thread is what is wrong with gaming. The concept that people are really crunching the numbers in order to have a slightly better chance of doing a little more damage is disgusting.

What I gather from this is that people on this thread would not build a barbarian with an axe, even though everyone knows that barbarians have axes (ask any 6 year old), because the axe has a slightly lower percentage to cause as much damage on a regular basis...for a character that is basically "Hulk. Smash!"

I miss the days when we built characters because we wanted to see if they'd be interesting. I'll bet none of you have an 8 or 9 as an ability score!

Sweet, that looks pretty good to me as well! I was just working out an Inquisitor character and wondering about this. Thanks!

Also, glad that search works this well!

This is a big document! However, in my version of Adobe Acrobat, I cannot add bookmarks. Is there a problem with my download? I purchased this document and would like to be able to bookmark the cards that I need. I hate trying to scroll through...

There are only 4 chips in the set? I'll pass, I was thinking it'd be good to have as DM so I can use them for multiple enemy situations...its easy enough to just remember.

I'm planning on running an NPC Playtest tonight as part of my regular campaign. The party consists of a lvl 6 Wizard, Fighter, Cleric (possibly with one level of Oracle, not sure atm) and a Paladin. Normally there is a Cavalier in it too, but I think he's changing characters since he's not having fun with the Cavalier, (I like it, but hey, his opinion is his opinion).

Anywho, I'm planning on pitting them against a lvl 9 Summoner and a lvl 9 Inquisitor, both with the Fiendish template too (just for storyline relation)

Perhaps I am confused. Are you putting a 6th level party (APL 6) against a CR 11 encounter? That is assuming you are building out the Fiendish Summoner and Inquisitor as CR +0. They could be going against a CR of 12 if they are the +1 CR version.

That is a CR of APL +5 (or +6) that is beyond and Epic difficulty as an
encounter.

I am referring to page 397 of the Core Rulebook and pg 294 of the Bestiary for the CRs and APls. Perhaps I am wrong but that seems sure to kill everyone. It is a playtest so I guess nothing that happens actually carries over to the ongoing characters...

...ambush enemies from hiding...

The Paladin would not participate in the ambush. However, would not be against allies hiding and launching attacks from positions of tactical superiority. At least, once it is clear that the Paladin cannot handle the entire group of enemies alone!

...make a pre-emptive strike against an enemy or enemies prior to their having shown actual hostility...

If it is possible to convince the Paladin that it is a 'nest of evil' then I think yes. However, beware convincing a Paladin of that if it is not true! There'd better not be women and children there either.

...pelt enemies to death with ranged attacks from afar while said enemies are unable to return fire...

Paladins are against ranged attacks except in the event that a cowardly enemy is fleeing from honorable battle. However, if there are mitigating circumstances (the group threatens a community, or is performing a nefarious ritual...etc) that would allow this kind of attack. Never for sport or cruelty though.

...bring harm to the enemy WHILE his/her innocent spouse and young children bear witness...

No. Unless we are talking Evil Outsiders.

...slay an enemy who has just been disarmed, or otherwise rendered ineffectual...

No.

...kill an enemy who is clearly outnumbered/overpowered by the paladin and/or his allies...

"Even a blind pig can find an acorn in a mud hole someday" Russian Proverb

Unless they surrender, even the lowliest seeming enemy could score a critical on one of the Paladin's allies.

Am I reading correct that this is being offered as a PDF? Is there any way to print it out? I have investigated printing Game Screens and ran into problems: 1) Most print shops don't have the capability 2) At the one's that do, it is prohibitively expensive ($70 - $125). Is there a solution being offered? Otherwise I am not sure why I'd need a PDF of this.

Welcome to the Errata and Typos thread for the Skills and Feats portions of the classes chaper. If you spot any typos or rules that need errata in this section, please post them to this thread. Note that this is not a thread for discussing rules changes, only obvious mistakes or unclear rules. We have done our best to make these chapters as clean as possible, but 10,000 eyes are better than 12. Thanks for your help.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

On page 93 of the Beta Release, Scribe Scroll comes before Scorpion Style in the alphabetical list of feats. However, O comes before R in the alphabet itself.

