>>Ask *Mark Seifter* All Your Questions Here!<<


Off-Topic Discussions

6,701 to 6,750 of 6,821 << first < prev | 127 | 128 | 129 | 130 | 131 | 132 | 133 | 134 | 135 | 136 | 137 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ziegfeld wrote:

Hi~ Mark, I have a question about Druid's Wild Shape.

The problem is very simple, that is, what is the DC for wild shape? for example, some animal's poison.

After my search, this question has been asked in the forum many times, starting from 10 years ago, there are many answers, but there has been no official answer.

Thank you!

I thought I had the answer to this, but since I couldn't find it I guess I was wrong.

Great question.

Paizo Employee Designer

11 people marked this as a favorite.
Mark Seifter wrote:
Ferious Thune wrote:
With PF2 on the horizon, the PF1 rules forum has started to get several posts arguing against what have been basic, established rules about how PF1 works. Since FAQs are unlikely in the near future (I hold out hope for at least a last round of cleanup FAQs for PF1 after PF2 settles in), I’m wondering if you might have thoughts on one of those questions to avoid misinterpretation of the rule becoming widespread.
I had an idea sort of related to this general topic but haven't had time to pursue it yet due to grueling hours on PF2. But maybe I'll get a chance eventually.

Alright, following up on this:

I've got my ducks in a row, so this Saturday at 10 AM PST, I'm launching a new stream called Arcane Mark! It'll be on my twitch channel https://www.twitch.tv/markseifter . I'm planning to have a variety of different features on the show, with my first episode starting with a feature I'm calling "Ask Mark," a recurring feature where I tackle at least one big question taken in advance from among a list of viewer requests and popular unanswered Pathfinder FAQs, and then provide advice and answers to other questions that you guys bring up in the audience about game design, rules adjudication, GMing dilemmas, and anything game related!

These won't be official Paizo answers, they're just my personal answers, but I do have access to a lot of tools to help give you answers that can assist you in deciding what to do in your own game. Questions and advice can cover any game, not just Pathfinder, but my main focus will be Pathfinder, starting mainly with 1st edition until 2nd edition launches. My first big rules question for the show this Saturday will be the simulacrum spell from Pathfinder 1st edition, one of the most asked about topics in the game due to its ambiguous and confusing wording (and one small but critical element that is accidentally missing, as I discovered when I investigated), and I'll also cover any other questions you ask.

If enough of you watch the stream and help get the word out, I have ambitions to add additional recurring features to highlight various elements of playing games and designing games, and even to hold interviews with other Paizo or RPG industry folks, including those you don't always get to hear from as much.

However, the direction of the show will depend on you. Ultimately the goal of Arcane Mark is not just to be entertaining, engaging, and thought-provoking but also to be useful to you in your games, answering the questions you want, and including the features you demand!

I would be delighted if you'd join me for my inaugural stream and help show your support if this sounds like something you'd enjoy. Again it's going to be this Saturday at 10 AM PST.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mark Seifter wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
Ferious Thune wrote:
With PF2 on the horizon, the PF1 rules forum has started to get several posts arguing against what have been basic, established rules about how PF1 works. Since FAQs are unlikely in the near future (I hold out hope for at least a last round of cleanup FAQs for PF1 after PF2 settles in), I’m wondering if you might have thoughts on one of those questions to avoid misinterpretation of the rule becoming widespread.
I had an idea sort of related to this general topic but haven't had time to pursue it yet due to grueling hours on PF2. But maybe I'll get a chance eventually.

Alright, following up on this:

I've got my ducks in a row, so this Saturday at 10 AM PST, I'm launching a new stream called Arcane Mark! It'll be on my twitch channel https://www.twitch.tv/markseifter

I'll created a twitch account just for this.

Do they show replays or only the live video?

For those of you who don't want to copy and paste I've linkified the url listed above.

Click here to go to Mark's Twitch channel/chat room.

Paizo Employee Designer

5 people marked this as a favorite.
wraithstrike wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
Ferious Thune wrote:
With PF2 on the horizon, the PF1 rules forum has started to get several posts arguing against what have been basic, established rules about how PF1 works. Since FAQs are unlikely in the near future (I hold out hope for at least a last round of cleanup FAQs for PF1 after PF2 settles in), I’m wondering if you might have thoughts on one of those questions to avoid misinterpretation of the rule becoming widespread.
I had an idea sort of related to this general topic but haven't had time to pursue it yet due to grueling hours on PF2. But maybe I'll get a chance eventually.

