Its become aparent that if there are going to be even more of these threads, someone needs to make the AM DRINKING GAME
There are no rules for casting while wearing a hat.
Just because you guys keep saying that does not mean it has anything to do with the topic at hand.
|
]Oh? Where does it say that? I thought one allowed you to make a full attack on a charge and one restricted you to a single attack if you mount moves more than five feet. The latter rule has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with charging, and therefore has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with pounce. No. Interaction. Your specific over general principle does not apply.
The latter rule doesn't have to have anything to do with charge, they are about about attacks, as I have bolded. There is your interaction.
Its become aparent that if there are going to be even more of these threads, someone needs to make the AM DRINKING GAME
AM LIKE DRINKING,WHY AM DRINKING? DOES NOT MATTER AM DRINKING.
Casting while wearing a hat is whatever and you should feel meh.
C'mon TOZ you're falling for it. Neither Ravingdork nor Seeker can be budged an inch after they decided on a position, no matter how much you argue with them. Thei'll keep ganging up with more nonsensical arguments as time goes on, inciting people to retaliate with more trollish stuff and inflamating less coolheaded posters that peruse the thread. This path leads only to insanity and flames and the mods having to delete posts.
Oddly me and Ravingdork rarely agree on well anything. I do agree with him here, pounce is not a mounted ability and does not over ride the mounted limits.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Casting while wearing a hat is whatever and you should feel meh.
C'mon TOZ you're falling for it. Neither Ravingdork nor Seeker can be budged an inch after they decided on a position, no matter how much you argue with them. Thei'll keep ganging up with more nonsensical arguments as time goes on, inciting people to retaliate with more trollish stuff and inflamating less coolheaded posters that peruse the thread. This path leads only to insanity and flames and the mods having to delete posts.
First, nonsensical?
Second, since when does disagreeing with someone make them a troll? A troll is a poster who is disruptive to the community. We are neither.
We aren't inciting/inflaming anyone to do anything. We are not trolls. You on the other hand...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Casting while wearing a hat is whatever and you should feel meh.
C'mon TOZ you're falling for it. Neither Ravingdork nor Seeker can be budged an inch after they decided on a position, no matter how much you argue with them. Thei'll keep ganging up with more nonsensical arguments as time goes on, inciting people to retaliate with more trollish stuff and inflamating less coolheaded posters that peruse the thread. This path leads only to insanity and flames and the mods having to delete posts.
First, nonsensical?
Second, since when does disagreeing with someone make them a troll? A troll is a poster who is disruptive to the community. We are neither.
We aren't inciting/inflaming anyone to do anything. We are not trolls. You on the other hand...
First, a mounted charge is not a charge. See it doesn't make any sense, thus nonsense. I might be using the wrong word, so I will check a dictionary tomorrow.
Second, I said that people would retaliate with trollish responses and things would devolve. Self fulfilling prophecy apparently.
And then you start with the name calling. My point, it has been proved.
To TOZ: If you're sure. Trinam might come back to back you up and I'll be back when everything has gone to flames, it's when the fun really starts.
NEED PLACE TO VOTE AM RAGELANCEPOUNCE OKEYDOKEY OR NO
ME AM VOTE OKEYDOKEY
NO ABSTAIN FROM DEMOCRATIC RESPONSA- RESPONDE- ...
FROM CONTRIBUTION TO TYRANNY OF MAJORITY
To TOZ: If you're sure. Trinam might come back to back you up
Yeah, TOZ, you really ought to revert to your other alias, because once people are confused about who they're arguing with it will only get more fun.
Everyone needs to read the mounted combat rules again. You technically do not charge while mounted since the mount charges you may never deal double damage with a lance. If your mount moves more than 5 feet you are only allowed to make one more melee attack ever since it never states this penalty ends. You never suffer any penalties to melee attacks while mounted so being dazzled, sickened, and frightened isn't to bad if you are mounted. You benefit from the bonus of your mounts charge if you attack at the end so If your mount has powerful charge you may benefit from it though you may not get the +2 to hit as it states you gain "the benefit of the charge" if your mount has pounce you may benefit from it but are restricted to only a single attack this is still useful if you are a magus and wish to employ spell combat however.
I think that sums up all the confusion over mounted combat right?
TOZ is secretly a pony!
What's that chap, I was nodding off there, did I RAGEPOUNCELANCE? Bother. Terribly sorry.
TOZ is secretly a pony!
NEIGH.
TOZ is secretly a pony!
A horrifically ugly pony.NINJA'D!
POUNCE AM FANCY MOVE
MORE PACIFIC
MOUNTY COMBAT AM COMBAT MODE, NOT FANCY MOVE
MOUNTY COMBAT MORE GENERIC THAN FANCY MOVE
POUNCE STUFF OVER-EAT MOUNTY COMBAT STUFF
OH LOOK
ME USE AM COMMA
AM SMART
AM STILL DRINKING. WHY YOU NO DRINK? DO YOU NOT LIKE DRINKING GODS? IT IS NOT GOOD TO NOT LIKE GODS.WHY YOU DON'T LIKE GODS? AM THINKS YOU BE HAPPY IF YOU DRINK.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
(I don't know why I'm bothering to chime in on this one, but thought I'd make a comment anyway):
Rage-lance-pounce is something I would not allow in a game I ran. To me, the "why not" is a 'rules as intended' (that is what you mean with that RAI acronym, right?) issue:
Pounce, as an ability, was originally intended for critters (like big cats) that are known for running up and slicing you to bits with both sets of claws... the barbarian "beast totem" set of abilities that eventually gives the barbarian character the 'pounce' ability also gives the barbarian claws at lower levels-- and explicitly makes the claws do more damage at the same level that you also get your 'pounce' ability. Now, I realize the RAW (Rules As Written) do not state that 'pounce' only works with natural weapons, but to me, that's implied by everything else about pounce as a critter ability granted by a 'beast totem' set of powers that gives you the claws to pounce with in the first place.
