|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
When GMing a PFS table, what rules most often need to be explained or briefly revisited to make sure everyone is on the same page? I'm not talking about Table Variation, but the normal PF/PFS rules.
Examples:
The Grappled condition...what can and can't I do?
Readying an action--you can't ready an action outside of combat and you can't ready a full-round action (and, sometimes, the initiative consequences of a readied action triggering in the next round)
Owning Herolab/consulting a website does not equal owning the material
etc
How many attacks of opportunity we get, and whether or not an action "should be possible". We have a physicist in our party, so things get...complicated. And hilarious.
Venture-Lieutenant, Indiana—Indianapolis
|
I always have to explain how bonuses from cover are applied. I have players who continually try to take -4 from their attack rolls, when I try to point out that it's actually a +4 bonus to the defender's AC. Mathematically, it's the same effect on the die roll, but it is mechanically different.
My campaign is full of new players (myself included), so we get a lot of recurring questions that would make experienced players shake their heads.
|
|
The difference between readying and delaying, and more importantly, why you would choose one over the other.
Combat pets are not an extension of your character, so they can't a)automatically know what you want them to do, b) see and know everything you do, c) have the ability to accomplish complex tactical maneuvers (like "ready an action to attack the wizard if he starts casting"--I only allow that if the player also readies an action to command the pet). This varies from pet to pet, of course, but there's a tendency (a fairly natural one, I think) for players to treat their combat pets as telepathically linked clones of themselves.
Less an actual rule misunderstanding, but I often have to remind players of the bonus types (and that same type bonuses don't stack).
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
** spoiler omitted **The character is lying on the ground. A prone attacker has a –4 penalty on melee attack rolls and cannot use a ranged weapon (except for a crossbow). A prone defender gains a +4 bonus to Armor Class against ranged attacks, but takes a –4 penalty to AC against melee attacks.
And that firearms can be used while prone (a rule found in Ultimate Combat).
|
Charging an enemy with reach. Does it provoke an attack of opportunity.
One part of the rulebook says yes, as you are moving through a threatened area. Another part says no as you are charging and the charge action does not.
I really wish there was an official FAQ on this one instead of digging around forum posts by non-rule writers.
|
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
One part of the rulebook says yes, as you are moving through a threatened area. Another part says no as you are charging and the charge action does not.
That ones easy. You'll provoke if you move through the space, but not for the act of charging itself. Same as flying does not make you immune to being flat footed just because the chart says you're not flat footed just because you're flying
|
And if we start listing rules everybody disagrees on in dire need of a FAQ we'd be here all day.
Jump DCs, are they for jumping over a x-foot-gap or do you have to jump from square to square like a broken knight? That is, do you need to hit a 5 or a 10 to jump over one square?
Using Acrobatics to avoid attacks of Opportunity, do you have to declare your whole move a tumbling action or can you choose to only tumble on certain squares (so these are the only ones where your speed is halved) and if it's the former, how does this interact with double moves?
A paladin's detect evil, is it always the move-action-version described or can he choose between the standard action and the move action version or does he have to activate the normal version before using the move action version? (Though this is slightly easier to solve than the others - the move action version would be completly idiotic if he really had to spend a standard action to keep it up every round as the spell does, so it's probably not the third version.)
And so on, and so on...
EDIT: Okay, maybe not everybody disagrees on, some of them seem to have a consensus. But there are always enough people arguing for the other side because it's vague enough.
|
|
Additional Resouces and needing to own the books outside the Core Rulebook if one wants to use something.
When one can Take 10 or Take 20. Lots of people not letting me take 10 to swim in not-so-calm water, or climb rope, or jump a pit, escape bonds, or pick a lock outside of combat because of the "risk of negative consequences when failing" rather than caring about the "not in immediate danger or distracted" part of taking 10. Folks keep mixing up the Take 20's "When you have plenty of time, you are faced with no threats or distractions, and the skill being attempted carries no penalties for failure" requirements for Take 10.