Alright, following up on this:

I've got my ducks in a row, so this Saturday at 10 AM PST, I'm launching a new stream called Arcane Mark! It'll be on my twitch channel https://www.twitch.tv/markseifter

I'll created a twitch account just for this.

Do they show replays or only the live video?

For those of you who don't want to copy and paste I've linkified the url listed above.

Click here to go to Mark's Twitch channel/chat room.

You can watch replays and then usually most people also put the video up on youtube after a while, possibly spending a lot of time editing the video first. I can't commit to putting them on youtube, as while I learned enough about OBS and twitch to ensure that I can get this stream up and running, I haven't investigated everything for youtube yet. However I anticipate putting them on youtube, especially if people don't mind if I don't edit them first; I figure the content and the access to me are what create the interest, as opposed to the editing, and editing might be more time than I can spare.

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Nice! I also hope there will be an option to replay the episodes later, as I won’t be able to watch this Saturday.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

This is very cool, and I've reactivated my long dormant Twitch account. I won't be able to watch tomorrow's inaugural stream live but I hope it's recorded.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Exciting! Will you be able to answer questions about PF2 is that all still hush hush?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Will your answers for PF1 and/or Starfinder be archived anywhere for easy access later?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
David knott 242 wrote:

Will your answers for PF1 and/or Starfinder be archived anywhere for easy access later?

As text for offline use?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Perhaps some sort of Fortunately Answered Questions document...

Paizo Employee Designer

7 people marked this as a favorite.
Dire Ursus wrote:
Exciting! Will you be able to answer questions about PF2 is that all still hush hush?

I can't give spoilers about unreleased products any more so than I would on the messageboards (where I give very light spoilers occasionally but mostly reiterate and analyze info that someone has revealed already). Furthermore, I'm going to wait about a month after a product comes out to intentionally cover a question from a new product, in case we can get an official FAQ first (our new process should make that prospect easier, and also possible for books outside the Pathfinder RPG line).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Society Subscriber

Ooh, this is exciting. I'll have to dig up my 'how the heck is this supposed to work' list!

Paizo Employee Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
David knott 242 wrote:

Will your answers for PF1 and/or Starfinder be archived anywhere for easy access later?

I'm planning on putting them on youtube but I can't swear to it yet. Mostly if it's OK to do so without a lengthy editing process; I don't really have the time or expertise to edit.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

This is awesome! Thank you for doing this, Mark. Sadly, I'm going to miss your first broadcast. I'm hoping I can watch the video after the event.


Mark Seifter wrote:
David knott 242 wrote:

Will your answers for PF1 and/or Starfinder be archived anywhere for easy access later?

I'm planning on putting them on youtube but I can't swear to it yet. Mostly if it's OK to do so without a lengthy editing process; I don't really have the time or expertise to edit.

As someone who loves the idea of Twitch, but almost never has time for it, I would, personally, deeply appreciate a YouTube video archive.

I, for one, often follow Twitch steams reposted on YouTube. I am not representative of more than myself, but you have my own, personal interest/request!

Paizo Employee Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Arcane Mark's inaugural episode begins in just 45 minutes at my twitch channel with an Ask Mark feature where I tackle simulacrum as well as your questions. Don't miss it!


Mark Seifter wrote:
Arcane Mark's inaugural episode begins in just 45 minutes at my twitch channel with an Ask Mark feature where I tackle simulacrum as well as your questions. Don't miss it!

No comments because I don't have Twitch, but I'm there!

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

I'm hoping someone was able to record the episode and will post it somewhere. :)

Paizo Employee Designer

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Twitch apparently doesn't archive by default and doesn't show you that options in the "Channel and Video" options. I've turned it on for the future. Meanwhile, I did get a recording, so I'm going to put it up on youtube!


Mark Seifter wrote:
Twitch apparently doesn't archive by default and doesn't show you that options in the "Channel and Video" options. I've turned it on for the future. Meanwhile, I did get a recording, so I'm going to put it up on youtube!

Awesome! Sorry I had to cut out before the end! It was awesome seeing you in person! YouTube sounds awesome! Please link it when you have the chance!

Paizo Employee Designer

5 people marked this as a favorite.

Alright, I've put the video of the stream for Arcane Mark: Ask Mark episode 1 up on youtube at my youtube channel so you can check it out if you missed it!

