What are some things about the Pathfinder rules that you think most people do not know?

[james maissen]

The_Hanged_Man wrote:

james maissen wrote:

Magic missile does 2-5 damage, that is the random numeric value per missile. The '1' is no more 'always there' than the '2' is.

Nope.

A magic missile does 1d4+1 damage. The 1d4 portion is a random variable and the +1 is a constant. Since the +1 portion is constant and not a random variable it is not multiplied by the 1.5 for the Empower feat.

It's already been ruled that way here anyway: Click me.

There seems to be problems starting threads otherwise I'd do so.

But absent of the mechanics (i.e. the dice) of determining what value in the 2-5 a magic missile does, how do you figure that '1' is a constant?

Doesn't a magic missile always deal at least 2? If there is a 'constant' there as opposed to a variable then it would be 2.

The argument here falls short, and was clearly not the case in 3e where the example in the book multiplied all of the 2-5 but as noted no examples were part of the SRD.

Moreover regional variation had this error (that variable = dice) take root in certain locales. These included the locales of the current PF developers.

And finally Jason was saying off the cuff, and even in that thread unofficially.

Many things like this are learned (or mislearned) at the table where they become reinforced.

But we can at least agree that in English the empower feat means that all numeric variables are multiplied. A magic missile does a variable amount of damage per missile. The number of missiles is dependent upon caster level (and that number of missiles is not multiplied) but is fixed for a given casting of the spell. The damage for a given magic missile is multiplied (en total) to determine the empowered magic missile variable damage.

But there is great table variation on this, despite the English.

-James

[cibet44]

Adam Ormond wrote:

The word random does not appear in any source. I tire of seeing this argument. The question comes down to "what is the variable?"

Does X = 1d4+1?
Or does X = 1d4?

The rule is entirely ambiguous. In the 3.5 PHB, it provided an example that suggested X = 1d4+1. This example was never included in the SRD, and thus didn't make it into PF. As far as I'm aware, no official clarification was made for 3.5.

X = 1d4 in PF, as you noted.

Doubly irritating is that this isn't in the FAQ, or errata.

Actually "random" is in the source (both 3.5 SRD, and PRD). What is meaningful in interpreting this feat is "variable", "random", and "damage".

From the PRD:
Empower Spell (Metamagic)
You can increase the power of your spells, causing them to deal more damage.
Benefit: All variable, numeric effects of an empowered spell are increased by half.

Saving throws and opposed rolls are not affected, nor are spells without random variables. An empowered spell uses up a spell slot two levels higher than the spell's actual level.

So right off the bat this feat only affects spells that cause damage. So that eliminates any non damage causing spells immediately. For instance, any healing spell is not a candidate unless it is doing damage (like to undead). So Ray of Enfeeblement ("The subject takes a penalty to Strength equal to 1d6+1") can NOT be Empowered using this feat. Color Spray, no damage, no empower, etc.

So the next step is to look for variable numeric effects that are randomly generated in the damage causing spell.

For Magic Missile the damage is "1d4+1 points of force damage" per missile. As you go up in levels you get MORE missiles but the damage of those missiles does not vary it is only random, so Empower has no affect on Magic Missile.

For fireball it is simple, 1d6 points of (random) damage per (variable) level. SO Empower works fine for Fireball and Lightning Bolt, for example.

Now, lets do a complex one, "Destruction".

PRD:
"This spell instantly delivers 10 points of damage per caster level." This is variable (per level) but not random, it is a static 10 points per level, so no Empower benefit here. However further down is says: "If the target's Fortitude saving throw succeeds, it instead takes 10d6 points of damage.", well now we have some random damage but it is NOT variable. It is always 10d6 no matter what. So we see this is consistent and Empower has no affect on "Destruction".

There you are. Problem solved. Consider this official.

[roll8dn]

Mauril wrote:

roll8dn wrote:

Stuff.

