Contributor—Canadian Maplecakes
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Indeed, but I still recommend asking Owen, not Thursty, nonetheless, if you want a more "official" source for any given reason. Personally, I'd just say do what works for your group, in which case anybody's answer is useful data as long as it comes with an explanation of why.
Mark speaks wise words. I guess there's a reason this thread is... dear God, like a million pages and growing! :D
FAQ today?
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
And one tiny step for FAQ-kind!
Tiny and smaller creatures: In the section on Tiny and smaller creatures, it says that entering a creature’s space provokes an attack of opportunity, but typically 5-foot steps don’t provoke an attack of opportunity. If a Tiny or smaller creature took a 5-foot step into a creature’s space, would it provoke an attack of opportunity?
Yes. Even with a 5-foot step, a Tiny or smaller creature entering a creature’s space provokes an attack of opportunity (unless it is using a more specific ability to avoid the attack of opportunity such as the Monkey Shine feat). This doesn’t mean that a Tiny or smaller creature entering a creature’s space and moving out of a threatened square with a move action provokes two attacks of opportunity from that creature, for the same reason that moving out of multiple of a creature’s threatened squares in the same move action doesn’t provoke two attacks of opportunity.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Mark,
Have you ever considered making the Grand Unificist? It would be a class that could break the 4th wall. Using the principles of magic, they could discern actual hit points, armor classes, saving throw modifiers, you name it. More as they got higher in level. And they would even use those crazy terms because they would have to invent those terms to describe what is outside of the box. Their philosophy would be that all things could be broken down into a number. I'm sure some GMs would hate the class on principle, but I'd love it.
"Okay Fighter, the creature has 5 life points left and given your strength your sword will do a minimum of 8 life points. Don't swing for power, swing for accuracy!"
I suppose it could be an archetype of a wizard or investigator...
Ever read 8-bit theater? The red mage is all of that.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Dear Mark
I wonder how a wizard can update his bonded ring in pfs. Since pfs baned craft, do we still use craft
rule to update it? The faq is not clear, I don't sure if a sc check is needed.
I'm not the person to ask for PFS clarifications, but as someone who has a wizard in PFS, I think you get to craft your bonded item for half, despite the feats being banned. Check the Guide for more details!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Mark,
Have you ever considered making the Grand Unificist? It would be a class that could break the 4th wall. Using the principles of magic, they could discern actual hit points, armor classes, saving throw modifiers, you name it. More as they got higher in level. And they would even use those crazy terms because they would have to invent those terms to describe what is outside of the box. Their philosophy would be that all things could be broken down into a number. I'm sure some GMs would hate the class on principle, but I'd love it.
"Okay Fighter, the creature has 5 life points left and given your strength your sword will do a minimum of 8 life points. Don't swing for power, swing for accuracy!"
I suppose it could be an archetype of a wizard or investigator...
I agree that it would annoy people. However, random story: One time I ran a goofy Mutants and Masterminds game where the players generated characters by randoming four tropes on tvtropes and it wound up being a fractured fairytales game based on what they all randomed. One of the encounters was against a Robin Hood-esque crew, which included one member named "Fourth Wall Scarlett" who was constantly extremely meta about the rules of the game, only to have the rest of the Merry Men always ignore his advice and berate him. The PCs liked him a lot, and in the end, while the PCs were in an epic battle against the genie of the lamp and the evil vizier (Arabian Nights fairy tales were the bad guys), Fourth Wall Scarlett showed up again and decapitated Aladdin ("Duh guys, why didn't you go after the defenseless kid instead of the all-powerful genie?"), only to have everyone berate him again.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Mark,
The Racial Feat: Improved Channel Force
It says it hits "all" targets. Does that mean it hits all targets and damages all targets? Even those not usually harmed by Channel Positive/Channel Negative?
No, look at it in context of regular Channel Force, which only moves one of the damaged creatures.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Mark, you got a moment for this?
