Fuck you too.icyshadowlord wrote:Seems like we've found another stupid Pathfinder fanboy in the form of rasmus here.
Now, instead of just SAYING something is wrong, maybe you could explain what really IS true...which I doubt you can do with your level of intelligence.
You're the one who reads: "You can have a ring, amulet, weapon, rod, staff or wand. It is of masterwork quality." as "You can have any fucking magic item you want, for free, at level 1, as long as it's a weapon, wand, rod, staff, ring or amulet". It's not that Sean K. Reynolds and the rest of the rules staff at Paizo are not drooling retards - check my UC overview thread on rpg.net - it's that your interpretation of the text is obviously not RAI, and you're writing theorywank that wouldn't fly at any actual table with an average age above 12.
Your argument that "masterwork non-magical wand is $CLASS_NOT_DEFINED, so it must mean a magical wand, and there are no specified limits so I can just take whatever" assumes fact not in evidence - namely, that the ruleset is written to an incredibly high level of precision and cohesiveness.
EDIT: From the 2. "you" and onwards, read "you" etc as "Mask de H".