Reach, for most purposes, is treated as movement, especially in regards to 5 foot reach/movement. If you could get there with a 5-foot step, you can get there with a 5-foot reach. The only exception seems to be 10-foot reach (which is called out as an exception to the reach=movement rules).

Thank you. That makes my head hurt less.

[Lyrax]

When the empower feat says "variable, numeric effects", it doesn't mean the computer science definition of the word 'variable'. Nor does it mean the mathematical definition.

It means the English definition. All numeric effects that vary from casting to casting (which might have been better written as dice rolled) are affected by empower. I think it should do more than this, to allow more spells to interact with the metamagic system, but it's not RAW.

[Kilbourne]

I just learned this today: "The only movement you can take during a full attack is a 5-foot step. You may take the step before, after, or between your attacks."

[Howie23]

james maissen wrote:

cibet44 wrote:

So right off the bat this feat only affects spells that cause damage.

Wrong.

The side thread is posted. Please move it there rather than adding pages of detailed discussion here as a thread-jack. (not picking on you James, just the last post in the topic)

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Kilbourne wrote:

I just learned this today: "The only movement you can take during a full attack is a 5-foot step. You may take the step before, after, or between your attacks."

If included, that belongs on the, "Been that way since 3.0" list.

[hjs102]

Howie23 wrote:

Summary through Post 114

Frequently Unknown Rules (through post 114)
Link to this thread

Change from SRD/D&D to Pathfinder

5. Paladin double of smite against some creatures is on first attack only.

Where does it say this? I could not find this under the smite evil ability.

[Howie23]

hjs102 wrote:

Howie23 wrote:

Change from SRD/D&D to Pathfinder

5. Paladin double of smite against some creatures is on first attack only.

Where does it say this? I could not find this under the smite evil ability.

I don't see it either. Peer review is a good thing. Will change in next iteration unless original statement is supported.

[Blave]

hjs102 wrote:

Howie23 wrote:

Summary through Post 114

Frequently Unknown Rules (through post 114)
Link to this thread

Change from SRD/D&D to Pathfinder

5. Paladin double of smite against some creatures is on first attack only.

Where does it say this? I could not find this under the smite evil ability.

It's right in the ability description:

PRD wrote:

Smite Evil (Su): Once per day, a paladin can call out to the powers of good to aid her in her struggle against evil. As a swift action, the paladin chooses one target within sight to smite. If this target is evil, the paladin adds her Charisma bonus (if any) to her attack rolls and adds her paladin level to all damage rolls made against the target of her smite. If the target of smite evil is an outsider with the evil subtype, an evil-aligned dragon, or an undead creature, the bonus to damage on the first successful attack increases to 2 points of damage per level the paladin possesses.

Kinda hard to miss, actually...

[Tilnar]

Howie23 wrote:

hjs102 wrote:

Howie23 wrote:

Change from SRD/D&D to Pathfinder

5. Paladin double of smite against some creatures is on first attack only.

Where does it say this? I could not find this under the smite evil ability.

I don't see it either. Peer review is a good thing. Will change in next iteration unless original statement is supported.

PRD wrote:

Smite Evil (Su): Once per day, a paladin can call out to the powers of good to aid her in her struggle against evil. As a swift action, the paladin chooses one target within sight to smite. If this target is evil, the paladin adds her Charisma bonus (if any) to her attack rolls and adds her paladin level to all damage rolls made against the target of her smite. If the target of smite evil is an outsider with the evil subtype, an evil-aligned dragon, or an undead creature, the bonus to damage on the first successful attack increases to 2 points of damage per level the paladin possesses. Regardless of the target, smite evil attacks automatically bypass any DR the creature might possess.

Edit: Ninja'd by 5 seconds.

[Tangible Delusions]

Blave wrote:

Kinda hard to miss, actually...

Unless they are looking in an older rulebook before the Errata that changed it.

[Some call me Tim]

Some call me Tim wrote:

More that I just learned about the acrobatics skill:

Now you can only make a soft fall if you deliberately jump down.