I've seen it. Before the FAQ, there was a solid ambiguity caused by the general rules vs. the nauseated rules, which required a PDT ruling (it was a solid topic to FAQ, good searching FAQ fans who brought this one up). Now though? It's pretty clear, and you and Cavall have it well enough in hand.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
After being woken by a 6.4 (some reporting 7.1) earthquake... you ever experience a 'good' earthquake in your life?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Since the earthquake woke me up and I couldn't get back to sleep, I decided to stop procrastinating and finally write up a Natsu inspired dragon slayer archetype for the kineticist. Here's the thread if you're interested.
Hi Mark....a bit of a gripe I'm afraid!
There are now D6, D8 and D10 arcane caster classes.... Why oh why oh why oh why! does the same not apply for divine classes?!?
Probably the most homebrewed and 3PP class out there is that of the D6 divine caster ("Priest" type) - can you explain why Paizo has never created a version?
There is a gaping hole from a thematic and RP persepctive and I genuinely find it bizarre that it has never been explored. And purely from a business perspective, it would be so popular you would earn $$$$$ if you incorporated it into a new book !
Come on Mark make it happen!! :)))
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hi Mark....a bit of a gripe I'm afraid!
There are now D6, D8 and D10 arcane caster classes.... Why oh why oh why oh why! does the same not apply for divine classes?!?
Probably the most homebrewed and 3PP class out there is that of the D6 divine caster ("Priest" type) - can you explain why Paizo has never created a version?
There is a gaping hole from a thematic and RP persepctive and I genuinely find it bizarre that it has never been explored. And purely from a business perspective, it would be so popular you would earn $$$$$ if you incorporated it into a new book !
Come on Mark make it happen!! :)))
Similarly, there's a d10 and d8 nature caster (Heck, TWO of them with the Hunter), but not d6 - nor is there a spontaneous nature full caster like the oracle is for traditional divine. (Nature Oracle doesn't count, because if it fills the blank, then why do we have druids instead of just clerics with nature-based domains?)
Similarly, there's a d10 and d8 nature caster (Heck, TWO of them with the Hunter), but not d6 - nor is there a spontaneous nature full caster like the oracle is for traditional divine. (Nature Oracle doesn't count, because if it fills the blank, then why do we have druids instead of just clerics with nature-based domains?)
You have to bare in mind that technically (and in a way thematically) a druid is a sub-class of a cleric.
I can see a hole for a spontaneous druid definitely (albeit a narrow one!) but as regards a D6 divine it can only be cleric -----> priest/holy man basis IMO. There is no hole from either a technical or RP view for a D6 nature class.
There are pacifist animals and animals that are prey solely, not predators. In fact, the majority of nature subsides off of plants and minds it's own business, with only a few @$$hole animals screwing it up for the rest of them.
If you can have a non-martial at all priest, a non-martial at all hippie nature caster is by no means a stretch.
I'm not disagreeing a d6 divine would be nice. I'm simply saying some more nature love would be cool, too, as a huge fan of the druid and ranger, and begrudgingly appreciative of the hunter (it's like the mediocre appearing child of two beautiful parents [like John in Terminator Genisys]).
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why do you want a D6 divine and what would it do?
It would have a D6 hp and 1/2 bab, and then what?
Clerics already have full 9th lv divine casting, domains and channel.
Wizards have the D6 with full 9th lv arcane casting, schools (similar to domains) and bonded item and a few feats.
So a "Priest" would need either a ton of extra class features, which would probably be over the top for a full 9th level caster, Or perhaps do divine with the arcane list.
I'm just not seeing the design space a "Priest" would have.
|
I agree with Chess Pwn, but if it has to be done, make it like a cloistered / bookish / scholarly priest, with d6, 1/2 bab, good save just for Will, no channel energy, have them keep their spells in spellbook (prayer book), scribe scroll as bonus feat, then additional craft/metamagic feat at 5th, 10th, 15th and 20th, no armor, no shield proficiency, same weapon prof. as wizards, give them a third domain, spontaneous casting with cure spells as well as all domain spells. Finally, give that guy access to all knowledge skills, and bump him to 6 skills points per level. Also give him Skill Unlocks feat for free at 5th (same way Rogue's Edge class feature works - 5th, 10th, 15th, etc.)
