RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Non Numerical Bonuses are still Bonuses
PHB p208: "Stacking Effects: Spells that provide bonuses or penalties on attack rolls, damage rolls, saving throws, and other attributes usually do not stack with themselves."
Con: This is not limited to spells, so if you have 5 Orange Ioun stones, you only get +1 Caster Level (the other 4 don't stack with themselves.)
Pro: Only spells are limited, so I can make use of multiple items or effects ll providing the same bonus. So a 1st level Wizard with 19 Orange Ioun stones make a frightening Magic Missile caster getting the 9th level benefit.
I subscribe to the Con position.
Bonus: Bonuses are numerical values that are added to checks and statistical scores. Most bonuses have a type, and as a general rule, bonuses of the same type are not cumulative (do not “stack”)—only the greater bonus granted applies.
The description of an orange prism Ioun Stone doesn't say "bonus", and even if the +1 caster level is still considered a bonus, no type is listed, so it would stack anyway. (I personally would houserule differently because that's kind of silly, but there is zero ambiguity in RAW here.)
|
I can't remember why it's supposed to matter, since the weapon's bonuses are explicitly stated not to apply, but I don't want to leave a very adamant party unrepresented.I can expand on that one.
Freddy the Fighter has Combat Patrol, Combat Reflexes, Improved Critical, Spiked Armor, and a Bardiche. He set's up a combat patrol. Anyone entering his area he can trip with the Bardiche at 10 feet away as his Bardiche. If he fails by 10, unless they have a reach weapon themselves, they can't get their AoO against anything but his weapon (as a sunder attempt I believe is the only valid one). Which can easily be taken care of by making his bardiche Adamantine. If he trips someone, and they get up, he can get an AoO on them for standing and he's more likely to crit (due to their prone penalties at the AoO). Basically, it let's you trip at range with any reach weapon and negate most of the penalty for tripping.
The existing in the summary would resolve the issue, but the FAQ entry that currently exists begs the question. Moving this out of the "already addressed by FAQ section."
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
but there is zero ambiguity in RAW here.)
To some, there was zero ambiguity in the RAW in 3.5 days when having a bag full of Night Sticks stacked. But in the run up to 4E, Wizards Sage Advice tackled my 3.5 " Book of Heavily Debated Topics" thread and answered that things like Orange Ioun Stone and Night Sticks granted "bonuses" and those bonuses would not stack.
Yes, I'm aware that bonus was then and is now defined as you said "are numerical values". Your view of what is a numerical value apparently differes with at least Wizard's 3.5 (+1 CL is a numerical value of 1 added to a statistical score of your caster level.)
wearing Rhino Hide armor and wildshape into a Rhino? Maybe your horn is bigger.
As point of fact, I do exactly that. I wild shape into a Large Rhino (Arsinotherium if B2 allowed or Woolly Rhino if B1 only)
Playing this character is an adventure, considering all the Overrun related rulings. I'll get to adding those to this thread later, I'm awaiting a VC response to them from a game at PaizoCon.
I would like to compliment James for elucidating the issues under question, explaining both sides, and then weighing in with his opinion. Nicely done, dude.
Seriously d00d, this is how it should be done. Easy to read, balanced and without snark, douchebaggery or the wiff of edition warring.
Again Bravo to you James.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Your view of what is a numerical value apparently differes with...
Er, I didn't say anything about what constitutes a "numerical value". I just referenced the fact that bonuses of the same type don't stack while untyped bonuses do.
I mean this honestly and not to be rude: did you read exactly what I wrote, or did you just read my conclusion and assume that my reasoning was the same as someone else's whom you've debated with in the past? I've noticed people do that a lot on the internet, you know?
Anyway, if you want to re-check what I actually said and still contest it, I'd be interested in discussing it if you'll make a new thread for it (so as not to clutter this one with rules debates). Just let me know. :)
EDIT: Also, as others have said, you're doing a great job of finding and clearly describing topics. Good job!
