Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ

gnomersy's page

1,651 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


1 to 50 of 1,651 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>


Gulian wrote:

I feel victorious.





Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
gnomersy wrote:





Deadmanwalking wrote:
Clockstomper wrote:







Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
gnomersy wrote:

Absolute b#@%+%&s!













fretgod99 wrote:

Did you miss the bolding?


So again, *shrug*




Happler wrote:
gnomersy wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:

Okay, how about the trapfinding ability:



TriOmegaZero wrote:


fretgod99 wrote:
gnomersy wrote:









BigDTBone wrote:




fretgod99 wrote:

PRD wrote:
PRD wrote:



Actually that's not true.



noretoc wrote:
_Ozy_ wrote:


Nefreet wrote:
_Ozy_ wrote:
Because the rules say you round

You're ignoring the other side of the argument, though.

One rule says when you round, round down.



So, going by your rule, you would be correct.

Going by the other rule, you would be incorrect.






Dave Justus wrote:

Occasionally the rules ask you to round a result or value.





Prince Yyrkoon wrote:
Nefreet wrote:
N N 959 wrote:
kinevon wrote:


This doesn't make sense.

It does, and his point is relevant.




There are no 1/2 HD creatures in Pathfinder.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
BigDTBone wrote:






Nefreet wrote:



5 (for being common) plus 1.







Davor wrote:


Well it's not actually that great in my opinion.




boring7 wrote:


Snickersnack wrote:
So.. can I declare victory now? :P


Marroar Gellantara wrote:
CWheezy wrote:

Pummeling charge only works on unarmed strikes.


Marroar Gellantara wrote:
(assume feats integrate previous feat effects when needed)


No. Only your effective caster level is modified.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Artemis Moonstar wrote:
Arnwolf wrote:






The main reasons not to multiclass are pretty obvious.

If you're a caster, don't multiclass and lose caster levels.



1 person marked this as a favorite.
Orfamay Quest wrote:
DM Under The Bridge wrote:
Orfamay Quest wrote:
DM Under The Bridge wrote:


What the hell are you talking about?



Do the rules say anything about your players not beating you unconscious with their hard back rulebooks and finding a DM who isn't a t+%~?

Orfamay Quest wrote:
DM Under The Bridge wrote:
Refusing an RP straight-jacket is not cheating.




Zhayne wrote:
gnomersy wrote:

Except you're wrong. Low intelligence is perfectly defined.


I'll say it again.




1 person marked this as a favorite.
Artanthos wrote:
CommandoDude wrote:

How much weight you can carry is explicitly defined under RAW.


Except you're wrong. Low intelligence is perfectly defined.




Soul wrote:




Ravingdork wrote:
gnomersy wrote:


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Ravingdork wrote:



Darksol the Painbringer wrote:





Darksol the Painbringer wrote:
Kwauss wrote:
I bet they notice if they don't have to carry the fighter because he/she's walking around. It would be devilish, almost to the point of metagamey, for the necromancer to animate the fighter and tell him to lie still. Very funny if you can justify it, though.
Hardly Metagaming. If the Necromancer is aware of this party, sees they went off to get something and come right back once before, sees them do the same exact thing again, and wants to keep them out, he'd simply do just that; even better, have the Undead rise up and attack his party members when the cleric finishes casting the spell. The best part? He just now most likely pushed blame at the one doing the resurrection, being convicted of blasphemy in the name of magic and all that is holy, perhaps even linked to the stupid Necromancer in the first place, and it will either be killed unjustly, chased out (along with the party), and simply serve as removing the one thing keeping those goobers from actually being alive in there.

If they're paying for true resurrection there is no reason not to destroy the body before hand so why aren't the priests doing that?

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Domestichauscat wrote:

Dm says: This merchant has every magic item in the game. But he is an ancient golden dragon. I designed him so that if you manage to kill him, you deserve all the stuff he has.

Dm means: Had to make a way so that you couldn't easily steal everything in a magic shop of magicness. If you want to, good freaking luck.

I don't know I'd opt for,

DM says: Are you sure you want to try to steal from this well established magical item shop?