Make that sucker a pure divine caster. Channel is good and powerful, and should remain the regular cleric's schtick... a weak bookish priest should just deal with things with memorized spells and be all about domains.
Why do you want a D6 divine and what would it do?
It would have a D6 hp and 1/2 bab, and then what?
Clerics already have full 9th lv divine casting, domains and channel.
Wizards have the D6 with full 9th lv arcane casting, schools (similar to domains) and bonded item and a few feats.
So a "Priest" would need either a ton of extra class features, which would probably be over the top for a full 9th level caster, Or perhaps do divine with the arcane list.
I'm just not seeing the design space a "Priest" would have.
Oh come on.... show some initiative and use your imagination!!!! There have been loads of homebrew attempts/ideas at a D6 divine class... have a look at some of them if you want to get the idea. There are a multitude of ways you could go about it.... you dont have to start with the existing template!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I agree with Chess Pwn, but if it has to be done, make it like a cloistered / bookish / scholarly priest, with d6, 1/2 bab, good save just for Will, no channel energy, have them keep their spells in spellbook (prayer book), scribe scroll as bonus feat, then additional craft/metamagic feat at 5th, 10th, 15th and 20th, no armor, no shield proficiency, same weapon prof. as wizards, give them a third domain, spontaneous casting with cure spells as well as all domain spells. Finally, give that guy access to all knowledge skills, and bump him to 6 skills points per level. Also give him Skill Unlocks feat for free at 5th (same way Rogue's Edge class feature works - 5th, 10th, 15th, etc.)
Make that sucker a pure divine caster. Channel is good and powerful, and should remain the regular cleric's schtick... a weak bookish priest should just deal with things with memorized spells and be all about domains.
There we go....a workable idea that took about 30 seconds to type out! You could really just make it into an archetype rather than a new class if you wanted to be lazy. It seems a shame to miss an opportunity for some different features that a new base class would bring though. I would suggest there be some form of "rotatability" in the domains...
There we go....a workable idea that took about 30 seconds to type out! You could really just make it into an archetype rather than a new class if you wanted to be lazy. It seems a shame to miss an opportunity for some different features that a new base class would bring though. I would suggest there be some form of "rotatability" in the domains...I agree with Chess Pwn, but if it has to be done, make it like a cloistered / bookish / scholarly priest, with d6, 1/2 bab, good save just for Will, no channel energy, have them keep their spells in spellbook (prayer book), scribe scroll as bonus feat, then additional craft/metamagic feat at 5th, 10th, 15th and 20th, no armor, no shield proficiency, same weapon prof. as wizards, give them a third domain, spontaneous casting with cure spells as well as all domain spells. Finally, give that guy access to all knowledge skills, and bump him to 6 skills points per level. Also give him Skill Unlocks feat for free at 5th (same way Rogue's Edge class feature works - 5th, 10th, 15th, etc.)
Make that sucker a pure divine caster. Channel is good and powerful, and should remain the regular cleric's schtick... a weak bookish priest should just deal with things with memorized spells and be all about domains.
Would a wizard take this archetype?
Take cleric, trade channel for some extra casting feats per level, lose 1hp per level and reduce your bab and lose your good fort save and not have access to the entire cleric list every day to get a third domain and 4 extra skill points.
Would a cleric take this?
Would a cleric take this archetype?
I feel the answers to both are no. You'd need class features better than the oracles to compensate for what you'd lose for this "Priest" but then people would complain because a full 9th lvl caster would have tons of class features. And you'd have to clearly be able to answer, "Why play a Priest and not play a wizard, Cleric, Witch, or Oracle." And I feel one would have a really hard time coming up with a reason why.
