Wrist Sheaths and Not-Daggers


Rules Questions

101 to 150 of 199 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Dark Archive

Azmyth wrote:
Does it belong in Pathfinder Society? No.

If the coordinators of PFS didn't want it in their campaign, it wouldn't be allowed in the campaign, like awaken, and the gunpowder inquisitions.

Saying that wanting to use an item from a Paizo book in a Paizo-run campaign is "fringe play" is not something I agree with.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Using such an item in a way contrary to its explicit intention (i.e., stuffing a scroll into a sheath meant for a dagger) is pretty damn fringey.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Card Game, Companion, Lost Omens, Maps, Pawns, Rulebook Subscriber

Chill, dudes.

Let's face it - this isn't going to come up at every table, so it's just not that big a deal. There are more serious balance issues to consider than this.

I doubt if a ruling either way is going to affect my PFS experience too much. As it's apparent that we're not going to reach consensus on this, let's just leave things as they are, and find something else to discuss.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Scroll wrapped arrows for the win.

Grand Lodge

Quote:
Azmyth wrote:
You can even use other game mechanics as examples to attempt to reenforce your position.
Mergy wrote:
If the coordinators of PFS didn't want it in their campaign, it wouldn't be allowed in the campaign, like awaken, and the gunpowder inquisitions.
Alitan wrote:
Using such an item in a way contrary to its explicit intention (i.e., stuffing a scroll into a sheath meant for a dagger) is pretty damn fringey.

Mmm-hmm.

JohnF wrote:
I doubt if a ruling either way is going to affect my PFS experience too much. As it's apparent that we're not going to reach consensus on this, let's just leave things as they are, and find something else to discuss.

I guarantee it won't effect PFS. ;)

Can't wait to see you @ Kubla M8! First pints on me.


Azmyth wrote:

This entire conversation/argument falls into what I commonly refer to as fringe play.

Fringe play is for players who are unhappy to exist within the Core (and Spirit) of the Game.

I'm not sure what other than personal opinion qualifies using a scroll with this as compared to popping five 30-36"-long longbow arrows into your hand as outside the spirit of the game. Watching monks carry buff sticks that they can't personally use, everyone and his cousin owning the mass-produced wand of cure light wounds (or more egregiously one filled with the essence of devil's blood), and all the PCs breaking character to fulfill some arbitrary and awkwardly-injected faction mission just to gain a special currency all seems pretty "fringey" to me, yet each is a hallmark of PFS play.

Quote:


Is it creative? Yes.
Is it manipulative? Yes.
Does it belong in Pathfinder Society? No.

"Manipulative" is a pretty subjective term, because most players try to manipulate their character's mechanics to get the best action economy. It doesn't make them manipulative people. Arguing that an item falls into a non-explicitly-defined category of items (and seriously, the wrist sheath has a relatively open description) doesn't make someone a manipulative person.

It'd be great if the wrist sheath said it was only usable with an explicit, set list of items. It'd be even better if the description had a particular wrist sheath made for a particular item. It's be the icing on the cake if it removed the silliness about the bolts/arrows, because the items that the wrist sheath does offer as examples have a pretty wide range of size/shape and encourage creative thinking like the scroll trick.

Quote:


Bottom line:
This IS an attempt to manipulate the basic action economy of the game and provide an (unbalancing) advantage for scroll users.

I haven't seen an example of where carrying two scrolls in wrist sheaths is really unbalancing for action economy. I even asked earlier in this thread why people thought this action economy was unbalancing, but nobody provided an example.

Unbalancing and problematic in PFS? Cool. I hope any GMs running a table that way also force archers to take some sort of action to put the fistful of arrows they clogged up their free hand into some sort of quiver or container before firing, because allowing an archer to take a full attack of five arrows all held in his second hand at the same time seems a bit manipulative and fringey to me.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
JohnF wrote:


Chill, dudes.

Let's face it - this isn't going to come up at every table, so it's just not that big a deal. There are more serious balance issues to consider than this.

I doubt if a ruling either way is going to affect my PFS experience too much. As it's apparent that we're not going to reach consensus on this, let's just leave things as they are, and find something else to discuss.

Don't worry, I'm chill, about the discussion at least.

What I'm not happy about is how a good number of people posting on this thread seem to think that the only reason a person would want to do a thing like this is because they're a cheating, manipulative munchkin player who wants to powergame through encounters and WIN THE GAME.

I assure all of you posting with that frame of mind: that is not the case.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Azmyth wrote:

Bottom line:

This IS an attempt to manipulate the basic action economy of the game and provide an (unbalancing) advantage for scroll users.

