|
That is not the grid itself, it is the movement rules being crazy for diagonals.
Other games have 1/1 and it works just fine, without all the terrible reach weapon holes and stuff like that
Must. Say. Nothing. Must. Stay. Quiet.
In other news:
Misconception: a lightning bolt can be 10 feet wide by shooting along the grid line.
No, it can't.
In this game, we obey the laws of the Pythagorean Theorem.
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16
|
That is not the grid itself, it is the movement rules being crazy for diagonals.
Other games have 1/1 and it works just fine, without all the terrible reach weapon holes and stuff like that
True, but then you get wizards casting firesquare instead of fireball, and so forth. ;)
You could always switch to hexes, but then you can't walk a straight line in some directions.
Key point: no system is perfect, just do your best to roll with it. :)
On the contrary, there is a perfect system. Just make diagonals cost √50 feet of movement, and all the math works out great!
... assuming you're comfortable adding lots of square roots in your head ;-)
|
|
Being able to make an AoO there but not a normal attack is just weird.The easier/shorthand version:
1. You don't threaten the corners.
2. The only abuse of #1 is trying to move through the gap; doing so provokes an AoO.Done. That's not so bad, is it?
There's one more abuse of #1, though--maps with hallways on the diagonal (uncommon but not unheard of) can be used to prevent reach weapon wielders from ever making an attack on their own turn (they can still take an AoO as per #2, but they can never actually make a full attack). I'm usually pretty darn strict on RAW in PFS, but in order to preserve any semblance of common sense or fairness to characters with reach weapons in these sorts of situations, I think we need to make our own ruling when they come up (I'd be even happier if they just changed it back to allow the corners and eliminate these other abuses that aren't currently covered, since I understand that the reason for making ruling #1 was that it was believed that #2 was well and truly the only abuse of #1).
|
|
Being able to make an AoO there but not a normal attack is just weird.The easier/shorthand version:
1. You don't threaten the corners.
2. The only abuse of #1 is trying to move through the gap; doing so provokes an AoO.Done. That's not so bad, is it?
Same true for normal melee weapons?
Then ALL people i know in person don´t know that here.And it would just make the logic of no-face, stealth rules, cleave,etc ridiculous.
No mathematical tautologies can save that. If i move in a straight line, it really doesn´t matter which direction i move, at 0°, -45° or +45°.
Probably those squares should be viewed as circles, would make it easier.
Probably those squares should be viewed as circles, would make it easier.
Indeed, Ken, that's why have some of us put aside aside the grid in favor of a tape measure. (Disclaimer: PFS should probably use a grid, just for speed of play.)
|
I am going to throw out one here that I see run different by different GMs.
Lighting, specifically the interaction of darkness, dim light, and normal.
Ex:
Cleric casts darkness. The cleric has darkvision but his ally doesn't. Thus the cleric can see through the darkness and beyond (rest of the room is normal light). The ally on the other hand can't see in the darkness. However, I have seen GMs say that the ally can see the lit area outside of the darkness. That is a darkness effect just prevents you from seeing whats in those squares and does not block line of sight. I on the other hand, rule that the ally can see nothing until he makes it out of the darkness effect and is next to a lighting type that they can see in.(the following is as I understand this):
First - Darkness and Deeper Darkness is different in this case.
For Darkness, consider it the same as being in a darkened room, looking out into a lit room. You can see out of the darkness just fine, but if you drop your keys - you need a light to see something at your feet. An area in Darkness is ... well, dark. Not dim light, dark. But an area of Darkness does not block vision. So if you look from your living room out your door at night, you can see the guy under the streetlight (he's in an area of light) but you can't see the guys in the yard, who are in an area of dark. But they can see both you (in your lit doorway) and the guy under the streetlight, but not each other.Now, for Deeper Darkness: (I am not as sure of this part).
Deeper Darkness blocks light from passing thru. so if you are in a Deeper Darkness - you can't see out, and other persons can't see thru it.Does that help? (remember that is just my understanding of the rules)
A good explanation, and the way I understand it operates as well, due to the fact that darkvision does not work within deeper darkness.
|
|
Thats the issue with threads like this. They are asking for controversial / varying aspects of the game. If we are staying on topic we are going to be spinning off side threads into the rules forum on a semi-constant basis. Thanks for the swarm thread by the way.Well, the big one with lighting is I dont think its a "common misconception" but more of "rules a lot of GMs have problems with"
Lighting specifically has SO many interpretations, and it is such a convoluted system. For example (breaking my rule here!) I don't agree with nosig's interpretation above. All darkness does is lower the light level by one step. In nosig's example, if there was light out, and someone cast darkness it would bring it down to low-light, which WOULD mean you can kinda see the light outside the area of effect. But if you were in low-light and you are now in pure darkness, you cannot see outside.