If you fail the acrobatics check to move through an enemy-occupied square you don't stop, you provoke an AoO, but nothing says you don't keep moving.

Here's another tidbit. If you fail an acrobatics check while balancing you never fall down. The grease spell mentions if you fail by 5 or more but no where under the acrobatics skill is this called out.

I'm hoping these last two will be fixed by errata.

[Blave]

Tangible Delusions wrote:

Blave wrote:

Kinda hard to miss, actually...

Unless they are looking in an older rulebook before the Errata that changed it.

That certainly would explain a lot. Though that woudl have been the very first printing, I guess? Because the line is there in my second printing book. Didn't check before your post, though. I'm way too lazy to get my Core Rule Book every time I want to check on a rule ^^

It's interesting that the first errata added even more power to Smite Evil.

Anyway, I hope my last post didn't sound to offfensive. If so, I appologize.

[Zonto]

Howie23 wrote:

hjs102 wrote:

Howie23 wrote:

Change from SRD/D&D to Pathfinder

5. Paladin double of smite against some creatures is on first attack only.

Where does it say this? I could not find this under the smite evil ability.

I don't see it either. Peer review is a good thing. Will change in next iteration unless original statement is supported.

The change for double damage only on the first attack was in the errata, I believe.

[Howie23]

Zonto wrote:

The change for double damage only on the first attack was in the errata, I believe.

Yeah, the errata is the answer to why it's plain as day to some and impossible to find for others. Existing text stays. Thx all.

[leo1925]

Some call me Tim wrote:

Some call me Tim wrote:

More that I just learned about the acrobatics skill:

Now you can only make a soft fall if you deliberately jump down.

If you fail the acrobatics check to move through an enemy-occupied square you don't stop, you provoke an AoO, but nothing says you don't keep moving.

Here's another tidbit. If you fail an acrobatics check while balancing you never fall down. The grease spell mentions if you fail by 5 or more but no where under the acrobatics skill is this called out.

I'm hoping these last two will be fixed by errata.

I don't think that this is an error, the spell simply makes the balance check more difficult.

[Howie23]

Some call me Tim wrote:

Some call me Tim wrote:

More that I just learned about the acrobatics skill:

Now you can only make a soft fall if you deliberately jump down.

If you fail the acrobatics check to move through an enemy-occupied square you don't stop, you provoke an AoO, but nothing says you don't keep moving.

Here's another tidbit. If you fail an acrobatics check while balancing you never fall down. The grease spell mentions if you fail by 5 or more but no where under the acrobatics skill is this called out.

I'm hoping these last two will be fixed by errata.

The acrobatics has a passage that failing an acrobatics check results in you going prone. Given where it is in the text, it is ambiguous as to whether it applies to all uses of acrobatics. This has been discussed a couple of times without consensus. Suggest another thread if discussion is desired, but it sounds like something for the FAQ thread rather than this one.

[Gully]

Christopher Dudley wrote:

Grapple is still impossible to play without house ruling something. They say the grappler (and the grapplee) takes a -4 penalty to AC. Went to great pains, it seems, to remove the fact that grappling gives you an automatic sneak attack target. However, the Armor Class Modifiers table on page 195 of the Core Rulebook has a footnote on Grappling. That says that you lose your Dex bonus to AC. Which in fact means that you are still vulnerable to sneak attack.

So... which is it? According to the rulebook I have, if I use every rule in it as faithfully as possible, grappled, and grappling characters both still lose their Dex bonus to AC (and are sneak-attackable). However, the only place I can still find this information is in a footnote in a table I never would have thought to look at after reading all the grapple information. It is not listed in the 2 pages on grapple (except for pinning a target, which, stupidly, makes the PINNER lose his dex bonus). It is not listed in the "grappled" condition in the condition summaries at the end of the book.

