|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I've never seen him paid in souls, but that doesn't mean he isn't.Is it true that Cosmo is paid in souls? (Or is that just what he tells everyone?)What is the estimated starting salary for a Paizo Employee? Just out of curiosity.I think the joke I used to hear at a lot of cons as a fan was "How do you make a small fortune in the RPG business? Start with a large fortune." Without discussing numbers, I'll say that designing tabletop RPGs is a labor of love and pays much like a graduate student's stipend rather than like a video game developer, which is one reason why so many tabletop RPG designers and developers also take freelance assignments to make ends meet. If you don't truly love it, I don't recommend trying to break into the industry.
How is the income tax withholding done on souls? That must be a complicated W-4.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Mark, do you feel allowing an Ironskin Monk to Flurry while in light armor, like a Sohei, is a resonable ruling?
Would an official response on this be possible in future?
I've glanced over those two links, and it looks to me like actually the ironskin monk can flurry in light armor because it replaces AC bonus but the sohei can't because it alters AC bonus.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
D&D had a couple of movies, Mortal Kombat got a movie, now WoW and Assassin's Creed are getting movies.
Has there ever been any discussion on a potential movie or miniseries based on the Pathfinder Storyline? Perhaps with the help of Kickstarter/IndieGoGo much like they are doing with Dragon's Lair.
Designers like me wouldn't be in on that discussion. Weirdly, the only time we usually hear about big secret things is right before a con, when we get a speech to the whole company like "Listen guys, don't tell anyone that Obsidian is making a Pathfinder Adventure Card Game app" and I'm thinking "If you didn't just tell me that, there's no way I could have told anyone..."
Anyway, I think it would be cool if it happened, but I'm not clued into those sorts of things.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Years of science fiction and T.V. says otherwise... :PMark, do you still do research and work from your former field for fun, even though you're working as a professional designer now? I have to imagine you don't get into MIT with just a casual enough interest in a subject where you can totally disconnect and walk away without looking back. (You were in MIT right? I'm not remembering the wrong thing? Could've sworn it was AI research and robotics or something like that.)AI research on language and thought. While it's fair to say that most people who get into MIT might not know exactly which subject they love (you only select a major sophomore year), I'm still interested in those topics; that said, now it's more of a reading about them thing, since you don't really freelance out AI research.
Yeah, going to MIT doesn't make you into a Felicity Smoak hacker who can hack anything super fast. In fact, if someone uses good security precautions, it is painfully slow to hack them even with incredible computing power behind you; that's why the failure point is so likely to be a human, unlike what they show on TV. They always show this like "18% done cracking" progress bar rather than the character sending targeted spear phishing e-mails to top executives after researching those executives, aiming to get the execs to send them the password.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I've glanced over those two links, and it looks to me like actually the ironskin monk can flurry in light armor because it replaces AC bonus but the sohei can't because it alters AC bonus.Mark, do you feel allowing an Ironskin Monk to Flurry while in light armor, like a Sohei, is a resonable ruling?
Would an official response on this be possible in future?
Sorry Mark, but you're off on this one.
The limitation on monk's flurrying in armor is in the monk weapon and armor proficiency section, not in the AC bonus section.
When wearing armor, using a shield, or carrying a medium or heavy load, a monk loses his AC bonus, as well as his fast movement and flurry of blows abilities.
The sohei changes the monk weapon and armor proficiency, and removes the limiting line. This is supported per the FAQ, Sohei can flurry in light armor. RAW, they can actually flurry in any armor, not just the light armor they have proficiency in.
The Ironskin monk does not change proficiency, so it still cannot flurry in armor. However, it would retain the natural armor AC bonus if it did wear armor.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Of course not. Souls are invisible.
That's what makes it so perfect.
That and who's going to make you pay taxes on souls?
Asmodeus.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've been meaning to ask you, what's your opinion on an official writeup for Senara in Hell's Vengeance? Also, if you were to houserule the Brimstone Den into the official city, how do you think it would interact with the part of the AP taking place in Senara?
