| 3 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Silly loopholes that are clearly not RAI but many insist are RAW, and that can be fixed with a minor errata:
1. Planar Binding = getting infinite wishes and/or simply slaying the summoned being so he/she can’t get revenge. Yes, I know there are checks involved, but a hyper optimized PC can easily make those checks automatically. (Simple fixes could include a firm limit on the number of wishes gained this way and/or a note that slaying the being will cause other allied beings to seek revenge.)
2. Did you really mean for a one level dip in Crossblooded Sorcerer to apply to Wizard spells?
3. Should there not be a absolute GP limit on Blood Money?
4. Simulacrum: Should this really be a “sno-cone wish machine”?
5. "Scry & Fry." Can we clarify what is meant by '“Viewed once” is a place that you have seen once, possibly using magic such as scrying."
Thank you.
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Silly loopholes that are clearly not RAI...
2. Did you really mean for a one level dip in Crossblooded Sorcerer to apply to Wizard spells?
Sorcerer: Do the bonuses granted from Bloodline Arcana apply to all of the spells cast by the sorcerer, or just those cast from the sorcerer's spell list?
The Bloodline Arcana powers apply to all of the spells cast by characters of that bloodline, not just those cast using the sorcerer's spell slots.General rule: If a class ability modifies your spellcasting, it applies to your spells from all classes, not just spells from the class that grants the ability. (The exception is if the class ability specifically says it only applies to spells from that class.)
—Jason Bulmahn, 10/21/10
Thanks Jiggy good find. But I was hoping they'd reconsider this particular version. Too powerful.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
"I think this is too powerful, so I wish they'd reconsider" is very very different from "This is clearly not intended, even though some claim it's legal".
Anyway, I don't know much about the other issues, but I'll say this:
The reason that genuinely-abusive munchkins tend not to listen when told that what they're doing is obviously against the intent, is because of how often people claim something is obviously against the intent when really it provably is the intent and they just don't like it. So when someone is doing something that's actually not intended to work and they're told so, they'll just write it off as another example of the above, with plenty of things to point to as examples of "against intent" claims that can be proven to be fully intended.
So as a personal request, please, make my life easier and stop giving them things to point at and say "You're only claiming it's not the intent because you don't like it, just like X, Y and Z."
Sure. But how about the rest of the stuff?
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Not sure my contributions are the most helpful on all of these topics, but I'll give it a quick shot (except for planar binding - I have no clue about that one.)
2. Crossblooded Sorcerer
I have no personal experience with a one level crossblooded sorcerer dip, though I do consider it more than a bit cheesy and would certainly be sure such a player noticed me giving them a disapproving eye roll. However, Evocation magic is the one, as a DM, that I am most comfortable with my party trying to min-max. It's usually fairly consistent, easy to measure, and easy to counter when it's necessary. If I had a caster who was really blowing enemies up with Evocation magic, I'd make sure to let them thoroughly enjoy their toys part of the time and then make sure that other areas of the game involved long dungeon crawls, heavy with SR and energy resistant critters. This way, you encourage casters to avoid "going all in" on one area.
3. GP limit on Blood Money
No personal experience with this one either, though I think the spell is something that shouldn't have made it into any book as an option for players, since it allows completely bi-passing what I would call the intended cost prohibitive nature of some powerful spells.
4. Simulacrum: “sno-cone wish machine”?
For a third time, I have no personal experience here, but I do have strong feelings on the topic. Quick simply, I CANNOT imagine a world (Golarion, for example.) in which a developer thought that a "sno-cone wish machine" would be a good idea, so I'll have to agree with you on this one - Some very minor errata or an FAQ about what level spell-like abilities are appropriate for lower HD versions of creatures, etc. would clear it up well in my opinion.
(Even if we're only talking about reducing the hit dice on a monster as part of a CR reduction, removing one or two of it's more powerful abilities if it drops more than 1/4 of it's hit dice is just a good idea - every GM who cares about their PC's survival know that...)
5. "Scry & Fry."
I would be 100% in support of a FAQ ruling that established Scrying on a person sitting within an obscure room as not being enough for teleportation. (In the past, I had allowed Scry and Fry, though my party only used it once, so it wasn't an issue. But in the future, I think I'll utilize skill checks to resolve similar situations... "The evil cult leader just mentioned a meeting at 'The Black Panther' bar. Give me a knowledge local check to see if you can determine which city that is in.", etc.)
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Silly loopholes that are clearly not RAI...
2. Did you really mean for a one level dip in Crossblooded Sorcerer to apply to Wizard spells?Sorcerer: Do the bonuses granted from Bloodline Arcana apply to all of the spells cast by the sorcerer, or just those cast from the sorcerer's spell list?