Further complicating matters, the table on page 195 again states for pinned targets that they are flat-footed (which is a different footnote than simply losing their Dex bonus to AC) WRT melee and ranged attacks, which also isn't mentioned in the text. Pinned in the text is doubly broken, because it says it's a more severe form of grapple, then it says the pinned target suffers an additional -4 penalty to Dex, then it says that grappled and pinned condition modifiers don't stack. Wait... what?

Summary? This needs errata. Either remove those footnotes from the grappled and pinned entries on the...

Some of what is written above is incorrect (grappler and grapply take a -4 to dex, not AC/ pinned condition does not say target suffers -4 to dex). I don't see any problem with the grapple rules as is. Though they are complicated.

-------------------------------------------
Lets say player A grapples player B with player C nearby.

PLAYER A gets -4 Dex, -2 to attacks other than grapple/escape, and loses his dex to AC against player C, but not B. Can still attack player B or C (with the -2), but neither is open to sneak attack.
(CMB unchanged, CMD -2, Escape Skill -2 —due to lost dex)

PLAYER B gets -4 Dex, -2 to attacks other than grapple/escape, and loses his dex to AC against player C, but not A. Can still attack player A or C (with the -2), but neither is open to sneak attack.
(CMB unchanged, CMD -2, Escape Skill -2 —due to lost dex)

PLAYER C can attack A or B with both losing their dex to AC, both open to sneak attack.

--------------------------------------------
Now player A has player B pinned

PLAYER A same as above but loses his dex to AC to player B too. Can still attack player B or C (with the -2), but can now "sneak attack" player B.
(CMB unchanged, CMD -2, Escape Skill -2)

PLAYER B is flat-footed to everyone, so loses his dex to AC to player A, and also has -4 to AC, and can no longer do anything other than grapple. No attacks directed towards B or C.
(CMB unchanged, CMD -4+ loses all +dex mod*, -0 to Escape Skill**)

PLAYER C can attack A or B with both losing their dex to AC, both open to sneak attack. Player B has an additional -4 AC.

--------------------------------------------
The table on page 195 is for a defender who is grappling (players A or B) versus someone who is not (player C).

*The big difference between being flat-footed v. losing dex to AC is that the CMD specifically says "A flat-footed creature does not add its Dexterity bonus to CMD". So players B's CMD can go down a lot once he is pinned (if he has a high dex) ... more than Player A doing the pinning. This is why they don't always say flat-footed.

** This is the one strange part, pinned condition allows for a better Escape check than grappling. This is because it is no longer -4 to dex. But remember that the Escape Skill turns a pin into a grapple. A successful combat maneuver breaks the pin and the grapple at the same time.

Grapple Condition:

A grappled creature is restrained by a creature, trap, or effect. Grappled creatures cannot move and take a –4 penalty to Dexterity. a grappled creature takes a –2 penalty on all attack rolls and combat maneuver checks, except those made to grapple or escape a grapple. In addition, grappled creatures can take no action that requires two hands to perform. A grappled character who attempts to cast a spell must make a concentration check (DC 10 + grappler's CMB + spell level), or lose the spell. Grappled creatures cannot make attacks of opportunity.

Pinned Condition:

A pinned creature is tightly bound and can take few actions. A pinned creature cannot move and is flat-footed. A pinned character also takes an additional –4 penalty to his Armor Class. A pinned creature is limited in the actions that it can take. A pinned creature can always attempt to free itself, usually through a combat maneuver check or Escape Artist check. A pinned creature can take verbal and mental actions, but cannot cast any spells that require a somatic or material component. A pinned character who attempts to cast a spell must make a concentration check (DC 10 + grappler's CMB + spell level) or lose the spell. Pinned is a more severe version of grappled, and their effects do not stack.