I haven't seen the official write-up, but honestly, I'm not a big fan of campaigns of evil PCs doing horrible things to people, so while I of course knew they wouldn't be using my write-up anyway if Senara eventually featured somewhere, I'm kind of glad it's a different Senara that's going to get evil-PC-ified anyway. Given that I chose Senara for that Wayfinder due to being obscure and unlikely to have someone else write it up, it's certainly funny that Robert did his fan write-up too, and also now the official one.
I'm not sure what part of Hell's Vengeance is taking place in Senara because I actually barely know anything about the plot of that AP other than things you guys already know: it's evil and it's Westcrown-focused, not Kintargo (and I guess now I know Senara is in it). Given that some people think that Ilara is consorting with chaotic outsiders, I imagine that if the Brimstone Den was in the AP, the PCs would probably brutally murder everyone in the Brimstone Den and maybe torture and humiliate Ilara or something awful like that. I'm just picturing the most horrible things that could happen and imagining the PCs doing it...:shudder: I don't why NPCs doing evil stuff doesn't bother me as much, or one PC being tempted by evil while still working with the party, but when the whole party is just going around being evil, it just feels bad to me.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I've glanced over those two links, and it looks to me like actually the ironskin monk can flurry in light armor because it replaces AC bonus but the sohei can't because it alters AC bonus.Mark, do you feel allowing an Ironskin Monk to Flurry while in light armor, like a Sohei, is a resonable ruling?
Would an official response on this be possible in future?
Sorry Mark, but you're off on this one.
The limitation on monk's flurrying in armor is in the monk weapon and armor proficiency section, not in the AC bonus section.
When wearing armor, using a shield, or carrying a medium or heavy load, a monk loses his AC bonus, as well as his fast movement and flurry of blows abilities.The sohei changes the monk weapon and armor proficiency, and removes the limiting line. This is supported per the FAQ, Sohei can flurry in light armor. RAW, they can actually flurry in any armor, not just the light armor they have proficiency in.
The Ironskin monk does not change proficiency, so it still cannot flurry in armor. However, it would retain the natural armor AC bonus if it did wear armor.
Aha, right, I knew it was in a weird non-flurry place, but you're right, it's in proficiencies not AC bonus. Still, it looks like the sohei can flurry in light armor because of the FAQ only (it doesn't get medium or heavy because it still has that line in weapon and armor proficiency, which it alters, preventing it from using armor at all, and only the FAQ helps it out there) but the ironskin can't because it doesn't have the FAQ, nor does it alter or replace proficiencies. I hadn't remembered the FAQ but had been allowing sohei to flurry in light armor in home games and had thought it was my house rule; perhaps it arose before the FAQ.
Given that ironskin doesn't even have armor proficiency, I see no reason it should flurry in armor.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Of course not. Souls are invisible.
That's what makes it so perfect.
That and who's going to make you pay taxes on souls?
I'm guessing psychopomps handle that with their spirit sense, since that would mean souls aren't invisible to them.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I've been meaning to ask you, what's your opinion on an official writeup for Senara in Hell's Vengeance? Also, if you were to houserule the Brimstone Den into the official city, how do you think it would interact with the part of the AP taking place in Senara?I haven't seen the official write-up, but honestly, I'm not a big fan of campaigns of evil PCs doing horrible things to people, so while I of course knew they wouldn't be using my write-up anyway if Senara eventually featured somewhere, I'm kind of glad it's a different Senara that's going to get evil-PC-ified anyway. Given that I chose Senara for that Wayfinder due to being obscure and unlikely to have someone else write it up, it's certainly funny that Robert did his fan write-up too, and also now the official one.
I'm not sure what part of Hell's Vengeance is taking place in Senara because I actually barely know anything about the plot of that AP other than things you guys already know: it's evil and it's Westcrown-focused, not Kintargo (and I guess now I know Senara is in it). Given that some people think that Ilara is consorting with chaotic outsiders, I imagine that if the Brimstone Den was in the AP, the PCs would probably brutally murder everyone in the Brimstone Den and maybe torture and humiliate Ilara or something awful like that. I'm just picturing the most horrible things that could happen and imagining the PCs doing it...:shudder: I don't why NPCs doing evil stuff doesn't bother me as much, or one PC being tempted by evil while still working with the party, but when the whole party is just going around being evil, it just feels bad to me.
