|
Post by Brave Sir Robin on Jun 28, 2015 0:46:31 GMT
Did we get a rule wrong? Help us out by pointing it out here. I am supposedly the rules expert in the group, but I don't know them as well as I would like. Often we look things up using the srd, but that's not always practical in the middle of the game. I used to know the old D&D 3.5 rules pretty well, but that was long time ago, and unfortunately it means I sometimes get those rules confused with Pathfinder rules, you might even notice us occasionally reference skills that used to exist but don't any more, because some habits are so ingrained. The best way to learn is to make mistakes and then pay attention to a correction, so we'll make a big effort not to make the same mistake again, once we've noticed it.
|
|
|
Post by Alex Newall on Jul 7, 2015 10:44:58 GMT
We've already been getting some people messaging directly but over time here's hoping that this thread starts to bear the brunt of the rules rage. I apologize in advance to everyone who hates it when I play fast and loose with the rules. You are right. I do fluff the rules sometimes but only if I think doing so will improve the story. That said, if we are getting something fundamentally wrong please stop us from making idiots of ourselves.
|
|
|
Post by Oneiros on Aug 5, 2015 12:07:48 GMT
As requested from Episode 10... With the Message spell, I'd say no problems with simultaneous instances of the spell running but, as you increase in level you won't need that - it affects one target per level of caster. However, it isn't strictly a walkie-talkie since all communication has to go through the caster and the caster has to initiate each communique. Each communicant (other than the caster) can ONLY be heard/respond to a direct message from the caster; they can't initiate a message. One message, one reply (but caster can send as many messages as they like within the 10mins/level duration. Don't forget that a Perception check by persons in the vicinity of the caster/target can allow them to overhear the messages - it's not silent or telepathic communication.
|
|
|
Post by Alex Newall on Aug 16, 2015 5:43:25 GMT
Hey Anil,
I did a bit of research on it and came to the same conclusions you did. Thankfully there has been no use of it in recordings to date that should be an issue and from here on in we know the score.
Thanks for getting in touch though!
|
|
|
Post by rainbowdeity on Aug 20, 2015 13:25:12 GMT
I'm gonna put a general apology for my treatment of the Cleric class abilities (I will get better but my goodness there have been some howlers).
|
|
|
Post by Alex Newall on Aug 21, 2015 2:25:17 GMT
Le sigh. Its hard enough being every other person in the game universe without having to take over Zolf too. Don't make we do it.
|
|
|
Post by rainbowdeity on Aug 25, 2015 14:10:32 GMT
Can't tell if spelling mistake or clever wordplay...
|
|
|
Post by Alex Newall on Aug 27, 2015 23:51:14 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Brave Sir Robin on Sept 8, 2015 0:08:46 GMT
Do you take a penalty to AC if you are not holding a weapon? I cannot find anything about this in the rules, so I might be misremembering.
|
|
|
Post by Alex Newall on Sept 8, 2015 19:04:47 GMT
I don't believe there is a penalty to AC, but I think you do provoke an attack of opportunity every time you strike.
|
|
|
Post by Brave Sir Robin on Sept 8, 2015 21:18:12 GMT
That is certainly true. An unarmed strike provokes an attack of opp, as does almost anything you do that doesn't involve using a weapon.
|
|
|
Post by Oneiros on Sept 9, 2015 7:32:34 GMT
Yup, no penalty to defence for just being unarmed. An unarmed strike does provoke the attack of opportunity (on attack, not on damage/hit) *if* you don't have the Improved Unarmed Strike feat or similar (e.g. natural weapon) - so that you are considered 'armed' whilst unarmed.
|
|
|
Post by theoverlord on Sept 9, 2015 18:13:52 GMT
Yeah, as Oneiros says, you provoke attacks of opportunity with unarmed strikes, as well as only dealing non-lethal damage. However if you take 'Improved Unarmed Strike' you can choose whether to use lethal or non-lethal damage.
|
|
|
Post by theoverlord on Nov 15, 2015 7:59:27 GMT
I was listening to one of the older episodes (can't remember exactly which one) but I heard that Zolf was going to use stone cunning in order to find traps. As a saltbeard he loses the perks of stonecunning, hatred and defensive training. As well as the greed trait only applying to treasure found in or under water, but it does apply to all treasure . However he does gain a +2 modifier to profession sailor and survival checks while at sea, as well as a +2 racial bonus to dodge rolls and a +1 bonus to attack rolls to creatures of the aquatic subtype. Even though I think you already knew that, I just thought I would bring it up never-the-less
|
|
|
Post by Alex Newall on Nov 18, 2015 18:07:51 GMT
It's a good point. I would have to go back and check but off the top of my head I Am fairly certain he hasn't used stone cunning at any point although he may very well have been under the misapprehension that he could. I will watch out for it in future.
|
|