Pathfinder Is Still Bad

nockermensch · Post by **nockermensch** » Wed Jun 18, 2014 8:48 pm

Dogbert wrote:
Koumei wrote:No, that comic promised me Burt Offerings. Presumably offerings for (or from?) someone named Burt but perhaps it's a person, first name Burt, last name Offerings.
Careful what you wish for... now have at you!

Chapter 1: Burt Offerings
Chapter 2: The Rise of the Reynolds

Antariuk · Post by **Antariuk** » Sat Jun 21, 2014 4:21 am

Ok, this isn't any news, but I just found something... well, something, in Ultimate Magic's options for wizards. It may have been posted already some hundret pages before, I don't care. In case you don't know, UC has a thing called 'arcane discoveries' that a wizard can take in place of a regular feat or a wizard bonus feat. Some of these discoveries are utter shit, and some are not. Like this one:

True Name (Sp): Your researches into ancient tomes and your inquisitions of bound spirits have led you to one of the best-hidden secrets of the multiverse: the true name of an outsider—the name that defines the very essence of the creature and that gives the speaker control over the being. This outsider can have no more than 12 Hit Dice. Once per day, you can speak the common name by which the outsider is known, and the outsider travels to you as if you had cast planar binding upon it. It must obey you to the best of its ability, without pay or bargaining for its services, for its fear that you might release its true name to the wider world is enough to bring even the most recalcitrant of outsiders to bear.

If the creature is within 100 feet, as a move action, you may punish it by deliberately mispronouncing its name, wracking its very essence and giving it the sickened and staggered conditions for 1 round (even if the creature is normally immune to these conditions). You cannot use true name in an area of silence, but the creature does not have to be able to hear you for it to be harmed by the ability.

It is in your best interest to call this creature only sparingly, and occasionally reward it in some fashion to mollify its wrath. If you repeatedly fail to offer it a reward appropriate to its type and ethos, the creature may begin plotting ways to destroy the bond between you, whether by creating an accident that will destroy your memory of the name, by plaguing you with nuisances or dangers until you vow never to call on it again, or by actively seeking to destroy you through its own devices or those of an underling. If this creature is of a lawful type and you are violating its ethos, its superiors may even destroy it or you rather than allow you to contaminate their servant further. Worse, they may establish situations where it is necessary for you to summon this outsider, opening gateways to infernal or angelic interference, in order to gain a foothold on the Material Plane.

You may select this discovery multiple times. Each time you select this discovery, it applies to a different, specific outsider. You must be at least an 11th-level wizard to select this discovery. If you select this discovery at 15th level or higher, the creature may have up to 18 Hit Dice and the call acts as greater planar binding instead of planar binding.

Sure, at 11th level you also get planar binding to do this kind of thing normally through spellcasting, but getting it for free (including any costs for services) is pretty awesome. The passage inviting the MC to fvck with you is as boring as it is unsurprising, but compared to Greater Cleaver or whatever lame feat the fighter took at 11th level this is pretty cool.

Koumei · Post by **Koumei** » Sat Jun 21, 2014 5:59 am

Antariuk wrote: Sure, at 11th level you also get planar binding to do this kind of thing normally through spellcasting, but getting it for free (including any costs for services) is pretty awesome. The passage inviting the MC to fvck with you is as boring as it is unsurprising, but compared to Greater Cleaver or whatever lame feat the fighter took at 11th level this is pretty cool.

Ideally, you should take that Arcane Discovery and also learn Planar Binding and Summon Monster VI at level eleven. Simply so you can turn to the Fighter and say "So this level I gained the ability to summon powerful Outsiders to do my bidding... in three different ways. What did you get?" and they have to turn to you and say "A +2 Bonus on CMD checks in any turn after the turn where I hit a foe with my favoured weapon, as long as I also took a Move Action." or something.

Avoraciopoctules · Post by **Avoraciopoctules** » Tue Jul 08, 2014 5:34 am

I was laughing at terrible 3rd-party spells when I came across this gem.

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/3rd-party ... rven-armor

"Saving Throw none; Spell Resistance yes"

Okay, what are the uses for this spell?
1. Cast on a druid to make them lose their powers.
2. Cast on an enemy in water to make them sink
3. Cast on a monk, or anyone nonproficient in heavy armor, in order to give a huge combat penalty.

Anything I'm missing?

GnomeWorks · Post by **GnomeWorks** » Tue Jul 08, 2014 5:39 am

Avoraciopoctules wrote:Anything I'm missing?

Target has to be willing.

radthemad4 · Post by **radthemad4** » Tue Jul 08, 2014 5:40 am

If the touched creature is not willing, this spell instantly fails.