Hmm, maybe because while NPC behavior is written by a person they can also distance themselves from the actions because they're static and pre-thought out, whereas a PC is actively played by a person and their decisions are also active and immediate? An NPC you think what they do, a PC you actually do.
Just my thoughts.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hmm, maybe because while NPC behavior is written by a person they can also distance themselves from the actions because they're static and pre-thought out, whereas a PC is actively played by a person and their decisions are also active and immediate? An NPC you think what they do, a PC you actually do.
Just my thoughts.
That's insightful. I also think part of it is that the PCs are set up to win, and so while every evil thing the NPC does is another reason to hate and defeat that NPC, when the PCs are doing their evil stuff, it's part of their path to victory. For whatever reason, while I tend to GM a lot and play evil NPCs in tabletop games, my PCs tend to be extra good-aligned in ongoing campaigns (though less so in PFS, which is episodic and doesn't deal as much with aftermath as my home games), and so do my characters in PC/console games where I get to pick how I react to stuff. I'm actually branching out a bit and playing a NG character who follows the tenets of Torag (that might not seem like branching out that much, since Torag is LG, but IMO Torag's tenets aren't actually particularly good-aligned due to the genocidal tenets in there, and are certainly less good than my more typical redeemy Shelyn/Desna/Arshea sorts) in Owen's Giantslayer game. Actually, I guess I played an Iomedaean as my first Pathfinder AP character, but it was Council of Thieves, and the NPC priest of Iomedae was so extraordinarily horrible to her, that eventually she decided "I think you're wrong about Iomedae's teachings, but you are a priest and clearly she is still granting you spells and not sending you visions that your path is wrong, so it would be arrogant of me to think that my interpretations were more valid than your experience as an actual member of the clergy. Thus, if you are correct, I can no longer worship a goddess with the teachings as you profess them." and then one of the two paladins of Shelyn converted her to Shelyn. (This was vis-a-vis "Tieflings are abominations in Iomedae's sight, and Iomedae's teachings of racial tolerance for all people don't apply to them since they aren't people; they are evil outsiders, which Iomedae explicitly hates.")
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Of course not. Souls are invisible.
That's what makes it so perfect.
That and who's going to make you pay taxes on souls?
The Infernal Revenue Service?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The Infernal Revenue Service?Of course not. Souls are invisible.
That's what makes it so perfect.
That and who's going to make you pay taxes on souls?
So, Asmodeus, then.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Aha, right, I knew it was in a weird non-flurry place, but you're right, it's in proficiencies not AC bonus. Still, it looks like the sohei can flurry in light armor because of the FAQ only (it doesn't get medium or heavy because it still has that line in weapon and armor proficiency, which it alters, preventing it from using armor at all, and only the FAQ helps it out there) but the ironskin can't because it doesn't have the FAQ, nor does it alter or replace proficiencies. I hadn't remembered the FAQ but had been allowing sohei to flurry in light armor in home games and had thought it was my house rule; perhaps it arose before the FAQ.
Given that ironskin doesn't even have armor proficiency, I see no reason it should flurry in armor
Without armor the Ironskin Monks have only 1/4 level to AC, as opposed to the Wisdom + 1/4 level the regular Monk has. How are they supposed to be viable without armor?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Without armor the Ironskin Monks have only 1/4 level to AC, as opposed to the Wisdom + 1/4 level the regular Monk has. How are they supposed to be viable without armor?Aha, right, I knew it was in a weird non-flurry place, but you're right, it's in proficiencies not AC bonus. Still, it looks like the sohei can flurry in light armor because of the FAQ only (it doesn't get medium or heavy because it still has that line in weapon and armor proficiency, which it alters, preventing it from using armor at all, and only the FAQ helps it out there) but the ironskin can't because it doesn't have the FAQ, nor does it alter or replace proficiencies. I hadn't remembered the FAQ but had been allowing sohei to flurry in light armor in home games and had thought it was my house rule; perhaps it arose before the FAQ.
