LOL - I read the feat first and was like - bad feat - so what...
But DAMN that's a bad feat!
Don't forget the 4 feats you need as pre req (scorpion style is needed for some of the other pre req's)But not 1 in 400. you have 1/20 to make a natural 20 - and then you just need to comfirm..
AND THEN the target needs to fail the fort save. Not likely unless you're a monk statted out like a primary caster.
So the chance is 1/20 * X/20 * N/20
where x = 21-(number you need to confirm)
and n=(number target fails on), likely to be a 1
the first number can be increased to 2/20 if you have improved Crit or something.
So you're looking at NX/8000 is the chance to get this to work, assuming you can start within 5' of a target that's got the prerequisite debuff on it. Personally, I'd rather just Flurry or Coup de Grace.
My head scratcher has always been the escalation of HP. Getting better at avoiding damage should increase with experience. The ability to absorb it, rather less so.
The game mechanics for sneak attacks have always offended my sensibilities. It is hard to imagine that there are techniques for striking targets in vulnerable locations that are only known exclusively and universally by rogues. You can't convince me that fighters, rangers, monks, etc. would never study these techniques.
HP is also the ability to parry, "roll with the blow", and generally "getting lucky". James Bond has a s!*!load of hit points; that's why the bad guys always miss. Kinda. The abstraction still doesn't make sense, but at least it's not as bad as could be thought (a 5th level barbarian can NOT have 7 longswords sticking out of him and walk around).
And on the rogues, the thing is that the other classes also study those methods. For fighters it's called weapon training and weapon specialization, for rangers it's favored enemy, for monks it's stunning fist, increased unarmed damage and so on. The difference is, most warrior classes can always use these tactics - while the rogue is worse at fighting, so he can just go for the weak spots when the opponent can't defend himself properly.
People keep saying this about HP, but the rules do a craptastic job of reflecting that philosophy. If increased HP were because of your improved ability to parry, squirm and evade the solid blow, then why don't your HP go down when you get blinded? Why don't blows delivered by [ANYBODY WHO IS NOT A ROGUE] hurt you more if they are invisible, you are unaware of the attack, or any of the infinite other scenarios where you can't use that argument and yet the inflated HP still remain?
If you actually read the rules, the only logical explanation for inflating HP is plot immunity, divine favor and/or high level people have stronger bones, tougher skins etc. The whole 'training lets me slip the worst of the blow' thing just doesn't survive any scrutiny. If this philosophy was central in the minds of the game designers, then they botched their craft: game system roll.
The question about swimming in armor, here you go
http://vimeo.com/13634653
That's not definitive. That means that, in one set of circumstances, it wasn't practical.
Higher level people are just tougher. Their bodies are capable of absorbing more positive energy from the environment, so they're harder to kill and they heal faster. That's why it takes more positive energy-- cure spells and Channel Energy-- to heal high-level characters; you're literally refilling a larger reservoir.
This also explains why they're capable of running faster than normal humans, jumping farther, and-- yes-- swimming in platemail.
A lot of people think that D&D is a very different kind of game than what it is. They simply don't understand the scale; since the game starts Warhammer, they expect it to stay Warhammer when it's only designed to stay that way for a short while before becoming more and more like Exalted.
Yes which is a point they make in the video, that if I guy was in better fitness or a skilled swimmer it likely would be possible
So in all practical ways, its just isn't going to happen.
- No helmet
- No weapons
- No shield
- Very incomplete suit of armour (no chain under, missing plates)
- In a millpond smooth body of water (ie no waves)
So the answer is... no.
Make a great anchor though!
Imo, the components part of spells is horrible unflavored. ASF should only affect spells with somatic components for instance.
Arcane Spell Failure Chance: Armor interferes with the gestures that a spellcaster must make to cast an arcane spell that has a somatic component. Arcane spellcasters face the possibility of arcane spell failure if they're wearing armor. Bards can wear light armor and use shields without incurring any arcane spell failure chance for their bard spells.
Rule as Written
So in all practical ways, its just isn't going to happen.