Edit: Ninja'd

OgreBattle · Post by **OgreBattle** » Tue Jul 08, 2014 5:42 am

Could you bluff someone into thinking you're using a touch-buff spell on them

radthemad4 · Post by **radthemad4** » Tue Jul 08, 2014 5:50 am

In the middle of combat? If Bluff is handled as written, I think so. +10 to DC for 'far fetched' lies. I don't think this counts as impossible (+20)

Attempting to deceive someone takes one round, but the pfsrd doesn't the pfsrd doesn't say what kind of action it is.

Avoraciopoctules · Post by **Avoraciopoctules** » Tue Jul 08, 2014 6:38 am

So a crippling debuff you have to bluff them into accepting. I guess I found what to go with next time I mislabel something as a healing potion.

Covent · Post by **Covent** » Wed Jul 09, 2014 7:44 pm

Finally read whole thread, time for curry chips to celebrate!

Also new random change to spell via FAQ rather than Errata is random and will confuse tables!

Paragon Surge FAQ

I love it when stuff is "Balanced" via online only FAQ rather than the supposed complete document of the PRD...

Insomniac · Post by **Insomniac** » Wed Jul 09, 2014 9:00 pm

Hey look. They finally are addressing Paragon Surge, a bonkers-level howdidthatgetprinted piece of Fromunda cheese. Sure, in a very poor fashion, but it is still being addressed.

momothefiddler · Post by **momothefiddler** » Wed Jul 09, 2014 9:31 pm

What the fuck? Who would ever ask about per-day limitations on the effect of a minute/level spell, much less frequently? Where does that ruling even come from?

FAQ: Can I use Summon Monster I multiple times in a day to summon different monsters?
No. The first time in a day you cast Summon Monster I (or Summon Monster II to summon 1d3 creatures off the 1st-level list, or Summon Monster III or higher to summon 1d4+1 creatures off the 1st-level list), you must select a specific type of creature and make any template- or feat- associated choices. Once that choice is made, it is set for the day and any subsequent castings of Summon Monster I (or any other Summon Monster spell that draws from the 1st-level list) must use those same decisions.

Axebird · Post by **Axebird** » Wed Jul 09, 2014 9:54 pm

It's because Paizo (stupidly) sometimes makes "rules changes" in their FAQ. This is a straight up change to how paragon surge functions.

Why they do this instead of just using errata is beyond me.

Kaelik · Post by **Kaelik** » Wed Jul 09, 2014 10:05 pm

Axebird wrote:It's because Paizo (stupidly) sometimes makes "rules changes" in their FAQ. This is a straight up change to how paragon surge functions.

Why they do this instead of just using errata is beyond me.

Because they are the true successors to 3e in every way imaginable. High Skip. Fuck Sorcerer's, am I right?

CapnTthePirateG · Post by **CapnTthePirateG** » Wed Jul 09, 2014 10:11 pm

momothefiddler wrote:What the fuck? Who would ever ask about per-day limitations on the effect of a minute/level spell, much less frequently? Where does that ruling even come from?

FAQ: Can I use Summon Monster I multiple times in a day to summon different monsters?
No. The first time in a day you cast Summon Monster I (or Summon Monster II to summon 1d3 creatures off the 1st-level list, or Summon Monster III or higher to summon 1d4+1 creatures off the 1st-level list), you must select a specific type of creature and make any template- or feat- associated choices. Once that choice is made, it is set for the day and any subsequent castings of Summon Monster I (or any other Summon Monster spell that draws from the 1st-level list) must use those same decisions.

Wha....how...I don't even...where in the rules does this come from? why do Paizils let the devs retroactively randomly change the rules sans errata? Can't they just treat it like Skip Smokes Crack?

Lago PARANOIA · Post by **Lago PARANOIA** » Wed Jul 09, 2014 10:14 pm

Does anyone have links regarding the Pathfinder 2nd Edition?

Google has way too much speculative chaff or crossover results from D&D 2E to be helpful, even after ten pages of looking through this crap.

momothefiddler · Post by **momothefiddler** » Wed Jul 09, 2014 10:17 pm

CapnTthePirateG wrote:
momothefiddler wrote:What the fuck? Who would ever ask about per-day limitations on the effect of a minute/level spell, much less frequently? Where does that ruling even come from?

FAQ: Can I use Summon Monster I multiple times in a day to summon different monsters?
No. The first time in a day you cast Summon Monster I (or Summon Monster II to summon 1d3 creatures off the 1st-level list, or Summon Monster III or higher to summon 1d4+1 creatures off the 1st-level list), you must select a specific type of creature and make any template- or feat- associated choices. Once that choice is made, it is set for the day and any subsequent castings of Summon Monster I (or any other Summon Monster spell that draws from the 1st-level list) must use those same decisions.
Wha....how...I don't even...where in the rules does this come from? why do Paizils let the devs retroactively randomly change the rules sans errata? Can't they just treat it like Skip Smokes Crack?