So let me get this straight:

A player wants to put a ________ in a spring-loaded wrist sheath so they can whip it out as a swift action and then use a standard action to activate it and get a spell effect while still having a move action left.

Fill in the blank with "wand" and it's explicitly legal, but fill it with "scroll" and it's manipulative.

Care to explain your reasoning there?

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mergy wrote:

What I'm not happy about is how a good number of people posting on this thread seem to think that the only reason a person would want to do a thing like this is because they're a cheating, manipulative munchkin player who wants to powergame through encounters and WIN THE GAME.

I assure all of you posting with that frame of mind: that is not the case.

We need a strongly agree button.

It's like when my niece got the idea of using her character's whip to wrap it around the paralyzed party member and drag him away from the ghoul. Is there somewhere in the mechanics to use a 15' long whip to grapple a paralyzed character and pull him along the ground? No. Did I make up rules on the fly to let her try it? Yes. It fits the 'rule of cool' Did it work as planned? Not entirely (drug him only 5'). Was everyone happy? Yes.

Or when she got the idea to use disguise to look like an ooze. I didn't say "no" I just told her how difficult it would be, and she decided to do something else. (hint, when she gets comfortable enough to play at tables w/o her Uncle Matt, she's going to give some GMs headaches for out of the box thinking)

Or when my (now ex-)wife's character was Dominated and they needed to get past her, another player had her character kiss the half orc barbarian, trying to shock her out of it. I figured attacking the friend (again) who just kissed her would be enough to allow another save. Was that 'manipulative' of the player to go for a kiss instead of a sword to the gut?

This conversation started, IIRC, about how to use the breath of life scroll to save an ally that fell, rather than relying on a character having the spell memorized. How is that a bad thing? It means a) a player came up with a creative solution to a problem and b) in PFS, it can prevent the heartache of another character dying. (not everyone takes the "My characters are Doritos" philosophy.)

What we end up with is a clever solution to a problem is being called 'wrongbadfun' and 'manipulative'

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Matthew Morris wrote:
What we end up with is a clever solution to a problem is being called 'wrongbadfun' and 'manipulative'

Near as I can tell from the arguments posted so far, it's because scrolls are VASTLY superior to wands and need extra limitations - beyond provoking, requiring certain stats and levels, getting used up faster (no charges), etc.

Therefore it's "manipulative" to have quick access to an item that's far more difficult to use than one that's explicitly allowed.


I'm STILL on the 'you can't do that to a scroll without a very real risk of damage' part of this argument.

And by default, the 'assuming you can do that to a scroll reeks of cheese' side of the argument.

I'm certain that a device SIMILAR TO a spring-sheath for a dagger COULD BE designed and crafted... but PFSOP disallows crafting. Which sucks, has always sucked, will always suck, imo.

Wands don't give me trouble: they're (a) rigid and (b) sturdy enough that the occasional nick/scratch isn't an issue. Scrolls? See my earlier posts.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Alitan wrote:

I'm STILL on the 'you can't do that to a scroll without a very real risk of damage' part of this argument.

And by default, the 'assuming you can do that to a scroll reeks of cheese' side of the argument.

Okay, so if you're mindful of the fragility of stored items, then when the rogue tumbles through a threatened area via Acrobatics, do you check to see if he accidentally crushes a potion that was in his pocket?

If someone gets pushed backwards off a ledge and lands flat on their back for 3d6 falling damage, do you apply any of that damage to items in their backpack?

When someone takes damage from stepping on a caltrop, do you apply that damage to their boots?

Grand Lodge

I would rule that unrolling a scroll would be part of the action of using the scroll, not retrieving the scroll. I base this assumption on the fact that the accelerated drinker trait implies that uncorking a potion is part of the action of drinking the potion, as "opening [the potion] with your teeth" expedites the task from a standard to a move action. It's not a perfect parallel, but it seems to indicate that readying an item is a part of the standard action instead of the move action.

That being said, I think using scrolls in spring-loaded wrist sheathes isn't in the spirit of the rules and is very very silly. I'd begrudgingly allow it in a PFS game to avoid drama, but it'd never fly in a home game.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Radiostorm wrote:
That being said, I think using scrolls in spring-loaded wrist sheathes isn't in the spirit of the rules and is very very silly.

Can you explain why? What's your idea of the spirit of the rules, where did you get said idea, and why does it not include scrolls?


Not unless said rogue fails the DC badly.

Hell yes, the backpack is now a mess of lamp oil and ruined rations. Or worse, toasted rations and burning alchemists' fire.