- No helmet
- No weapons
- No shield
- Very incomplete suit of armour (no chain under, missing plates)
- In a millpond smooth body of water (ie no waves)So the answer is... no.
Make a great anchor though!
The Romans did it. Granted, they had lamellar instead of full plate, but they still had helmet, weapon, and shield and were in running water. History says there is some precedent.
Sure, given that they were hanging around the Med and passtimes like swimming were more common, the Romans were generally very fit, and they had much lighter/buoyant equipment, it probably was (for very short distances) feasibile - though how many simply drowned? Just because they managed to do a few water crossings doesn't mean they all made it... what was the casualty rate?
In Pathfinder though you could pretty much do it all day in full plate...which is getting carried away just a bit too far.
Sure, given that they were hanging around the Med and passtimes like swimming were more common, the Romans were generally very fit, and they had much lighter/buoyant equipment, it probably was (for very short distances) feasibile - though how many simply drowned? Just because they managed to do a few water crossings doesn't mean they all made it... what was the casualty rate?
In Pathfinder though you could pretty much do it all day in full plate...which is getting carried away just a bit too far.
Well, you have to remember that Pathfinder PCs are exceptional people, not commoners.
I do, however, agree that it's almost certainly only feasible over very short distances. Perhaps add in a rule that after a few minutes you have to save against fatigue?
Phone your local Coast Guard base; I'll wait. Ask the NCOIC who answers if someone can swim while wearing 35-lbs of chain mail strapped to their body by leather buckles, with a 10-lb wooden shield fastened to one arm, a 5-lb iron helm sitting on their head, and around 7-8 lbs. of assorted weaponry hanging from their waist and chested.
After he finishes laughing, and tells you no, come on back here.
Certainly--in very shallow water, for an extremely brief time--it is possible, but look at how many swimmers die each year because of exhaustion. These are (for the most part) professional swimminers who are properly equipped for swimming, and yet, they push just a little too far and wind up drowning or having to be hauled out of the water by a rescue boat. Long-distance swimming (or long-duration swimming) is extremely exhausting.
Swimming in heavy (or even medium) armor is very simply put a way to rapidly commit suicide.
Master Arminas
Some soldiers on D-Day waded ashore carrying huge loads. Several hundred of them drowned because they left the ramp in water that was over their heads and couldn't get their packs, equipment, weapons, and gear off their bodies in time. Many more did swim to shore, with their equipment--and frequenty their boots left behind offshore. Luckily for them, there were plenty of spare weapons on the beach. I would not consider D-Day a sterling example of how someone can swim in armor or while weighed down. You need to re-read your history, Fozbek.
Master Arminas
Normandy is not a good example. putting most of your gear in a backpack is not the same as wearing armor. Distribution matters a great deal.
It's not safe or easy, but there are those who can do it. The Romans pulled it off in lamellar, which is just as heavy as chainmail. Did a lot drown? Probably. Do a lot of Pathfinder PCs drown? Yup. The way Pathfinder handles the issue may not be 100% realistic, but I am willing to buy that an incredibly strong character (remember, the PCs are not normal people) could do it, if only over a very short distance.
People keep saying this about HP, but the rules do a craptastic job of reflecting that philosophy. If increased HP were because of your improved ability to parry, squirm and evade the solid blow, then why don't your HP go down when you get blinded? Why don't blows delivered by [ANYBODY WHO IS NOT A ROGUE] hurt you more if they are invisible, you are unaware of the attack, or any of the infinite other scenarios where you can't use that argument and yet the inflated HP still remain?
If you actually read the rules, the only logical explanation for inflating HP is plot immunity, divine favor and/or high level people have stronger bones, tougher skins etc. The whole 'training lets me slip the worst of the blow' thing just doesn't survive any scrutiny. If this philosophy was central in the minds of the game designers, then they botched their craft: game system roll.
HP are a goofy concept. I don't believe that the rules intend for you to take 12 solid hits with a great axe.... but I also can't see 'parry/dodge/roll' making any sense either.
Healing spells heal 'DAMAGE', they're not increasing your luck bar... they heal DAMAGE.
Critical HITS mean that you were HIT with the great axe, not that you rolled with the blow...