Precise Shot and careful positioning for ranged attacks are important if one doesn't want buttload of penalties for the shot. Ranged combat is pretty strong as lot as those things are watched out for. Shooting into Melee is -4 to the attack. Cover grants the bonus to AC, not extra penalties to the attack. Cover is something the GM is supposed to be in charge of when determining if an attack hits, not an extra penalty to be thrown at the player.
Even though everyone is aware of each other and itching for a fight, once initiative is rolled, and someone hasn't acted yet, they are flat-footed. If someone initiated the fight by throwing a punch, that may be a surprise round, but if they roll low on overall initiative, folks are gonna recover mighty quick.
Readying an action does change the initiative order. If someone's readied action gets triggered, in subsequent rounds, his new initiative order is right before the target who triggered the readied action.
|
|
Spellbooks and Learning New Spells.
Every time someone starts up playing a wizard/magus/alchemist for the first time in PFS, I gotta check how they've been adding extra spells to their spellbooks. More often than not, they've been buying scrolls and scribing the spells from that. Those players get confused/surprised when I gotta pull up the magic chapter and the scribing/spell obtaining costs are a fraction of what they're paying.
|
|
Here are some:
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Here are some:
That taking 20 on Perception takes one minute, not twenty minutes.
I thought it was two minutes? that taking a twenty was effectively taking twenty rounds (6 seconds x 20 = 2 minutes) to do something?
edit: ninja'd
Looking is a move action, so you can do it twice a round
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That taking 20 on Perception takes one minute, not twenty minutes.
Actually it usually takes 2 minutes.
Taking 20 takes 20 times as long as making a single check would take (usually 2 minutes for a skill that takes 1 round or less to perform).
Since the rule you cite is referring to the entire Skills system as a whole, "usually" means "for most, but not all, skills". That means you need to be able to name at least one "skill that takes 1 round or less to perform" for which "usually 2 minutes" is NOT the case.
If Perception doesn't fit the bill, then which skill does? Because if you can't name a skill that takes 1 round or less to perform and does NOT take 2 minutes to T20 on, then you end up changing "usually" to "always", which is by definition against the rules.
But if someone wants to stick to the assertion that T20 always takes at least 2 minutes no matter what, then I guess I can just say "In that case, instead of 'taking 20', I'll just spend 20 move actions to roll 20d20" and throw a bunch of dice on the table, then tell you the highest result. And that will take me 1 minute, with no wiggle room to argue otherwise.
|
|
wait whatHere are some:
That a creature with Combat Reflexes can still only take one attack of opportunity against me for moving through its threatened area, regardless of how many threatened squares I move through.
It is in the Combat chapter.
Combat Reflexes and Additional Attacks of Opportunity: If you have the Combat Reflexes feat, you can add your Dexterity bonus to the number of attacks of opportunity you can make in a round. This feat does not let you make more than one attack for a given opportunity, but if the same opponent provokes two attacks of opportunity from you, you could make two separate attacks of opportunity (since each one represents a different opportunity). Moving out of more than one square threatened by the same opponent in the same round doesn't count as more than one opportunity for that opponent. All these attacks are at your full normal attack bonus.
|
How many attacks of opportunity we get, and whether or not an action "should be possible". We have a physicist in our party, so things get...complicated. And hilarious.
Along those lines, I have to constantly remind people that Pathfinder physics can be and often is very different from real-world physics.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
How many attacks of opportunity we get, and whether or not an action "should be possible". We have a physicist in our party, so things get...complicated. And hilarious.Along those lines, I have to constantly remind people that Pathfinder physics can be and often is very different from real-world physics.
True.
As is Pathfinder mathematics. :)
In particular, Pathfinder √2 is a variable between 1 and 1.5. Don't even get me started on Pathfinder π. :)
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Sorry, The Fox, I should have said "Well I'll be damned" or something along those lines. I looked it up after you posted it and was surprised, that's all. Thanks for posting the rule nontheless!
And the you-check-one-square-every-time-thing was a real pain in the butt in the Library of the Lion...
(Also, I heard that in Golarion a² + b² = c² + x, where x is determined by whatever Desna wants it to be at the time.)
|
|
True.