Mathias Gehl wrote:

The enchantment school's Aura of Despair ability is written without a penalty type.

I'm presuming a morale penalty, given the ability's name.

Penalties do not have a type and they always stack.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

Penalties do not have a type? So I can keep hitting fools with Ray of Enfeeblement? Over and Over again? Do bonuses have a type?

I am not sure how that works, penalties had a type (just like bonuses) in 3.5. I though that was pretty sensible.

HA! Your DM is "coddling" you if he's not targetting your spellbook or spell components (half joke half serious, afterall in the whole history of D&D no fighter has figured out that if he takes out the book or components the wizard goes from GOD to GIMP?)

Seriously though, I've had a few times where I've been very glad I took eschew materials and spell mastery.

If you keep your spellbook in a bag of holding, handy haversack, etc. and it gets a targetted dispel, or worse, mage's disjunction you can't access the contents of the container until it is fixed, which means you could be without your spellbook there too.

My DM is not a Joke!!!! :-p

I do see the utility of it, but it is kind of like walking in a bear suit (not a costume, the one that bears can attack) just in case you get hit by a truck. If it happens, there really aint to much you're going to do about it. I think if that Wiz drops my Haversack down, I'm gonna drop him! Son!

What keeps me up at night is what if they take my haversack and drop it in a bag of holding. I took the "Bag of Holding Restraining Order' feat just in case of that. It doesn't let Bags of Holding within 5 ft of you. (the previously mentioned feat is a joke and does not (nor should it) exist)

Again, seriously though, what is the deal with the paltry 'bonus' feat choices?

Perception (vs. Stealth/Invisibility)
"Pinpointing an invisible creature moving past you is a reactive check, DC 5 (+20 for invis) for armored foes, DC 10 (+20 for invis) for unarmored foes, or DC 20 + Stealth for invisible foes moving stealthily"

I thought that was seriously out-of-wack.
Armor/ No Armor/ Stealth should all use the base DC, and add/subtract Stealth Ranks and Armor Penalty where appropriate.
Otherwise, why NOT take 1 Rank in Stealth, since it raises the DC by 15 PLUS your Stealth skill, if wearing Armor?

This is another place where a clearer rule about who is and is not proficient would help out. If one rank is all it takes to make you proficient the system can be abused by spending one rank in everything. Doing that would only be 25 points, not too hard for an intelligent character (Bard, Ranger, or Rogue especially) to do so. The player wouldn't even have to do it for all skills, just the juicy ones.

I think spotting an invisible character should always be an opposed check. They are actively trying to remain undiscovered. The Pathfinder system is very good at removing unnecessary die rolls. However, in this instance I think the opposed roll is important.

Forget the bonus feats, how about just feats that are interesting to a wizard that he can use any of his feats on. I don't want things that just meta-magic and item creation feats, but feats that add character flavour. What about bluff-casting that increases the DC of spellcraft checks for opposed casters to determine (and counter) your spells. Or spell sniping, lets a caster make a stealth check after casting a spell from stealth to remain hidden (much like a rogue can make a stealth check to remain hidden after firing at you, with like penalties.)

Here are just two flavour feats that casters could use that are "feat worthy" without being op.

I think those would be awesome feats. Especially bluff casting. I have allowed a player to use Sleight of Hand to confuse others into thinking it was a different spell, but a Bluff-Casting feat would rock. Also, I play with a DM that will let you make up any feat, if he thinks its too powerful he just powers it down a bit. If you don't have one of those, you should get one. :-)

My wizards are often snipers with Weapon Focus (Ray), Point Blank Shot and Precise Shot. I have never had a problem Sniping after shooting. That's not a Rogue talent just part of the Stealth skill which Wizards do not get. Its one of the few times that the Stealthy feat or Skill Focus have come in to play. Luckily, in Pathfinder, I can even be good at a Cross Class skill.

I am trying to implement that sniper aspect in a 3.5 game right now, but I'll be Twelfth level before I am any good at it. That's 3.5 for you though.