The rules have been clarified, through FAQ and board posts, to my satisfaction. People still wildly misunderstand them however, and I admit I did for a long time as well.
So yeah, item creation rules and stealth. They don't need a FAQ they just need scrapping and starting over.
Could you point me to said FAQ and board posts?
The PF FAQ is well hidden. Here's the LINK
Notice the question about Pearls of Power. I think the board posts you'll have to dig up on your own, but there's a decent search function on the boards.
Touch of Law (Law Domain), does the target roll a a d20 and then decide whether or not to take 11, or do they forego the dice roll and just take 11?
Does Inspire Courage add to attacks and damage with ray spells, which are treated like weapons for purposes of Weapon Focus, Point Blank Shot etc?
Re: Touch of Law - the description says it applies to ALL such rolls for the round, not just some of them. Your forego the roll.
Re: Inspire Courage - The description specifically says "attack and weapon damage rolls", so all attack rolls (including rays and such) but only weapon damage rolls (so not spells).
You're using the Take 10 rules and applying it to Touch of Law, but it's not the same thing:
Touch of Law: "allowing it to treat all attack rolls etc... as if the natural d20 roll resulted in an 11"
Take 10: "Instead of rolling 1d20 for the skill check, calculate your result as if you had rolled a 10"
The first tells you to convert the die you rolled, the second tells you not to roll anything. It seems obvious to me that you roll first and always get 'at least' 11, but you disagree. Hence clarification needed.
With regards to Inspire Courage, some GMs don't apply it to either attack or damage, you think it applies to attacks but not damage, it could apply to both depending on your definition of weapon, hence clarification needed.
Do the feats Skill Focus - Diplomacy and Persuasive stack, or are they both assumed to be feat bonuses and therefore the same type? The same applies to any other combination of feats, such as Noble Scion of Lore, Breadth of Experience, Scholar, etc
Do the feats Skill Focus - Diplomacy and Persuasive stack, or are they both assumed to be feat bonuses and therefore the same type? The same applies to any other combination of feats, such as Noble Scion of Lore, Breadth of Experience, Scholar, etc
Since there's no such thing as a feat bonus , the bonuses granted by the feat are untyped bonuses from different sources. As such they stack.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
So when a rule says "treat all attack rolls as...", it's "obvious to you" that the intention is that you instead treat some rolls as that? As is the insertion of an "at least" clause that's not actually in the text?
So the "obvious" interpretation of the text is to remove one adjective and add another? Remember, the purpose of requesting an FAQ or somesuch is to clarify a topic on which the RAW itself is unclear, not when the speculative concept behind it could go two different ways. The text says "treat all rolls as 11", not "you always get at least 11". The text is not unclear.
I could sort of see a case for your view on Inspire Courage, and my counter to it would be based on verbiage used elsewhere, rather than being plainly and explicitly stated in the Inspire Courage description, so I guess that makes it a potential FAQ candidate.
EDIT: Ninja'd.
So when a rule says "treat all attack rolls as...", it's "obvious to you" that the intention is that you instead treat some rolls as that? As is the insertion of an "at least" clause that's not actually in the text?
You're ignoring part of the quote:
"allowing it to treat all attack rolls etc..."
Nobody is being forced to do anything, thus it only applies to some rolls. It could actually prove a serious hindrance if the recipient was forced to always take 11.
If you're 'allowed' to treat the natural d20 roll (for which you must have already rolled the dice, otherwise it does nothing) as 11, then you cannot get less than 11 [edit - unless you want to]. You roll the dice (the natural d20 roll) and are then 'allowed' to treat it as 11. You may choose not to.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
did you read exactly what I wrote
I read the exact quote, I'm sorry I didn't make it clear. I guess I am confused too, as I now have no idea what the point you are trying to make. I thought it was about the orange ioun stone granting an untyped non-bonus boost to your caster level. Was I wrong? Anyway, post a new thread and I'll join in.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
Boon Companion for single classed Druids/Rangers
"as though your class were four levels higher, to a maximum bonus equal to your character level."