As is Pathfinder mathematics. :)
In particular, Pathfinder sqrt(2) is a variable between 1 and 1.5. Don't even get me started on Pathfinder π. :)
Yes! Pathfinder math, where the shortest path can actually end up in 3 different squares thanks to the first 5' diagonal only being 5'
E.G. you have a huge monster 4 squares from a PC as seen below with X and numbers being empty squares, O being the monster, and P being the PC:
X X X X X
X o O o X
X o O o X
X o O o X
X 1 2 3 X
X X X X X
X X X X X
X X P X X
Technically any one of 1, 2, or 3 are mathematically the closest distance to charge and are all straight lines, thus any of them are legal to charge to. I've seen plenty of people that disagree with me, but haven't found anything in the rules that would deny it.
|
|
(Also, I heard that in Golarion a² + b² = c² + x, where x is determined by whatever Desna wants it to be at the time.)
I think x is determined by Norgorber! ;)
For those of you who are curious, in Golarion π = 4. But there is no general formula for the area of a circle like A = π r² like there is in our world.
Spellbooks and Learning New Spells.
Every time someone starts up playing a wizard/magus/alchemist for the first time in PFS, I gotta check how they've been adding extra spells to their spellbooks. More often than not, they've been buying scrolls and scribing the spells from that. Those players get confused/surprised when I gotta pull up the magic chapter and the scribing/spell obtaining costs are a fraction of what they're paying.
I have this issue but in reverse. I've only been playing a few months, but none of the 6 GMs I've played with allowed me to pay an NPC for spellbook access. They say this isn't allowed in PFS and that you have only two ways to get additional spells: 1. buy scrolls 2. copy from the spellbook of another PC who is running in the same adventure as you.
The last GM said that he had a 12th level wizard and had never heard of being allowed to pay an NPC for spellbook access.
Then there was the GM that said I couldn't take 10 when learning a spell from a scroll. Having to buy a new scroll for each failure gets expensive real fast.
|
|
That Bob's ability which lasts 1 round expires at the beginning of his next turn. (I'm looking at you, Bit of Luck (Su).)
Could you pull up the relevant bit for me? If so this makes summoning at early levels even worse than I thought.
In this area it's common to need to be informed of stacking rules on various things. Types of bonuses mostly.
We've had lots of back and forth discussions over falling rules when you are greater than 400 feet or whatever in the air. To be precise 5000 feet. We ended up using the rules of real world physics for that one.
How magi work. Just in general. Spellstrike is apparently complex for some people. As is spell combat.
Holding the charge and touch spells. I.e. Yes I can walk around with lightning hand. Yes I would like a circumstance bonus on my intimidate check please. :P
Diplomacy, Fly, Handle Animal, and the particulars of a few other skills.
|
|
Since the rule you cite is referring to the entire Skills system as a whole, "usually" means "for most, but not all, skills". That means you need to be able to name at least one "skill that takes 1 round or less to perform" for which "usually 2 minutes" is NOT the case.
No, I don't. I disagree with your assertion that the rule means "for most, but not all, skills"
I think it means most of the time, all skills that are 1 round or less to use take 2 minutes to take 20.
As a GM I'm sure there are some circumstances where I think 1 minute would be appropriate for take 20 on perception. However I've found "searching x" to be by far the most common use of take 20 and think it obviously fits into the usually box.
I'm happy to disagree rather than argue further on what is really just rules minutia though.
|
|
True.
As is Pathfinder mathematics. :)
In particular, Pathfinder sqrt(2) is a variable between 1 and 1.5. Don't even get me started on Pathfinder π. :)
Yes! Pathfinder math, where the shortest path can actually end up in 3 different squares thanks to the first 5' diagonal only being 5'
E.G. you have a huge monster 4 squares from a PC as seen below with X and numbers being empty squares, O being the monster, and P being the PC:
X X X X X
X o O o X
X o O o X
X o O o X
X 1 2 3 X
X X X X X
X X X X X
X X P X XTechnically any one of 1, 2, or 3 are mathematically the closest distance to change and are all straight lines, thus any of them are legal to charge to. I've seen plenty of people that disagree with me, but haven't found anything in the rules that would deny it.
