Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
I add my own opinion here
but sunder builts often just target holy symbols when they can take many different shapes and forms - some more obvious, some less. And the description in a scenario doesn't tell you how it looks like.
Yes, but to channel or to cast focus spells, you need to present your holy symbol, and the moment you do that, it is pretty much fair game, right?
As a steal bard, I *expect* to have to identify holy symbols, magic pouches, nifty amulets, magic cloaks, etc. Amd to make it even worse, I have to identify holy symbols *before* they are presented, cause I can't steal them once they are being used. I don't see why the sunder build would have anything to complain about.
Unlikely that I have a feather and bat guano mixed up. So what are you actually sundering when you target the meta-object spell component pouch. And can you even sunder bat guano or is the wizard allowed in a move action to scoop some up from the floor (AoO) and then cast?
If I were gming, and a player's spell pouch got destroyed and wanted to scoop something from the mess on the floor, I think I would make them make a spellcasting check as well as the AoO, and whats good for the PC is good for the NPC. So go ahead.
The next issue is after the sunder. Some spells don't need components/holy symbols.
Yes, but you need to be looking up these spells when you cast them so that you know their range and number of targets, saves, etc. right? And don't you have the same problem with silence? For that matter, are you checking for somantic gestures and making sure the character has a free hand?
(One of the things I want to put together when I get a bit of time is to find or put together a spell database and use it to build a quick reference chart for spell components, ranges, saves, and effects.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
While not explicitly against the rules, bringing a sunder PC to a table with a GM that doesn't know you're coming and is not prepped for it is kinda being a jerk, in my opinion. And a lot of GMs are going to feel the same way. If you build a sunder PC, you should be aware of this from the get go.
While not explicitly against the rules, bringing a (grapple PC, a Magus, Paragon Surge, or other class/feature I don't like or understand) to a table with a GM that doesn't know you're coming and is not prepped for it is kinda being a jerk, in my opinion. And a lot of GMs are going to feel the same way. If you build a (see above), you should be aware of this from the get go.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One of the things I want to put together when I get a bit of time is to find or put together a spell database and use it to build a quick reference chart for spell components, ranges, saves, and effects.
I made a spellcasting summary sheet for my casters, and whenever I learn/scribe a spell (or in the case of clerics, when I decide it's a spell I'm likely to prep) I fill in all vital info: name, save, DC, range, components, summary of effect, etc.
Alternatively, Google "Perram's Spellbook" for a free spell card generator. Very nice.
Isn't the problem with sundering that after a certain caster level it is nigh impossible to even get a Make Whole at the appropiate caster level to repair the item?
|
|
If you're going to do something unique, as a GM I would love if you had something like this with your character sheet.
|
|
In PFS, that's not an issue. You just pay the cost of whatever level caster it would take to do it in gold.You don't need to do that with NPC gear, only your own gear if it gets destroyed.
Well, you only need fix your own gear, unless you wanted to use that NPC's gear during the scenario...in which case you'd need to get it fixed via that same method.
You do not need to get the NPC's gear to have it be on the chronicle sheet or get the gold for the gear though, correct.
|
I hate any rules that players use, but don't understand and require me to correct them on how to play their character.
If you're going to make a sundering character, please take the time to learn the sunder, item hardness/hit points, and broken condition rules and be prepared to calculate those things on the fly. Also be prepared to mend or make whole NPC gear if you want to use it during the scenario.
If you're going to make a grappler, I expect you to have the grapple rules, conditions, and blog clarifications all handy and properly understood.
If it's part of the game, great, do it, have fun doing it, but please at least put some effort into understanding it! Unless you're a 1st level newbie, GMs don't have the time to help you run your character. ;-)
I don't normally do the "+1" thing, but there aren't enough "Favorite" buttons for this post.
If you're going to do X every single game, know how X works.
I'm going to +1 the +1.
Know your tricks, or don't make a character that uses them. GM's (even 5-stars) are not all-knowing (as much as Kyle likes to think he is ;b).
|
|
If you're going to do something unique, as a GM I would love if you had something like this with your character sheet.
That's awesome!
I did something similar with my crazy complicated alchemist (midnchemist) / cavalier (luring cavalier).
