Earlier tonight in a PFS game, I dropped prone to avoid being pin-cushioned by some annoying archers. The GM proceeded to tell me that I would not be able to use my kinetic blast while prone since the rules state the following:
AND
The GM said that since the kinetic blast was considered a weapon, and was not a crossbow or firearm, then I could not use it while prone.
Was this ruling correct?
I would think you still can. It's a SLA and not an actual weapon. Functionally, all you need to do is point your hand at the target. It's not complex like a bow+arrow.
You can't for a bow prone because it's unwieldy. A crossbow is less so, which is why it works. A kinetic blast is far less unwieldy than a crossbow.
Earlier tonight in a PFS game, I dropped prone to avoid being pin-cushioned by some annoying archers. The GM proceeded to tell me that I would not be able to use my kinetic blast while prone since the rules state the following:
AND
The GM said that since the kinetic blast was considered a weapon, and was not a crossbow or firearm, then I could not use it while prone.
Was this ruling correct?
I think the key part is the following sentence: "The kineticist is never considered to be wielding or gripping the kinetic blast". If you're never "wielding" the weapon, there shouldn't be any reason you can't use it while prone.
Also, by your GM's ruling, you couldn't use most ranged touch attack spells and alchemist's bombs while prone.
PFS encourages snap judgments like this though, it seems. Going by the "RAW" in a dishonest attempt to say "This is the rules" by cherry-picking partial rules quotes instead of just admitting "I don't want you to do that".
You're in a home game, everyone has come together from maybe an hour away to play together for 5 hours. Then this situation comes up. The GM hasn't said he's made any houserules about this issue, so he's wanting to try and follow the rules as to how this works. Perhaps this GM has only been playing pathfinder for 3 months perhaps for 3 years, we're not sure for this story. So the GM wanting to play by the rules thinks of the rules he knows of. He knows that the kinetic blast makes a ranged touch attack. And many people on the boards say that any ranged attack is an attack with a weapon-like thing and benefits from PBS, but that could mean that penalties, like not being able to shoot prone, is also enforced. Do you have a solid rule that says you can throw bombs while prone or cast ray spells from prone? If not anything "RAW" or even anything solidly clarifying "RAI" then your interpretation that you can isn't really more valid than the interpretation that it can't. So what would you do in this home game? Would you "ruin the fun" and spend perhaps an hour or more of your 5 hours trying to look into this and discuss what should be done. Or would you make a quick rule using your best guess, allowed or disallowed, and then look into it afterwards before the next session?
Again, how would a Home GM doing this be any different from the PFS experienced discribed? What makes PFS GMs "so evil"?
Would feel different if you knew the GM spent a minute and wished it was allowed but doesn't want to make a houserule? Perhaps in a situation where a character wants to power attack without the feat. Does the fact that he rules it doesn't because he feels the rules say so even though he thinks it'd be cool make him a bad GM in the same way?
And for my personal experience, I've had worse GM calls made in all my home games than any PFS game I've been a part of. I've had GM's think that a witch's Evil Eye was a free action since you were just looking at someone. That a creature larger than you falls on you when it dies. That you can gather information without a Diplomacy check, and that diplomacy couldn't be used to change a person's attitude.
See here's the difference: Most people can look and apply common sense that says "Yeah this should work even if it might not be RAW I'll look it up later".
PFS GMs are encouraged to use this sort of half-assed "RAW" rulings even when common sense would contradict it, because they're supposed to stick as close to RAW as possible even when they don't understand it.
Granted I've had PFS GMs that ruled that Favored Enemy (Humans) works on any humanoid creature regardless of type, Blindsense is superior to blindsight, creatures can aid another on grapple checks to move the grappler, grapplee, and themselves twice their moverate, and that all constructs are immune to critical hits and precision damage.
There's plenty of variance
PFS have as much freedom to ban things that are "broken RAW". A PFS GM would be completely allowed to say "Yeah this should work even if it might not be RAW I'll look it up later". Basically you rule just like you would in a Home game. The only difference is once you do know the rule you can't change it.
Granted I've had PFS GMs that ruled that Favored Enemy (Humans) works on any humanoid creature regardless of type, Blindsense is superior to blindsight, creatures can aid another on grapple checks to move the grappler, grapplee, and themselves twice their moverate, and that all constructs are immune to critical hits and precision damage.
There's plenty of variance
Those are pretty extreme examples... I was under the impression PFS was meant to be regulated to be as close to RAW as reasonable and that houseruling to that extent wouldn't be allowed.
Those are pretty extreme examples... I was under the impression PFS was meant to be regulated to be as close to RAW as reasonable and that houseruling to that extent wouldn't be allowed.Granted I've had PFS GMs that ruled that Favored Enemy (Humans) works on any humanoid creature regardless of type, Blindsense is superior to blindsight, creatures can aid another on grapple checks to move the grappler, grapplee, and themselves twice their moverate, and that all constructs are immune to critical hits and precision damage.
There's plenty of variance
GMs are expected to try and follow the rules as best as they know. So if nobody at the table knows, and if they don't bother looking it up at the moment because they don't want to delay a game, then they make rulings of what they think the rule is. They are encouraged to then look stuff up after the game to get the correct ruling and follow it from then on.
GMs are expected to try and follow the rules as best as they know. So if nobody at the table knows, and if they don't bother looking it up at the moment because they don't want to delay a game, then they make rulings of what they think the rule is. They are encouraged to then look stuff up after the game to get the correct ruling and follow it from then on.
Everyone knows that Favored Enemy (Humans) doesn't apply to all humanoid creatures regardless of type. That is not an example of "follow the rules as best as they know", it's a blatant houserule. You don't need to look that up, you just look at the name of the ability and you know.
GMs are expected to try and follow the rules as best as they know. So if nobody at the table knows, and if they don't bother looking it up at the moment because they don't want to delay a game, then they make rulings of what they think the rule is. They are encouraged to then look stuff up after the game to get the correct ruling and follow it from then on.Everyone knows that Favored Enemy (Humans) doesn't apply to all humanoid creatures regardless of type. That is not an example of "follow the rules as best as they know", it's a blatant houserule. You don't need to look that up, you just look at the name of the ability and you know.
Oh I wouldn't know about that.
It's amazing the things people don't know. I was two years into D&D 3.0 before I realized that druids could change their animal form each and every time they wild shaped (I thought they were limited to a single form per size category).
You'd be surprised. I've had to explain to a few people that Monstrous Humanoids and Humanoids are two different Types when they've tried to Charm/Hold/Dominate Person one.
In their case Favored Enemy Human encompasses anything humanoid in shape. Inluding human-shaped outsiders and undead.
See here's the difference: Most people can look and apply common sense that says "Yeah this should work even if it might not be RAW I'll look it up later".
PFS GMs are encouraged to use this sort of half-assed "RAW" rulings even when common sense would contradict it, because they're supposed to stick as close to RAW as possible even when they don't understand it.
That's incorrect. The PFS Guide to organized play specifically states that GMs are supposed to use common sense to adjudicate situations where rules are unclear. I really don't understand where this misconception comes from.
PFS format has a number a disadvantages & flaws, but this one is simply variation in GM quality. People post bad experiences on forums more readily than good ones, and a large pool of rotating GMs is going to naturally result in more variation and negative experiences.
I really don't understand where this misconception comes from.
...From scenarios like the OP.
I really don't understand where this misconception comes from....From scenarios like the OP.
Where if he left out the word PFS in the first sentence you'd have not known it was for PFS because the question and situation is just as likely to have occurred in a non-pfs game.
PFS format has a number a disadvantages & flaws, but this one is simply variation in GM quality. People post bad experiences on forums more readily than good ones, and a large pool of rotating GMs is going to naturally result in more variation and negative experiences.
And on this point I wanted to reiterate that the particular GM in question usually does pretty swell job.
Oh I wouldn't know about that.
It's amazing the things people don't know. I was two years into D&D 3.0 before I realized that druids could change their animal form each and every time they wild shaped (I thought they were limited to a single form per size category).
It's ridiculous to think that Favoured Enemy (Human) would work on things that aren't human. I sincerely doubt that both the GM and the ranger's player didn't know that the ability didn't apply to 80% of the creatures in the game including undead and outsiders, and that it only applied to humans.... It's in the name. They knew, they houseruled. Houserules aren't bad, but they aren't meant to be a thing in PFS unless it is a on the fly decision to make up for the gap of knowledge of people at the table so the game doesn't get bogged down looking through rulebooks.
See here's the difference: Most people can look and apply common sense that says "Yeah this should work even if it might not be RAW I'll look it up later".
PFS GMs are encouraged to use this sort of half-assed "RAW" rulings even when common sense would contradict it, because they're supposed to stick as close to RAW as possible even when they don't understand it.
PFS GMs are encouraged to use explicit RAW rulings even when common sense would contradict it because nearly every rule in the game explicitly violate common sense. If you want to have a consistent experience playing the game then you run it with the rules as explicitly written even though sometimes the rules are dumb.