DM means: I'm going to have all your characters get stabbed to death by the roving death squads they hire to keep this king's ransom of magical goods safe if you do this, just try me.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
ParagonDireRaccoon wrote:

...(unless you're Ravingdork, who makes interesting concepts that are very effective).

I'm in LA for the summer and have friends who game in LA, so I'm hoping to run The Emerald Spire assuming schedules and interest line up. I'm assuming some people may want to play ACG classes, and some may want to play quirky concepts (dire bat riding halfling cavalier comes to mind). Say for example that there might be a shaman or druid, and someone plays an early-entry mystic theurge so the group has cleric spells. Assume wizard 2/cleric 1/mt X. The mystic theurge will be pretty underpowered until level 6 or 7, a high point buy makes it more workable. Or if a player wants to play a prestige class that is primarily an NPC prestige class- those have great flavor but are generally weaker than base classes.

No offense meant to Ravingdork I like a lot of his character concepts but I've definitely seen characters of his which I felt would not survive the climb to the level where they come into their own as well.

But yeah I can attest that with a higher point buy I'm more liable to play something that is either more MAD, more thematic, or more quirky. I was considering making a twf build that passes it's own crits to itself to use with a big multiplier weapon that I would never have bothered with if our PB wasn't so high. And I did infact go into Noble Scion which definitely would not have happened if I didn't know that the rest of our party wasn't optimizing and if our DM hadn't given us rather ungodly stats.

I think an array is better for this kind of thing than point buy though because it means that while you might have a crazy high PB equivalent you might force SAD classes to be a little more rounded whether they like it or not and it gives MAD classes more bang for their buck than PB might. But other methods work too.

Kwauss wrote:

It's true that it was a fundamental mistake to use so many weakly protected abilities to create the rogue's niche. But people would still be reliant on rogue levels if content hadn't crept for at least some of them.

The concept of 'rogue levels' should have been given as much importance as 'caster level' for things within their niche. Just as they should have protected the concept of 'fighter levels' as something special, rather than just giving away of their unique gifts to everyone and their brother.

If levels in Rogue were worth taking you'd see people taking them anyways like with fighter levels and all of their primary features having been passed around to other classes.

Note things like Magus, EK, Sohei, I think a Barbarian archetype etc all get access to "fighter levels" or things like Weapon Training and Armor Training.

I don't even think the fighter is that good but it's certainly more worth a dip than the Rogue is.

Frankly the real issue with the Rogue is that their only combat ability is situational and mediocre and conflicts with the lack of accuracy on the rest of their kit, and that Rogue Talents, unlike any other classes Feat equivalents, are pretty much universally worse than just having extra feats.

If you want to use an old EQ 1 example it's worth noting that often you had Wizards, Mages, Necros, Shadow Knights, Monks, Enchanters, and other classes infringing on their role as a scout and often those classes were valued more highly than the Rogue because of party dynamics(needed a tank, needed burst DPS, needed a puller, etc.)

And on top of that, that in EQ 1 Rogues were among the highest DPS classes in the game when they had good weapons on their hands, additionally EQ had an agro system which allowed "Tanks" to actually exist while they don't in Pathfinder and as such each Rogue can get pounded into a fine paste by an angry monster in each fight.

This isn't a solution to the Rogue's problems in Pathfinder, no offense. And they aren't unusually good at doing the other roles you specified, they have the same bonuses everyone does unless they are built to optimize for it in which case they have absolutely no value in combat unlike many other classes who can benefit from specializing towards that both in combat and out of it.

Deylinarr wrote:
Sushewakka wrote:
Lemme guess: Someone's playing an Inquisitor.
Which brings us to the next can an inquisitor get MORE swift actions???

AFAIK he can't. The game doesn't support downgrading moves or standards into swifts so that isn't an option ... I suppose if he could get access to timestop somehow he'd have a couple bonus rounds to use swifts in but overall it's not an option unless I missed something.

A - E ) Yes you can always do your actions in any order you choose and you possess 1 swift one move and one standard per round a 5 ft step is a non action which is exclusive of other movement that round, and a full attack takes one move and one standard action, hence any combination of those is valid.