Given the general accessibility of Mending, this shouldn't be a problem for LONG, but that boot won't be watertight until it's fixed.

Just because it's a fantasy game doesn't mean that general physics are suspended WITHOUT MAGICAL INTERVENTION.

Stuffing a scroll into a spring-sheath built for a dagger is begging for damage. Whether as part of the insertion, carrying, or retrieval. The spring-sheath (as written) is not designed for use with scrolls. Again, it could be engineered to work with one, if PFSOP wasn't anti-crafting. Not my problem since I don't OP any more. But until OP includes specially designed scroll wrist sheaths, it's a problem for those who do.

YMMV. Table variation being what it is. I'm sure there are plenty of GMs who won't give a rat's ass about the feasibility of the whole scroll/spring-sheath issue. There are likely to be many who look at the idea and snort 'no.'

The problem here wouldn't be one if there were rational rules about crafting.

EDIT: first three sentences reference Jiggy's questions from four posts up. Was ninja'd while typing this up...

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Well, hey, as long as you're consistent. If I was at a table with a GM who wasn't doing those things I asked about but wanted to apply damage to a sheathed scroll, I'd protest. But it sounds like you've got a real stance that you're taking instead of pretending to have a stance when it's convenient for nerfing something you don't like (which happens a lot on these boards). Game on, buddy! :)


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

Here's another way to look at it, for those of you who seem to have problems with realism. The Joker's gun, from Batman. The one that goes "BANG!" The scroll is wrapped around a rod that extends out of the sheath when activated, but is still attached the the mechanism. If you really prefer, we'll say that the rod on which the scroll is wrapped is able to freely turn about its axis. Once the spring goes off, you can use your other hand to unroll and cast the scroll quite easily. At least as easily as a normal scroll.

Edit: Yes, it's a change from what the item actually says. However, I feel it's more in line what how a spring loaded wrist sheath would actually function.


It's not even that I don't LIKE the idea... it just doesn't WORK the way people seem to want it to. Imo.


Matthew Morris wrote:
Is there somewhere in the mechanics to use a 15' long whip to grapple a paralyzed character and pull him along the ground?

Kind of.

Serpent Lash (Combat): "... In addition, you can use your whip to perform reposition maneuvers, though you take a –4 penalty on your CMB and you may only move the target toward you from its original position."

(Not as good as the original version, though.)


Alitan wrote:


Stuffing a scroll into a spring-sheath built for a dagger is begging for damage. Whether as part of the insertion, carrying, or retrieval. The spring-sheath (as written) is not designed for use with scrolls. Again, it could be engineered to work with one, if PFSOP wasn't anti-crafting. Not my problem since I don't OP any more. But until OP includes specially designed scroll wrist sheaths, it's a problem for those who do.

Where does it say the sheath is built for a dagger? According to the item's description it's built to accomodate a forearm-length object, or up to five arrows/bolts (!). If it were built for a dagger, the other items listed would have as much trouble as a scroll working with it. The logical assumption to me is it's explicitly designed as a multipurpose sheath considering the variety of objects listed as examples to use with it.

Using a scroll in the sheath is not something I would expect to see causing massive conflict due to table variation in PFS considering the way the description is worded, but maybe I'm just lucky to be in an area where there's pretty minimal table conflict.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Matthew Morris wrote:


What we end up with is a clever solution to a problem is being called 'wrongbadfun' and...

That would be appropriate if what we were talking about was actually a clever solution. But what it really is someone trying to ignore physical characteristics, engineering, and spatial dimensions in order to fit a scroll in a space designed for a short FLAT blade and expect it to pop out as smoothly as the knife it was designed for.

That's not being clever, it's manipulating text to defy sense.


WRoy wrote:
Alitan wrote:


Stuffing a scroll into a spring-sheath built for a dagger is begging for damage. Whether as part of the insertion, carrying, or retrieval. The spring-sheath (as written) is not designed for use with scrolls. Again, it could be engineered to work with one, if PFSOP wasn't anti-crafting. Not my problem since I don't OP any more. But until OP includes specially designed scroll wrist sheaths, it's a problem for those who do.

Where does it say the sheath is built for a dagger? According to the item's description it's built to accomodate a forearm-length object, or up to five arrows/bolts (!). If it were built for a dagger, the other items listed would have as much trouble as a scroll working with it. The logical assumption to me is it's explicitly designed as a multipurpose sheath considering the variety of objects listed as examples to use with it.

Using a scroll in the sheath is not something I would expect to see causing massive conflict due to table variation in PFS considering the way the description is worded, but maybe I'm just lucky to be in an area where there's pretty minimal table conflict.

