#d&d - 2012-01-04 - AustNet Archive Project

// #d&d — 2012-01-04

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
« 2012-01-03 2012-01-05 »
01:55 <Mekkis> season 0 goes up to around 28
10:36 <Avatar> devil we know 1 is 29
30:50 Spaceshot has quit (Ping timeout: 121 seconds)
44:36 Topic for #d&d is: PFS: Sat 10am (new game/Avatar) | CoTE: Sun Jan 8th 10am || AEDT (UTC+11:00) | D&D and Pathfinder Online http://dnd.ballig.net/
44:36 Topic for #d&d set by Avatar at Tue Jan  3 23:33:05 2012
47:37 <MekkisScreen> indeed it is
54:47 <MekkisScreen> anyone up for running Devil We Know 3 and 4?
31:46 <Avatar> for running it?
51:51 <MekkisScreen> yeah
56:43 <Avatar> did you not want to
56:46 <Avatar> didn't you run 1 and 2
59:51 Tashes ([email protected]) has joined #d&d
59:56 Spaceshot ([email protected]) has joined #d&d
06:02 Brunius ([email protected]) has joined #d&d
11:19 <MekkisScreen> I haven't played it yet
11:38 <MekkisScreen> I might be able to see what The Trade Prince wants...
18:14 <Avatar> I don't remember what happened in 1 and 2
23:11 <Brunius> of what?
26:22 <Avatar> devil we know 1 and 2
26:27 <Avatar> [10:54] <MekkisScreen> anyone up for running Devil We Know 3 and 4?
27:12 <Brunius> There's like, things, that like, happen
27:34 <Brunius> There's probably a synopsis somewhere to jog our communal memory
27:45 S711 ([email protected]) has joined #d&d
29:34 <Brunius> I don't remember 1, even after reading the description on the paizo site
29:52 <Brunius> All it says is you have to join forces with apsis consortium agents
29:56 <Brunius> Which seems dodgy
30:26 <Spaceshot> why?
30:27 <Spaceshot> WHY?
30:37 <Spaceshot> seems like a fucked up module
30:44 <Brunius> I do remember Part II though
30:52 <Brunius> Because that was the time Ballig ragequit
30:59 <Spaceshot> hahaha
31:04 <Brunius> Over the Stealth issue
31:11 <Brunius> That was pretty dodgy, that
31:19 <Brunius> I think that was my fault, really
31:23 <Brunius> I didn't read the rules for Stealth
32:09 <Spaceshot> was that the one where you were in the 2 floored building
32:25 <Spaceshot> and one person was doing something on the floor above/below and team was on the other?
33:06 <Brunius> Nah, that was at a con
33:16 <Brunius> Shades of Ice Part I
33:42 <Brunius> The Orc Cavalier dropped down to fight these guys, and the rest of us stayed up there and tried shooting them
33:49 <Brunius> That was pretty disastrous
34:09 <Brunius> The Cavalier died (Faction ressed though) and we failed the mod
34:44 <Avatar> don't spoil it man
34:47 <Avatar> he will probably play it at some point
34:49 <Spaceshot> I thought in here one time there was the part where someone's faction mission was to alter something but having no one watch see him do it, he was hiding on the floor bellow, the team was above
34:55 <Spaceshot> but he still failed his faction mission
35:33 <Spaceshot> cause he wasn't doing it stealthly/slight of handly
35:55 <Brunius> I dunno, I can't remember that one ever taking place
36:03 <Avatar> I think I do
36:12 <Brunius> Avatar - That's a pretty basic summary of the battle
36:52 <Avatar> I'm usually inclined to just let them have it, or at least give a warning to say they're about to be spotted and had to stop trying
36:56 <Brunius> It's not like I'm saying "The room, which was 20' by 25' with a table in the middle, was jumped by 4 goblins and 2 orcs, from the SW and SE corners"
37:34 <Avatar> it's much more specific when you give away the name of the scenario
39:44 <Spaceshot> I think nightmare has been melted away a bit
39:48 <Spaceshot> good-ol forums XD
40:45 <Brunius> Huh?
41:22 <Spaceshot> buh?
43:04 <Avatar> people on the paizo forums are saying Nightmare's +8 eidolon bonus doesn't apply to the day job roll
43:24 <Spaceshot> also the trait bonuses don't stack
43:40 <Avatar> the second trait doesn't apply anyway
43:46 <Avatar> mekkis acknowledged that though
43:50 <Spaceshot> no I mean in general
44:03 <Avatar> yeah, I guess
45:56 <Brunius> Where is this thread?
47:23 <Brunius> Got it
50:59 <Avatar> great Q&A about synthesists here: http://paizo.com/products/btpy8k8r/faq?Pathfinder-Roleplaying-Game-Ultimate-Magic#v5748eaic9ob8
06:01 Spaceshot has quit (Ping timeout: 121 seconds)
08:30 Spaceshot_tm2 ([email protected]) has joined #d&d
20:13 <MekkisScreen> is that the UM FAQ?
22:13 <Spaceshot_tm2> yup
22:19 <Spaceshot_tm2> basically all summoner questions
27:00 <MekkisScreen> what do you think about the remark regarding /enlarge person/?
31:18 <Avatar> FAQ pending?
38:36 <MekkisScreen> yeah
39:57 <MekkisScreen> and "people on the paizo forums" is not a good source
40:28 <Avatar> one of them is a venture captain, another is a 4-star DM
40:43 <Spaceshot_tm2> this about enlarge or the dayjob thing?
40:45 <Avatar> who works for paizo
40:49 <MekkisScreen> does't even matter
40:55 <MekkisScreen> it's not an official source
41:09 <Spaceshot_tm2> if it's about dayjob then I'd take a coordinator of PFS as a legit answer
41:10 <Avatar> what do you consider an official source
44:23 <Spaceshot_tm2> I bet he demands it come from a designer
45:14 <MekkisScreen> published book, published errata, published FAQ (not in a forum thread), official paizo blog
45:29 <Avatar> but not a venture captain and someone who works for paizo
45:39 <Spaceshot_tm2> Mekkis; it's not 100%, thus you shouldn't do it
46:31 <MekkisScreen> no
46:48 <Avatar> well I'm not accepting the +8 bonus on a day job roll in any of my games
47:07 <Avatar> you can appeal it if you like
47:51 <Spaceshot_tm2> also mekkis, both traits don't stack
48:11 <MekkisScreen> I know that
48:12 <Spaceshot_tm2> for in-game
48:22 <Spaceshot_tm2> then how do you get +3 or +4 for traits?