I put together a cheat sheet with all the mounted combat, ride skill, handle animal, ranged combat, splash weapon, and how ranged/mounted combat works together rules.
|
I think the player knowing the tricks is still only about 2/3 of it. I've sat down with a Tetori Monk at the table, and the player knew the grapple rules fine. But the GM was constantly stopping to double check that the Tetori could really do all the stuff he was doing. It's important for the GM to be at least vaguely familiar with how grapple works.
|
|
Grappling from 3.0 till now has always been a confusing set of rules. Fortunately with Pathfinder the rules have been simplified some, with the Combat Maneuver rules.
But Grapple still is confusing with all the bonuses and penalties and what you can and cannot do depending on whether you are grappled, pinned or tied up.
I wouldn't blame a newer (or even moderately experienced) GM for not knowing the grapple rules, especially if they haven't really run into someone who uses them extensively for more than just a simple "Grab" from a monster.
Isn't the problem with sundering that after a certain caster level it is nigh impossible to even get a Make Whole at the appropiate caster level to repair the item?In PFS, that's not an issue. You just pay the cost of whatever level caster it would take to do it in gold.
Ah, alright then.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The problem is, that the Tetori breaks almost all the standard grapple rules (being able to flurry with grapple attacks the prime example).
As beautiful and handsome Tetori, Bruno just note that righteous and pure Tetori no can flurry with grapple.
However, wicked and evil Maneuver Master monk can flurry with grapple.
|
|
Grappling from 3.0 till now has always been a confusing set of rules. Fortunately with Pathfinder the rules have been simplified some, with the Combat Maneuver rules.
But Grapple still is confusing with all the bonuses and penalties and what you can and cannot do depending on whether you are grappled, pinned or tied up.
I wouldn't blame a newer (or even moderately experienced) GM for not knowing the grapple rules, especially if they haven't really run into someone who uses them extensively for more than just a simple "Grab" from a monster.
I would tend to agree with that, but I would expect a 4+ star GM to at least have some experience with this mechanic.
|
|
The problem is, that the Tetori breaks almost all the standard grapple rules (being able to flurry with grapple attacks the prime example).As beautiful and handsome Tetori, Bruno just note that righteous and pure Tetori no can flurry with grapple.
However, wicked and evil Maneuver Master monk can flurry with grapple.
Ah, that's right. My bad.
Still, there are lots of archetypes that break all the rules of various maneuvers.
Some fighter archetypes eventually allow you to not have the grappled condition while you are grappling someone else.
|
|
I would tend to agree with that, but I would expect a 4+ star GM to at least have some experience with this mechanic.Grappling from 3.0 till now has always been a confusing set of rules. Fortunately with Pathfinder the rules have been simplified some, with the Combat Maneuver rules.
But Grapple still is confusing with all the bonuses and penalties and what you can and cannot do depending on whether you are grappled, pinned or tied up.
I wouldn't blame a newer (or even moderately experienced) GM for not knowing the grapple rules, especially if they haven't really run into someone who uses them extensively for more than just a simple "Grab" from a monster.
Based on a lot of your posting, you have some very high expectations for your GM's to have system mastery.
GM's are not encyclopedias. Perhaps you should sit behind the screen once or twice and see just how easy it really is.
|
|
" I also feel it's poor gaming ettiquette to bring a character based on summoning as many creatures as possible in combat"
Note that a druid with an animal companion only has to cast summon once to have three models on the battle board. Yet apparently the hate is directed at grapplers and sunderers. Okay.
I played both a cleric and a wizard from level 1 to level 15+ in 3.5, so familiarity with those spell lists are not an issue for me, but do I often find myself telling GMs what a given spell does. (The ones that ask, that is)
|
|
Not so. The FAQ indicates that you just pay for the repair.
Repairing an magic item with gold is equal to half the cost of buying the item per the "reparing magic items" section in the Magic Items chapter of the Core Rule Book.
Do you have a link for that? Because the last clarification I found for the subject was this, where MB is signing off on using Make Whole at whatever CL is required.
|
|
GM's are not encyclopedias.
It is the player's job to inform the GM how something works, if the GM is unfamiliar with it.
It is the player's responsibility to bring the source for that something, so the GM can read it for themselves and then make a determination how it will work for that session.