Conservative: Single class Druids gain no benefit, as their character level limits their Druid level to the same. Single class Rangers have a -3 effective level (their druid level is -3 their Ranger level), but their ranger level is still capped at their character level. So Rangers also gain no benefit for example: 5th Ranger = ((5+4) limited to 5)-3 = 2nd level companion.
Middle: Single class Druids gain no benefit, but Rangers get to negate the -3 because the feat works on their effective Druid level and not their effective Ranger level for example: 5th Ranger = (5-3)+4 limited to 5 = 5th level companion.
Liberal: Single classed Druids/Rangers gain a benefit if their AC has less HD than they do. For example: A 5th Ranger's AC has 3 HD, so he would gain 2 additional levels. A 20th Druid's AC has 16 HD, so he would then have a 20 HD AC.
I subscribe to Conservative view.
On the topic of boon companion, is this following bit of cheese legal.
Take nature bond: Domain: animal
At 4th level gain an animal companion
At 5th level take boon companion and have your companion at full HD.
When making a full attack to get multiple ranged attack rolls (either because of iterative attacks or rapid shot) whilst threatened in melee, does the attacker provoke once for the 'full attack' action, or once for each attack roll?
When tumbling past an opponent do you move at half speed for the whole move action, or just for the squares you're tumbling in? If for the whole move and you use acrobatics to tumble whilst withdrawing (due to multiple enemies or reach) do you have to move at half speed for the whole double move?
As a reminder, please take rules debates elsewhere. It's one thing to correct a factual error. Beyond that, start a new thread and provide a link to it. Thanks.
There's no point debating Touch of Law any further as we're not going to agree. Can you please add it to the list? Thanks
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
James, the author of Boon Companion has posted about his intended interpretation, which correspond to your "Middle" position.
Sounds like debating... ;-)
Yes, Russ did. But James Jacobs said in the same thread that he wouldn't allow that interpretation (so it wouldn't help single classed Rangers.)Domain: animal ... At 5th level take boon companion and have your companion at full HD.
Using the above Conservative interpretation: No Middle: Yes Liberal: Yes
On the topic of boon companion, is this following bit of cheese legal.
Take nature bond: Domain: animal
At 4th level gain an animal companion
At 5th level take boon companion and have your companion at full HD.
Rules wise it is. You are using a feat to get a domain, but it is no stronger than natural spell IMHO.
|
|
As a reminder, please take rules debates elsewhere. It's one thing to correct a factual error. Beyond that, start a new thread and provide a link to it. Thanks.There's no point debating Touch of Law any further as we're not going to agree. Can you please add it to the list? Thanks
I have a draft updated up until about post 85. I'm moving house this week and don't know if I'll be able to finish the update until after the move.
I was hoping Ultimate Combat might have a section for rules explained further upon with situations that would come up in game and show how things are intended to work.
One of my biggest quandaries is intelligent mounts in combat that have unusual feats (and just mounted combat in general, it really needs some polishing in a book). For instance, mounts that have charge through, improved overrun, vital strike, and other odd combat feats; being combined with the riders ride by attack feat, how do they interact? Or the mount is some sort of creature that gets pounce, such as a quadruped eidolon using the same tactics, do they get to make their pounce? If the eidolon decides it wants to pounce by itself, does the rider get to ready an attack on the way by? Does it get the +2 bonus from charging even though he wasn't the actual charger? Can the eidolon gain the bonus from ride-by-attack? It's all very convoluted to me.
By the way someone was asking about scent on the first page, I would like to clarify for them. Dog has scent. Invisible man is 20 feet away. Dog is aware their is something within 30 feet. Dog can spend a move action discerning the direction of said scent. Dog then moves towards it. Dog automatically knows Invisible man is in a 5 foot square it encounters (within 5 feet). Dog has then pinpointed the square Invisible man is in. I gains no other benefit than that. If invisible man kicks dog then moves 30 feet away again dog has to do it all over again, or he may try to locate the man with listen, then move to where he thinks invisible man moved via the listen skill. If he passes within 5 feet of invisible man he automatically pinpoints him, and having a standard action left, can bite at him with a 50% miss chance. Good dog.
