Really i think the only actions the new rule stops in general are those that need to be sequentially explained with a chart.And if you have to explain your actions sequentially with a chart, odds are your are trying to exploit a technicality in the rules.
Which is what the FAq is about
Only valid if you ignore the grapple rules, which are perfectly RAW, and generally require a flowchart to keep things straight when it gets complicated (all still by RAW).
Congratz all, this thread has managed to survive, and is the Fittest of all Free Action threads.
It is the only one (so far) not to have been locked.
Survival of the fittest in action.
Wow, holy crap. I speculated that this thread remains because it has the least amount of solid, hard hitting critiquing of the new ruling, and the mods deleted it!
Wow, holy crap. I speculated that this thread remains because it has the least amount of solid, hard hitting critiquing of the new ruling, and the mods deleted it!
That sounds like a pretty solid case for speculation: verified.
Wow, holy crap. I speculated that this thread remains because it has the least amount of solid, hard hitting critiquing of the new ruling, and the mods deleted it!
Without a note too. Gotta be careful about your conspiracy theories. They can erase a part of your history!
They did. A few minutes ago I responded to StreamOfTheSky's comment with a joke about the conspiracy involved, and they've already deleted it:OWow, holy crap. I speculated that this thread remains because it has the least amount of solid, hard hitting critiquing of the new ruling, and the mods deleted it!Without a note too. Gotta be careful about your conspiracy theories. They can erase a part of your history!
Same here - I had a witty line about the natural evolution of contentious threads that bordered on a math joke.
edit: On second thought it would have been funnier as a set of equations.
Wow, holy crap. I speculated that this thread remains because it has the least amount of solid, hard hitting critiquing of the new ruling, and the mods deleted it!
Now the question is whether the mods will delete this post too...
|
For another example, let's take the Enforcer feat.
Whenever you deal nonlethal damage with a melee weapon, you can make an Intimidate check to demoralize your target as a free action.
This means all attacks, even AoOs.
Any PC with Combat Reflexes can get this off more than 3 times a round, at first level.
According to FAQ, this could be seen as abuse.
This is not drawing an arrow, or reloading, or anything else that seems to be a focus here.
This is even more restricted if one decides to speak, while being intimidating, because that is definitely abuse then.
At least, according to these "reasonable" suggestions.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Let's try to turn this thread around by saying something intelligent about the original topic.
/I got nothing.
Seeing as the other threads are closed, many are unable to respond to what has already been discussed. Also, much was deleted.
I don't see quite a thought-police reaction to what is being discussed, but I can understand the desire to post double-think responses.
So you can fire a longbow six times a round because drawing an arrow is not a free action but is instead part of the full attack action with many shot, rapid shot, and three more iterative attacks at say 16th level?
|
|
So you can fire a longbow six times a round because drawing an arrow is not a free action but is instead part of the full attack action with many shot, rapid shot, and three more iterative attacks at say 16th level?Seeing as the other threads are closed, many are unable to respond to what has already been discussed. Also, much was deleted.
I don't see quite a thought-police reaction to what is being discussed, but I can understand the desire to post double-think responses.
Drawing an arrow is a free action. Nocking an arrow is a non-action.
Wow, holy crap. I speculated that this thread remains because it has the least amount of solid, hard hitting critiquing of the new ruling, and the mods deleted it!Now the question is whether the mods will delete this post too...
It's not breaking any forum rules I can see. And they don't seem inclined to say why exactly it's offensive or breaking the rules. So if they do, I'll just post it again. And again. And again.
I haven't kept up with this thread besides some searches, so this might come out of nowhere:
Regardless of the feasibility of gunslingers reloading as a free action, I have seen no mention of the cost for a gunslinger to reload fast. Lightning reload can be used only once per round, which means any additional free-action reloads are going to burn a 6gp paper cartridge.
When is 6gp per cartridge ever going to be trivial? And that investment must be made upfront.
The hypothetical Gunslinger reloading 16 times per turn is going to be pissing away 90gp per turn.
I am currently playing a Musket Master with a DB musket. I see the inherent cost of reloading as a free action as a form of self-regulation. If necessary I can go all-out, but I'll more often stick with Dead Shot to keep costs down. If I were to attack as much as I can every round, I would quickly become a very poor Musket Master.
Yeah, that's the thing. You don't ALWAYS go full on nova with the pistols.
But when you want to, you can utterly annihilate the encounter, without fail. Tons of attacks with dex to damage, Deadly Aim + touch AC, and x4 crit is every bit as crazy as the old pouncing lancer build -- without all the easy ways to hinder charges and a much higher chance of hitting.
Of course, as has been said before, the problem was NEVER free action abuse. It's some combo of how easy it is to overcome guns' supposed disadvantage of being a slower rate of fire, the utter stupidity of not only hitting touch AC but also getting to apply deadly aim to it, and so forth. But admitting the ENTIRE gun rules are completely ridiculous would be embarrassing. So...don't count on that happening.
It's not breaking any forum rules I can see. And they don't seem inclined to say why exactly it's offensive or breaking the rules. So if they do, I'll just post it again. And again. And again.Wow, holy crap. I speculated that this thread remains because it has the least amount of solid, hard hitting critiquing of the new ruling, and the mods deleted it!Now the question is whether the mods will delete this post too...