48:38 <MekkisScreen> I don't?
48:54 <Spaceshot_tm2> !findchar nightmare
48:55 <diebot> Spaceshot_tm2, Character: nightmare, number: ( http://dnd.ballig.net/viewchar.php5?char= )
49:09 <Spaceshot_tm2> !findchar nightmare
49:10 <diebot> Spaceshot_tm2, Character: nightmare, number: ( http://dnd.ballig.net/viewchar.php5?char= )
49:14 <Spaceshot_tm2> ok...
49:17 <Spaceshot_tm2> that's broken
49:21 <MekkisScreen> no
49:23 <MekkisScreen> you're broken
49:26 <Avatar> !findchar cairo
49:27 <diebot> Avatar, Character: cairo, number: ( http://dnd.ballig.net/viewchar.php5?char= )
49:35 <MekkisScreen> diebot insists that you are able to spell
49:36 <Spaceshot_tm2> !findchar Nightmare
49:36 <diebot> Spaceshot_tm2, Character: Nightmare, number: 313( http://dnd.ballig.net/viewchar.php5?char=313 )
49:38 <MekkisScreen> you seem to fail
49:42 <Spaceshot_tm2> oh, character specific
49:53 <Avatar> !findchar Cairo
49:54 <diebot> Avatar, Character: Cairo, number: 270( http://dnd.ballig.net/viewchar.php5?char=270 )
50:46 <Spaceshot_tm2> wow your character sheet could be a little more windows character friendly
52:45 <Spaceshot_tm2> so what's the +3 misc bonus on diplomacy?
52:51 <Spaceshot_tm2> would be good to give detail
52:57 <Spaceshot_tm2> misc does allow for anything
53:07 <MekkisScreen> +2 equipment, +1 trait
54:37 <MekkisScreen> can become +2 to alter reactions
55:15 <Spaceshot_tm2> how would mutagen work on a sythesist summoner?
56:03 <MekkisScreen> look it up
56:11 <MekkisScreen> from the rules, not from a forum post
57:23 <Spaceshot_tm2> yes mishta rules nazi/lawyer
57:36 <Avatar> no need to get snarky
57:53 <Spaceshot_tm2> I dunno
03:16 <Spaceshot_tm2> MekkisScreen: I think I've almost solved, or at least know how to solve, the TWF with 2 two-handed weapons
03:29 <Spaceshot_tm2> try to find a quad armed edilon with it working
03:30 <Spaceshot_tm2> XD
06:41 <MekkisScreen> says the person who's evidentally been poring over my sheets to find discrepencies?
06:53 <Spaceshot_tm2> not exactly
06:58 <Spaceshot_tm2> can't read half your sheet
07:35 <MekkisScreen> that's not my fault
07:56 <Spaceshot_tm2> actually it is
08:06 <Spaceshot_tm2> you're not using windows character compliant characters
08:11 <Spaceshot_tm2> UTC whatever
08:11 <Brunius> I can read them fine
08:17 <Brunius> Explain that
08:28 <Spaceshot_tm2> really? so there aren't weird characters?
08:36 <MekkisScreen> you're not using a standards-compliant browser
08:48 <Spaceshot_tm2> so chrome isn't a standards'compliant browser?
09:00 <Brunius> Ewww
09:03 <Brunius> Chrome
09:23 <Spaceshot_tm2> go back to pretend chrome (recent firefox)
09:49 <Brunius> I've actually changed my firefox 8 to look like the firefox I'm used to
09:58 <MekkisScreen> I'll start encrypting my character sheets from now on
10:03 <Brunius> Do it!
10:23 <MekkisScreen> I'll use standards-compliant encryption protocols, though !
10:48 <Spaceshot_tm2> heh
11:07 <Spaceshot_tm2> it's when you start using characters such as ' " and stuff
11:27 <Spaceshot_tm2> Height: 3’4“
11:31 <Spaceshot_tm2> for example
12:53 <Brunius> Which sheet is that?
13:12 Avatar- ([email protected]) has joined #d&d
13:16 <Spaceshot_tm2> !findchar Nightmare
13:16 <diebot> Spaceshot_tm2, Character: Nightmare, number: 313( http://dnd.ballig.net/viewchar.php5?char=313 )
13:38 <Avatar-> it's surprisingly not hot at all outside
13:45 <Spaceshot_tm2> same here
14:02 <Spaceshot_tm2> there was a nice breeze at 11:30ish when I went out to get a package
14:34 <Brunius> Good job of pointing out one of two problems with the sheet
14:49 <Spaceshot_tm2> two problems? I see more
15:01 <Brunius> That and speed
15:25 <Brunius> Ah, I thought that sheet was a little small
16:21 <Brunius> I wonder why Mekkis' sheets have trouble with ' while the rest are fine
19:10 <Spaceshot_tm2> yea
19:12 <Spaceshot_tm2> ' and "
19:32 <Spaceshot_tm2> probably some unix character code difference
22:11 <MekkisScreen> Avatar-: congratulations on your board post. You realise, don't you, that the issue of what constitutes a permanent bonus is really weak?
23:01 <Brunius> That's what they're arguing, I think
27:39 <MekkisScreen> it's come up that a synthesist can miss a night's sleep to take Power Attack
27:46 <Avatar-> yeah that's why I made the post
28:07 <Avatar-> no need to congratulate me
28:29 <MekkisScreen> Nightmare can just do his dayjob rolls without sleeping
28:33 <MekkisScreen> no problem
28:41 <Brunius> Hmmm
28:46 <MekkisScreen> fatigue penalties don't effect charisma
28:53 <MekkisScreen> <?fatigue
29:04 <MekkisScreen> <?fatigued
29:05 <diebot> A fatigued character can neither run nor charge and takes a 2 penalty to Strength and Dexterity. Doing anything that would normally cause fatigue causes the fatigued character to become exhausted. After 8 hours of complete rest, fatigued characters are no longer fatigued.