Sneak attack. Pretty well 'nuff said, but here are a few:
Can you SA with spells? (seems yes)
Can you SA with spells that don't do hp damage? (mixed)
If you SA with a spell, what type is the damage? (mixed)
Actually, what type is the damage from an SA?
1) Yes if the spell requires an attack roll (most touch, ranged touch, or rays spells)
2) No
3) The type of damage the spell inflicts (Aka scorching ray would do 4d6 fire + 1d6 fire, if the target had fire resist 15 and you got 12 damage from the 4d6 and 6 from the 1d6 you would deal 3 fire damage to the target, for clarity)
4) What ever damage the weapon would deal, for instance a rogue doing 1d4 with a silver dagger + 6d6 sneak attack would overcome silver damage reduction as if the weapon did (6d6+1d4)
The answers for most of these where dealt with in 3.5, in sage advice, rules compendium, and complete arcane. I find no new reasons they would be changed for pathfinder. Hope this helps.
Btw the Rules compendium is a fantastic book, worth picking up even for pathfinder so long as you comb it and circle things that have been changed between editions.
| 2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Here's another one from the boards.
Reach Weapon.
Fighter with a polearm is fighting a dragon. The dragon closes on him, to the point where they are adjacent. It's an elder dragon, and it takes up a 15x15x15 cube. Can the fighter thrust up or sideways at the dragon with his polearm? In other words, does the fact that there is a valid portion of the dragon in his polearm's threatened range allow him to attack normally, despite being adjacent to the dragon (something that's normally not allowed). The rules are written as if the character's are all medium, not one medium and one huge or colossal.
Another example is using a reach weapon as a -4 improvised weapon for adjacent targets.
Which I'm actually kind of ok with. It's sort of like using a spear as a quarterstaff to attack adjacent. It's not balanced for it, so it's got a penalty.
I second the motion that item creation, in general, is messed up and should be overhauled or fixed somehow. Even ignoring the WBL problems, the rules are A) all over the place, B) not terribly clear, C)not entirely consistent everywhere, and D) allow for ridiculously low level Wizards (high Int mod, spellcraft as a class skill, feats, etc) to make ridiculously high level items with no chance of failure. For openers they need to put in errata that you cannot take 10 on an item creation roll.
On a different note, I think a lot of the classes and their abilities, spell lists, etc need to be looked at. I think most players will agree that most parties probably need a rogue if there are going to be any traps, whereas I believe that there ought to be other options for "trap solver guy" classes beyond just the rogue. In fact, I think the main roles of the party members can be defined as "tank", "blaster", "sneak" and "healer" and all of the core classes, in their non-multiclassed states, should be designed to fill one of these roles somehow. For me personally, Fighter, Paladin and Barbarian would be "tanks", Rogue, Ranger, and Monk would be "sneaks", etc. As such the monk and ranger would need some sort of class abilities to deal with trap-oriented encounters. I would also like to see the various spell lists rearranged with an eye toward which role the spell-casting classes are trying to fill. If the Druid is to be a "healer" he should be able to cast Restoration, Remove Paralysis, etc or he should have some druidic spells that server the same purpose. If the sorceror/wizard is to be a "blaster" then he should NOT get party buff spells like Haste that are better than the "healer's" party buff spells, as that is the the healer's job after all. I would also make an effort to make one class for each role for each "origin". Origins being defined as Martial, Arcane, Divine, and Natural. Natural would be the origin of the barbarian, druid, ranger, etc. Divine would be the origin of the cleric, paladin, monk, etc. For each role, there ought to be a divine class, arcane class, martial class and natural class that fills that role. So I think there needs to be an arcane tank, a natural blaster, a divine blaster, etc.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Errata Needed:
The rules for combining fighting with manufactured weapons and natural weapons are contradictory between the Bestiary and the Core Rulebook. This has been clarified by James that the Bestiary is correct (manufactured weapons do not take TWF penalties) going back to 2009. Yet the text in Core Rulebook has not been errata'd to reflect this and still reads that all manufactured weapon attacks in a sequence that includes TWF and natural attacks are subject to TWF penalties.
|
Reach Weapon.