Note that what I wrote was not a quote from anything. It was just analogous to the left-field change to Paragon Surge as a way to express the absurdity thereof.

I don't know if you read it that way, but I want to make sure there's no confusion. Summon Monster doesn't have that particular change.

Yet.

Covent · Post by **Covent** » Wed Jul 09, 2014 10:24 pm

Lago PARANOIA wrote:Does anyone have links regarding the Pathfinder 2nd Edition?

Google has way too much speculative chaff or crossover results from D&D 2E to be helpful, even after ten pages of looking through this crap.

I have this.

They announced Pathfinder Unchained, alternate ideas without backward compatibility.

ishy · Post by **ishy** » Wed Jul 09, 2014 10:28 pm

Axebird wrote:It's because Paizo (stupidly) sometimes makes "rules changes" in their FAQ. This is a straight up change to how paragon surge functions.

Why they do this instead of just using errata is beyond me.

Because they only publish errata when they do new print runs for books.

TiaC · Post by **TiaC** » Wed Jul 09, 2014 11:47 pm

So, in the GitP thread where the Paragon Surge "errata" was brought up, it took all of six posts before the feat that breaks it again was posted.

Rawbeard · Post by **Rawbeard** » Thu Jul 10, 2014 2:41 am

Anyone remember the short lived change limiting the same free action to 3 per turn, that made archers go "wait..." and look sad at their arrows?

Yeah, FAQs are fun. On the other hand you also have paizo staffers posting in the forums and totally expect you to know those rules changes too. Because these days everyone has internets and the google tubes, so obviously they will double check EVERYTHING they read in a book, amirite?

CapnTthePirateG · Post by **CapnTthePirateG** » Thu Jul 10, 2014 5:05 am

momothefiddler wrote:
CapnTthePirateG wrote:
momothefiddler wrote:What the fuck? Who would ever ask about per-day limitations on the effect of a minute/level spell, much less frequently? Where does that ruling even come from?

FAQ: Can I use Summon Monster I multiple times in a day to summon different monsters?
No. The first time in a day you cast Summon Monster I (or Summon Monster II to summon 1d3 creatures off the 1st-level list, or Summon Monster III or higher to summon 1d4+1 creatures off the 1st-level list), you must select a specific type of creature and make any template- or feat- associated choices. Once that choice is made, it is set for the day and any subsequent castings of Summon Monster I (or any other Summon Monster spell that draws from the 1st-level list) must use those same decisions.
Wha....how...I don't even...where in the rules does this come from? why do Paizils let the devs retroactively randomly change the rules sans errata? Can't they just treat it like Skip Smokes Crack?
Note that what I wrote was not a quote from anything. It was just analogous to the left-field change to Paragon Surge as a way to express the absurdity thereof.

I don't know if you read it that way, but I want to make sure there's no confusion. Summon Monster doesn't have that particular change.

Yet.

Ah. At this point I wouldn't even be surprised. It really did sound like something that would pop up in a FAQ.

Jeff W · Post by **Jeff W** » Thu Jul 10, 2014 5:33 am

[quote="ishy"][quote="Axebird"]It's because Paizo (stupidly) sometimes makes "rules changes" in their FAQ. This is a straight up change to how [i]paragon surge[/i] functions.

Why they do this instead of just using errata is beyond me.[/quote]Because they only publish errata when they do new print runs for books.[/quote]

Yeah, that is a completely retarded design choice. I don't know why they're afraid to errata their products. If you want to make a pathfinder society compliant character, you have to sort through mountains of stealth errata.

Dean · Post by **Dean** » Thu Jul 10, 2014 5:38 am

Yeah it's one of those rulings that's obviously wrong on first inspection. Like when Complete Psionics tried to retroactively rule that Astral Construct powers would destroy any old Astral Constructs when you cast a new one. It's cowardly bullshit. If you want to totally rewrite something then find your stones and then fucking do it. But pretending that whole paragraphs of new information were always true is ridiculous and clearly wrong on a first reading.

Covent · Post by **Covent** » Sat Jul 12, 2014 7:49 am

I am raging just a little right now.

There is a complete idiot, or now that I think about it perhaps a brilliant troll, that has been arguing in a thread about monks, that you get a 6th level ability from one archetype at 4th simply because you multi-class into another class that has an ability with the same name at 3rd. Even though the abilities share a name they are not mechanically identical, and a specific FAQ response along with a long logical layout of why this is stupid does not convince this guy.

In short being level 1 X/Level 3 Y Does NOT give you abilities from level 6 X!

BLARGHGHG!!