If You Are Grappled:

If you are grappled, you can attempt to break the grapple as a standard action by making a combat maneuver check (DC equal to your opponent's CMD; this does not provoke an attack of opportunity) or Escape Artist check (with a DC equal to your opponent's CMD). If you succeed, you break the grapple and can act normally. Alternatively, if you succeed, you can become the grappler, grappling the other creature (meaning that the other creature cannot freely release the grapple without making a combat maneuver check, while you can). Instead of attempting to break or reverse the grapple, you can take any action that requires only one hand to perform, such as cast a spell or make an attack with a light or one-handed weapon against any creature within your reach, including the creature that is grappling you. See the grappled condition for additional details. If you are pinned, your actions are very limited. See the pinned condition in Conditions for additional details.

[Demon9ne]

Not long ago I re-read the combat chapter, and took some notes to share with my group, to polish up -- these are semi-translated from DM short-hand, but the page numbers ought to be correct, if there is any confusion:

A creature can't use Stealth in an area of bright light unless it is invisible or has cover. ~ p.172

In darkness, creatures without darkvision are effectively blinded (50% miss chance vs. opponents, lost Dex to AC, -2 AC, -4 Perception, -4 Str/Dex based skills; lost Dodge AC bonus also, per p.179) ~ p.172

Incorporeal touch attacks do not ignore armor bonuses granted by force effects. ~ p.179

Multiple attacks of opportunity can be made against a single target, but only one may be made if incurred for moving out of threatened squares (per attacker threatening). ~ p.180

Run is speed x3, or speed x4 unencumbered, and is not necessarily taken in a straight line. ~ p.180

You can natural 1 or natural 20 a saving throw or attack roll, but not skill checks. ~ p.180

Retrieving a non-weapon item provokes an attack of opportunity. ~ p.183

The withdraw action may be taken in a limited round (such as the surprise round, where only one action is permitted). ~ p.183

You cannot make attacks of opportunity while using the total defense action. Expertise does not stack with total defense. ~ p.186

Additionally, every GM should have a house rules for the circumstances during which a Reflex save cannot be made, due to a lack of official rules. I believe that as it is a character can make a Reflex save from a fireball in a 5x5x5 room with no exits, while blinded, prone, dazed, frightened, nauseated, and covered in a flammable substance. ~ AFAIK

[mdt]

By RAW :

A) Centaurs do not qualify for the Mounted Combat feat tree, not even Trample. :)

B) Centaurs do not use Large Weapons. (Same from 3.5, but most people forget it).

[psionichamster]

Ddddddoooooootttttttt.

Also, thanks to Howie for the collation.

[Gorbacz]

How about some monster things:

* Grab now works against opponents no larger than the same size category. Medium grabbers got far more dangerous.
* Monster type HD tied to BAB. Outsiders have D10 HD now. Undead have D8, but they get Charisma bonus on HP.
* Several monster stats were dramatically changed. Ropers and Ogre Magi are good examples.

[Diego Rossi]

Demon9ne wrote:

Additionally, every GM should have a house rules for the circumstances during which a Reflex save cannot be made, due to a lack of official rules. I believe that as it is a character can make a Reflex save from a fireball in a 5x5x5 room with no exits, while blinded, prone, dazed, frightened, nauseated, and covered in a flammable substance. ~ AFAIK

And paralysed, don't forget that he should be paralysed too to make it interesting.

[Cartigan]

Anything stating Reflex saves don't work as written is unnecessary and heavy handed.
Moreover, it's wholly unrelated to this topic. There are not "official rules" when Reflex saves can't be made because they can ALWAYS BE MADE. That's your official rule. If I am standing in the middle of a 100' wide plain where a 100' slab is to be dropped on my head and it allows a Reflex save, I can make the save. That is the rule. You just don't like the rule because you don't think it is "realistic." Well too bad, that is neither relevant to this thread or to how the game is written.

[Gruuuu]

Cartigan wrote:

Anything stating Reflex saves don't work as written is unnecessary and heavy handed.