Given that ironskin doesn't even have armor proficiency, I see no reason it should flurry in armor
They certainly seem to have AC problems, but they weren't written with proficiency or any other clue that they were supposed to wear armor, either. It starts getting some favorable trades eventually, but honestly the first few levels look pretty rough to me. MC is the last book where I don't have much insider insight to the "why", since it was already in copyfit by the time I got here.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ironskin was around long before Monster Codex anyway.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ironskin was around long before Monster Codex anyway.
Ah ARG. That explains why I didn't remember it from Monster Codex! I think the material in the ARG for some of the more obscure races is probably my point of least knowledge in the hardcover line, since I had little occasion to use them in my own games, and MC at least I helped with a few things during the late stages.
They certainly seem to have AC problems, but they weren't written with proficiency or any other clue that they were supposed to wear armor, either. It starts getting some favorable trades eventually, but honestly the first few levels look pretty rough to me. MC is the last book where I don't have much insider insight to the "why", since it was already in copyfit by the time I got here.
At 2nd level, an ironskin monk can shake off the physical effects of certain attacks. If he makes a Fortitude saving throw against an attack that has a reduced effect on a successful save, he instead avoids the effect entirely. This ability can be used only if the monk is wearing light armor or no armor. A helpless monk does not gain the benefits of resilience.
personally when the Advanced Race Guide got it's errata I was hoping this class would get the once over
They certainly seem to have AC problems, but they weren't written with proficiency or any other clue that they were supposed to wear armor, either. It starts getting some favorable trades eventually, but honestly the first few levels look pretty rough to me. MC is the last book where I don't have much insider insight to the "why", since it was already in copyfit by the time I got here.At 2nd level, an ironskin monk can shake off the physical effects of certain attacks. If he makes a Fortitude saving throw against an attack that has a reduced effect on a successful save, he instead avoids the effect entirely. This ability can be used only if the monk is wearing light armor or no armor. A helpless monk does not gain the benefits of resilience.
That's a good thought, but that's just going from the normal monk's evasion, and normal monks can't flurry in armor despite the following bold:
At 2nd level or higher, a monk can avoid damage from many area-effect attacks. If a monk makes a successful Reflex saving throw against an attack that normally deals half damage on a successful save, he instead takes no damage. Evasion can be used only if a monk is wearing light armor or no armor. A helpless monk does not gain the benefit of evasion.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
personally when the Advanced Race Guide got it's errata I was hoping this class would get the once over
We wound up having so many errata hitting us all at once that I (the usual person who gathers the questions we need to answer for the errata) was still working on another errata (I think ACG freelance edits, one of the bestiaries, or both), so I didn't see our sources for the ARG errata; I'm not sure if it just wasn't on there or was on there but didn't make it to discussion. When it comes to all the errata hitting all at once, it might have seemed like some sort of conscious decision of the company as an entity to make lots of changes to various books at the same time, but it was actually just the coincidence of a convergence of print runs.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, it's too bad. Maybe in another 5 years when another printing is needed.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That's a good thought, but that's just going from the normal monk's evasion, and normal monks can't flurry in armor despite the following bold:
At 2nd level or higher, a monk can avoid damage from many area-effect attacks. If a monk makes a successful Reflex saving throw against an attack that normally deals half damage on a successful save, he instead takes no damage. Evasion can be used only if a monk is wearing light armor or no armor. A helpless monk does not gain the benefit of evasion.
I didn't notice that - I guess other than the Ironskin gaining AC as a Natural Armor Bonus there really isn't any implication that they are ment to wear armor, which is a shame, because I thing it would bring their strength to about even with a regular monk.
I just wanted a armored monk, and this seemed for flavorful of that than the Sohei
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That's a good thought, but that's just going from the normal monk's evasion, and normal monks can't flurry in armor despite the following bold:
At 2nd level or higher, a monk can avoid damage from many area-effect attacks. If a monk makes a successful Reflex saving throw against an attack that normally deals half damage on a successful save, he instead takes no damage. Evasion can be used only if a monk is wearing light armor or no armor. A helpless monk does not gain the benefit of evasion.I didn't notice that - I guess other than the Ironskin gaining AC as a Natural Armor Bonus there really isn't any implication that they are ment to wear armor, which is a shame, because I thing it would bring their strength to about even with a regular monk.