BLEED damage, means that you are BLEEDING...
The entire game is designed around HP = Damage... Right down to the stat DAMAGE under the weapons.
However... Realistically that doesn't make any sense, so it's been reworked, revisted, reimagined... and really should just be accepted as necessary and just not think too hard on it. ;)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Jack LaLanne swam across a harbor while handcuffed, shackled, and towing a tugboat. To celebrate his 80th birthday.
You get a human-- a real-life human-- with a high Strength and ranks in Swim, and you can swim in metal armor for a while. Longer than most people would guess. Most humans are so fat, soft, and weak-willed that people don't even realize what a well-conditioned, highly-motivated human being can truly accomplish.
And D&D heroes? They're not in peak human condition. They left their humanity behind somewhere around fifth level and they never looked back. The -5 armor check penalty for trying to swim in chainmail? That's the difference between a part-time lifeguard and a Coast Guard rescue swimmer. -9 for half-plate and a heavy shield? (Steel, so it don't float.) That's the difference between your average sailor and Michael Phelps.
You know that show's a joke, right?
Their so-called scientific tests and the resulting conclusions certainly are a joke, but are you trying to tell me they DIDN'T bury a sling bullet into a skull? Looked pretty real to me.
You know that show's a joke, right?
I stopped watching when they started glorifying the IRA. Freedom fighters? Yea, right. Northern Ireland is part of Great Britain because it's people like it that way. That makes the IRA's actions an attempt to forcibly take territory that the Republic of Ireland has no rightful claim to. Not to mention the fact that their tactics make no sense. It's terrorism, pure and simple.
There so-called scientific tests and the resulting conclusions certainly are a joke, but are you trying to tell me they DIDN'T bury a sling bullet into a suit of armor? Looked pretty real to me.
There is a reason it took composite bows to finally make the sling obsolete.
There is a reason it took composite bows to finally make the sling obsolete.
Wasn't it the bow's longer range and ease of learning that made slings obsolete?
In terms of sheer damage, slings are just as deadly as bows, but it takes more training to get there.
|
There so-called scientific tests and the resulting conclusions certainly are a joke, but are you trying to tell me they DIDN'T bury a sling bullet into a suit of armor? Looked pretty real to me.
I'm just saying the show is a joke. Max Geiger is a geek fanboi who refuses to listen to anyone who might say a ninja wasn't all that, etc. Robert Daly lied about his credentials, experts have said they're not even listened to for the computer sims, and there is little to suggest they actually have a clue what they're talking about.
As to the sling/armor deal. I have no idea. I could whip us a convincing CGI if you'd like. It's already been suggested on several forums that Geiger tinkers with the programming to get the results he wants. So anything's possible with that crap fest.
...bow's...ease of learning...
HA! Hahahahahahahahaha! That's funny.
HA! Hahahahahahahahaha! That's funny.
Compared to learning how to aim a sling properly, it's a damn sight easier.
Compared to learning how to aim a sling properly, it's a damn sight easier.
Not appreciably.
Crossbows were the point-and-click WMD of their time.
Still, without getting into a debate about which was easier to aim, the fact that the bow did scads more damage and greater range would far outweigh concerns of aiming.
Besides, wasn't it the catapult that put the sling out of business? ;)
Besides, wasn't it the catapult that put the sling out of business? ;)
Nah it was the slingshot ;)
Scent auto detects within a range, but perception includes smells now. Really feel that scent ability ought to just give a bonus to perception.
Scent autodetects within a short range, yes, but it does not autolocate unless the subject is within an adjacent 5' square. A move action will give you a direction for free, but I'd say that it's still a hefty DC to try to pinpoint the exact hex at any greater range than 5'.
Even so, I concede that Stealth is pretty useless against wakeful targets with Scent at close range. However, sleeping targets would only get that +8 bonus to the Perception checks they'd need to make (at -10) to wake up and if the Stealther moves in from downwind (assuming there IS any wind) then it is within 15' and attack range before that +8 even comes into play.