Moreover, it's wholly unrelated to this topic. There are not "official rules" when Reflex saves can't be made because they can ALWAYS BE MADE. That's your official rule. If I am standing in the middle of a 100' wide plain where a 100' slab is to be dropped on my head and it allows a Reflex save, I can make the save. That is the rule. You just don't like the rule because you don't think it is "realistic." Well too bad, that is neither relevant to this thread or to how the game is written.

Cartigan:

You're so warm and fuzzy. Can I cuddle you?

[cibet44]

Cartigan wrote:

Anything stating Reflex saves don't work as written is unnecessary and heavy handed.

Moreover, it's wholly unrelated to this topic. There are not "official rules" when Reflex saves can't be made because they can ALWAYS BE MADE. That's your official rule. If I am standing in the middle of a 100' wide plain where a 100' slab is to be dropped on my head and it allows a Reflex save, I can make the save. That is the rule. You just don't like the rule because you don't think it is "realistic." Well too bad, that is neither relevant to this thread or to how the game is written.

Agreed.

BTW, still a great thread, but it is starting to dip into "here is a rule I never knew despite it being obviously documented in ever edition" territory.

[Vaahama]

-Anvil- wrote:

Tagion wrote:

You can use your one standard action in the surprise round to charge.

You can coup de grace a creature with total consealment or invisable with two full round actions

Can you tell me where the reference is for the Charge during a surprise round? I don't remember seeing it under Charge.

You can see it under CHARGE page #198 in core rulebook AND under the zombie "stagerred" special rule.

Basicaly you can charge in a surprise round or if limited to 1 standard action if moving UP TO your speed only, as opposed to moving UP TO twice your speed under normal charge.

[hogarth]

Some call me Tim wrote:

More that I just learned about the acrobatics skill:

Now you can only make a soft fall if you deliberately jump down.

Other things were removed from 3.5 when the Acrobatics skill was formed, like the ability to entertain a crowd with the Tumble skill or the ability to hop up onto a waist-high object with a DC 10 Jump check.

[hogarth]

Here's one I just noticed: Diplomacy DCs are modified by the target's Charisma modifier. So, for instance, Wild Empathy is much easier to perform on a Cha 2 boa constrictor than a Cha 10 dire wolf.

[Demon9ne]

Cartigan wrote:

Anything stating Reflex saves don't work as written is unnecessary and heavy handed.

Moreover, it's wholly unrelated to this topic. There are not "official rules" when Reflex saves can't be made because they can ALWAYS BE MADE. That's your official rule. If I am standing in the middle of a 100' wide plain where a 100' slab is to be dropped on my head and it allows a Reflex save, I can make the save. That is the rule. You just don't like the rule because you don't think it is "realistic." Well too bad, that is neither relevant to this thread or to how the game is written.

The thread is titled:

What are some things about the Pathfinder rules that you think most people do not know?

The part of my post that rubbed you the wrong way amounts to:

There are no restrictions on when a character can Reflex save.

It's wholly appropriate to this thread. And don't tell me why I do or don't like anything.

[Cartigan]

Demon9ne wrote:

Cartigan wrote:

Anything stating Reflex saves don't work as written is unnecessary and heavy handed.

Moreover, it's wholly unrelated to this topic. There are not "official rules" when Reflex saves can't be made because they can ALWAYS BE MADE. That's your official rule. If I am standing in the middle of a 100' wide plain where a 100' slab is to be dropped on my head and it allows a Reflex save, I can make the save. That is the rule. You just don't like the rule because you don't think it is "realistic." Well too bad, that is neither relevant to this thread or to how the game is written.

The thread is titled:

What are some things about the Pathfinder rules that you think most people do not know?

The part of my post that rubbed you the wrong way amounts to:

There are no restrictions on when a character can Reflex save.

It's wholly appropriate to this thread. And don't tell me why I do or don't like anything.

If you had said that, there wouldn't be a problem. What you did was go pontificating about how you don't like that rule and every GM should change it because you don't like it.