29:07 <Spaceshot_tm2> fatigue would effect your ability to do the dayjob
29:14 <MekkisScreen> no it wouldnt
29:21 <Spaceshot_tm2> since people wouldn't want to talk to you if you're half asleep
29:33 <Brunius> If you can't get to the place to make connections, you can't use your diplomacy
29:36 <Spaceshot_tm2> and also, it's up to the GM
29:45 <Spaceshot_tm2> since the rule isn't 100% either way
29:46 <Avatar-> you're not making a day job roll with that bonus in my games unless you can argue it in that post successfully
30:10 <Avatar-> it has nothing to do with sleep and you know it
30:30 <MekkisScreen> the post that you're basing it off implies that
31:07 <Spaceshot_tm2> so you don't take into account that a VC, a RPG superstar top 16, and a coordinator all say it doesn't work
31:11 <Avatar-> argue that in there and see what they say if you like
32:25 <Spaceshot_tm2> sorry, and VL
33:06 <MekkisScreen> perhaps you'd better actually read the posts...
33:36 <MekkisScreen> the venture captain is admitting that it's all in assumptions
33:45 <MekkisScreen> and that there's no concrete answer
33:50 <Spaceshot_tm2> the parts about it not being a permanent effect?
34:12 <MekkisScreen> more to the point, didn't you say last Monday that the rules are restrictive, rather than permissive?
36:25 <Spaceshot_tm2> again, we aren't playing lawyers and loopholes
37:13 <Spaceshot_tm2> you've been doing something, someone thought it was a bit out of the rules, they asked about it, and the general concenus is that it shouldn't be allowed
37:27 <Spaceshot_tm2> now, this doesn't mean each table is going to agree, or even know about the queery
37:38 <Spaceshot_tm2> but those who do, such as Avatar, can make their own stance
37:41 <Spaceshot_tm2> and he has decided
38:12 <MekkisScreen> what's a "queery"
38:20 <Spaceshot_tm2> are you really asking that?
38:33 <Spaceshot_tm2> maybe I didn't spell it right
38:43 <Spaceshot_tm2> query*
38:48 <MekkisScreen> sounds like a homosexual reference
38:56 <Spaceshot_tm2> too many e's
41:24 <MekkisScreen> Apostrophes don't indicate plurality
41:40 <Brunius> Sometimes, but not always
43:17 <MekkisScreen> they never do
43:48 <Brunius> If we're playing Lawyers and Loopholes, I guess.
45:00 <MekkisScreen> what? there is NO situation where an apostrophe is used for plurality
46:45 <Brunius> Often used in conjunction with other characters, however
46:58 <Brunius> For your average person, that would be enough
47:48 <Spaceshot_tm2> that over there bob and dan's
47:50 <Spaceshot_tm2> XD
51:15 <MekkisScreen> Those things over there are my husband's.
51:21 <MekkisScreen> Those things over there are my husbands'.
51:25 <MekkisScreen> Those things over there are my husbands.
51:30 <Spaceshot_tm2> SEE SEE
51:32 <MekkisScreen> each have different meanings
07:39 Avatar- has quit (Quit: go get analysed)
07:50 Avatar- ([email protected]) has joined #d&d
07:58 <Brunius> You analyser
08:36 <Avatar> that doesn't even make sense
08:48 Avatar- has quit (Quit: go get analysed)
17:18 <MekkisScreen> yes they do
17:38 <MekkisScreen> the first one means "My husband owns those things over there"
17:43 Spaceshot_tm2 has quit (Ping timeout: 121 seconds)
18:19 <MekkisScreen> the second one means "Those things over there are collectively owned by my husbands"
18:34 <MekkisScreen> the third one means "I am married to those things over there"
20:48 <Avatar> talking to brunius
21:13 <Brunius> [15:07] ..[signoff/Avatar-] Quit: go get analysed
21:57 <Avatar> yeah, not "go get analysed by me"
22:18 <Brunius> Why should we get anaylsed anyway?
26:30 <Avatar> you might be an alien disguised as a huamn
26:33 <Avatar> human*
26:40 <Avatar> how do we know?
29:17 <MekkisScreen> true
29:38 <Brunius> ...
30:20 <Brunius> Couldn't you win parasite by simply killing everyone else?
42:44 Tashes has quit (Ping timeout: 121 seconds)
46:48 <MekkisScreen> A panda walks into a café. He orders a sandwich, eats it, then draws a gun and proceeds to fire it at the other patrons.
46:51 <MekkisScreen> 'Why?' asks the confused, surviving waiter amidst the carnage, as the panda makes towards the exit. The panda produces a badly punctuated wildlife manual and tosses it over his shoulder.
46:55 <MekkisScreen> 'Well, I'm a panda,' he says, at the door. 'Look it up.'
46:57 <MekkisScreen> The waiter turns to the relevant entry in the manual and, sure enough, finds an explanation. 'Panda. Large black-and-white bear-like mammal, native to China. Eats, shoots and leaves.'
11:16 <Avatar> Brunius: only if everyone doesn't kill you first
11:24 <Avatar> the odds aren't great with you vs everyone
16:20 <Brunius>                                                                 
26:08 <Brunius> A black dragon appears!
09:51 Spaceshot_tm2 ([email protected]) has joined #d&d
23:32 <Spaceshot_tm2> I'm come to the conclusion, fuck the dual wielding
24:34 <Spaceshot_tm2> more str
24:45 <Spaceshot_tm2> less MAD
35:10 <Brunius> ha
38:52 Spaceshot_tm2 has quit (Ping timeout: 121 seconds)
57:54 Spaceshot ([email protected]) has joined #d&d
41:54 <Avatar> zzzz
42:29 <Spaceshot> xxxx
46:25 <Ballig> zzzz
57:22 <Spaceshot> avatar: what's your stance on dual wielding 2 two-handed weapons with vestigial arms as a GM?
57:38 <Avatar> I think it's okay
57:58 <Spaceshot> you'd allow it?
58:05 <Avatar> I don't see any reason not to
58:50 <Avatar> is there anything which suggests it's not kosher
59:26 <Spaceshot> no, but using mekkis' logic, there isn't a hard set ruling allowing it
59:49 <Spaceshot> Ballig: would you also allow it?