The Bloodline Arcana powers apply to all of the spells cast by characters of that bloodline, not just those cast using the sorcerer's spell slots.General rule: If a class ability modifies your spellcasting, it applies to your spells from all classes, not just spells from the class that grants the ability. (The exception is if the class ability specifically says it only applies to spells from that class.)
—Jason Bulmahn, 10/21/10
And on further thought I am gonna have to disagree with this particular ruling on this particular bloodline. What is the big advantage for Crossblooded?
Bloodline Arcana: A crossblooded sorcerer gains the bloodline arcana of both her bloodlines.What is the big disadvantage?
A crossblooded sorcerer has one fewer spell known at each level (including cantrips) than is presented on the sorcerer spells known table.
Thus, using Crossblooded then switching to Wizard means you gain the advantage (in the usual example, both Orc and dragon so +2 to fire spells) but there's no disadvantage.
In other words, due to the wording here the advantage applies to all class levels, the disadvantage applies only to sorc class levels.
And when Jason did this ruling back in 2010, there was no Crossblooded.
|
| 2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
The entire Monk class could use an errata, to become a bit easier to play by core.
The Shield Master feat, as written, allows you to Power Attack Combat Experite Fight Defensively with a Broken shield while shaken and sickened, and Two-Weapon Fighting, and take absolutely no penalty. This could use an errata.
The Double x stat to an ability [like Fury's Fall+Agile Maneuvers] could use some clarification to either say "Yes, you can" or "No, you can't" just so that we don't have all the disagreements.
The entire Monk class could use an errata, to become a bit easier to play by core.
The Shield Master feat, as written, allows you to Power Attack Combat Experite Fight Defensively with a Broken shield while shaken and sickened, and Two-Weapon Fighting, and take absolutely no penalty. This could use an errata.
The Double x stat to an ability [like Fury's Fall+Agile Maneuvers] could use some clarification to either say "Yes, you can" or "No, you can't" just so that we don't have all the disagreements.
Yeah, that would take Pf 2.0. not gonna happen, out side the scope of this thread, sorry.
Yes, those other two are great examples!
regarding crossblooded and disadvantage - is the -2 to will saves suffered by the crossblooded sorcerer negated by the dip case you are asking about, or considered inconsequential in general?
Meh, it's by no means nothing, but compared to losing a spell every level, it's less than half.
True, but you get back many more lower level spells to make up for it.
In any case, at least one significant penalty isn't there.
And on further thought I am gonna have to disagree with this particular ruling on this particular bloodline.Do you mean "disagree" as in "I'm not in favor of it" or as in "I think Paizo is incorrect on how this works"?
Both. Mind you, I think the world of Jason, but his answer was posted before this particular combo was possible. I dont think they worded it well, what with Jason's FAQ. It should have been worded EITHER:
"Bloodline Arcana: A crossblooded sorcerer gains the bloodline arcana of both her bloodlines : if either is a spell modifier, this applies only to sorcerer spells.
OR
Drawbacks: A crossblooded sorcerer has one fewer spell known at each level (including cantrips) than is presented on the sorcerer spells known table. This applies to any casting class which gets a benefit from this bloodline. "
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So, you believe you have a better idea of how the game works than the Design Team does? Am I understanding you correctly?
Not at all, in fact I said the opposite. Even the Design Team has admitted that some things from some new products don't mesh as well at they should with other products. They can't anticipate all combos, sometimes mistakes are made.
I just don't think they saw this combo coming. It's really easy to do when you have a lot of products, not all of which are written by the same person or team.
The Design Team also admitted making some errors in accidentally leaving in outdated wording from a previous edition. I think Planar binding, Simulacrum and Scry vs Teleport are in this category. James Jacobs has made it clear that you can't 'scry & fry" but so far they have not changed the wording of Teleport.
Is James Jacobs then saying the Design team is in error? Not at all, they just haven't gotten around so that the RAW matches with the RAI yet. Part of the idea of this thread is to get the Design team to fix some of these.
And Jiggy, I am not understanding why you have been so hostile to my posts in this thread.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
So, you believe you have a better idea of how the game works than the Design Team does? Am I understanding you correctly?Not at all, in fact I said the opposite.
Good thing I checked, then; when you responded in the affirmative to my asking whether you meant "I think Paizo is incorrect on how this works", it (to me) implied at least the possibility that perhaps you believe you have a better grasp on the rules than they do.
And Jiggy, I am not understanding why you have been so hostile to my posts in this thread.
I don't understand how asking you to clarify yourself is hostile. Can you point me to exactly which post/line came across as hostile, so I can speak differently in the future?