[Enrol-Dur]

Reflex saves in limited circumstances are also about the outside variables beyond your own numerical skill level. That 100ft slab falling on you might get knocked off center and not completely crush you (representing a successful save). However, that might not save you from suffocation later on. The "everything gets a save" rule is merely a way to streamline instances that the DM might not want to thoroughly explain if characters survive, merely that they did and the fight goes on.

[Finarin Panjoro]

Undead now get d8 plus Charisma bonus hit points and add Charisma bonus in all places related to abilities that Constitution would normally be applied (such as ability DCs).

This is as opposed to d12 hit die and no bonus to hp in 3.5.

[Demon9ne]

Cartigan wrote:

If you had said that, there wouldn't be a problem. What you did was go pontificating about how you don't like that rule and every GM should change it because you don't like it.

Did you miss the 'don't tell me what I do or don't like' part of my last post? I never stated whether I did or didn't like anything. I stated what I believed the rule is/isn't. It was verbose to make it noticeable, so that anyone who found a rule in the book on the subject which I hadn't noticed might speak up.

I posted rules that helped my group and contributed to this thread, whereas you came along and contributed nothing, save for nitpicking my post and offending me. And twice now -- because I wasn't "pontificating".

That having been said, maybe you should contribute something here instead of being the relevancy police.

[Cartigan]

Demon9ne wrote:

Cartigan wrote:

If you had said that, there wouldn't be a problem. What you did was go pontificating about how you don't like that rule and every GM should change it because you don't like it.

Did you miss the 'don't tell me what I do or don't like' part of my last post? I never stated whether I did or didn't like anything. I stated what I believed the rule is/isn't. It was verbose to make it noticeable, so that anyone who found a rule in the book on the subject which I hadn't noticed might speak up.

What.

You literally stated every GM should houserule limitations into it. Who, exactly, is not going to take that as an assertion you don't like the rule as it is?

I've thus far contributed everything (much earlier in the thread) I can think of that hasn't been contributed already.

[yarb]

The Dodge feat does not apply to swarms.

[Balodek]

Kilbourne wrote:

I just learned this today: "The only movement you can take during a full attack is a 5-foot step. You may take the step before, after, or between your attacks."

Oh man, I've been running that wrong. My players are going to kill me!

[Howie23]

I have created a side thread for Cartigan and Demon9ne to yell at each other. Please continue there in order to keep this thread nice and tidy. :)

Convenient Link

Edit: Lest this be misconstrued, this is intended as a light-hearted humorous way to help keep the thread clean.

[Adam Ormond]

yarb wrote:

The Dodge feat does not apply to swarms.

?

D20PFSRD.com wrote:

Your training and reflexes allow you to react swiftly to avoid an opponents' attacks.

Prerequisite: Dex 13.

Benefit: You gain a +1 dodge bonus to your AC. A condition that makes you lose your Dex bonus to AC also makes you lose the benefits of this feat.

Do Swarms cause a condition that denies Dex to AC? If so, I think that should go on the list.

[Demon9ne]

By 'every GM should house rule it' I didn't mean to imply that anyone must and I think it's bizarre that you interpreted it as such. Is it commonplace for people to enter threads, contribute, and then proceed to attempt to force others to make house rules?

I was speaking casually, and what I meant to say was that the situation is very common and it would benefit a GM to have a planned rule for such cases. Area spells requiring Reflex saves will eventually target characters under various status effects -- and this is not covered by the rules.

Can we be done nitpicking my post now?

[yarb]

Adam Ormond wrote:

yarb wrote:

The Dodge feat does not apply to swarms.

?

D20PFSRD.com wrote:

Your training and reflexes allow you to react swiftly to avoid an opponents' attacks.

Prerequisite: Dex 13.

Benefit: You gain a +1 dodge bonus to your AC. A condition that makes you lose your Dex bonus to AC also makes you lose the benefits of this feat.

Do Swarms cause a condition that denies Dex to AC? If so, I think that should go on the list.