I was disappointed to discover that Pathfinder failed to address the most ridiculous problem with Wizards. Their bonus feats are awful.

The usefulness of Metamagic Feats is debatable as they cost spell slots. Item Creation feats are useless as it takes months to create most magic items, so cannot be done when you need the item. Spell Mastery is a ridiculous feat that is great for the NPC Wizard you find strung up in a dungeon to have, but for a PC? I have never had my wizard's spell books taken away, nor have I as a DM ever done so. Has anyone ever had this happen?

Why are none of the useful magic feats on the list? I would love to take: Spell Focus, Greater Spell Focus, Augment Summoning, Spell Penetration, or Greater Spell Penetration.

Blegh!

I have played a Half-Elf Rogue to 5th level at this point. I think that finally the Half-Elf has an identity beyond that of retarded elf or sorta human...

I really like the versatility of the character. Having Skill Focus is awesome. I always kinda wanted to take it as a character but could never justify losing a feat for skills. As a DM most of my NPCs have Skill Focus. I think this iteration of Half-Elves makes them more playable than ever.

!!!!Why did the Halfling lose throwing!!!!

There are three things that I found disappointing in the Pathfinder Skill System. Now that I have played the game a bit I feel confident expressing my opinion about these items.

I want to qualify this by saying that I am overall, far more impressed by Pathfinder than disappointed. This is a very solid improvement to 3.5 which remains one of the most solid RPGs I have played. I critique these because I have been asked to, and because I truly want to see this system improve.

My gripes:

1) Craft: Although craft is obviously useful, the matter of weeks it takes to create something has remained an elusive goal in many campaigns. I have largely stopped taking craft as a skill because it is unrealistic in most modules to say "My Character is going to take 4 weeks to craft a sword." It does offer monetary rewards. That is nice, but not enough. I have started using, in my campaigns, the Craft Points system introduced in Unearthed Arcana. IMO it allows for simulation of crafting items without the extreme downtime for the entire group.

2) Profession: Profession offers no bonus beyond monetary reward. Craft offers at least offers the ability to make things as well (even if it does take an understanding module.) Taking a Profession in Pathfinder is exactly like it was in 3.5. It is nice in giving a character a background and a role in society, but as a player you just lose skill points on something that gives no return. I have always house ruled that having a profession allows bonuses in certain specific instances (When a player had decided to take Profession (Beekeeper) I rewarded with a +2 circumstantial bonus to attack/damage against swarms) this helped but still gave little reward for skill points spent. Caveat It seems that Profession (Sailor) is the only Profession that ever seems to come up in published material. Perhaps splitting it out for a Sailing skill or Knowledge (Maritime) would be better.

3) The beginning of the chapter on skills is rather quick. Somehow the paragraphs on acquiring and gaining skill points are obtuse and required a couple of readings and some discussion before it made sense. This was perhaps because the system is different and understanding it takes time. However, every time I have leveled up I have run into the same issue. An example is the idea of proficiency with a skill. There is no concrete answer (that I could find, please correct me if there is) as to what makes one proficient. Is one skill point enough to be proficient? Also, the rule that allows an extra skill point if you take a level in your favored class should be reiterated in the Skill chapter. It is only in a sidebar on pg 11 for some reason that is nebulous.

The system is wonderful, thank you Pathfinder Design team for having our back When Other Companies turned away from those of us who had supported them.

"Special: If you are proficient in the Acrobatics skill, you gain a +3 dodge bonus to AC when fighting defensively instead of the usual +2, and a +6 dodge bonus to AC when taking the total defense action instead of the usual +4" (p. 55)

What does it mean to be proficient? Five ranks?

It seems that proficiency is granted by spending skill points in the skill. After all, when you spend a single point in a class skill you get the "+3 to make you more proficient." The skill system is unclear however.

WooHoo!!!! I've got 4 on the way. Paid 5 bucks total! A Kobold (monk) stole my baby!!!!

OMG Kobold Monk!

I have been trying to play one of these for like 5 years. No DM will go for it. Anyone know if one is available anywhere?