Deliquescent gloves + ranged


Rules Questions

51 to 71 of 71 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

I did notice even see that post, but PFS is only a small consideration for how the rules work. If they were the primary consideration things would not have to be approved being going to PFS. They would be edited to be sure they did not have to be approved. The reasoning was explained by a dev in detail before.

PS: That was for DarkSol.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Paizo Charter Superscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

"Waiting for wraithstrike to notice my post right before his"

"waves"


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dragnmoon wrote:

"Waiting for wraithstrike to notice my post right before his"

"waves"

Stop posting so close to me. :)

I had a feeling it was mid-game. I just read it as "I ain't reading no damn book. Quit asking me about it." I also thought it was an ongoing issue in the area, but thanks for the clarification.

The weapon is being wielded when you use it. All weapons are wielded.

Quote:
Thrown Weapons: Daggers, clubs, shortspears, spears, darts, javelins, throwing axes, light hammers, tridents, shuriken, and nets are thrown weapons. The wielder applies his Strength modifier to damage dealt by thrown weapons...

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Paizo Charter Superscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Thanks for the quote wraithstike.

Nope the item was read during the game, a quick ruling was made by the GM and should have gone from there. GMs make mistakes, it happens you move on and bring it up again after the game as the OP was advised and assumed happened.

No ongoing problem first time ever brought up.


Dragnmoon wrote:

Thanks for the quote wraithstike.

Nope the item was read during the game, a quick ruling was made by the GM and should have gone from there. GMs make mistakes, it happens you move on and bring it up again after the game as the OP was advised and assumed happened.

No ongoing problem first time ever brought up.

If the GM didn't see the word "melee" in the description of the item, he not only made a mistake; he made a stupid mistake. Not only that, according to what I've read, he was insistent on defending his stupid mistake instead of admitting it. If it were a case of disparate or unclear rules, that would be one thing. This wasn't such a case; it was a clear rule that the gloves apply to any wielded weapon, not just melee weapons. If he needed "rationaliation" for it, it's not that hard to just touch the ammo before it is fired to lace the tip with a streak of acid. He flubbed it and got defensive and stubborn about it. Everyone makes mistakes but that doesn't mean you shouldn't strive not to make mistakes in all situations.


Not everyone is going to get the rules right the first time; nobody is perfect, and mistakes are how we learn. that being said, at our table sometimes it may take too long to research a particular rule, so the DM will make a decision on the fly and the rest of us go with the flow,and then after the game we take the time to properly look it up. If we find the DM was wrong, no problem, we know know what the rule is and move forward from that point. I take issue with DMs who will take a guess at the rules and then not only not bother to educate themselves later, but actually actively resist finding out the proper rules. They shut their ears off when somebody dares to contradict their ruling, and they have the mindset of " I have decreed my ruling and so shall my decision be evermore!" It's frustrating to find a DM who refuses to acknowledge even the possibility that they may be wrong. It's not good gaming, and it's not being a good person.

Liberty's Edge

Paizo Charter Superscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
pezlerpolychromatic wrote:
Not everyone is going to get the rules right the first time; nobody is perfect, and mistakes are how we learn. that being said, at our table sometimes it may take too long to research a particular rule, so the DM will make a decision on the fly and the rest of us go with the flow,and then after the game we take the time to properly look it up. If we find the DM was wrong, no problem, we know know what the rule is and move forward from that point.

Luckily that is exactly what is the case with the Opening Poster. He may have not liked the ruling and disagreed with it but the GMd listened made a ruling and tried to move on.

pezlerpolychromatic wrote:
I take issue with DMs who will take a guess at the rules and then not only not bother to educate themselves later, but actually actively resist finding out the proper rules. They shut their ears off when somebody dares to contradict their ruling, and they have the mindset of " I have decreed my ruling and so shall my decision be evermore!" It's frustrating to find a DM who refuses to acknowledge even the possibility that they may be wrong. It's not good gaming, and it's not being a good person.

And this is not what happened, in fact after the game the GM looked further into it on his own and came to the conclusion he made the wrong call and will do the correct call if it comes up again.


I understand what you're saying Dragnmoon, though I was not commenting specifically on the OP's statement, but in gaming in general. There are good and bad GMs out there, and ones like I had referred to have been around since gaming was invented. We all must do what we can to limit the latter, or rather to help improve them to be good GMs.

Dark Archive

I am just glad that the op had his issue resolved. I have been in his shoes but my issues were not resolved. I was forced into rebuilds a selling my gear off at half value, waiting for months to figure out a new character concept that I wanted to play, and all the while the rules say I can do what I was trying to do....but the VC and vl disagree so meh.

Seeing a small victory for someone else is better than no victory for anybody.

Sczarni

I am going to post on here to make peace and than leave it alone.