If we are to discuss this more we should take this elsewhere.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Mark, you got a moment for this?I've seen it. Before the FAQ, there was a solid ambiguity caused by the general rules vs. the nauseated rules, which required a PDT ruling (it was a solid topic to FAQ, good searching FAQ fans who brought this one up). Now though? It's pretty clear, and you and Cavall have it well enough in hand.Not sure why the clarification couldn't have been posted in the actual thread? If you've read the thread, then you've seen how lots of people don't understand why this is true. Or perhaps put another way, how did the PDT decide that the single move action that nauseated limits us to is different than the single move action we can elect to limit ourselves to in the surprise round? Yes, nauseated eliminates concentrating and attacks and spells, but those are specific types of acts, not durations of acting.
It would seem the answer is based on comparing staggered. But once again, the "single move action" limit in the surprise round doesn't specifically say you can perform free, swift, etc. And as I said in that thread, are there any other instances where we can only perform the action higher on the food chain, but not lower?
This isn't a big deal for me, it's just beyond confusing. And when the game is confusing, it's less enjoyable. Again, understanding the reasoning is as important as getting a clarification on the rule.
I don't post follow-ups to FAQs. I was answering TOZ's question since unlike Jason (for now) I don't have any caveats on which questions people can ask in this thread. It's looking like I might have to add one, though. That's too bad. I was kind of proud that we'd managed to come through so many posts without one.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...If you haven't played PFS, then the exclusivity of the scenario is probably of less concern to you than it would be to someone who played a whole bunch; you might be better off playing the big multi-table specialI've never played PFS before, would I be able to play with a lvl 1 character? Or would it need to be on equal footing with the rest of the party? I know it works chronologically with a starting session and an "ending" session, unless I am completely misunderstanding it, which is entirely possible. Care to clarify the guidelines for signing up for a PFS game (in a general sense at least)?As I understand it, the sign-up is the same as other Owlcon games (I asked if they would do a special lottery and was told that wasn't the case), but I don't actually know how that works (if you've been there previous years, you know better than I do). You would bring a PFS character for the PFS ones, and Anagnorisis has "pregens." In fact, the Anagnorisis characters start with amnesia and you never see the mechanics behind the pregen, so from a player-centric PoV it's all about getting into character and making decisions; I also optioned First World Problems, but Owlcon organizers (wisely, in my opinion) leaned towards Anagnorisis due to First World Problems having complicated pregens that the players would probably need ahead of time or it would take a while to just read and understand them.Mark, will you be at Owlcon for the full event? If not which day(s) will you be there?Linda and I are there the whole time. We'll be overseeing the PFS Special, and we're also offering some even more exclusive games (one each of of a PFS thingy that's exclusive to staff members, and then I'm running an atmospheric RP/puzzle-heavy game).Hmmm, and how does one sign up for these games?
EDIT: And will there be pregenerated characters?
NN959 basically has it with a thorough explanation above, but it's also relevant that the Linda/me exclusive isn't a Tier 1-5, so level 1 characters can't swing it regardless of party composition.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
After being woken by a 6.4 (some reporting 7.1) earthquake... you ever experience a 'good' earthquake in your life?
Not yet. I am mildly terrified about the expected one that's going to hit up here, though. I used to be more terrified until I checked the kill zones and saw that Redmond isn't expected to get more than a 7 or so out this far from it.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hi Mark....a bit of a gripe I'm afraid!
There are now D6, D8 and D10 arcane caster classes.... Why oh why oh why oh why! does the same not apply for divine classes?!?
Probably the most homebrewed and 3PP class out there is that of the D6 divine caster ("Priest" type) - can you explain why Paizo has never created a version?
There is a gaping hole from a thematic and RP persepctive and I genuinely find it bizarre that it has never been explored. And purely from a business perspective, it would be so popular you would earn $$$$$ if you incorporated it into a new book !
Come on Mark make it happen!! :)))
This was a really good question back on October 24th, when you posted it on this thread before, and you and I had some back and forth with good ideas. Now that it's the second time around, though, I'll just refer you back to last time.
Also, @later posts, I agree with Chess Pwn's spoiler that more discussion belongs elsewhere.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Oh man, did I post my nature thing then too? I really need to work on my memory. Sorry if that's the case Mark, and if it is, I would've deleted it if an hour hadn't passed!
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also, @later posts, I agree with Chess Pwn's spoiler that more discussion belongs elsewhere.