ALL the listed items (and I have issues with several of them being on that list, but nevermind, not relevant) are rigid. Scrolls are not.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

WRoy wrote:
Alitan wrote:


Stuffing a scroll into a spring-sheath built for a dagger is begging for damage. Whether as part of the insertion, carrying, or retrieval. The spring-sheath (as written) is not designed for use with scrolls. Again, it could be engineered to work with one, if PFSOP wasn't anti-crafting. Not my problem since I don't OP any more. But until OP includes specially designed scroll wrist sheaths, it's a problem for those who do.
Where does it say the sheath is built for a dagger? According to the item's description it's built to accomodate a forearm-length object, or up to five arrows/bolts (!). If it were built for a dagger, the other items listed would have as much trouble as a scroll working with it. The logical assumption to me is it's explicitly designed as a multipurpose sheath considering the variety of objects listed as examples to use with it.

This makes me think of another point:

Arrows have fletchings. Since the sheath is obviously designed for arrow storage, it would be reasonable to assume (and in fact kind of dumb not to) that the arrows' fletchings, even with five of them jammed in there together, are not significantly damaged.

If the sheath is safe enough for fletchings that need to be in pretty good shape for the arrow to function properly, then I don't think it could do enough damage to a scroll (which only needs to be legible) to prevent its use.

I was somewhat on the fence before, but thinking about this, I see no reasonable option but to allow scrolls in wrist sheaths, without mechanically-significant damage to them.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Alitan wrote:
ALL the listed items (and I have issues with several of them being on that list, but nevermind, not relevant) are rigid. Scrolls are not.

Actually, I've balanced books on top of a rolled-up piece of paper before. My brothers and I have also used them as weapons (and I mean single sheets, not whole newspapers). So I can't imagine a rolled-up scroll not being rigid enough to be pushed out of a sheath.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Jiggy wrote:
Alitan wrote:
ALL the listed items (and I have issues with several of them being on that list, but nevermind, not relevant) are rigid. Scrolls are not.
Actually, I've balanced books on top of a rolled-up piece of paper before. My brothers and I have also used them as weapons (and I mean single sheets, not whole newspapers). So I can't imagine a rolled-up scroll not being rigid enough to be pushed out of a sheath.

Now take that rolled up piece of paper and mash it so that's as flat as a blade. Call me again after you've checked on how smoothly it comes out of a dagger sheath.

Grand Lodge

Jiggy wrote:
Radiostorm wrote:
That being said, I think using scrolls in spring-loaded wrist sheathes isn't in the spirit of the rules and is very very silly.
Can you explain why? What's your idea of the spirit of the rules, where did you get said idea, and why does it not include scrolls?

I'm going to preface this by saying that any "in the spirit of the rules" argument is purely opinion, and that I already stated that as written I would allow this in a PFS game.

It really boils down to two things in my mind:

1) It adds a substantially powerful capability to an existing item that isn't explicitly stated. I feel if Paizo went to the trouble of specifying wands could be used with spring-loaded wrist sheathes, they would have touched on scrolls as well.

2) I feel that the pragmatic problems of loading a rolled up piece of paper into a device designed for a rigid weapon or wand overshadows the catchall size requirement.

That being said, I generally prefer it if players avoid using muddy mechanics such as this one. Even if they are eventually proven right through an errata or developer post, it causes a lot of drama in the interim (as this thread has demonstrated).

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

LazarX wrote:
Jiggy wrote:
Alitan wrote:
ALL the listed items (and I have issues with several of them being on that list, but nevermind, not relevant) are rigid. Scrolls are not.
Actually, I've balanced books on top of a rolled-up piece of paper before. My brothers and I have also used them as weapons (and I mean single sheets, not whole newspapers). So I can't imagine a rolled-up scroll not being rigid enough to be pushed out of a sheath.
Now take that rolled up piece of paper and mash it so that's as flat as a blade. Call me again after you've checked on how smoothly it comes out of a dagger sheath.

Drop the snark until you've read the item. It's not for "flat things". It explicitly allows up to 5 arrows. We're not talking about a "dagger sheath" here.


For common sense reasons, I don't think paper alone would work, but that's easily remedied. Roll the scroll around a wand (or equivalent doweling), affixing the scroll to the wand on the left-side of the scroll. Or write your scrolls on strips of wood. No problem with stiffness. Or what are the "reinforcing rods" doing anyway? They seem to do this perfectly as-is.

It's odd at first blush, but I think it works. And it makes sense in the D&D type world.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

LazarX wrote:
Matthew Morris wrote:


What we end up with is a clever solution to a problem is being called 'wrongbadfun' and...