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Thank you so much!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Hey Mark. First I'd like to say, great job on the Twitch/Youtube video.

However, due to my work schedule I won't likely be able to make the live videos most of the time. Will it be possible for me to leave questions somewhere so you can answer them.

I'm not going to be greedy and drop a 50 question list. I don't even think I have 50 questions. Maybe 1 or 2 at a time.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Just caught the video on youtube, thank you for doing this. I found the principles and modes of thought you explained even more valuable than the actual rule clarification.

Any teasers about future topics? Bardic masterpieces perhaps?

Paizo Employee Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
wraithstrike wrote:

Hey Mark. First I'd like to say, great job on the Twitch/Youtube video.

However, due to my work schedule I won't likely be able to make the live videos most of the time. Will it be possible for me to leave questions somewhere so you can answer them.

I'm not going to be greedy and drop a 50 question list. I don't even think I have 50 questions. Maybe 1 or 2 at a time.

Yeah, I want to make an e-mail "hotline" where people can request questions even if they aren't asking them live, and I can answer a few of those too, or perhaps form an episode around one if it's a significant enough topic. Might use the address associated with the youtube account for that, since it's a new one.

Paizo Employee Designer

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Java Man wrote:

Just caught the video on youtube, thank you for doing this. I found the principles and modes of thought you explained even more valuable than the actual rule clarification.

Any teasers about future topics? Bardic masterpieces perhaps?

You're welcome! Design principles are a good way to learn how to answer further questions, so they're important to me to include. There's not much more to say on a bardic performance revamp to handle the non-futureproofed wording in the original class, other than the rough guidelines I've already posted in that thread, at least not without spending more time than I have available researching every bard option to make a one-by-one decision.

I have a few potential topics large enough to be episode 2 (most questions don't have answers that can hold up an episode, and I want to save a "variety" episode where my pre-researched topic is a set of smaller topics for a little later). I think I want to go with Divinations for Ask Mark Episode 2; it would be a slam dunk except that I wrote a section for Ultimate Intrigue that contains my best tips for a lot of divinations, but I think it's still useful because I can go through them one by one, tackle audience questions on either adjudication or on how to use or handle divinations in specific situations in their games. Does that seem like a cool topic?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Handling divinations is a great topic, I imagine all GMs have had some struggles with that.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Hey Mark, where are you going to be posting your new write up on simulacrum? You mentioned you were going to do this in your episode.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Perception, stealth, illusions and invisibility would be a good topic for my education as well.

Paizo Employee Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Here's a text dump at least: It seems neither twitch nor youtube really wants to host little non-video files associated with a channel.