Real world examples are bad for the lighting discussions, because there is no real-world way to produce a 20ft. globe of darkness. Magic and all that.
And yes, anyone interested in the swam discussion you can feel free to mosey over to this thread in the rules forum. Or just head over there and FAQ it.
I think the problem lies with the fact that the spell descriptions only talk about seeing into the spell area, and not what someone inside sees outside of it.
|
|
That is not the grid itself, it is the movement rules being crazy for diagonals.
Other games have 1/1 and it works just fine, without all the terrible reach weapon holes and stuff like that
True, but then you get wizards casting firesquare instead of fireball, and so forth. ;)
You could always switch to hexes, but then you can't walk a straight line in some directions.
Key point: no system is perfect, just do your best to roll with it. :)
At one time I was trying to do a conversion to hexes for pathfinder/3.5, but two things really make it hard...most rooms are square, and you get stupid half hexes where either you can't go or you're squeezing, and flanking gets really complicated to determine. I thought maybe it ought to switch to something like outnumbering, similar to what WFRP2E did.
|
|
Misconception: a lightning bolt can be 10 feet wide by shooting along the grid line.
No, it can't.
That's a carry-over issue from 3.5, in which line spells affected every square they touched, no just passed through. This was changed in PF, and is one of the things 3.5 players can miss.
In 3.5 yes, in PF, no.
Yeah, I know where it comes from. Doesn't help much when it's a regional virus ruling tho. :)
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
10' reach should just be hand-waved to two squares in all directions. In my opinion the decision to change from 3.5 simply wasn't fully thought through.
And no, I wouldn't change spell shapes/areas. Yes, that's inconsistent -- and no, I don't care. It's an abstraction, and play-ability is paramount.
|
|
@Dysfunction I don't you can make a thread about common misconceptions without having some of those misconceptions be debated between those who have misconceived them and those who have not.
It also does not help that one of your misconceptions, was in itself a misconception.
I have found this thread to be very helpful and pointed out one or two things that I did not already know about reach weapons.
|
xxx xxxc
xxc xxxx
xpx xpxx
xxx xxxxDo i get his right, in both cases p cannot attack c?
With a Reach weapon, other than a whip, according to SKR, correct.
SKR, of course, is looking at the distance there a bit simplistically. That diagonal square is not at 15', it is a range of distance from approximately 7.5' at the near corner, to 15' at the far corner, and, therefore, should actually be threatened by a 10' reach weapon.
Of course, even my statement is a simplification. The actual distance from center square to center square, for diagonals, should be calculated out using the square root of the total of the ordinal distances squared and added together.
1 diagonal square = square root of 50 (5**2 [25] + 5**2 [25]), which is actually a fraction over 7'
2 diagonal squares = square root of 200 (10**2 [100] + 10**2 [100]), which is a fraction over 14' feet.
Given that a reach weapon actually threatens the area from 5'1" to 9"11" away from their square, technically, a 10' reach weapon user could attack someone in either diagonal square.
Obviously, for fairness, simplicity, and fun, I believe a 10' reach user should just threaten and be able to attack all 16 squares non-adjacent to them.
|
|
Flyby Attack is spring attack for flyers.
I got a surprised look from Daigle and Lisa Stevens, CEO during Green Blood on Black Rock last PaizoCon. One of the party went down last night when the GM & VL insisted there is no AoO from the target.
*OK eidolon isn't as scary as a PFS member dropping, but as the only one who could damage it, and actual characters being negative hp, it almost was that scary. :)
|
|
No flyby attack still provokes.
No where does it say the movement does not.
Prerequisite: Fly speed.
Benefit: When flying, the creature can take a move action and another standard action at any point during the move. The creature cannot take a second move action during a round when it makes a flyby attack.
|
|
yea flyby attack is more for the dragon strafing you, or something similar.
big flying thing starts away from you overhead, flies over your group out of reach and breathes/casts/whatever then continues flying out of range.
nothing states the movement doesn't provoke if they happen to fly through threatened squares.