I wish you'd stop expecting GM's to be encyclopedias.
|
|
Do you have a link for that? Because the last clarification I found for the subject was this, where MB is signing off on using Make Whole at whatever CL is required.Not so. The FAQ indicates that you just pay for the repair.
Repairing an magic item with gold is equal to half the cost of buying the item per the "reparing magic items" section in the Magic Items chapter of the Core Rule Book.
I couldn't find it. I thought it was on the compilation thread, but it isn't, and it isn't part of the FAQ either.
But there are rules for repairing magic items in the book, without using a spell.
|
|
I would tend to agree with that, but I would expect a 4+ star GM to at least have some experience with this mechanic.Grappling from 3.0 till now has always been a confusing set of rules. Fortunately with Pathfinder the rules have been simplified some, with the Combat Maneuver rules.
But Grapple still is confusing with all the bonuses and penalties and what you can and cannot do depending on whether you are grappled, pinned or tied up.
I wouldn't blame a newer (or even moderately experienced) GM for not knowing the grapple rules, especially if they haven't really run into someone who uses them extensively for more than just a simple "Grab" from a monster.
Based on a lot of your posting, you have some very high expectations for your GM's to have system mastery.
GM's are not encyclopedias. Perhaps you should sit behind the screen once or twice and see just how easy it really is.
I've run 3.X games plenty. I've run PFS some. (I should probably have one star, but some of the games were not reported. I'm never going to have significant stars, so I don't care) The NPC gimmicks are usually pretty well laid out and usually straight forward, leaving plenty of time to address questions of PC builds if necessary. I find PFS considerably easier to run than homebrew, since so much of the work is already done. That actually makes it easier to focus on system questions, if necessary.
Also, "some experience with a mechanic" is not equivalent to encyclopedic knowledge. And that's for a 4+ star GM. How can you GM that many games and *not* run into grappling and bull rushing?
|
|
The same way a player who's played a character to level 12 and still doesn't understand the main schtick of their character.
I've never actually seen that, but if I did, I'd be pretty dismayed as well. No arguments on that. There's no one in my regular play group that would even consider sitting down with a PC for whom they couldn't explain the relevant rules for their feats, etc.
I have seen new players not understand all kinds of stuff, but that's completely different. To me, just surviving to level 12 would require a decent idea of all kinds of different schemes that NPCs might throw at you. Maybe not, evidently.
|
|
Yeah, came as a complete shock to me as well. How could a player who had a level 10 or 11 character not understand the core conceptual rules of their character? Completely boggled my mind.
And it wasn't a girlfriend who had their boyfriend build their character very complicatedly (saw a guy bring a brand new player--never roleplayed before, and built her a vivisectionist) and essentially play it at the game days either. It was a player who had a simple class (rogue) and didn't know how flanking worked.
|
|
FLite
You bring up a lot of good remarks. But you miss my main issue.
Yes, but you need to be looking up these spells when you cast them so that you know their range and number of targets, saves, etc. right? .
Wrong - and that is when I dislike a sunder. I tend to be able to do 80-90% of spells as GM without any need to look them up.
I dislike any situation that forces me extra rule look ups during game as it interrupts the game flow. It isn't possible to never look into the rule book. But my experience is - the less, the better.
You minimise rule look-ups via experience or GM preparation. But certain builds can force them on you. These are often the builds discussed here asking - why does the GM hate my build.
|
|
Game flow during combat time is sketchy anyway. I just consider a rules look up as part of a PCs turn if necessary. I go some games without a single rules look up, and some games we get half a dozen. It doesn't bother me, and most of the people I play with would rather get it right the first time and try to remember for the future.
GM preparation is rarely an issue in my experience, since 90% of look ups have to do with player actions. However, experience is invaluable, since a single person at the table that knows mechanic X can save a look up.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Game flow during combat time is sketchy anyway. I just consider a rules look up as part of a PCs turn if necessary. I go some games without a single rules look up, and some games we get half a dozen. It doesn't bother me, and most of the people I play with would rather get it right the first time and try to remember for the future.
GM preparation is rarely an issue in my experience, since 90% of look ups have to do with player actions. However, experience is invaluable, since a single person at the table that knows mechanic X can save a look up.