00:01 <Avatar> there's no hard set ruling that you can use a two handed weapon in two hands 
00:08 <Ballig> what are "vestigial arms"
00:20 <Avatar> you grow an extra arm or two
00:35 <Spaceshot> Vestigial Arm (Ex): The alchemist gains a new arm (left or
00:35 <Spaceshot> right) on his torso. The arm is fully under his control and
00:35 <Spaceshot> cannot be concealed except with magic or bulky clothing.
00:35 <Spaceshot> The arm does not give the alchemist any extra attacks or
00:35 <Spaceshot> actions per round, though the arm can wield a weapon
00:35 <Spaceshot> and make attacks as part of the alchemist’s attack routine
00:35 <Spaceshot> (using two-weapon fighting). The arm can manipulate or
00:35 <Spaceshot> hold items as well as the alchemist’s original arms (for
00:35 <Spaceshot> example, allowing the alchemist to use one hand to wield
00:35 <Spaceshot> a weapon, another hand to hold a potion, and the third
00:35 <Spaceshot> hand to throw a bomb). The arm has its own “hand” and
00:35 <Spaceshot> “ring” magic item slots (though the alchemist can still
00:35 <Spaceshot> only wear two rings and two hand magic items at a time).
00:35 <Spaceshot> An alchemist may take this discovery up to two times.
00:38 <Spaceshot> sorry for the spam :P
01:41 <Ballig> I imagine you could wield one 2-handed weapon and a second one-handed weapon
01:50 <Spaceshot> you can take it twice
01:59 <Ballig> does it say you can take it twice and get two arms
02:11 <Spaceshot> [07:30.33] <Spaceshot> An alchemist may take this discovery up to two times.
02:18 <Spaceshot> what else would you get for taking it twice?
02:29 <Ballig> another arm on the same side
02:32 <Ballig> so you might have three right arms
02:53 <Avatar> I think that'd be a bit silly
02:57 <Spaceshot> yea
02:59 <Avatar> it obviously means two left and two right
03:05 <Ballig> you might have issues with some GMs saying it doesn't seem to work, realistically
03:11 <Spaceshot> you could take 2 extra right or left arms if you want
03:22 <Ballig> like when you dual wield you have a weapon on each side, when you two-hand you don't
03:54 <Spaceshot> 2 right hands carry 1, 2 left hands use the other?
03:56 <Ballig> I think you might actually need a feat for it
04:10 <Ballig> for example, it says you can wield an extra weapon but is silent on the act of wielding, say, four weapons
04:11 <Spaceshot> why?
04:16 <Ballig> and there is a feat for multi-arm attack
04:20 <Ballig> which would actually let you do that (wield 4 weapons)
04:21 <Spaceshot> 4 weapons sure
04:27 <Spaceshot> not using 4 weapons
04:41 <Ballig> it's using all your arms for weapons
04:44 <Ballig> I would rule it as the same deal
04:46 <Spaceshot> yes it is
04:52 <Spaceshot> how would it be the same deal?
04:58 <Ballig> you're using all your arms for weapons
05:46 <Spaceshot> so?
05:50 <Ballig> it might just be to reduce penalties
05:51 <Spaceshot> I'm only using 2 weapons still
06:06 <Spaceshot> TWF is -4/-4 with a non-light off-hand
06:23 <Spaceshot> with the feat
06:42 <Ballig> well
06:51 <Ballig> for example, if you were wielding a weapon in all your hands
06:55 <Ballig> you'd take -6/-10/-10/-10
07:14 <Spaceshot> yes
07:22 <Spaceshot> but that is 4 different weapons, flailing all at once
07:37 <Spaceshot> you can use 2 one-handed weapons in 2 hands using TWF easy
07:50 <Spaceshot> just adding an extra arm to each weapon, and increasing the size of said weapon
07:55 <Spaceshot> and bamn, that's what I want to do
08:05 <Ballig> seems a bit dodgy if you don't receive any different penalties
08:33 <Spaceshot> how is it dodgy?
08:39 <Spaceshot> I've got 2 extra arms
09:18 <Ballig> it seems to me like the rules and feats you're relying on don't take extra arms into account
09:31 <Ballig> can you show me an example of any creature that uses existing rules to do this
09:50 <Spaceshot> I haven't found any in bestiary 1 or 2, and I don't have bestiary 3
09:54 <Spaceshot> so I can't look ther
09:56 <Spaceshot> there*
10:14 <Spaceshot> but eidilons can get 4 arms and are in theory able to do the same thing
10:46 <Ballig> I didn't say give me an example of a creature that can do it in theory :p
13:16 <Spaceshot> no I mean you can probably find an instance of it happenning
13:25 <Spaceshot> and finding out if any rulings have occured
14:55 <Ballig> I'm saying you should do that research, not me
16:10 Spaceshot_tm2 ([email protected]) has joined #d&d
17:01 <Avatar> what is the feat?
17:27 Spaceshot has quit (Ping timeout: 121 seconds)
17:43 <Spaceshot_tm2> I think I missed something
17:48 <Ballig> well, spaceshot
17:52 <Ballig> you want to use the TWF feat right?
18:12 <Spaceshot_tm2> that does make my ability to attack a lot less shit yes
18:22 <Ballig> I'd suggest you get multiweapon fighting instead
18:30 <Ballig> (pretty sure the reqs are the same, except for 3+ hands)
18:34 <Spaceshot_tm2> can't in PFS
18:36 <Ballig> and the rest might be a GM by GM basis
18:40 <Ballig> why can't you in PFS?
18:42 <Spaceshot_tm2> so since you can't, TWF can't be replaced
18:48 <Spaceshot_tm2> you can't take any monster feats
18:54 <Ballig> sucks for you
19:06 <Spaceshot_tm2> but since you can't take it, which it would generally replace TWF
19:09 <Spaceshot_tm2> you go back to using TWF
19:17 <Ballig> I don't think TWF is meant to work for it
19:28 <Avatar> multiweapon fighting is a combat feat
19:29 <Spaceshot_tm2> TWF doesn't specify 2 hands
19:42 <Spaceshot_tm2> it specifies 2 weapons
19:44 <Ballig> it's listed under monster feats
20:24 <Avatar> ah, combat and monster feat
20:45 <Ballig> Spaceshot_tm2: seems to me there are too many oversights for this to work without issue
21:15 <Spaceshot_tm2> there isn't an issue unless the GM running the session has one
21:21 <Spaceshot_tm2> avatar doesn't/didn't
21:47 <Ballig> that's the issue I speak of
22:55 <Spaceshot_tm2> well you agree that you can TWF with a two-handed weapon and IUA/armour spikes/fighter archetype that allows buckler bash
23:11 <Ballig> when did I agree that
23:19 <Spaceshot_tm2> sorry
24:02 <Spaceshot_tm2> do you agree to that?