You don't think that would be a jerkish thing to do? If they keep deleting something it seems pretty clear that posting it again and again is deliberately breaking the rules (even if you don't understand what that rule is). They have a sub forum to query moderator decisions. It's not necessary to try and grind them down in a war of attrition.
Wow, holy crap. I speculated that this thread remains because it has the least amount of solid, hard hitting critiquing of the new ruling, and the mods deleted it!Without a note too. Gotta be careful about your conspiracy theories. They can erase a part of your history!
With the History Eraser Button?
I'm disappointed that this "FAQ" is still online. It causes so many problems and solves nothing at all.
So many good points were raised against it, there's really no reason to keep it up. It opened a huge can of worms and didn't do anything to improve the game.
Sure, it's "just a suggestion", but like BBT said before, that implies the FAQ is RAI.
If it's not RAW and it's not RAI, why is it there? And even more importantly, because this deserves to be said again.
If the problem are the firearm rules. Address firearm rules. I know Paizo will never admit how poorly-designed is the "target touch AC" mechanic, but trying to solve a problem by changing a completely different (and functional) rule is a terrible idea.
I haven't kept up with this thread besides some searches, so this might come out of nowhere:
Regardless of the feasibility of gunslingers reloading as a free action, I have seen no mention of the cost for a gunslinger to reload fast. Lightning reload can be used only once per round, which means any additional free-action reloads are going to burn a 6gp paper cartridge.
When is 6gp per cartridge ever going to be trivial? And that investment must be made upfront.
The hypothetical Gunslinger reloading 16 times per turn is going to be pissing away 90gp per turn.
I am currently playing a Musket Master with a DB musket. I see the inherent cost of reloading as a free action as a form of self-regulation. If necessary I can go all-out, but I'll more often stick with Dead Shot to keep costs down. If I were to attack as much as I can every round, I would quickly become a very poor Musket Master.
You need a buddy to cast abundant ammunition for you once in a while!
--------------------------------Abundant Ammunition
School conjuration (summoning); Level bard 1, cleric 1, ranger 1, sorcerer/wizard 1
CASTING
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S, M/DF (a single piece of ammunition)
EFFECT
Target one container touched
Duration 1 minute/level
Saving Throw none; Spell Resistance no
DESCRIPTION
When cast on a container such as a quiver or a pouch that contains nonmagical ammunition or shuriken (including masterwork ammunition or shuriken), at the start of each round this spell replaces any ammunition taken from the container the round before. The ammunition taken from the container the round before vanishes. If, after casting this spell, you cast a spell that enhances projectiles, such as align weapon or greater magic weapon, on the same container, all projectiles this spell conjures are affected by that spell.
For another example, let's take the Enforcer feat.
Whenever you deal nonlethal damage with a melee weapon, you can make an Intimidate check to demoralize your target as a free action.
This means all attacks, even AoOs.
Any PC with Combat Reflexes can get this off more than 3 times a round, at first level.
According to FAQ, this could be seen as abuse.
This is not drawing an arrow, or reloading, or anything else that seems to be a focus here.
This is even more restricted if one decides to speak, while being intimidating, because that is definitely abuse then.
At least, according to these "reasonable" suggestions.
And it amazes and upsets me that the designers either don't realize this or refuse to acknowledge it.
Hopefully, they will see the error of their ways and change it.
I mean that absurd example in the FAQ.
Their problem with what they consider "abuse" obviously stems from firearms (they've said as much), so I would limit the example to reloading firearms, at the very least.
|
For another example, let's take the Enforcer feat.
Whenever you deal nonlethal damage with a melee weapon, you can make an Intimidate check to demoralize your target as a free action.
This means all attacks, even AoOs.
Surely, if that Intimidate check is a free action, and free actions (except speech) can only be taken on your own turn, then you can't use your Enforcer feat on any AoO you take outside your own turn.
This means that Snap Shot is unusable with Combat Reflexes....unless drawing an arrow joins speaking as a free action which can be taken outside your own turn....with the feat or for everyone?
Also, to keep from losing a reload, only speak when it isn't your turn!
Yeah, it's a mess!
And this FAQ didn't clear up the mess, it created a whole new pile of mess!
|
|
Actually, talking is noted as something you can do outside your turn.
Of course, if you used up the suggested "reasonable" 3-5 limit per round, then you couldn't even cry out in pain when stabbed, if you used too many free actions before.
You must remain silent, or otherwise, you might be guilty of abuse.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Just convinces me I'm right not to play in PFS.
In a home game, if I run into a GM using this ruling, I can argue it on grounds of insanity.
In PFS it's unarguable. If the GM invokes it, it's concrete, because it's an official FAQ and that's concrete in PFS.
Heaven help the GM in PFS that shuts down some craziness but then runs an encounter with a monster that has grab.
For another example, let's take the Enforcer feat.
Whenever you deal nonlethal damage with a melee weapon, you can make an Intimidate check to demoralize your target as a free action.
This means all attacks, even AoOs.
Any PC with Combat Reflexes can get this off more than 3 times a round, at first level.
According to FAQ, this could be seen as abuse.
This is not drawing an arrow, or reloading, or anything else that seems to be a focus here.
This is even more restricted if one decides to speak, while being intimidating, because that is definitely abuse then.
At least, according to these "reasonable" suggestions.
And it amazes and upsets me that the designers either don't realize this or refuse to acknowledge it.
Hopefully, they will see the error of their ways and change it.
You can't take free actions when it is not your turn.