So, you believe you have a better idea of how the game works than the Design Team does? Am I understanding you correctly?Not at all, in fact I said the opposite.Good thing I checked, then; when you responded in the affirmative to my asking whether you meant "I think Paizo is incorrect on how this works", it (to me) implied at least the possibility that perhaps you believe you have a better grasp on the rules than they do.
And Jiggy, I am not understanding why you have been so hostile to my posts in this thread.I don't understand how asking you to clarify yourself is hostile. Can you point me to exactly which post/line came across as hostile, so I can speak differently in the future?
"So, you believe you have a better idea of how the game works than the Design Team does? "
The Design team makes errors all the time. People point them out. Doesn't mean they know better than the design team in how to write Pathfinder, it means the Design team is human and makes mistakes. There's hundreds of FAQ's alone, not to mention posts by devs and rule changes. Do you think that finding a problem in the RAW means that I have a better idea of how the game works than the Design Team does?
Heck, have you read what James Jacobs has said about the design of the Summoner class?
Note that I have even found a few minor things and PMed them and been warmly thanked for my contribution.
That's what I like about Paizo- they aren't afraid to admit when they make a mistake and they fix them. Mind you, it isn't always easy to get their attention.
So, it's kinda surprising. Many people keep pointing these out as issues of why "wizards are OP', but few seem willing to come here and hit the FAQ or make suggestions to fix these?
So, it's kinda surprising. Many people keep pointing these out as issues of why "wizards are OP', but few seem willing to come here and hit the FAQ or make suggestions to fix these?
I don't think hitting the FAQ button is appropriate on this thread - The design team has expressed that they prefer a single clear cut question for any FAQ requests. Also, with this thread being in the houserules subforum, it is just going to be seen by less people.
My suggestion would be to start a rules forum thread clarifying a single question and why you believe it needs to be addressed, complete with both sides of the discussion and any relevant developer comments on the topic. I'd recommend that either the 'Scry and Fry' topic or the 'Simulacrum sno-cone wish machine' topic would be the best to start with.
Even if you gather enough FAQ requests (one of which, I'll gladly give), it won't be answered quickly since the only FAQ given since November of 2013 was the one on Crane Wing. (I suspect that you know this DrDeth, but I've written this fact here as information for others who may stumble upon this thread.)
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
So, it's kinda surprising. Many people keep pointing these out as issues of why "wizards are OP', but few seem willing to come here and hit the FAQ or make suggestions to fix these?I don't think hitting the FAQ button is appropriate on this thread - The design team has expressed that they prefer a single clear cut question for any FAQ requests.
See this sticky thread for more information on the FAQ system.
So, it's kinda surprising. Many people keep pointing these out as issues of why "wizards are OP', but few seem willing to come here and hit the FAQ or make suggestions to fix these?I don't think hitting the FAQ button is appropriate on this thread - The design team has expressed that they prefer a single clear cut question for any FAQ requests. Also, with this thread being in the houserules subforum, it is just going to be seen by less people.
My suggestion would be to start a rules forum thread clarifying a single question and why you believe it needs to be addressed, complete with both sides of the discussion and any relevant developer comments on the topic. I'd recommend that either the 'Scry and Fry' topic or the 'Simulacrum sno-cone wish machine' topic would be the best to start with.
Even if you gather enough FAQ requests (one of which, I'll gladly give), it won't be answered quickly since the only FAQ given since November of 2013 was the one on Crane Wing. (I suspect that you know this DrDeth, but I've written this fact here as information for others who may stumble upon this thread.)
Yes, but this is also the "Suggestions" forum. But I'll take your advice.
OK, started two threads one on "scry & fry" another on "Sno-cone wish machine".
Yes, the FAQ system seems to be "staggered" at this point in time. Crane-wing got a lot of backlash.
How about make it so Simulacrums can't use SLAs that simulate spells with costly material components? That'd end the whole wish-farming issue without neutering the spell.
Thus, using Crossblooded then switching to Wizard means you gain the advantage (in the usual example, both Orc and dragon so +2 to fire spells) but there's no disadvantage.
Wait, I'm confused. Are we talking about, for example, a sorcerer 1/wizard 10 as being potentially abusive compared to a wizard 11? I'm not seeing that -- at all. There is no way I'd give up 6th level spells in exchange for a couple of minor bloodline arcana, even with a bunch of 1st level spells thrown in.
So, it's kinda surprising. Many people keep pointing these out as issues of why "wizards are OP', but few seem willing to come here and hit the FAQ or make suggestions to fix these?
For people lookylurking, I did so in the respective specific threads.
So, it's kinda surprising. Many people keep pointing these out as issues of why "wizards are OP', but few seem willing to come here and hit the FAQ or make suggestions to fix these?For people lookylurking, I did so in the respective specific threads.