Like here!
This was a really good question back on October 24th, when you posted it on this thread before, and you and I had some back and forth with good ideas. Now that it's the second time around, though, I'll just refer you back to last time.
Also, @later posts, I agree with Chess Pwn's spoiler that more discussion belongs elsewhere.
Ooops sorry! I completely forgot about that - got caught up in the moment!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ooops sorry! I completely forgot about that - got caught up in the moment!
This was a really good question back on October 24th, when you posted it on this thread before, and you and I had some back and forth with good ideas. Now that it's the second time around, though, I'll just refer you back to last time.
Also, @later posts, I agree with Chess Pwn's spoiler that more discussion belongs elsewhere.
No worries, figured it might be that; just explaining why I'm not answering in case it seemed odd I was skipping so many posts!
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hey Mark，I have 3 Questions
1 When I riding a mount, could I use BOOTS OF SPEED with a free action?
2 I am a Primal Companion Hunter， when my animal companion become to Large size by Evolution， could I make it bigger by Animal Growth spell？
3 When my ally and me can make Attacks of Opportunity to an enemy and my ally provide me an other AoO by Broken Wing Gambit, could I make 2 AoO？
thx :P
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hey Mark，I have 3 Questions
1 When I riding a mount, could I use BOOTS OF SPEED with a free action?
2 I am a Primal Companion Hunter， when my animal companion become to Large size by Evolution， could I make it bigger by Animal Growth spell？
3 When my ally and me can make Attacks of Opportunity to an enemy and my ally provide me an other AoO by Broken Wing Gambit, could I make 2 AoO？
thx :P
1) No game rules here, so here's what I would say as a home GM: Since you have to click your heels together, presumably you would need to be riding side-saddle, so just say you're doing that and you're probably okay (though that could make it hard to guide with your knees).
2) "Multiple magical effects that increase size do not stack" is the rule in question. How to apply it here is interesting, since normal eidolons with Large evolution just flat-out are the new size, but the hunter's AC is being increased by the Primal Transformation ability, which is Su and thus magical. At first, it was weird for me that it would act differently than it does for an eidolon, but it looks like they wouldn't stack.
3) Usually your BWG AoO triggers when the opponent attacks your buddy, so I'm having difficulty understanding the setup here.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hey Mark,
EDIT: And just to be clear, I'm asking for your opinion on how it works. =p
This seems like it should be clear, but in talking with a player I'm now not sure how to read this.
If I was doing d8+4 damage with a Lance, and I used Spirited Charge would I now do 3d8+4 or 3d8+16?
Basically is the weapon getting extra damage dice like Vital Strike, or is it working like a Crit?
EDIT: I had assumed it worked like a crit, but he thought it worked like vital strike.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hey Mark,
This seems like it should be clear, but in talking with a player I'm now not sure how to read this.
If I was doing d8+4 damage with a Lance, and I used Spirited Charge would I now do 3d8+4 or 3d8+16?
Basically is the weapon getting extra damage dice like Vital Strike, or is it working like a Crit?
EDIT: I had assumed it worked like a crit, but he thought it worked like vital strike.
I think those are both incorrect and instead you would do 3d8+12, like a crit. So you were basically right.
I think those are both incorrect and instead you would do 3d8+12, like a crit. So you were basically right.Hey Mark,
This seems like it should be clear, but in talking with a player I'm now not sure how to read this.
If I was doing d8+4 damage with a Lance, and I used Spirited Charge would I now do 3d8+4 or 3d8+16?
Basically is the weapon getting extra damage dice like Vital Strike, or is it working like a Crit?
EDIT: I had assumed it worked like a crit, but he thought it worked like vital strike.
Hah! Good catch!
For a home game, are there any rules for building your own animal companion? More specifically, if I wanted to make a giant with cavalier levels (or at least cavalier-like abilities) I've got nowhere to really make his mount. My two ideas were either to take the full animal I wanted him to ride (a triceratops) and add/subtract hit dice to get it to roughly the right CR I wanted, or take the triceratops animal companion version, and just make it a size larger.