Long:
BANDERSNATCH SIMULACRUM
CR 8–9
XP —
N Gargantuan magical beast
Init +9; Senses blindsense 60 ft., darkvision 120 ft., low-light vision, scent; Perception +26
DEFENSE
AC 23, touch 11, flat-footed 18 (+5 Dex, +12 natural, –4 size)
hp 126 (11d10+66)
Fort +13, Ref +12, Will +7
Defensive Abilities quick recovery, quill defense; Immune fear, paralysis, poison, sleep
OFFENSE
Speed 60 ft., climb 20 ft.
Melee bite +16 (1d10+9 plus grab), 2 claws +16 (1d8+9/19–20), tail slap +11 (1d10+4/×3 plus pain)
Ranged 4 quills +12 (1d8+9/19–20) plus pain
Space 20 ft.; Reach 15 ft. (20 ft. with tail slap)
Special Attacks bounding charge, brutal tail, gaze, pounce, rake (2 claws, +16, 1d8+9/19–20)
STATISTICS
Str 28, Dex 21, Con 23, Int 2, Wis 15, Cha 18
Base Atk +11; CMB +24 (+28 grapple); CMD 39 (47 vs. trip)
Feats Combat Reflexes, Improved Critical (claws), Improved Initiative, Improved Iron Will, Iron Will, Skill Focus (Stealth)
Skills Acrobatics +13 (+25 when jumping), Climb +21, Perception +16, Stealth +11 (+19 forests), Survival +2 (+13 tracking); Racial Modifiers +4 Acrobatics, +6 Perception, +4 Stealth (+12 forests), +10 Survival when tracking
SQ planar acclimation, relentless tracker
ECOLOGY
Environment any forests
Organization solitary
Treasure incidental
SPECIAL ABILITIES
Bounding Charge (Ex) A bandersnatch can move through difficult terrain when it charges.
Brutal Tail (Ex) The quills and barbs on a bandersnatch's tail cause triple damage on a critical hit from its tail slap.
Gaze (Su) Confused for 1 round, range 30 feet, Fortitude DC 21 negates. This is a mind-affecting compulsion effect. The save DC is Constitution-based.
Pain (Ex) Whenever a creature takes damage from a bandersnatch's tail slap attack, quills, or quill defense, that creature must make a DC 20 Reflex save or a quill lodges in its flesh, causing the creature to become sickened until the quill is removed. Removing one quill requires a DC 20 Heal check made as a full-round action. For every 5 by which the check exceeds the DC, one additional quill can be removed. On a failed check, a quill is still removed, but the process deals 1d8+4 points of damage to the victim. The save DC is Dexterity-based.
Planar Acclimation (Ex) A bandersnatch is always considered to be on its home plane, regardless of what plane it finds itself upon. It never gains the extraplanar subtype.
Quill Defense (Ex) Any creature that strikes a bandersnatch with a non-reach melee weapon, unarmed strike, or natural weapon takes 1d8 points of piercing damage from the bandersnatch's quills and suffers from the bandersnatch's pain attack.
Quick Recovery (Su) A debilitated bandersnatch recovers with frightening speed. If a bandersnatch starts its turn affected by any or all of the following conditions after failing a save, it receives a new save against the effect at its original DC at the end of its turn: confused, dazed, dazzled, exhausted, fatigued, nauseated, sickened, and stunned.
Quills (Ex) With a snap of its tail, a bandersnatch can loose a volley of four quills as a standard action (make an attack roll for each spike). This attack has a range of 300 feet with no range increment. All targets must be within 30 feet of each other. Launched quills regrow in a single round, during which the bandersnatch's defensive abilities are unaffected.
Relentless Tracker (Ex) A bandersnatch can move at up to double its speed and still track without penalty. It gains a +10 competence bonus on Survival checks made to track creatures it has wounded.

Paizo Employee Designer

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Many thanks for your topic feedback on this thread. This Saturday at 10 AM PDT, Episode 2 of Arcane Mark's Ask Mark feature will be about all sorts of divinations in your game: We'll have clarifications, tips, answers to your questions, and advice for tough spots that you request!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mark Seifter wrote:
Many thanks for your topic feedback on this thread. This Saturday at 10 AM PDT, Episode 2 of Arcane Mark's Ask Mark feature will be about all sorts of divinations in your game: We'll have clarifications, tips, answers to your questions, and advice for tough spots that you request!

Here are my first two questions.

1. Since there seem to be abilities that allow you to overcome obstacles and/or difficult terrain is it intended to be able to overcome them by jumping without a feat or class feature?

If the answer is yes then I may post these abilities for next week to find out what their benefits are.

2. If you're a druid, and you shapechange into a creature that has an ability with a save DC such as poison how do you figure out the DC when you're wildshaped into that form?

That is all for this week.

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Combat Maneuvers would make a good topic either separate or alongside Mounted Combat. Grapple rules, Overrun while mounted, provoking while mounted, etc.

Paizo Employee Designer

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Ferious Thune wrote:
Combat Maneuvers would make a good topic either separate or alongside Mounted Combat. Grapple rules, Overrun while mounted, provoking while mounted, etc.

I got so many surprising and very useful answers from Jason years ago that would have made it into a grapple blog if we ever published it (soon after starting, Jason asked if there was a rules question I had always wondered, and I asked about grapple topics and some of the tangliest questions I had), there's almost no chance that I don't eventually do a topic about grapple. To be honest, the main reason I'm holding off on that topic is that there's a lot of antipathy on the paizo.com community about grapple, including antagonism and lines in the sand specifically against Jason's answers as I have relayed them in the past, so I'd like a few episodes to build the Arcane Mark community first rather than have that be Episode 2.

Paizo Employee Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Just under 40 minutes until Episode 2 of Arcane Mark's Ask Mark feature! Bring your questions about divinations!

Paizo Employee Designer

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Thanks for watching everyone! This time it's actually up on twitch, so you can check it out if you missed it. Ask Mark will continue at the same time (Saturday 10AM PDT), but I'm adding a Tuesday 7PM PDT stream to Arcane Mark, premiering the Design Diaries feature this week with a look at the path of the medium class. This is essential viewing for all you diehard Harrow medium fans, especially if you want a glimpse at some stages of the process and iterations that happened even before the playtest!