24:02 <Ballig> haven't looked at it
24:16 <Ballig> your problem is that people are going to see trying to wield two large weapons, both in front of you, as opposed to lighter weapons on each side of you, as possibly requiring more penalties than the core rulebook - which only takes two hands into account - provide for
25:49 <Ballig> although you grow two extra arms you don't necessarily grow the extra body-mass or changed centre of gravity that that kind of thing would likely require
25:54 <Ballig> without, at the very least, a feat
26:13 <Spaceshot_tm2> tis a feat, TWF
26:29 <Ballig> that feat allows for you to fight with smaller weapons on either side of you
26:33 <Ballig> not two huge weapons both in front of you
26:43 <Avatar> sorry, what weapons are you talking about using
26:44 <Spaceshot_tm2> no, allows you to fight with a weapon, and an off-hand weapon
26:52 <Spaceshot_tm2> anything twohanded
27:00 <Avatar> your offhand weapon has to be light
27:05 <Spaceshot_tm2> nope
27:09 <Spaceshot_tm2> off-hand has to be off-hand
27:10 <Ballig> you're using rules that don't account for extra arms man
27:20 <Spaceshot_tm2> but they don't specify 2 hands
27:24 <Avatar> you take more penalties without light weapons
27:27 <Ballig> exactly, they don't account for it
27:30 <Spaceshot_tm2> find me where it specifically says 2 hands
27:35 <Ballig> don't go quoting the rules at me and saying "they don't say anything about 2 hands!"
27:39 <Ballig> when the point is they DON'T ACCOUNT FOR IT
27:41 <Ballig> either positively or negatively
27:44 <Ballig> so you WILL run into problems
27:48 <Ballig> you can argue it with me all day
27:50 <Ballig> you WILL run into problems
27:53 <Spaceshot_tm2> THEY AREN'T SPECIFIC AGAINST 4 ARMS
27:58 <Ballig> exactly, man
27:58 <Ballig> fuck
27:59 <Ballig> I just said
28:02 <Ballig> THEY DO NOT SAY EITHER WAY
28:06 <Ballig> THEY DO NOT ACCOUNT FOR NUMBER OF ARMS
28:34 <Ballig> if you have to argue it with me, and you have to argue it with Mekkis, you WILL run into problems
28:37 <Ballig> take it or don't, it's your risk
29:15 <Spaceshot_tm2> mekkis' only arguement was find me a hard set rule
29:18 <Spaceshot_tm2> which is retarded
29:33 <Ballig> doesn't mtater what he argues, he wouldn't let you use it in any game he ran
29:42 <Ballig> and if at least one person, or two people out of three, would argue with you about it
29:45 <Spaceshot_tm2> I can't anyway
29:46 <Ballig> imagine how many more would argue about it
29:49 <Spaceshot_tm2> don't own APG
30:11 <Ballig> if you're willing to take a character option that will make a number of PFS GMs argue with you about it, that's up to you
30:16 <Ballig> but don't come crying to me about it when it happens
30:53 <Spaceshot_tm2> would only play it in here
30:59 <Spaceshot_tm2> since I don't own APG or UM
31:10 <Ballig> and straight away 2/3 of the regular PFS GMs in here would argue it
31:32 <Spaceshot_tm2> ??
31:36 <Spaceshot_tm2> you require us to own the books?
31:53 <Ballig> technically yes, but it's not something I've enforced. but that isn't even what I'm talking about
31:58 <Ballig> I was ignoring your comment about not owning the book
32:03 <Spaceshot_tm2> oh
32:05 <Spaceshot_tm2> mmk
32:18 <Avatar> two weapon fighting without offhand is -4, -4 if you're not using a light weapon
32:23 <Avatar> er
32:26 <Avatar> without offhand being light
32:37 <Spaceshot_tm2> yep
32:41 <Spaceshot_tm2> I'll live
32:54 <Spaceshot_tm2> katana can be 1 handed successfully
32:56 <Ballig> Avatar: now imagine, not only is the off-hand not light... it's a 2-handed weapon
33:08 <Spaceshot_tm2> imagine the rules, OWAIT
33:32 <Ballig> you can't use a brand new sourcebook and point to a lack of the originally existing rules not taking that into account as meaning it's allowed, man
33:34 <Ballig> that's just not kosher
34:30 <Ballig> this is in fact what killed 3.5e for me
34:32 <Spaceshot_tm2> rules are rules
34:50 <Ballig> the huge amount of supplementary materials that allowed things which the existing core rules never considered
35:01 <Spaceshot_tm2> who cares what the core rules considered
35:01 <Ballig> and because there was nothing that said you couldn't do it, people would make stupid combinations
35:06 <Ballig> the GM does, man
35:07 <Ballig> the GM does
35:30 <Spaceshot_tm2> the core rules should be future thoughted
35:34 <Avatar> if it's not light, it's an additional -4 penalty
35:37 <Ballig> that is impossible
35:48 <Ballig> Avatar: yeah, but it's assuming that the only other option is one-handed
35:53 <Ballig> they never considered two two-handed weapons
36:16 <Ballig> I would be adding a further -4 penalty to both attacks
36:21 <Spaceshot_tm2> why?
36:29 <Ballig> because you are trying to wield two two-handed weapons
36:33 <Spaceshot_tm2> the initial attack can be two-handed in TWF
36:35 <Avatar> Spaceshot_tm2: it's probably a question for the forums
36:37 <Ballig> if something going from light>one-handed is -4
36:40 <Avatar> I mean we're pushing house rules here
37:57 <Ballig> something going from light>two-handed should be -8
37:57 <Avatar> this kind of character probably isn't even worth starting until you clear it up
37:57 <Spaceshot_tm2> checked the forum
37:57 <Ballig> which is my point
37:57 <Spaceshot_tm2> many many people questioning it, most people saying it's doable
37:57 <Ballig> you can make it, but I guarantee you will generate argument
37:57 <Avatar> got a post?