I was wondering about the aether kineticist's ability force barrier.
-Is the burn cost 0 for the first round you use it?
-If the burn cost 0 for first round you could use it every other round for no cost, correct?
|
|
Hey Mark，I have 3 Questions
1 When I riding a mount, could I use BOOTS OF SPEED with a free action?
2 I am a Primal Companion Hunter， when my animal companion become to Large size by Evolution， could I make it bigger by Animal Growth spell？
3 When my ally and me can make Attacks of Opportunity to an enemy and my ally provide me an other AoO by Broken Wing Gambit, could I make 2 AoO？
thx :P
1) No game rules here, so here's what I would say as a home GM: Since you have to click your heels together, presumably you would need to be riding side-saddle, so just say you're doing that and you're probably okay (though that could make it hard to guide with your knees).
2) "Multiple magical effects that increase size do not stack" is the rule in question. How to apply it here is interesting, since normal eidolons with Large evolution just flat-out are the new size, but the hunter's AC is being increased by the Primal Transformation ability, which is Su and thus magical. At first, it was weird for me that it would act differently than it does for an eidolon, but it looks like they wouldn't stack.
3) Usually your BWG AoO triggers when the opponent attacks your buddy, so I'm having difficulty understanding the setup here.
3 The enemy shot my buddy with a bow，could I AoO twice by this range attack and BWG？ And if my buddy AoO to that enemy，could I AoO by Paired Opportunists at same time？
Hey Mark, quick question.
Is a character who takes a bloodline familiar considered to have an archetype?
The reason I ask:
In many ways it acts like an archetype.
It is never called an archetype.
All archetypes I know of alter a single class and are formatted Archtype Name (Parent Class). Bloodline familiar can apply to a few classes.
If it is not an archetype, can it stack with archetypes that change the spells gained at a level?
Bloodline familiar delays the level these bonus spells are gained.
The prohibition on altering the same class feature twice is written to only apply to trying to combine multiple archetypes.
A character can take more than one archetype and garner additional alternate class features, but none of the alternate class features can replace or alter the same class feature from the base class as the other alternate feature.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hi Mark:
Does Freedom of Movement negate any other conditions besides those listed in the spell description?
Freedom of Movement-
"...move and attack normally...even under the influence of magic that usually impedes movement, such as paralysis, solid fog, slow, and web... grappl[ing] the target automatically fail...automatically succeeds on any combat maneuver checks and Escape Artist checks made to escape a grapple or a pin...move and attack normally while underwater,"
For instance, players argue that even mental impediments like being stunned should be negated by FOM. They base this on the phrase in the description "[can] move and attack normally...even under the influence of magic that usually impedes movement"
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Is "Kinetic Healer" a positive energy effect or can it heal any living creature regardless if it is healed by positive or negative energy?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And one tiny step for FAQ-kind!
Tiny and smaller creatures: In the section on Tiny and smaller creatures, it says that entering a creature’s space provokes an attack of opportunity, but typically 5-foot steps don’t provoke an attack of opportunity. If a Tiny or smaller creature took a 5-foot step into a creature’s space, would it provoke an attack of opportunity?
Yes. Even with a 5-foot step, a Tiny or smaller creature entering a creature’s space provokes an attack of opportunity (unless it is using a more specific ability to avoid the attack of opportunity such as the Monkey Shine feat). This doesn’t mean that a Tiny or smaller creature entering a creature’s space and moving out of a threatened square with a move action provokes two attacks of opportunity from that creature, for the same reason that moving out of multiple of a creature’s threatened squares in the same move action doesn’t provoke two attacks of opportunity.
Thanks! That moves doge/mobility up on Grr's priorities list...
Would acrobatics count as a more specific ability to move into someone's square? Or does the blatant small medium/sizist nature of the rules mean that the acrobatics is just for moving through :)
FAQ today? Bard related maybe?
guess not?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Is there anyway we could get Searing Flesh to be, you know, useful? Especially against people using melee weapons? Fire Elementals burn people attack them with daggers, but people channeling the Plane of Fire itself can't? That seems quite inconsistent.