Likewise, I think I wouldn't allow you to use the 'pounce' ability while mounted-- your mount makes the charge, not you (as others have said)-- again, while this isn't specifically RAW, to me it is RAI: using 'pounce' is about you imitating one of the big cats, rushing up, leaping on an opponent, and clawing him to ribbons... unless you're going to leap from your mount to your target at the end of the charge and use your claws on your intended victim (at which point, I would allow the pounce if you make your acrobatics check, because IMO that does fit the flavor of the ability, and it's cool...), YOU are not pouncing.
However, if I was aware that any of my players were even thinking about wrapping a build around just such a concept or use of the mechanics, I would be clear in advance about how 'pounce' works in my game (and I'd allow someone who had made such a build, not realizing it wasn't going to work that way, to rebuild the character if the player wished to do so).
You want to call that 'house-ruling' it? Fine, I guess that's what my decision on it is. YMMV.
I can support Finn's assessment on how to handle it in a game (despite Fozbek's accurate correction).
However, I also believe that RageLancePounce is legal by the RAW.
What this simply tells me is that this requires errata. Until then, it's legal.
In a serious game, I would overrule it as Finn does, but in a silly game, I would allow it.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm with Finn K on this one ...
... Its common sense really. Otherwise you're saying that, and picture it in your head, someone on a horse charges another person. They have a lance down and readied. The horse charges towards the target and upon reaching it .... the world goes into some nonsense world where the person on the horse gets to stab with the lance multiple times as he rides by?
Basically that's what I'm seeing with the whole pro-pounce argument. Are you people seriously trying to argue that's kosher? Hang the literal interpretation of the rules (which I think that interpretation is wrong anyway) and arguments of RAW ... its just silly and you're being a bunch of ninnies about it.
Gods Above knows that's the truth. Silly things folks have tired with the rules as well.
Oh yes, sooooooooooooo many of them in fact. :)
However, I also believe that RageLancePounce is legal by the RAW.
What this simply tells me is that this requires errata. Until then, it's legal.
Unlike you, I believe it is illegal by the RAW, as are those silly feats that do nothing. Like you, I too believe that errata is required (if only to see that those feats work again).
I think Ravingdork has come up with some of them.Oh yes, sooooooooooooo many of them in fact. :)
I'm curious to know which ones you are referring to/thinking of.
The old lady lich thread always springs to mind :)
The duel lance thread was 2 or maybe 3 years back. Ended up with some nice historical debate on it.
maybe we should not be asking WHAT is ragelancepounce, but WHY is ragelancepounce. what event sped AM BARBARIAN on his path of caster-splatting and rules-munchikining?
once we uncover this event, we may gain some insight into the legend of RAGELANCEPOUNCE that has thus far eluded us.
failing that, it'll give everyone new stuff to argue over for the next hundred or so posts;)
Neither Ravingdork nor Seeker can be budged an inch after they decided on a position, no matter how much you argue with them.
THERE! ARE! FOUR! LIGHTS!
:P (Kudos to anyone who gets the reference and the meaning behind it.)
Mostly rules munchkin casters I would say
Don't think this is the first one, but here is a thread from 09
Neither Ravingdork nor Seeker can be budged an inch after they decided on a position, no matter how much you argue with them.THERE! ARE! FOUR! LIGHTS!
:P (kudos to anyone who gets the reference)
There are three lights.
THERE! ARE! FOUR! LIGHTS!
Don't let them break you, Captain Leondegrance.
THERE! ARE! FOUR! LIGHTS!Don't let them break you, Captain Leondegrance.
;P
Neither Ravingdork nor Seeker can be budged an inch after they decided on a position, no matter how much you argue with them.THERE! ARE! FOUR! LIGHTS!
What self-respecting turbonerd wouldn't get that reference?
What self-respecting turbonerd wouldn't get that reference?Neither Ravingdork nor Seeker can be budged an inch after they decided on a position, no matter how much you argue with them.THERE! ARE! FOUR! LIGHTS!
Well, me. An hour ago.
I just watched the episode for the first time.
AMAZING. Simply. Amazing.
AMAZING. Simply. Amazing.
YOU AM MET MY COUSIN?
What self-respecting turbonerd wouldn't get that reference?Neither Ravingdork nor Seeker can be budged an inch after they decided on a position, no matter how much you argue with them.THERE! ARE! FOUR! LIGHTS!
Well, me. An hour ago.
I just watched the episode for the first time.
AMAZING. Simply. Amazing.
3 more points on your nerd card and you get a free interweb
holy crap.
I read the first post because I wanted to know what RAGELANCEPOUNCE was.
I read the first page because i was entertained by the madness of the trolling.
but for this thing to be at 200 posts now is truly insane troll posse
note... I dint read past first page
(201)
edit: ok, read the last page. and i have one all important question...
WTF does is this 'AM' all about?