I absolutely agree if you play with the same group. In this time it is worth the time.
Convention play is a different matter. I still remember the 43 grapple check from a camel companion. It took me an hour - after !! The game to work out the legality and how it was done. During game-play I just didn't feel it as worthwhile challenging.
Hmm - I guess I could come up with a sundering animal companion specialist. Guess it wouldn't take me longer as an hour or two to get the right items, feats, spells together. 100% RAW legal but most GMs would be stumped by it if you spring it upon them.
|
|
I would tend to agree with that, but I would expect a 4+ star GM to at least have some experience with this mechanic.
Not necessarily a reasonable expectation (says the 4 star who had never run for a character that grapples until two or three games before getting her fourth star). We only had two grapple monks locally that I know of and I never got the chance to GM for either of them. My first experience with a grappling character was at Paizo Con.
Needless to say I plan on studying these rules a bit before Gen Con ;)
|
|
Wow, statistical outliers bite me in butt again! I should know better from Warhammer 40K. When I roll 12 six-sided dice, and only get one that is "5" or "6", I guess I should know better.
I guess my play group is more used to using grapples against casters as a way to help nullify them than many other play groups.
|
|
Given that I've seen Tetori monks roll grapples almost that high, it wouldn't shock me that there's some way to make an animal companion do it. Of course, I would think it would be a handle animal DC 25 push check to make the camel do it to begin with.
Unless it took feats to do it. AC's know how to use their feats :) So maybe a normal push to get it to prefer grapple over spitting on someone?
|
|
DC 25 is a normal push. I'd have to look at animal archive again, but I still don't think there's a trick for "combat maneuver". So while the animals knows how to use the feat, it still has to be pushed, since there is no "grapple" trick.
Okay. I am completely wrong. There is a DC 20 maneuver trick. However, without this trick, its DC 25 push time. The actual grapple check doesn't surprise me due to the huge STR that most animal companions possess. (And hence, one of my huge problems with them)
|
|
Given that I've seen Tetori monks roll grapples almost that high, it wouldn't shock me that there's some way to make an animal companion do it. Of course, I would think it would be a handle animal DC 25 push check to make the camel do it to begin with.
That is CRB. With the right book there is no pushing needed.
Edit : we seem to cross post here. I replied to a message 5 up or so
|
|
Given that I've seen Tetori monks roll grapples almost that high, it wouldn't shock me that there's some way to make an animal companion do it. Of course, I would think it would be a handle animal DC 25 push check to make the camel do it to begin with.That is CRB. With the right book there is no pushing needed.
I don't understand this comment. Before animal archive was published, it was a DC 25 push to get any animal companion to do any combat maneuver.
|
|
I already edited my own post.
Same with me - cross posting here.
But yes - there are interesting bits you can do.
Start camel - high strength
Antromorphic polymorph - make it bipedal
Add some feats - improved grapple (sunder ?)
Maneuver skill from Animal Archives
Still need to look up items and spells as you want to overcome hardness. And suddenly you turned something completely incapable to do a certain task into a monster.
|
|
There are a few already posted, but here is the page I made for my sunder build. I take a printed copy with my character binder and hand it to the GM when I play that character.
Where are you getting this rule:
"Magic weapons cannot be damaged by weapons that have a lower enhancement bonus. (CRB p. 468)"
You list the page but on the page (or in the entire CRB) I can't din any rule like that.
Also I know the table in the CRB doesn't list it but don't weapons/shields made of special materials inherit the hardness as well?
|
I add my own opinion here . . . good stuff . . .
About the holy symbol. Usually the description that I have heard is that it must be presented to cast most (all?) cleric spells. To sunder this holy symbol being presented to cast doesn't require knowledge religion just a perception (maybe not even a roll, what's obvious is obvious) to note it's being used. I'm not a big fan of sundering because typically PFS doesn't give the BBEG enough thugs in front to allow a caster the ability to cast/lead from the rear like the Pathfinder characters tend to do.
With spell component pouches I think that you hit on the head. Not all components would be stored in one pouch. If a character felt that he was going to be combat he would obviously spread out his potential for loss, or perhaps even have stored only one spell's components in each pouch.