I just wanted a armored monk, and this seemed for flavorful of that than the Sohei
Hmm, well since we're going into homebrew territory anyway, the flavor is sort of "I don't need armor because my skin is IRON" but the archetype doesn't make it iron enough. I'm thinking constant self-only barkskin when not wearing armor (starting at 1st), in addition to what it already gets, would probably be the best way to handle AC.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Or Invulnerable Rager levels of DR.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Or Invulnerable Rager levels of DR.
I was actually considering that one too, but the DR comes in a bit late for those early levels, so it would have to also involve swapping some things around to get the DR sooner. That could definitely work too, though. Third option is that the monk's skin is truly the same as the iron of a chain shirt, granting a +4 armor bonus to AC as if under the effects of constant mage armor.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If we are going into home brew territory, would simply allowing flurry and fast movement in light armour, but not proficiently (you'd have to buy it), seem at all unbalanced to you?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If we are going into home brew territory, would simply allowing flurry and fast movement in light armour, but not proficiently (you'd have to buy it), seem at all unbalanced to you?
I think it loses fast movement? Proficiency in light armor doesn't really do much after level 1 or so (having it just would indicate that the archetype was meant to wear armor), and I think that flurry in light armor is off-theme for the archetype focusing on its own skin, compared to the mage armor from skin or barkskin options. That said, it's not going to be too different in the effect on AC until higher levels.
I think it loses fast movement? Proficiency in light armor doesn't really do much after level 1 or so (having it just would indicate that the archetype was meant to wear armor), and I think that flurry in light armor is off-theme for the archetype focusing on its own skin, compared to the mage armor from skin or barkskin options. That said, it's not going to be too different in the effect on AC until higher levels.
It does replace fast movement, you are right, thanks for taking the time to respond. I love the flavor of the Ironskin, it's just a shame he ironically lacking in the defense department. It really felt to me that the Ironskin was supposed to wear armor.
I guess I'll stick to Sohei for armored Monks for now. It's a shame, because the armor feels more like an afterthought for the Archetype.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I played an Iomedaean as my first Pathfinder AP character, but it was Council of Thieves, and the NPC priest of Iomedae was so extraordinarily horrible to her, that eventually she decided "I think you're wrong about Iomedae's teachings, but you are a priest and clearly she is still granting you spells and not sending you visions that your path is wrong, so it would be arrogant of me to think that my interpretations were more valid than your experience as an actual member of the clergy. Thus, if you are correct, I can no longer worship a goddess with the teachings as you profess them." and then one of the two paladins of Shelyn converted her to Shelyn. (This was vis-a-vis "Tieflings are abominations in Iomedae's sight, and Iomedae's teachings of racial tolerance for all people don't apply to them since they aren't people; they are evil outsiders, which Iomedae explicitly hates.")
Ironic considering that Iomedae's herald used to work for Ragathiel. You know, the angel who was born a tiefling?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hey Mark!
Any news yet concerning the Harrow Medium?
Hi Mark,
Do elementals speak or are able to speak normally? I'm curious as this comes up via wildshape and it seems like a druid should still be able to communicate with people.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Elementals have their own language and everything, if you look. Air Elementals speak Auran for example.
If they were incapable of speech, they'd have text like the Shambling Mound, which has its languages listed as "Common, Undercommon (Cannot speak)".
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hey Mark!
Any news yet concerning the Harrow Medium?
Here.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Here.Hey Mark!
Any news yet concerning the Harrow Medium?
Thanks!
Here's hoping they can make room for it. I knew it was a fool's hope to have it before Strange Aeons; I'll just have to go with something else.
Do combat maneuvers count as melee attacks? I would presume they do, but could also see some people arguing that either only the ones that can be used in place of an attack are (disarm, trip, etc.), or that none are, being maneuvers rather than attacks.
For context, looking at feats like Crane Wing, Juke, Just Out of Reach, and Osyluth Guile, which all specify melee attacks, and wondering if their Dodge bonus to AC applies to CMD when being targeted by a combat maneuver being used in melee range or not...I would think yes, but I'm not 100% certain, so figured it's worth asking.
They are normally all melee attacks. So unless you have a class ability or feat or somesuch that changes that then they are melee attacks.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sounds exciting. Any hints?I may have raised hopes too much already; no hints unless I start thinking the chances are >50%. The back-up triple question I will say is uplifting, as befits the holiday spirit.