Fighter with a polearm is fighting a dragon. The dragon closes on him, to the point where they are adjacent. It's an elder dragon, and it takes up a 15x15x15 cube. Can the fighter thrust up or sideways at the dragon with his polearm? In other words, does the fact that there is a valid portion of the dragon in his polearm's threatened range allow him to attack normally, despite being adjacent to the dragon (something that's normally not allowed). The rules are written as if the character's are all medium, not one medium and one huge or colossal.
Great question.
Can you increase the Stregnth bonus of a composite bow without having to buy a whole new bow?
You can wield it in full defense mode, but it has to be wielded and wielded properly. i.e in a position and grip that you could attack with it. Essentially it does it's thing by being in super parry mode.There's one about
the Defending weapon property: do you need to actually attack with said weapon to ativate the propety.
Unfortunately, that is not true, per SKR. It is not valid if it's just in your hand. If you take a full defense action, you don't get bonuses from it, which is dumb (no offense to SKR). Unless you have actually attacked with the defending weapon now, it gives you no benefits. I houserule it as you said above, but the official Paizo response (see FAQ) is that you have to attack with it to get the bonuses.
|
|
Yes, Russ did. But James Jacobs said in the same thread that he wouldn't allow that interpretation (so it wouldn't help single classed Rangers.)
Just updated that SKR did weigh in on an official ruling on it, though it hasn't been added to any FAQ:
Benefit: The abilities of your animal companion or familiar are calculated as though your class were four levels higher, to a maximum effective druid level of equal to your character level. If you have more than one animal companion or familiar, choose one to receive this benefit.This would make it clearer. And yes, you can take the feat if you're a single-classed ranger. It's actually pretty sweet deal.
Currently we don't have a place to post FAQ/update material for books other than the Pathfinder RPG hardcovers, so I can't attach this to a permanent FAQ, but consider this an official ruling on this question.
on another topic, i'd love to see the devs address Fog. in much the same way that light/darkness can be confusing, Fog and its limitations on movement speed , on its own or combined with difficult terrain or solid fog, can be a pain to convey to DMs in org play.
Pro: fog "hampers visibility", doubling movement costs.
con: fog doesn't "hamper visibility" and doesn't increase movement cost.
i lean pro. so a solid fog spell is 1/2 movement, and because it hampers visibility, movement is quartered.
The current rules for light also a pain, i know its been raised already. but the fog thing brought it to mind:
pro: dim light hampers movement.
con: normal and dim light don't hamper movement unless you're in complete darkness.
me: i haven't run it like this, but conservatively, most indoor situations in dim light, movement would always be limited to half speed.
keeping track of relative lighting conditions on a map, on a per character basis, is kind of hampering. it also doesn't answer what happens if you want to try and move faster: do you bump into things? get lost? take damage? fall down? avoid it with acrobatics like moving full speed when blind?
In an area of dim light, a character can see somewhat. Creatures within this area have concealment (20% miss chance in combat) from those without darkvision or the ability to see in darkness. A creature within an area of dim light can make a Stealth check to conceal itself. Areas of dim light include outside at night with a moon in the sky, bright starlight, and the area between 20 and 40 feet from a torch.
Hampered Movement: Difficult terrain, obstacles, and poor visibility can hamper movement (see Table: Hampered Movement for details). When movement is hampered, each square moved into usually counts as two squares, effectively reducing the distance that a character can cover in a move.