I was the gm for the encounter in question. This was the first time I had came across this item in pfs or pathfinder at all. I did make a mistake in reading the description in somehow not reading the last few words of the first paragraph when it mentions that the gloves basically give the weapon the corrosive weapon special ability. When I got home, I went back over the description and realized I ruled wrong. In pulling up this thread while at work today, I did see that Mike Brock did confirm its legality for pfs.

Now for those who feel that I was being stubborn and/or an idiot, I may actually be both but not in this case. After I made the judgement call, the player choose to spend the next 2 or so hours of the encounter creating this thread and less then he should have on the encounter. After receiving enough feedback to his liking, he yelled out exclaiming that "he has gotten the messageboards to explode and that I need to read." He had not actually tried to correct my judgement on the reading besides creating this thread. Since this how he chose to argue my initial judgement (by focusing on this thread during rounds beyond his own and then demand I stop the encounter to read his thread in how he did), he rubbed me the wrong way in how proving he was right and I was wrong was more important to him than playing the encounter or how the other 2 players enjoyed the encounter. I told him that if he still had a problem with my judgement call, he could talk to the person I saw as our unofficial pfs leader for the area whom was GMing an encounter in the next room.

I do realize that my initial judgement was indeed wrong. But the creator of this thread could have done a much better job to prove his case that he was right.

I also realize that I am an average GM at best in some cases but there are times to argue an issue if you are not providing proof of your claim on the spot (and I mean official pathfinder/pfs material; not hero labs).


I very much appreciate the response from everyone, especially Mike on the situation.

Unfortunately it seems things are straying from their original purpose and it seems perspectives of the situation are being tossed into the air, so before this becomes buried in a flurry of insults and accusations, I'd like this thread to pleased be closed. Not sure how to go about doing that, if anyone can please assist.

Thank you all for your time and effort.

Take care.

Grand Lodge

Ulfen Death Squad wrote:
the messageboards to explode

This is not the message boards exploding.

60 posts in one day is tame.
160 is impressive.
260 is the board starting to explode.... :)

Dark Archive

Hmm, from what the op stated he waited until after the game, and time had elapsed and multiple people were involved and the ruling had remained the same. I guess it is a case of he said/she said. Either way, the ruling is cleared up and if the op was being less than honest about the events, perhaps they will learn to be more so in the future. If they were completely honest, then again a he said/she said situation and since everything is said and done, all that would matter now is that the rules are understood.

Sczarni

Dragnmoon wrote:
changed it... but originally had a question about it working on thrown weapons....

The point of the "thrown weapons" was to say that a thrown weapon is wielded (OBVIOUSLY) and would get the bonus when it is thrown (and becomes A RANGE WEAPON).

Thrown weapons have to be wielded to be thrown. Ranged weapons have to be wielded to fire projectiles.

Thank you for changing your post and letting us know it is now clear.

Sczarni

FLite wrote:
Ulfen Death Squad wrote:
the messageboards to explode

This is not the message boards exploding.

60 posts in one day is tame.
160 is impressive.
260 is the board starting to explode.... :)

Right.. Post something about how good/bad the Rogue class is if you want them to explode... lolz.


Michael Brock wrote:
Yes the gloves allow a ranged weapon to add the corrosive property.

@Michael Brock,

You know, when you take time out of your day to help out the little guy, you're going to make me feel bad when Indy beats Atlanta in the Super Bowl.


So...it seems like there is just one person (James Risner) who thinks it doesn't work?

Sczarni

Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Those that disagree would be relying on house rules.

Grand Lodge

Actually James Risner only said it would never occur to him to use it that way, and if your GM says it doesn't work it doesn't.

He never definitively said that it didn't work by the rules.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

FLite wrote:

Actually James Risner only said it would never occur to him to use it that way, and if your GM says it doesn't work it doesn't.

He never definitively said that it didn't work by the rules.

+1

I'm fine with it working, but without someone saying "I'm using this with a ranged weapon" I wouldn't have imagined it worked with them.

Shadow Lodge

Dark Immortal wrote:
Hmm, from what the op stated he waited until after the game, and time had elapsed and multiple people were involved and the ruling had remained the same. I guess it is a case of he said/she said. Either way, the ruling is cleared up and if the op was being less than honest about the events, perhaps they will learn to be more so in the future. If they were completely honest, then again a he said/she said situation and since everything is said and done, all that would matter now is that the rules are understood.

It's not just about whether the OP is being or should be honest on the messageboards - and while the OP states that he intended to bring it up after the session his posts don't actually say at what point the session ended. Both sides could be honest at least as far as they interpret the situation.

The advice I'd give the OP if the GM's assessment is accurate is that it is never a good idea to disrupt or mentally check out of a session in order to get hung up on a rules dispute. I say this as someone who has made that mistake and regretted it. Not only do you annoy the other players and the GM who you'd like to get on your side after the session, but you end up having less fun than if you'd just rolled with the ruling.

51 to 71 of 71 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Deliquescent gloves + ranged All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.