This is confirmed as a "No," but I've raised awareness, so perhaps early in the new year? Either way, we do still have the backup for tomorrow.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Flight and Magical Flight: Can a paralyzed or stunned creature keep flying with magical flight? Does a creature with magical flight not apply bonuses or penalties to Fly checks because it doesn’t have a “natural” fly speed? Does flying make a creature immune to being flat-footed?
No, any creature that loses all actions can’t take an action to attempt a Fly check to hover in place and thus automatically falls. That includes a paralyzed, stunned, or dazed creature. Magical flight doesn’t act any differently, even for paralysis, as it isn’t a purely mental action. A creature with 0 Dexterity can’t fly, and paralysis sets a creature’s Dexterity to 0. Despite the fact that the Fly skill mentions that bonuses and penalties from maneuverability apply to creatures with natural fly speeds, they apply for any fly speed. If they didn’t apply to creatures that gained flight artificially or through magic, then those maneuverabilities (like the listed good maneuverability for the fly spell) would have no game effect. Finally, the statement “You are not considered flat-footed while flying” means that flying (unlike balancing using Acrobatics or climbing) doesn’t automatically make you flat-footed or force you to lose your Dexterity bonus to AC; it doesn’t mean that flying makes you immune to being caught flat-footed.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Flight and Magical Flight: Can a paralyzed or stunned creature keep flying with magical flight? Does a creature with magical flight not apply bonuses or penalties to Fly checks because it doesn’t have a “natural” fly speed? Does flying make a creature immune to being flat-footed?
No, any creature that loses all actions can’t take an action to attempt a Fly check to hover in place and thus automatically falls. That includes a paralyzed, stunned, or dazed creature. Magical flight doesn’t act any differently, even for paralysis, as it isn’t a purely mental action. A creature with 0 Dexterity can’t fly, and paralysis sets a creature’s Dexterity to 0. Despite the fact that the Fly skill mentions that bonuses and penalties from maneuverability apply to creatures with natural fly speeds, they apply for any fly speed. If they didn’t apply to creatures that gained flight artificially or through magic, then those maneuverabilities (like the listed good maneuverability for the fly spell) would have no game effect. Finally, the statement “You are not considered flat-footed while flying” means that flying (unlike balancing using Acrobatics or climbing) doesn’t automatically make you flat-footed or force you to lose your Dexterity bonus to AC; it doesn’t mean that flying makes you immune to being caught flat-footed.
Glad to see that flat-footed part cleared up and official.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Flight and Magical Flight: Can a paralyzed or stunned creature keep flying with magical flight? Does a creature with magical flight not apply bonuses or penalties to Fly checks because it doesn’t have a “natural” fly speed? Does flying make a creature immune to being flat-footed?
No, any creature that loses all actions can’t take an action to attempt a Fly check to hover in place and thus automatically falls. That includes a paralyzed, stunned, or dazed creature. Magical flight doesn’t act any differently, even for paralysis, as it isn’t a purely mental action. A creature with 0 Dexterity can’t fly, and paralysis sets a creature’s Dexterity to 0. Despite the fact that the Fly skill mentions that bonuses and penalties from maneuverability apply to creatures with natural fly speeds, they apply for any fly speed. If they didn’t apply to creatures that gained flight artificially or through magic, then those maneuverabilities (like the listed good maneuverability for the fly spell) would have no game effect. Finally, the statement “You are not considered flat-footed while flying” means that flying (unlike balancing using Acrobatics or climbing) doesn’t automatically make you flat-footed or force you to lose your Dexterity bonus to AC; it doesn’t mean that flying makes you immune to being caught flat-footed.
I actually think this may be a downer for some.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's comforting to me, since I made a judgement call about this a while back and it resulted in a PC's death.
The part about maneuverability bonuses seems clunkily worded. Took me two reads to get what it was saying. But, that's the side I was on anyway. Fly bonuses from the Fly spell are HUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUGE.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Huh. So that superman pose doesn't just look cool, its actually required....
Wait, DAZED while flying will get you killed?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I just realized that's worse than having the fly dispelled