Sovereign Court

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber

!!!!!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Thanks for the show. It was interesting to see another view on how to use divination spells.

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mark Seifter wrote:
Ferious Thune wrote:
Combat Maneuvers would make a good topic either separate or alongside Mounted Combat. Grapple rules, Overrun while mounted, provoking while mounted, etc.
I got so many surprising and very useful answers from Jason years ago that would have made it into a grapple blog if we ever published it (soon after starting, Jason asked if there was a rules question I had always wondered, and I asked about grapple topics and some of the tangliest questions I had), there's almost no chance that I don't eventually do a topic about grapple. To be honest, the main reason I'm holding off on that topic is that there's a lot of antipathy on the paizo.com community about grapple, including antagonism and lines in the sand specifically against Jason's answers as I have relayed them in the past, so I'd like a few episodes to build the Arcane Mark community first rather than have that be Episode 2.

Good to hear. I’ve just experienced some of that antipathy, which is why it came to mind. Thanks again for putting Arcane Mark together!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Card Game, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Another vote for Mounted Combat. We're halfway thorough 6th level in my wife's Rise of the Runelords campaign, and we've got a halfling cavalier riding a wolf. Sarah sometimes feels like she's getting overrun with our character abilities, and I just want to make sure we're not cheesing things.
Note: I take responsibility for the suggestion to play a Small cavalier with a Medium mount, having seen how that tends to work better for adventurers. Now that he's about to hit 7th level and likely to accept the wolf's increase in size, he is contemplating getting some scrolls of Reduce Animal and/or having my character cast (potentially permanently) Enlarge Person on his character.

Paizo Employee Designer

3 people marked this as a favorite.
First World Bard wrote:

Another vote for Mounted Combat. We're halfway thorough 6th level in my wife's Rise of the Runelords campaign, and we've got a halfling cavalier riding a wolf. Sarah sometimes feels like she's getting overrun with our character abilities, and I just want to make sure we're not cheesing things.

Note: I take responsibility for the suggestion to play a Small cavalier with a Medium mount, having seen how that tends to work better for adventurers. Now that he's about to hit 7th level and likely to accept the wolf's increase in size, he is contemplating getting some scrolls of Reduce Animal and/or having my character cast (potentially permanently) Enlarge Person on his character.

Ah Mounted Combat, the topic that was so confusing with so many contravening rules that when Stephen tried to work it out on the messageboards, it led him to have to make the official policy that personal designer posts were not official. That one's really hard to adjudicate consistently, possibly impossible in one case where I feel two FAQs contradict each other, but I could try. Grapple is in a similar boat, and if I didn't have a good set of "Word of Jason" answers from his time writing the grapple text in the CRB, there are a few things in grapple that I would be shaky answering too. I know how I've always limited myself when playing a mounted character, so I could give that if I do a mounted topic, but more than usual there's a lot of competing possibilities in the text.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I've always felt like the designers have certain ideas of intent, however due to wording other things are technically legal. I'd be fine with rulings that said "this" was how we envisioned the rule working. I say that because it's impossible to think of every possible situation, so some things are "against the rules" as they are "outside the scope of original intent".
I'd personally be fine with rulings that explain things in a solid manner while leaving other things to the GM. I think the pouncing lance issue was one that fell into the realm of "We never considered that".

PS:I personally wouldn't allow it. ⬅️ Just making sure nobody thinks Im advocating for the lance pounce combo.

Paizo Employee Designer

3 people marked this as a favorite.
wraithstrike wrote:

I've always felt like the designers have certain ideas of intent, however due to wording other things are technically legal. I'd be fine with rulings that said "this" was how we envisioned the rule working. I say that because it's impossible to think of every possible situation, so some things are "against the rules" as they are "outside the scope of original intent".

I'd personally be fine with rulings that explain things in a solid manner while leaving other things to the GM. I think the pouncing lance issue was one that fell into the realm of "We never considered that".

PS:I personally wouldn't allow it. ⬅️ Just making sure nobody thinks Im advocating for the lance pounce combo.

That's easy for me to do when the rule was something I was here for, but for something in the CRB, say, only Jason knows what he was thinking, and by now he probably forgets a lot of it too. Fortunately for grapple I got answers nearly 5 years ago so they were fresher.