I'd argue that as soon as you have to take a diagonal step you are covering a greater distance than by running a straight line because while it only counts as one square, this is not because the distance is the same but because it's the only way how diagonal movements works in a square-based environment. By running the same path twice positions 1 and 3 were suddenly 7 squares while position 2 was 6 squares. And we all now:
x*2 = 7, y*2 = 6, thusx*2 > y*2 --> x > y.
So the way to positions 1 and 3 should be longer.
Just because the first diagonal only counts as 5' that does not mean it actually IS 5'.
|
|
Could you pull up the relevant bit for me? If so this makes summoning at early levels even worse than I thought.
That Bob's ability which lasts 1 round expires at the beginning of his next turn. (I'm looking at you, Bit of Luck (Su).)
It is also in the Combat chapter. First page of that chapter.
Each round represents 6 seconds in the game world; there are 10 rounds in a minute of combat. A round normally allows each character involved in a combat situation to act.
Each round's activity begins with the character with the highest initiative result and then proceeds in order. When a character's turn comes up in the initiative sequence, that character performs his entire round's worth of actions. (For exceptions, see Attacks of Opportunity and Special Initiative Actions.)
When the rules refer to a “full round”, they usually mean a span of time from a particular initiative count in one round to the same initiative count in the next round. Effects that last a certain number of rounds end just before the same initiative count that they began on.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Could you pull up the relevant bit for me? If so this makes summoning at early levels even worse than I thought.
That Bob's ability which lasts 1 round expires at the beginning of his next turn. (I'm looking at you, Bit of Luck (Su).)
It is also in the Combat chapter. First page of that chapter.
Each round represents 6 seconds in the game world; there are 10 rounds in a minute of combat. A round normally allows each character involved in a combat situation to act.
Each round's activity begins with the character with the highest initiative result and then proceeds in order. When a character's turn comes up in the initiative sequence, that character performs his entire round's worth of actions. (For exceptions, see Attacks of Opportunity and Special Initiative Actions.)
When the rules refer to a “full round”, they usually mean a span of time from a particular initiative count in one round to the same initiative count in the next round. Effects that last a certain number of rounds end just before the same initiative count that they began on.
Rough stuff for the early game buffers and conjurers. Oh well, they both get their moment in the sun a bit later. Thanks for contributing so much useful information to this thread Fox.
One thing I've definitely overlooked in the past is that Sorcerors don't magically get better with metamagic rods. They always get the suck end of the stick, particularly with Arcanists existing now. D:
|
|
True.
As is Pathfinder mathematics. :)
In particular, Pathfinder sqrt(2) is a variable between 1 and 1.5. Don't even get me started on Pathfinder π. :)
Yes! Pathfinder math, where the shortest path can actually end up in 3 different squares thanks to the first 5' diagonal only being 5'
E.G. you have a huge monster 4 squares from a PC as seen below with X and numbers being empty squares, O being the monster, and P being the PC:
X X X X X
X o O o X
X o O o X
X o O o X
X 1 2 3 X
X X X X X
X X X X X
X X P X XTechnically any one of 1, 2, or 3 are mathematically the closest distance to change and are all straight lines, thus any of them are legal to charge to. I've seen plenty of people that disagree with me, but haven't found anything in the rules that would deny it.
I'd argue that as soon as you have to take a diagonal step you are covering a greater distance than by running a straight line because while it only counts as one square, this is not because the distance is the same but because it's the only way how diagonal movements works in a square-based environment. By running the same path twice positions 1 and 3 were suddenly 7 squares while position 2 was 6 squares. And we all now:
x*2 = 7, y*2 = 6, thus
x*2 > y*2 --> x > y.
So the way to positions 1 and 3 should be longer.Just because the first diagonal only counts as 5' that does not mean it actually IS 5'.
You guys might find this post by SKR interesting. Be sure to read the few posts following also, at least up to his next post in that thread.
Edit:
All of the following (A, B, C, D, and E) are legal choices for charges to end in when charging from P (the enemy is size Huge and occupies the squares marked O):
XOOOX
XOOOX
XOOOX
ABCDE
XXXXX
XXXXX
XXPXX
Edit edit: it is actually worthwhile to read all of his posts in that thread.