You did, and made some excellent and helpful posts, thanks!
Thus, using Crossblooded then switching to Wizard means you gain the advantage (in the usual example, both Orc and dragon so +2 to fire spells) but there's no disadvantage.Wait, I'm confused. Are we talking about, for example, a sorcerer 1/wizard 10 as being potentially abusive compared to a wizard 11? I'm not seeing that -- at all. There is no way I'd give up 6th level spells in exchange for a couple of minor bloodline arcana, even with a bunch of 1st level spells thrown in.
Yeah, well how about this: "Bloodline Arcana: You gain the orc subtype, including darkvision 60 feet and light sensitivity. If you already have darkvision, its range increases to 90 feet. Whenever you cast a spell that deals damage, that spell deals +1 point of damage per die rolled."
then combine that with any other bloodline that adds +1 to elemental damage. Viola! +2 for every die of that element. That's a free Empower spell on every spell with that element- which can be combined with Empower and has none of the disads for a metamagic feat.AND you get darkvision, which is generally considered to a a Feat.
Not to mention, your choice of two Bloodline Powers @ 1st, 3rd, 9th, 15th, and 20th levels.
I think I'd still much rather have 6th level spells (from a "which is better for my PC's survivability" standpoint). That makes me sort of wonder that if two people look at it and say it's "obviously" better to do opposite things -- maybe it's more or less balanced after all? Dunno.
I'll admit I haven't seen it in play, so I have no actual experience with it, and I'll also note that I haven't given it much thought past my initial reaction, so this isn't really "theorycrafting" either. It's just a gut sense of things, so take it with a grain of salt.
Apparently DrD would like to see it nerfed.
Along with "simulacrum" and "scry and fry" which apparently has never happened to him personally in a game. But still gets him all riled up.
Me, too. When you look at an ability explicitly granted by the rules, and say to yourself, "Self, this would potentially ruin my game, if people ran with it" -- I'd say that's maybe something to look at. Combine it with 15 years worth of essays on "how to best nerf this, or accommodate it without it breaking the game," and at some point it bears looking at.
I am playing a CB orc/draconic sorceror 1 level and 7 in admixture wizard in PFS? Does this mean I am having badwrongfun?
Not at all. It's legal, altho note that the orc bloodline is from a older book, and appears to be meant for orcs, even tho they did not make that a requirement- except by putting it in a book for orcs.
What I think is that they didn't consider the ramifications of a lot of Blaster wizards suddenly having some orc blood and taking that combo. There's quite a bit of stuff from campaign books that clearly wasn't well thought out as to how it would combine with other stuff.
Same with Crossblooded, I don't think they realized how this would combine with Jason's ruling.
But if that's really how they actually meant it- fine with me.
I'm okay with blaster getting nice things... It's not like blasting is a particularly powerful build anyway...
Sure, Lemmy if that's how they really meant it to go, then fine. OTOH, I have a bright shiny nickel that sez that 99% of the people that use that bloodline don;t actually own the product. In fact, I have never seen that book. For all we know it has a line like "these things are only usable if you're an orc".
Sure, Lemmy if that's how they really meant it to go, then fine. OTOH, I have a bright shiny nickel that sez that 99% of the people that use that bloodline don;t actually own the product. In fact, I have never seen that book. For all we know it has a line like "these things are only usable if you're an orc".
It doesn't. Also saying the Orc bloodline is only for Orcs is like saying the Draconic bloodline is only for dragons.
The Bloodline is just in a sidebar found between the faiths and superstition entries. Heres the fluff entry on it too.
The rage of your ancestors burns within you, and the taint of savage orc blood flows through your veins. Your anger is never far from the surface, giving you strength and driving you to seek greater power.
This source can represent a blood relation or an extreme event involving a creature somewhere in the family's past.
So you could have some orc blood in you, orcs could have killed your parents, raised by orcs, or whatever.
And on further thought I am gonna have to disagree with this particular ruling on this particular bloodline. What is the big advantage for Crossblooded?
Bloodline Arcana: A crossblooded sorcerer gains the bloodline arcana of both her bloodlines.What is the big disadvantage?
A crossblooded sorcerer has one fewer spell known at each level (including cantrips) than is presented on the sorcerer spells known table....
In other words, due to the wording here the advantage applies to all class levels, the disadvantage applies only to sorc class levels.
And when Jason did this ruling back in 2010, there was no Crossblooded.
-2 on will saves applies to both classes, and losing a caster level in exchange for a couple level 1 spell slots and some cantrips isn't exactly a great deal either.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Tyrannosaurus can swallow triceratops whole.
Just gonna go out on a limb and say that's an oopsy.