Paizo Employee Designer

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Just a reminder that Arcane Mark: Design Diaries is tomorrow night at 7PM PDT taking a look at the twists and turns in the design of the medium. Plus, a special surprise guest. Tune in to learn more!


I have sort of a meta-rule question about mounted combat. To what degree, do the Rules of the Game material on All About Mounts (1-5) provide guidance for understanding and implementing the Pathfinder mounted combat rules (which as near as I can tell are essentially a cut and paste of the 3.5 OGL).

Paizo Employee Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Arcane Mark: Design Diaries begins in just under 40 minutes. Medium fans, be sure to tune in! https://www.twitch.tv/markseifter

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mark Seifter wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:

I've always felt like the designers have certain ideas of intent, however due to wording other things are technically legal. I'd be fine with rulings that said "this" was how we envisioned the rule working. I say that because it's impossible to think of every possible situation, so some things are "against the rules" as they are "outside the scope of original intent".

I'd personally be fine with rulings that explain things in a solid manner while leaving other things to the GM. I think the pouncing lance issue was one that fell into the realm of "We never considered that".

PS:I personally wouldn't allow it. ⬅️ Just making sure nobody thinks Im advocating for the lance pounce combo.

That's easy for me to do when the rule was something I was here for, but for something in the CRB, say, only Jason knows what he was thinking, and by now he probably forgets a lot of it too. Fortunately for grapple I got answers nearly 5 years ago so they were fresher.

I’ve always wished for more examples to go along with new rulings or content, like what you gave us with the light and darkness blog. Many, many questions could be answered a lot easier if there were examples to point to along with the rule. How Spellstrike and Spell Combat work, for example. Even with the FAQs and community knowledge, new players get confused and new GMs think that it can’t be right that you get an extra weapon attack along with the spell. A breakdown that comes from Paizo of an attack sequence using both abilities separately and combined would be incredibly useful to point people at who are reluctant to believe the other forum posters or players who try to explain the abilities.

It’s probably late in the product life to hope for that kind of thing for PF1 on a large scale, but I do hope we might see more examples as PF2 rule discrepancies or areas prone to confusion are identified.


Ferious Thune wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:

I've always felt like the designers have certain ideas of intent, however due to wording other things are technically legal. I'd be fine with rulings that said "this" was how we envisioned the rule working. I say that because it's impossible to think of every possible situation, so some things are "against the rules" as they are "outside the scope of original intent".

I'd personally be fine with rulings that explain things in a solid manner while leaving other things to the GM. I think the pouncing lance issue was one that fell into the realm of "We never considered that".

PS:I personally wouldn't allow it. ⬅️ Just making sure nobody thinks Im advocating for the lance pounce combo.

That's easy for me to do when the rule was something I was here for, but for something in the CRB, say, only Jason knows what he was thinking, and by now he probably forgets a lot of it too. Fortunately for grapple I got answers nearly 5 years ago so they were fresher.

I’ve always wished for more examples to go along with new rulings or content, like what you gave us with the light and darkness blog. Many, many questions could be answered a lot easier if there were examples to point to along with the rule. How Spellstrike and Spell Combat work, for example. Even with the FAQs and community knowledge, new players get confused and new GMs think that it can’t be right that you get an extra weapon attack along with the spell. A breakdown that comes from Paizo of an attack sequence using both abilities separately and combined would be incredibly useful to point people at who are reluctant to believe the other forum posters or players who try to explain the abilities.

It’s probably late in the product life to hope for that kind of thing for PF1 on a large scale, but I do hope we might see more examples as PF2 rule discrepancies or areas prone to confusion are identified.

I agree. Sometimes examples present a better idea than rules text when it comes to intent.

Scarab Sages

Clarification in grappling in the future (even unofficial clarifications)? Maybe I should get my last few games in to retire this character before that happens ;)

Paizo Employee Designer

5 people marked this as a favorite.

Alright, you guys have convinced me, Arcane Mark: Ask Mark this Saturday at 10 AM PST will be about grappling. But please, no matter what I say and what facts I discovered from Jason, let's try to avoid this spilling a big fight on the messageboards.

6,701 to 6,750 of 6,821 << first < prev | 127 | 128 | 129 | 130 | 131 | 132 | 133 | 134 | 135 | 136 | 137 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Off-Topic Discussions / >>Ask *Mark Seifter* All Your Questions Here!<< All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.