-wizards not being combat viable (think gandalf. I suppose he was a gestalt fighter/wizard. I also suppose magus 'fixed' this)
Gandalf is not a very good example of a wizard not being good at melee combat. First Tolkien’s wizards are not mortals, they are human shaped creatures formed from magic. Gandalf was nearly 1000 years old at the beginning of LoTR, giving him several centuries of fighter training to be almost as good as a regular Rohan warrior. Gandalf after he died killing the balrog was resurrected and granted even more power by the gods themselves for the express purpose of defeating Saruman. Lastly, according to Tolkien’s own notes Gandalf the white was the equal to Sauron in power so he is hardly comparable to any non-deity.
|
It's my understanding that a wizard when wizard is preparing his spells, he's actually starting his casting. So think of it this way, lets say you know how to make a grenade (aka fireball), so you make 2 in the morning. You get into a fight and toss your two grenades. Sure you know how to make a grenade, but you can't simply say "I toss out a third grenade" because you know how to make one.
-wizards, pinnacles of magical knowledge, forget spells that they had memorized because they used them (seems sirry to me, also see:prepared casters)
I was always of the mindset that preparing spells means going to the cupboard where the wizard keeps his spell components, measuring out little spoonfuls of whatever spells he wants to prepare, and loading them up in his spell component pouch. So when you're out of castings of Silent Image but still have a Tiny Hut and a Flaming Sphere left, it's because the pouch on your belt is out of sawdust and moths' wings but you still has a tablespoon of grig's ear and some dry tinder left, or something.
My biggest issue is that the paladin's alignment restrictions also restrict who the paladin is allowed to be in a party with, while all the other classes with alignment restrictions can hobnob with whoever they want and never lose any sleep (or class abilities) over it.
raw
3 rogues vs 1 pole arm fighter.
15 foot wide corridor. Rogues are sighted at the end. Init is rolled.
3 rogues advance. They leave a threatened square. Pole arm fighter has combat reflexes. Whack whack whack three attacks of opportunity on the rogues.
The fighter is then sneak attacked because he hasn't had his regular turn in initiative.
A ranger getting bonuses against a favored enemy even if he has no idea that the creature is his favored enemy. I guess the bonus could be fluffed as divine inspiration though.
PS:I am not against the ability, but it is hard for some to explain if they take the time to think about it.
raw
3 rogues vs 1 pole arm fighter.
15 foot wide corridor. Rogues are sighted at the end. Init is rolled.
3 rogues advance. They leave a threatened square. Pole arm fighter has combat reflexes. Whack whack whack three attacks of opportunity on the rogues.
The fighter is then sneak attacked because he hasn't had his regular turn in initiative.
What's weirdest about that is that it's no accident. Combat reflexes specifically provides an exception to the rule about normally being unable to make AoO when you're flat-footed, but doesn't remove any of the other penalties. I guess they're a very specific kind of reflexes. Just the offensive reflexes.
------
Want to know another weird thing about how wizard magic works? Wizards don't know any spells. Seriously. Well, besides "Read Magic". They know that one. Other than that, they don't know spells. If you swap the spellbooks of two wizards, you almost completely swap their magical capabilities. (Outside of supporting features, like arcane school, feats, etc.)
------
Liam Warner - Regarding your 3a, there are feats that allow you to ignore ASF. Arcane Armor Training/Mastery are in the Core Rulebook. They burn swift actions, which is pretty unfortunate, however.
------
My humble contribution is Tree Stride. The spell makes sense, but the "different distances for different trees" table is one of the most baffling tables in the system. Who thought that was an important thing for the spell to have, and how was the table populated? The table barely even makes a difference.
Tree stride is an example of a legacy mechanic that has no particular reason to be that way except for tradition, but nobody bothered changing it.
|
HP has always been the same through the editions of DnD and now into PF.
Your experiences through your adventuring career have honed your senses and techniques to avoid blows from your enemies. This is why @ 1st level that longsword would kill you in a few blows, but @ 10th it is merely a scratch. It went from near eviseration to a cut on the forearm.
That's fine, until you begin taking damage from a source that is absolutely unavoidable and can't be marginalized as to "coming close". If you fall into a pit of acid, your higher level shouldn't really come into account.