That would be appropriate if what we were talking about was actually a clever solution. But what it really is someone trying to ignore physical characteristics, engineering, and spatial dimensions in order to fit a scroll in a space designed for a short FLAT blade and expect it to pop out as smoothly as the knife it was designed for.

That's not being clever, it's manipulating text to defy sense.

Funny, I'm reading it can hold a dagger, a dart, a wand, or up to 5 arrows (no rules about their fletching being damaged) or bolts.

Per Wikipedia:

Always subjective wikipedia wrote:
Arrow sizes vary greatly across cultures, ranging from eighteen inches to five feet (45 cm to 150 cm). However, most modern arrows are 75 centimetres (30 in) to 96 centimetres (38 in); most war arrows from an English ship sunk in 1545 were 76 centimetres (30 in).

By comparison, a scroll is 'only' 8 1/2" by 11" flat, so even rolling it lengthwise, it is smaller than the smallest arrow listed. It also has stiffening rods on the ends, either of leather or wood. If you've ever seen an arrow in flight, it is flexible and ripples in flight too.

So not only does the wrist sheath not function as you describe, but it allows arrows (again minimum 30 inches, or 2.5 feet long to be stored there (with no risk of damage from the sheath) and be hidden. (+2 on sleight of hand checks)

So for the 'It wouldn't fit' argument, the same device can somehow hold and hide 5 shafts of wood equal in length to most people's full arm, if not longer.

As to the weakness of the scroll, what exactly is the hardness and hit points of a feather? Remember, the fletching of those five arrows is undamamged.

And a rolled up scroll gives everyone fits?

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Remember the OP is not just talking about a mere container. He wants to pop scrolls into his hand the way James West would pop his derringer.


So if one chipped in an extra 1 gold to write the scroll on a strip of leather instead of leather-reinforced paper would that satisfy the fragility concerns of most people? I mean, it's not the paper itself that's the important part of a scroll, it's what's written on it. Even if magic paper is vital, you could attach a 8.5 by 11 strip of leather to the back of the scroll to protect it.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

LazarX wrote:
Remember the OP is not just talking about a mere container. He wants to pop scrolls into his hand the way James West would pop his derringer.

And do so with a device which can hold 5 arrows and pop them out in the same way without damaging the fletchings.


A derringer clearly would not fit into the sheath of this item!

(Sorry, couldn't resist.)

Sovereign Court

Radiostorm wrote:
1) It adds a substantially powerful capability to an existing item that isn't explicitly stated. I feel if Paizo went to the trouble of specifying wands could be used with spring-loaded wrist sheathes, they would have touched on scrolls as well.

I find that confusing; what level play are you expecting in PFS? It was my understanding that most games take place in the sweet spot, where the PCs wouldn't have access to scrolls that are more than a single level higher than what could be cast from a wand.

I certainly could be wrong, but I suspect it isn't the slippery slope that some are implying here.

As for the physics/physical mechanics, I refer the curious to my earlier posts.


Mergy wrote:
oneplus999 wrote:
I don't get how these threads get so long. This is a clear example of something that is EXPLICITLY A DMS DECISION! It's awkward having to work out the details of everything with a new DM, but if you think it will matter, it's just something you should ask him about beforehand, as part of the quick look at your character sheet that he is supposed to do anyway. RAW answer is that there is no answer.
That just seems lazy to me. Let's know the correct answer so that things like organized play don't fall about, and let people who don't like the correct answer make house rules.

That's a noble but futile goal. Organized play does not mean uniform play. It's still explicitly up to the DM, and not up hordes of ppl on the messageboards, assuming no official FAQ.


PFS Rules wrote:
It is impossible for the campaign management staff to cover every possible situation or rules interpretation. As such, you may encounter rules combinations or questions during the course of a scenario that aren’t covered in this book or the official Pathfinder Society FAQ. In these cases, the Game Master has the freedom to adjudicate the rules as needed to ensure a fun and fair gaming experience is had by all.

Even in PFS, there's going to be table variation.


I can completely see a spring loaded scroll with the Scroll Master wizard Archtype. The width of a scroll is smaller than a typical arrow. As for the scroll opening and casting in the same round, why would a rogue with one be able to draw a dagger via the spring load and take their standard which may be a sneak attack? Or a melee with multiple attacks drawing it during the round and taking a full attack with the recently drawn weapon? (a 5 foot step is a move action and a full attack is allowed with a 5 foot step)

101 to 150 of 199 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Wrist Sheaths and Not-Daggers All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.