37:57 <Spaceshot_tm2> no devs/designers though
37:57 <Avatar> it'd be enough for me to see the concensus
38:04 <Spaceshot_tm2> on my PC, I can find it in a bit
38:10 <Ballig> I'm saying it should be doable, it should just be harder
38:10 <Spaceshot_tm2> playing hon atm
38:30 <Avatar> the way I'm seeing it is -4, -8
38:37 <Spaceshot_tm2> because ballig said so?
38:48 <Avatar> I'm not sure what ballig said honestly 
38:51 <Avatar> I am skimming your conversation
38:53 <Ballig> isn't -4 -8 the standard "not a light off-hand weapon" rule
38:58 <Ballig> I think it should be -8 -12
39:00 <Avatar> -4 -4 is
39:02 <Spaceshot_tm2> without TWF
39:04 <Ballig> ah
39:06 <Ballig> then it should be -8 -8
39:11 <Avatar> but when wielding a weapon that isn't one handed
39:16 <Avatar> then it's improvised
39:24 <Ballig> going up a size category for /both/ weapons should create penalties
39:36 <Avatar> why go up a size category for the primary hand
39:43 <Spaceshot_tm2> how is it improvised? it's a manufactored weapon
39:43 <Ballig> he's using two two-handed weapons
39:51 <Ballig> so the rules are based on one-handed/light, or one-handed/one-handed
39:55 <Ballig> he's going two-handed/two-handed
40:06 <Avatar> so the first two handed weapon is wielded in a primary hand and an offhand, which is normal
40:22 <Ballig> in the same way that a one-handed weapon wielded in the main hand is normal
40:28 <Ballig> but when you add two weapon fighting, it still causes a penalty in the main hand
40:41 <Avatar> yeah, so that's -4
40:44 <Ballig> right
40:46 <Ballig> for a one-handed weapon
40:53 <Ballig> -8 for two-handed
41:08 <Spaceshot_tm2> no
41:13 <Spaceshot_tm2> the penalty isn't the main handed weapon
41:17 <Avatar> well it's a one handed weapon because normally you only have one hand
41:17 <Spaceshot_tm2> it's using a secondary weapon
41:30 <Spaceshot_tm2> because a light weapon in main hand doesn't reduce the penalty
41:49 <Ballig> okay, regular is -6/-10
41:56 <Ballig> TWF is -4/-4
42:14 <Ballig> you should definitely have further penalties if both of those weapons are one or two size categories larger than TWF specifies
42:18 <Avatar> and the offhand isn't light, so there's a -4 penalty for improvised
42:50 <Spaceshot_tm2> -4 for improvised?
42:57 <Avatar> Spaceshot_tm2: when you use a weapon in a way that it's not designed, it becomes improvised
42:59 <Spaceshot_tm2> by improvised you mean not a light-weapon right?
42:59 <Brunius> Yo Ballig, you around?
43:03 <Ballig> see, the way I see it, the rules aren't accounting for any of this, because they didn't take four arms into account
43:04 <Ballig> Brunius: yes
43:11 <Ballig> and therefore if you take it, you will be arguing every GM you play with
43:25 <Spaceshot_tm2> I need to find that monster
43:39 <Avatar> wait maybe I have it wrong, because you're still using two hands aren't you
43:50 <Ballig> he's using four hands
43:52 <Spaceshot_tm2> per weapon yes
43:58 <Avatar> two for that secondary weapon though
44:03 <Spaceshot_tm2> yes
44:05 <Spaceshot_tm2> 2 per weapon
44:38 <Avatar> so -4, -4
44:39 <Ballig> I actually think there' sa reason PFS doesn't let you take monster feats
44:41 <Ballig> and this is one of those reasons
45:14 <Avatar> yeah
45:18 <Avatar> it's chipmunking it
45:22 <Ballig> so people can't make builds like this
45:36 <Avatar> I don't know if the errata corrects any of the wording
45:43 <Spaceshot_tm2> but a +8 to diplomacy, getting +20 at level 1 is fair game?
45:57 <Avatar> it is fair game
46:03 <Avatar> you can audit it and it works
46:46 <Avatar> as far as I can tell at least
48:25 <Avatar> if you dedicate your character that hard to a skill, it makes sense you'd be able to get it high
48:38 <Avatar> it just looks stupidly high because of that +8 bonus, but the skilled evolution is legit
51:03 <Spaceshot_tm2> no, what I mean is that there are many bullshit builds available, just because RAW EXPLICITLY says so, but if something that RAW allows but doesn't EXPLICITLY say so people call bullshit
52:12 <Avatar> what are you talking about
54:00 <Spaceshot_tm2> shit like bobbob's charge, nightmares diplomacy rolls
54:25 <Avatar> what about them
54:50 <Spaceshot_tm2> they're bullshitly good builds, but they aren't called bullshit rules wise cause RAW EXPLICITLY allows it
58:23 Tashes ([email protected]) has joined #d&d
14:30 <Brunius> Ballig, is tomorrow OK?
14:45 <Ballig> Brunius: if you like, what time?
17:03 <Brunius> Google transit is telling me 12:30
19:39 <Ballig> okay
28:54 <Brunius> gg
03:12 <MekkisScreen> so what you're
03:22 <Ballig> Spaceshot_tm2: the charge is plenty flawed, you've argued that exact point previously
03:27 <MekkisScreen> saying is that it's unfair that bullshit supported by rules trumps bullshit that isn't?
03:31 <Ballig> don't go targeting my characters just because I didn't agree with the way you want to write yours
03:48 <Spaceshot_tm2> here they come, nice in sync
04:10 <Ballig> that's an ad hominem
07:04 <MekkisScreen> Spaceshot_tm2 likes targetting characters, becuase he has nothing better to do
07:24 <Ballig> well, I actually meant his comment about "here they come, nice in sync" as a form of ad hominem
07:34 <Ballig> if he says that we're responding in sync, clearly our arguments aren't worth listening to
07:45 <MekkisScreen> or because he thinks that pointing out flaws in our characters will somehow permit him to flaunt the rules
08:06 <MekkisScreen> it doesn't work that way
13:53 Spaceshot_tm2 has quit (Ping timeout: 121 seconds)
15:01 <Mekkis> Ballig, you don't need a feat to attack with multiple weapons
15:21 Spaceshot ([email protected]) has joined #d&d
15:21 <Spaceshot> shitty internets/router
16:47 <Spaceshot> I believe I missed something about a feat
17:38 <Mekkis> what sort of something?