"You can take a 5-foot step before, during, or after your other actions in the round." (

You can also 5 ft step during your full attack should you choose if say you kill the enemy next to you and want to resolve the rest on a nearby enemy.

F) Probably? "A full-round action consumes all your effort during a round. The only movement you can take during a full-round action is a 5-foot step before, during, or after the action. You can also perform free actions and swift actions (see below). See Table: Actions in Combat for a list of full-round actions."

G) Only one swift or Immediate they are called out in the core rules as being the same thing only the Immediate can be done outside of your turn and takes up your next round's swift action.

H) If they used another swift already or an immediate in the previous round. Or surprise rounds/ other times you lose actions.

I'm going to toss in my 2 cents I suppose.

For what it's worth I don't hate the idea of a healer in MMOs or videogames where a healer converts easily restored mana into HP at a far greater rate than it is dealt as damage and when often times you are controlling more than one character(at least for JRPGs or RPGs like Baldur's Gate etc.)

That being said, in said games a healer does outpace the damage dealt, and more importantly, post healing you generally need only to pop some potions or sit around for a minute to fully recover your spell pool. In this game you need to pull over the entire party for a solid 8 hours to recover your ability to heal and as such spam healing like in those games becomes a much less valuable thing.

In contrast I do really think spot/emergency healing is valuable depending on the circumstances and I think having a refill wand of CLW to top off post battle is important as well. But I am generally highly skeptical of someone who wants to go in right off the bat as a "Healer" or even worse if they say they want to play a "Pacifist" character because if you make the healing your primary role and don't pay attention to the other things a divine caster can do you are just shooting yourself in the foot and making things unnecessarily hard on yourself and your party.

TLDR: Having the ability to heal is great, focusing solely on healing is bad, and when you say you want to play a healer it's important to make sure everyone understands which of those you mean.

Deadmanwalking wrote:


All the things you list can do Rogue stuff...but none except Bard (and Ninja, I guess) are actually very good at social stuff specifically. Which was the point of the OP's request.

Hence my just listing Bard.

Fair I was actually just pointing out people who can do Rogue stuff and are superior at combat while being roughly equivalent at social stuff because they have the same amount of focus on Cha(roughly none). I'll admit I tend to focus on combat effectiveness since my DM is relatively unlikely to call for rolls on skills(he prefers us just acting it out) but the OP did ask for someone who could hold his own in combat as well.

So yeah Bard is choice number one I agree but I think the ones I listed are half steps towards the character intended if the OP doesn't like Bard for whatever reason.

If the rest of your party is playing anything of moderate levels of optimization or higher the Rogue is a bad choice if they aren't your DM can rebalance encounters down to make up for it.

Bard would be a superior choice almost always. Other options that I'd consider are Ninja(just a better Rogue if you don't need trapfinding and depending on your GMs policy on campaign traits you could trade one of those for it). I hear alchemists can do a Rogues job pretty well with the right archtype.

Trapper and Urban Rangers both can do what you want pretty well. Urban is stronger imo but Trapper is a better 1 level dip if you want a different class afterwards.

If you don't need trapfinding at all you could probably get there with a Lorewarden Fighter which also is one of the best choices to pull off combat maneuvers and if you're human you get a decent number of skill points to do what you want. If needed you could take the one level dip in Rogue or Trapper Ranger before swapping to this to round out your skills a bit but it's not really a great investment of a level compared to just speeding up progression as a Lorewarden.

Bandw2 wrote:
gnomersy wrote:

Sure you can, of course now the air is your foe, and as such you cannot move through it's square. And since there is no listed CMD for Air due to GM prerogative it now has a CMD of 99.

And since you can't occupy the same square as an enemy the air moves out of your square on it's turn, and you suffocate to death without being able to move. Congratulations on that Great Cleave though. Worth?

air has a CMD of 10 at best, it has no strength or dexterity... or anything, it's not even got hp so no matter how easily it is to hit it i can't kill it either...

edit: actually what if your had a burrow speed?

Show me where it says that in the rules? If you can't find it then the air has whatever CMD the DM decides it has. Likewise with burrow you would never be able to surface and therefore suffocate to death.

