Max Dexterity Issue - increasing armor minimum


Advice

51 to 63 of 63 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

Dragonborn3 wrote:
Only because it only works on a target once per day.

That's one downside yes but the main reason it just doesn't work is it cant follow the antagonize if doing so would cause it harm meaning they can't ever follow up unless the person using it is either A)alone or B) already the biggest threat on the board, and if its the latter than they would already be attacking the user of the feat anyways and if its the former than there's no point using the feat anyways.

Shadow Lodge

Moving up to attack doesn't cause harm by itself, nor do casting spells defensively or making ranged attacks if not threatened.

You can also move around threatened areas too, so you can avoid AoOs. There are a myriad of ways to not come to harm and still attack.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The way antagonize doesn't work is if its surrounded but would need to move or shoot you. Or if its a non reach melee char and you are using a reach weapon.

Aka there are very few ways it "works" but does nothing.

Btw there is also the Call Out feat. People always seem to forget it.

Grand Lodge

Temperans wrote:

The way antagonize doesn't work is if its surrounded but would need to move or shoot you. Or if its a non reach melee char and you are using a reach weapon.

Aka there are very few ways it "works" but does nothing.

Btw there is also the Call Out feat. People always seem to forget it.

I never knew that one.


Dragonborn3 wrote:

Moving up to attack doesn't cause harm by itself, nor do casting spells defensively or making ranged attacks if not threatened.

You can also move around threatened areas too, so you can avoid AoOs. There are a myriad of ways to not come to harm and still attack.

Ignoring high value targets that are casting devastating spells however is harmful in fact its a severe health risk to do so.

Shadow Lodge

Luckily the feat says nothing about future harm then.


Dragonborn3 wrote:
Luckily the feat says nothing about future harm then.

It states thing that would bring harm to it and lists things as well, like falling off a cliff that doesn't do harm right away and that's still barred.

Shadow Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Hey, if you want to make it useless that's your game, buddy.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
doomman47 wrote:
Dragonborn3 wrote:

Moving up to attack doesn't cause harm by itself, nor do casting spells defensively or making ranged attacks if not threatened.

You can also move around threatened areas too, so you can avoid AoOs. There are a myriad of ways to not come to harm and still attack.

Ignoring high value targets that are casting devastating spells however is harmful in fact its a severe health risk to do so.

Taking up arms and engaging opponents at all is potentially harmful. He should full withdraw from any risk.

/s

You are metagaming.


Volkard Abendroth wrote:
doomman47 wrote:
Dragonborn3 wrote:

Moving up to attack doesn't cause harm by itself, nor do casting spells defensively or making ranged attacks if not threatened.

You can also move around threatened areas too, so you can avoid AoOs. There are a myriad of ways to not come to harm and still attack.

Ignoring high value targets that are casting devastating spells however is harmful in fact its a severe health risk to do so.

Taking up arms and engaging opponents at all is potentially harmful. He should full withdraw from any risk.

/s

You are metagaming.

That's how the feat plays as written.

Shadow Lodge

As written, the feat doesn't care about people that might cause you harm after you attack, just the ones that might attack you during your turn.


Dragonborn3 wrote:
As written, the feat doesn't care about people that might cause you harm after you attack, just the ones that might attack you during your turn.

It doesn't care about there where or the when if it would bring any harm at all they can not follow the attempt.

Silver Crusade

doomman47 wrote:
Dragonborn3 wrote:
As written, the feat doesn't care about people that might cause you harm after you attack, just the ones that might attack you during your turn.
It doesn't care about there where or the when if it would bring any harm at all they can not follow the attempt.

This level of obtuseness belongs to the Rules section. Please, leave the Advice section alone.

51 to 63 of 63 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / Max Dexterity Issue - increasing armor minimum All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.