17:56 <Spaceshot> and the nice in sync remark was just vocalising the observation I made when you 2 coincidentally communicated about the rules again at the same time
18:16 <Spaceshot> I don't believe I really need to have to explain every action I do if you don't get it the same way I do
18:27 <Mekkis> Ah
18:34 <Mekkis> but at my table, you do
18:56 <Spaceshot> maybe I do then
19:05 <Spaceshot> (which you'll change the maybe to must or leave)
19:14 <Spaceshot> but this isn't currently your table
19:25 <Mekkis> and at $DM's table, you do
19:40 <Spaceshot> not really
19:47 <Mekkis> (note the use of apostrophe for possessive)
20:14 <Spaceshot> depends if it alters what happens to you, or if the DM thinks it's an insult
20:15 <Mekkis> if you're trying to do something the DM doesn't agree with
20:52 <Spaceshot> I was again refering to the 'in sync' comment, and comments in general
21:16 <Mekkis> I have no idea about what you meant by the 'in sync' comment
21:21 <Spaceshot> I know it must be hard to keep track
21:39 <Spaceshot> [09:33.46] <Spaceshot_tm2> here they come, nice in sync
21:40 <Spaceshot> [09:34.08] <Ballig> that's an ad hominem
21:40 <Mekkis> unless you're saying that Ballig and I share the same opinions on some matters
21:40 <Spaceshot> [09:37.02] <MekkisScreen> Spaceshot_tm2 likes targetting characters, becuase he has nothing better to do
21:40 <Spaceshot> [09:37.22] <Ballig> well, I actually meant his comment about "here they come, nice in sync" as a form of ad hominem
21:40 <Spaceshot> [09:37.33] <Ballig> if he says that we're responding in sync, clearly our arguments aren't worth listening to
22:14 <Spaceshot> and what I meant was
22:17 <Brunius> Spaceshot, unless you're trolling, most of your comments make no sense at all
22:23 <Spaceshot> [09:47.54] <Spaceshot> and the nice in sync remark was just vocalising the observation I made when you 2coincidentally communicated about the rules again at the same time
22:45 <Mekkis> what do you mean?
23:09 <Spaceshot> brunius: I really doubt they make no sense, they probably just make no sense the way you take them/think about them, and that's not you specifically, you as in the general people here that aren't me
23:25 <Mekkis> I had just logged in and was responding to your statement regarding your opinion about bullshit you make up vs bullshit that's written
23:38 <Spaceshot> mekkis; you came in here, said something, ballig did as well at the same time, I thought it would be funny to say in sync, you get all huffy about it
23:48 <Mekkis> I didn't
24:00 <Mekkis> if you notice, all the scathing comments were from Ballig
24:14 <Mekkis> I just accidentally pressed enter when I meant to press spacebar
24:17 <Spaceshot> [09:37.02] <MekkisScreen> Spaceshot_tm2 likes targetting characters, becuase he has nothing better to do
24:21 <Spaceshot> yup, all ballig
24:46 <Mekkis> what do you WANT?
25:07 <Spaceshot> stop reading into what I say with the assumption that I'm a dickhead
25:15 <Mekkis> what do you WANT?
25:36 <Spaceshot> stop reading into what I say with the assumption that I'm a dickhead
25:38 <Spaceshot> I can do that too
25:58 <Brunius> I can't :(
26:07 <Mekkis> %jack
26:08 <diebot> Mekkis, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8RwfbHt944A&feature=player_embedded
26:11 <Spaceshot> can't up arrow then enter?
26:33 <Spaceshot> seen it, don't care
26:44 <Brunius> I can't
26:49 <Brunius> This IRC won't all ow it
26:52 <Spaceshot> Mekkis  likes targetting characters, becuase he hasnothing better to do
27:02 <Spaceshot> brunius; ouch
27:19 <Mekkis> Brunius, you using telnet to connect to IRC or something?
27:28 Mekkis sets mode -R Mekkis
27:51 <Brunius> 0irc
29:05 <Mekkis> http://irssi.org/files/irssi-win32-0.8.12.exe
33:51 <Spaceshot> so brunius, when do you want the dudes?
34:26 <Brunius> Whenever, I've got the cash available
34:44 <Brunius> I'll talk to my friend, see when he can get the cash for the tau
35:25 <Spaceshot> actually, probably better if I don't have to take both at once :P, all depends how they stack up in a bag or something
38:00 <Avatar> Mekkis: do you need handle animal checks to make your mount attack
38:23 <Avatar> ride DC 10 then handle animal DC 10
38:52 <Mekkis> is your mount war-trained?
39:01 <Mekkis> is your mount an animal companion?
39:11 <Avatar> combat training just makes the tricks pre-trained
41:47 <Mekkis> I'm not absolutely sure whether it's needed for a non-bonded mount
42:48 <Mekkis> (for a bonded mount, in theory it might be needed, but handle animal does not require training, is a free action, and allows retries)
43:07 <Mekkis> (unless somehow the druid gets a -11 to handle animal)
46:24 <Spaceshot> treated animals badly all their life?
46:49 <Mekkis> not sure if even that's enough
47:00 <Mekkis> CHA 1 is -5...
47:14 <Mekkis> hmmm
47:20 <Mekkis> level 11
47:46 <Spaceshot> could kill the mother painfully in front of the animal in question
47:54 <Spaceshot> that would give a huge negative modifier
48:25 <Mekkis> it's possible
48:38 Mort ([email protected]) has joined #d&d
48:43 <Spaceshot> well probably -5 to -10, you'd need some negative cha too
49:11 <Mekkis> 1 charisma (-5), level 11, with ten negative levels (-10), +4 because it's your animal companion...
49:17 <Mekkis> that's a -11
50:15 <Spaceshot> you can be in negative levels?