Its not your dex, its the nature of a swarm, swarming you know. but of course now that I have been called to task, I can't find the rule. Disregard until I find a source.

[Aldin]

yarb wrote:

Its not your dex, its the nature of a swarm, swarming you know. but of course now that I have been called to task, I can't find the rule. Disregard until I find a source.

Probably a legacy of when you had to pick an opponent for dodge to apply against in 3.5

[yarb]

Aldin wrote:

yarb wrote:

Its not your dex, its the nature of a swarm, swarming you know. but of course now that I have been called to task, I can't find the rule. Disregard until I find a source.

Probably a legacy of when you had to pick an opponent for dodge to apply against in 3.5

could be. Heck, I have the occasional 1st ed flash backs even. Thank god for hero lab and combat manager or my old noggin just couldn't keep up.

@ Demon9ne and Cartigan (in my best Miss Garet voice) GIRLS, GIRLS!

[Demon9ne]

Howie23 wrote:

I have created a side thread for Cartigan and Demon9ne to yell at each other. Please continue there in order to keep this thread nice and tidy. :)

Convenient Link

I apologize for the unrelated back-and-forth.

To Paizo staff: I've flagged this post because the other thread is not necessary.

.
.
...Back on topic:

If someone more versed than myself is paying attention, I believe that a good rule to include here would be one stating who gets to control summoned creatures, and to what extent. I forget the exact rule, and I remember it being somewhat of a pain when my group looked it up.

[Ravingdork]

Dodge doesn't apply to swarms because they never attack your AC, so the dodge bonus becomes moot.

Demon9ne wrote:

Run is speed x3, or speed x4 unencumbered, and is not necessarily taken in a straight line. ~ p.180

This one is incorrect I'm afraid. Running still requires a straight line.

[Cartigan]

Demon9ne wrote:

Howie23 wrote:

I have created a side thread for Cartigan and Demon9ne to yell at each other. Please continue there in order to keep this thread nice and tidy. :)

Convenient Link

I apologize for the unrelated back-and-forth.

To Paizo staff: I've flagged this post because the other thread is not necessary.

.
.
...Back on topic:

If someone more versed than myself is paying attention, I believe that a good rule to include here would be one stating who gets to control summoned creatures, and to what extent. I forget the exact rule, and I remember it being somewhat of a pain when my group looked it up.

I think it was already brought up that unless a creature can understand you, you can't direct it to do any more than attack your enemies - which it does automatically. And since templated creatures no longer get an automatic 3 Int, you can't really get the VAST MAJORITY of the Summon Monster list to do anything useful.

[Benicio Del Espada]

yarb wrote:

@ Demon9ne and Cartigan (in my best Miss Garet voice) GIRLS, GIRLS!

I prefer Mr. Whipple: Ladies, PLEASE!

[Gorbacz]

Cartigan wrote:

Demon9ne wrote:

Howie23 wrote:

I have created a side thread for Cartigan and Demon9ne to yell at each other. Please continue there in order to keep this thread nice and tidy. :)

Convenient Link

I apologize for the unrelated back-and-forth.

To Paizo staff: I've flagged this post because the other thread is not necessary.

.
.
...Back on topic:

If someone more versed than myself is paying attention, I believe that a good rule to include here would be one stating who gets to control summoned creatures, and to what extent. I forget the exact rule, and I remember it being somewhat of a pain when my group looked it up.

I think it was already brought up that unless a creature can understand you, you can't direct it to do any more than attack your enemies - which it does automatically. And since templated creatures no longer get an automatic 3 Int, you can't really get the VAST MAJORITY of the Summon Monster list to do anything useful.

Well, at least that means a SMI wand doesn't make Rogues obsolete in the trap detection department! :)

[yarb]

Ravingdork wrote:

Dodge doesn't apply to swarms because they never attack your AC, so the dodge bonus becomes moot.

Quote:

Yes, yes indeed. I don't know where I came up with that. Now, where did I leave my ginkgo biloba?