50:46 <Mekkis> no
50:58 <Mekkis> that's why you need to be level 11, before you can survive 10 negative levels
51:06 <Spaceshot> haha
51:52 <Mekkis> so it CAN be done
52:16 <Spaceshot> heh
52:27 <Mekkis> oh, and this is what you missed:
52:28 <Mekkis> <Mekkis> Ballig, you don't need a feat to attack with multiple weapons
53:00 <Mekkis> Spaceshot, I would be satisfied if you wanted to wield four weapons in four arms...
53:32 <Spaceshot> yes, but I can't lower my negative to hit without multiweapon fighting
54:18 <Avatar> actually uh
54:53 <Avatar> mmm nevermind
54:58 <Spaceshot> heh
55:19 <Mekkis> (I believe that it is specified in the rules...)
56:00 <Spaceshot> that is, for 4 weapons
56:09 <Mekkis> correct
56:11 <Spaceshot> not specifically for 2 weapons, no matter how many hands it takes XD
56:28 <Mekkis>   Normal: A creature without this feat takes a –6 penalty
56:28 <Mekkis> on attacks made with its primary hand and a –10 penalty
56:28 <Mekkis> on attacks made with all of its off hands. (It has one
56:28 <Mekkis> primary hand, and all the others are off hands.) See Two-
56:28 <Mekkis> Weapon Fighting in the Pathfinder RPG Core Rulebook.
56:33 <Mekkis> that's pretty clear
00:14 <Brunius> Fucking crashing all over the joint
00:16 <Brunius> Night yo
00:21 Brunius has quit (Quit: Canberra)
10:52 <Avatar> but how does it work with two weapon fighting in four hands
11:04 <Avatar> with two weapons
11:13 <Mekkis> simple
11:20 <Mekkis> the second weapon is in the off-hand
11:23 <Avatar> the problem is that a two handed weapon should get the same penalties as a one handed weapon
11:31 <Avatar> right, and with two weapon fighting, it's still -4, -4
11:36 <Mekkis> correct
11:46 <Avatar> is that right? 
11:53 <Mekkis> almost
11:55 <Avatar> when with one handed weapons you'd be getting -4, -8, -8
11:57 <Avatar> ,-8
12:26 <Mekkis> you've walked onto another minefield :)
12:55 <Mekkis> I'll need to download the latest /guide/
14:57 <Mekkis> the minefield is as follows:
16:03 <Mekkis> the Multiweapon Fighting feat, that is specifically not allowed "unless specified by another legal source", "replaces the Two-Weapon fighting feat for creatures with more than two arms"
16:40 <Mekkis> Some people are reading it as "if you have more than two arms, you Can't Take the Two-weapon fighting feat"
19:17 <Spaceshot> don't you need TWF for MWF?
19:52 <Mekkis> no
20:05 <Mekkis> 0.1
20:29 <Spaceshot> mmk
20:39 <Spaceshot> never really looked at monster feats in much detail before
20:47 <Mekkis> as I said, Some people believe that if you have more than two arms, you can't take TWF, because it becomes MWF, which isn't allowed
21:00 <Spaceshot> some do
21:08 <Mekkis> other people believe that if you have more than two arms, and take TWF, you instead get MWD
21:09 <Mekkis> MWF*
21:18 <Mekkis> Personally, I am in the latter camp
22:47 <Mekkis> Spaceshot, how thick are the wings on your models?
23:19 <Spaceshot> don't believe I've specifically checked
23:20 <Spaceshot> this on the warhawk or the bat?
23:39 <Mekkis> either
23:46 <Mekkis> preferably something largish
24:07 <Spaceshot> warhawk wing thickness, is about just under the thickness of a GBA cartrige
24:21 <Spaceshot> by thickness you mean how much metal in it right to make it heavier?
25:51 <Mekkis> no
26:10 <Mekkis> I mean how much metal is in the wing to help it stay together
27:02 <Spaceshot> that too
27:19 <Spaceshot> I've dropped the models off their mounting stick before and it's stayed together
27:32 <Spaceshot> the bat's wings and the torso is the same metal
27:38 <Spaceshot> as it the same piece, but it's a bat
27:46 <Mekkis> how many mm thick is the thinnest part of the wing
28:27 <Spaceshot> hmmm... I dunno exactly, probably 1-3 is the thinnest, but that is like .5 - 1mm of feathers being detail
28:37 <Spaceshot> along the rim of the wing
28:44 <Mekkis> hmmm
28:51 <Spaceshot> the thickness is more like 3-7, maybe even a a cm
29:00 <Spaceshot> the large chuck of the torso is about an inch
29:04 <Spaceshot> maybe a bit less
29:36 <Mekkis> it's the thinnest part that's the issue
30:31 <Spaceshot> for travel purposes?
31:25 <Mekkis> for printability purposes: I'm trying to print a model of a dragon
32:50 <Spaceshot> I heard
33:01 <Spaceshot> lol you want to scan it
33:25 <Mekkis> no
33:42 <Mekkis> this model I've got: well, I'm wondering how stable it will be
33:47 <Mekkis> <flameWRK> we have a Cthulhu-related update on our store page
33:47 <Mekkis> <flameWRK> it starts with "Iä Iä" 
33:47 <Mekkis> <flameWRK> which is translated "Please please"
33:47 <Mekkis> <jbennett> Ha.
33:47 <Mekkis> <flameWRK> finnish doesn't even have a word for "please"
33:47 <Mekkis> <jbennett> Google suggests "Ole hyvä"
33:47 <Mekkis> <flameWRK> that works in some contexts
33:47 <Mekkis> <jbennett> Which I assume means "do this or I will exile you to Sweden".
33:47 <Mekkis> <flameWRK> and it's sort of very formal
34:10 <Spaceshot> ???
34:13 <Spaceshot> wrong channel?
34:21 <Mekkis> yeah
34:22 <Mekkis> oops
34:51 <Spaceshot> what store?
36:28 <Mekkis> some card store
36:46 <Spaceshot> they have an IRC channel?
42:35 <Mekkis> it was in #mtg-judge
43:42 <Spaceshot> ahh
59:22 Jaggedsoul ([email protected]) has joined #d&d
05:29 Jaggedsoul has quit (Quit: http://www.mibbit.com ajax IRC Client)
11:57 Spaceshot has quit (Ping timeout: 121 seconds)
11:57 Spaceshot_tm2 ([email protected]) has joined #d&d
Search this day's buffer: