I believe a spellchecker would recognize that particular word, yes.
I believe a clarification is needed on page 21 under the heading Action Point Enhancements to the relative to whether enhancements stack and whether or not the must be taken in order.
To wit, at level 3 can I take Extra action point IV or am I required to take I-III? If I take I-IV do I end up with 4 extra action points or 10 (4+3+2+1)
I believe a clarification is needed on page 21 under the heading Action Point Enhancements to the relative to whether enhancements stack and whether or not the must be taken in order.
To wit, at level 3 can I take Extra action point IV or am I required to take I-III? If I take I-IV do I end up with 4 extra action points or 10 (4+3+2+1)
You and Glassjaw are cut from the same cloth. I must be really bad at anticipating what I think is clear.
They don't stack, they supersede. I had this spelled out at one time (ie, 7 points, 8 points, 9 points, 10 points) but I took it out-- because some DMs might want to use different base starting amounts.
You take them in order: I-II-III-IV. Each prior number of the same enhancement is a pre-requisite of the next.
You gain new enhancements at 1, 4, 7, 10, 13, 16, and 19. In other words, the level after you get a feat.
If it isn't too forward may I suggest changing the table entry as follows:
Extra Action Point I: Base action points are increased by 1
(indent)Extra Action Point II Base action points are increased by 1
et cetera which I believe would solve both problems now they do stack and with the teensy indent they look like you have to take one to take the other.
I believe the confusion stems from the line --but there is no restriction on what enhancements you choose other than your level.
Last edited by Forgefly; 17th August 2009 at 06:02 PM..
Reason: formatting
No suggestion is too forward. Just prepare yourself for my aggressive style of debate.
Quote:
may I suggest changing the table entry as follows:
Extra Action Point I: Base action points are increased by 1
(indent)Extra Action Point II Base action points are increased by 1
et cetera which I believe would solve both problems now they do stack and with the teensy indent they look like you have to take one to take the other.
I believe the confusion stems from the line --but there is no restriction on what enhancements you choose other than your level.
I'll take a look at that suggestion but have to compare it vs other enhancements that clearly don't stack. Basically I don't want to form an impression one way or the other that's correct half the time and incorrect half the time.
I'll also take a look at the line that you think is causing the confusion.
This is what I've got so far. I'm trying to actually read the document so I'm a bit slow. I've just been making notes into a notepad file as I go along and thought I'd post what I've got so far. Apologies if it seems brisk, pedantic, or whatever. I figure I can point 'em out and if they're not a problem, they can be ignored. Rather that than not point it out and have a forehead smacking moment after the file is off and being printed.
pg 13 "how much coinage you'll have left over.," Period and a comma together
pg 23: Constitution. On page 24, Intelligence explicitly mentions not gaining retroactive skill points, but Constitution doesn't explicitly address retroactive Hit Points, merely saying that they "also increase or decrease accordingly."
pg 27 Spellcasting: "his spell slots per rest, and the number of spells he may ready each day." I'm confused. Is this an accidental redundancy or is there a daily thing I've missed somewhere with the casters?
pg 29: Barbarians "A barbarian can fly into a rage a certain number of times per day." Page 18 references things as being "per rest". Looks like the Rage description didn't get modified appropriately.
"While raging, a barbarian cannot use any Charisma-, Dexterity-, or Intelligence-based skills" looks kinda funny and seems to suggest they can't use skills that are a negative to to Cha and Dex.
It also says "Entering a rage takes no time itself, but a barbarian can do it
only during his action, not in response to someone else’s action.". Druid wildshape (page 35) notes that assuming a Hybrid form is a Free action. Should the Rage actually have an Action type to be consistent?
pg 36: Combat maneuvers: DO you have to pick _one_ maneuver, or are you allowed to use ony of them when you take "Combat maneuvers"?
Pg 37: It appears as though Monks get up to 4 attacks/round starting at 11. Iterative Attacks (page 19) talks about betting a 2nd Attack at 6th level, and that's it. Does that mean that Monks are the only ones to be able to exceed 2 attacks/round? The final paragraph of the Monk explanation would seem to suggest this, but it might be an idea to call it out explicitly under Iterative Attacks if possible.
Also, the Balance box notes that the centered bonus doesn't grant monks the complete benefits of a full Bab including "the dodge and block bonuses thereof, iterative attack rate, etc." That seems to suggest that the Iterative Attacks should be BaB based, not Level based.
pg 38, Trapfinding: "the monk gains the trapfinding ability. She may use his Disable Device". Should either be "this" or you've got a gender pronoun mismatch. Barb, Bard, are male, Druid, Paladin classes appear to be using female gender pronouns.
pg 40 Paladin: Laying on of hands. "Each day she can heal a total number of hit points of damage" Should this be "each rest"?
pg 45 Familiars: "A sorcerer can manifest his familiar any number of times per day but
only up to 1 minute per caster level per rest." The idea of per day and per rest is confusing here.
pg 46 Spellbooks: "The wizard’s spellbook is “arcane focus” of sorts. He must study
his spellbook each day to ready his spells". Again, the per rest thing... when is it that a Wizard really has to study his spellbook? It's a stupid and fiddly question that ought to be able to be resolved with a simple and normal discussion, but...
pg 73 Extra Music: It's talking about Bardic Music in per day terms, not per rest but page 31 Bard Music talks about it per rest.
pg 74 Extra Turning. Per day again.
pg 77 Plant control, Plant Defiance. Per day again.
pg 79 Stunning Fist. Per day again.
pg 103 Turning. Per day again.
pg 109 Ability Damaged. This talks about it returning at the rate of 1 per day. I'm not sure if this is supposed to switch to the per rest mechanic, since spells drop off per rest, or if it's supposed to stay 1 per day. If so, it makes Ability damage _much_ nastier in comparison to a lot of other damage. It also seems to be a bit out of step with page 108 Healing Ability Damage.
pg 110 "Instead, each day he must make a stabilization check to start recovering hit points naturally". Each day?
pg 118 "Multiclass spellcasters use their highest applicable ability score to determine bonus spell slots per day and the DC of their spells," Per day again.
pg 128 Chart, Features column refers to smite evil 1/day, and others down the entire column. Not sure if this is supposed to be that way or shifted to per "rest" or "encounter" given the nature of the Summon Monster features and the duration of the spell.
pg 133 Ability Damage: again, per day healing. Probably want it in line with Page 108 and 109 Ability Damaged.
pg 136 Breath Weapons. Again, per day.
pg 138 Disease. "Once per day afterward, he must make a successful Fortitude saving throw to avoid repeated damage." Again, per day. Also shows up in the Damage entry for disease. If it really should be per day, then an explicit note like "Damage: The ability damage the character takes after incubation and each day (not Rest) afterward."
pg 139 Healing a Diseas: "Characters recover points lost to ability score damage at a rate of 1 per day per ability damaged," Again per day.
pg 155 Empower Spell-like Ability "The creature can use that ability as an empowered spell-
like ability three times per day (or less, if the ability is normally usable only
once or twice per day)." Again per day. Also shows up in Quicken Spell-like Ability.
pg 27 Spellcasting: "his spell slots per rest, and the number of spells he may ready each day." I'm confused. Is this an accidental redundancy or is there a daily thing I've missed somewhere with the casters?
The simple rule of thumb is that PC class features and hit points return on a per rest basis. I'll hunt these down. This is not (necessarily) true of natural (daily) healing rates for conditions, etc.
Quote:
pg 36: Combat maneuvers: DO you have to pick _one_ maneuver, or are you allowed to use ony of them when you take "Combat maneuvers"?
Pick one. You can pick new ones if you choose this feature again.
Quote:
Pg 37: It appears as though Monks get up to 4 attacks/round starting at 11. Iterative Attacks (page 19) talks about betting a 2nd Attack at 6th level, and that's it. Does that mean that Monks are the only ones to be able to exceed 2 attacks/round? The final paragraph of the Monk explanation would seem to suggest this, but it might be an idea to call it out explicitly under Iterative Attacks if possible.
I'm not 100% certain I understand your question. The monk is getting his extra attacks from flurry. Flurry gets better, adding a second attack, and reducing the penalties, as the monk increases in level.
Iterative attacks are really very much based on the mechanics behind flurry attack. The monk ends up benefiting from both.
There's nothing about iterative attacks per se that limits a character to 2 attacks per round. You simply don't earn any iterative attacks beyond the 2nd.
But if you are hasted, two weapon fighting, barbarian with frenzy, monk flurry, rapid shot, etc. then you can certainly exceed 2 attacks/round.
Quote:
Also, the Balance box notes that the centered bonus doesn't grant monks the complete benefits of a full Bab including "the dodge and block bonuses thereof, iterative attack rate, etc." That seems to suggest that the Iterative Attacks should be BaB based, not Level based.
Iterative attacks are BAB-based. Oof! I'll fix p. 19.
The monk's flurry attack is level based, and when it overlaps what is happening with iterative attacks, you get the chart shown on the monk table.
Quote:
pg 38, Trapfinding: "the monk gains the trapfinding ability. She may use his Disable Device". Should either be "this" or you've got a gender pronoun mismatch. Barb, Bard, are male, Druid, Paladin classes appear to be using female gender pronouns.
Don't presume to know what's going on under that cassock!
Quote:
pg 45 Familiars: "A sorcerer can manifest his familiar any number of times per day but only up to 1 minute per caster level per rest." The idea of per day and per rest is confusing here.
That is confusing. Does this make more sense?
"A sorcerer can manifest his familiar any number of times, but only up to 1 minute per caster level per rest."
Quote:
pg 109 Ability Damaged. This talks about it returning at the rate of 1 per day. I'm not sure if this is supposed to switch to the per rest mechanic, since spells drop off per rest, or if it's supposed to stay 1 per day. If so, it makes Ability damage _much_ nastier in comparison to a lot of other damage. It also seems to be a bit out of step with page 108 Healing Ability Damage.
I spent so long trying to explain this to Glassjaw that I think it ended up more confusing than where I started. We'll hunt it down together.
Quote:
pg 128 Chart, Features column refers to smite evil 1/day, and others down the entire column. Not sure if this is supposed to be that way or shifted to per "rest" or "encounter" given the nature of the Summon Monster features and the duration of the spell.
Per encounter would certainly clear up the intended use.
Quote:
pg 138 Disease. "Once per day afterward, he must make a successful Fortitude saving throw to avoid repeated damage." Again, per day.
Yes, per day.
Quote:
pg 139 Healing a Diseas: "Characters recover points lost to ability score damage at a rate of 1 per day per ability damaged," Again per day.
Yes, per day.
It's not a simple matter of doing a find/replace on per day vs. per rest. A rest does not equal a day, nor does a day necessarily imply a good rest.
You could also have noted fatigue and exhaustion (as Glassjaw did) which still have pretty long rest times.
Now, admittedly, functionally, these conditions may not be that big a deal if you have a cleric on hand. Take a short rest, load up restoration or the like, fix your oddball conditions, and get on your way.
But there are nods to verisimilitude that leave some "long rest/recovery times" intact.
Again, the intent of the rest mechanic is to refresh the class features and hit points of PCs as if they had rested for a full day-- but it's not technically a full day.
As I said, Glassjaw had a lot of the same questions you do, and in passing the ball back and forth as we did, we might have fumbled it.
Quote:
pg 155 Empower Spell-like Ability "The creature can use that ability as an empowered spell-
like ability three times per day (or less, if the ability is normally usable only
once or twice per day)." Again per day. Also shows up in Quicken Spell-like Ability.
I'll plead, "Monsters are not PCs," your honor.
These comments are very much appreciated by me (as I am sure they will be by other players).
The simple rule of thumb is that PC class features and hit points return on a per rest basis. I'll hunt these down. This is not (necessarily) true of natural (daily) healing rates for conditions, etc.
Pick one. You can pick new ones if you choose this feature again.
I'm not 100% certain I understand your question. The monk is getting his extra attacks from flurry. Flurry gets better, adding a second attack, and reducing the penalties, as the monk increases in level.
Iterative attacks are really very much based on the mechanics behind flurry attack. The monk ends up benefiting from both.
There's nothing about iterative attacks per se that limits a character to 2 attacks per round. You simply don't earn any iterative attacks beyond the 2nd.
But if you are hasted, two weapon fighting, barbarian with frenzy, monk flurry, rapid shot, etc. then you can certainly exceed 2 attacks/round.
Iterative attacks are BAB-based. Oof! I'll fix p. 19.
The monk's flurry attack is level based, and when it overlaps what is happening with iterative attacks, you get the chart shown on the monk table.
Don't presume to know what's going on under that cassock!
That is confusing. Does this make more sense?
"A sorcerer can manifest his familiar any number of times, but only up to 1 minute per caster level per rest."
I spent so long trying to explain this to Glassjaw that I think it ended up more confusing than where I started. We'll hunt it down together.
Per encounter would certainly clear up the intended use.
Yes, per day.
Yes, per day.
It's not a simple matter of doing a find/replace on per day vs. per rest. A rest does not equal a day, nor does a day necessarily imply a good rest.
You could also have noted fatigue and exhaustion (as Glassjaw did) which still have pretty long rest times.
Now, admittedly, functionally, these conditions may not be that big a deal if you have a cleric on hand. Take a short rest, load up restoration or the like, fix your oddball conditions, and get on your way.
But there are nods to verisimilitude that leave some "long rest/recovery times" intact.
Again, the intent of the rest mechanic is to refresh the class features and hit points of PCs as if they had rested for a full day-- but it's not technically a full day.
As I said, Glassjaw had a lot of the same questions you do, and in passing the ball back and forth as we did, we might have fumbled it.
I'll plead, "Monsters are not PCs," your honor.
These comments are very much appreciated by me (as I am sure they will be by other players).
The simple rule of thumb is that PC class features and hit points return on a per rest basis. I'll hunt these down. This is not (necessarily) true of natural (daily) healing rates for conditions, etc.
I thought that might be the case, which is why I went through looking for all those bits that I could find. I personally really dig the "per rest" thing for PCs refreshing their combat abilities and I'm fine with some stuff still staying in the "per day" category as in healing Ability damage. Having that rule of thumb is groovy and if there's a place to mention it in the Trailblazer document, it might be an idea.
Granted, there's a level of rules mastery expected in picking up and using Trailblazer, but it'll still help folks looking to gain their footing, or those that are more on the "casual" side when it comes to rules questions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wulf Ratbane
Pick one. You can pick new ones if you choose this feature again.
Groovy, thanks for the clarification.
Hmmm. I have to wonder, why would someone wind up taking "Trip" and "Disarm"? I guess with Disarm you're getting a +2 bonus which you'd otherwise only get if you got Improved Disarm, but... both maneuvers are normally available to a person whether they're using standard 3.x rules or Pathfinder.
As it reads to me right now, these are just a waste of a feat. Unless the intent is that they're eliminating penalties that are normally in place, and in the case of Disarm giving an additional bonus as well? If so, it might need to be called out more explicitly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wulf Ratbane
I'm not 100% certain I understand your question. The monk is getting his extra attacks from flurry. Flurry gets better, adding a second attack, and reducing the penalties, as the monk increases in level.
Iterative attacks are really very much based on the mechanics behind flurry attack. The monk ends up benefiting from both.
There's nothing about iterative attacks per se that limits a character to 2 attacks per round. You simply don't earn any iterative attacks beyond the 2nd.
But if you are hasted, two weapon fighting, barbarian with frenzy, monk flurry, rapid shot, etc. then you can certainly exceed 2 attacks/round.
Ok. It's not really clear to me from the text that this is the case. I was going to post a question asking about Hast and Two Weapon fighting, but you've already beat me to it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wulf Ratbane
Iterative attacks are BAB-based. Oof! I'll fix p. 19.
Groovy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wulf Ratbane
Don't presume to know what's going on under that cassock!
Speaking as a fellow that ran a half-senile cross-dressing pirate dwarf (the cross dressing part was his disguise during crimes), I can assure you I make no assumptions about cassock contents.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wulf Ratbane
That is confusing. Does this make more sense?
"A sorcerer can manifest his familiar any number of times, but only up to 1 minute per caster level per rest."
Yes, much better, thanks!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wulf Ratbane
It's not a simple matter of doing a find/replace on per day vs. per rest. A rest does not equal a day, nor does a day necessarily imply a good rest.
You could also have noted fatigue and exhaustion (as Glassjaw did) which still have pretty long rest times.
Now, admittedly, functionally, these conditions may not be that big a deal if you have a cleric on hand. Take a short rest, load up restoration or the like, fix your oddball conditions, and get on your way.
But there are nods to verisimilitude that leave some "long rest/recovery times" intact.
Again, the intent of the rest mechanic is to refresh the class features and hit points of PCs as if they had rested for a full day-- but it's not technically a full day.
As I said, Glassjaw had a lot of the same questions you do, and in passing the ball back and forth as we did, we might have fumbled it.
I expected as much but thought I'd hit up the potential rough spots and ask. As I mentioned above, I'm fine with there still being stuff that takes a while (or a spell ) to fix. Clarifying these things (what actually is intended to stay as per day) is something that I can see as getting a bit confusing and slipping through the cracks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wulf Ratbane
I'll plead, "Monsters are not PCs," your honor.
Totally cool by me. I've been noodling at a "Monsters aren't PCs" project and I'll be giving some serious thought about some of the stuff in Trailblazer in regards to that. I really dig that (some) folks are willing to push aside that for the sake of their own games. We've had years of "Monsters follow the same rules as PCs", so I think it's time we had some stuff that finally breaks that.
A note in the Monster section might be in order. Then again, in theory we're all big kids now and can come up with that determination ourselves.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wulf Ratbane
These comments are very much appreciated by me (as I am sure they will be by other players).
Hey, if it's useful/appreciated, I'm happy. I figure since you were cool enough to let folks like myself get in on some groovy freeness, the least I can do is return the favor by actually reading the darn thing and providing some feedback. The fact that this hits a number of the points I'd been hoping would be fixed makes this a happy thing for me. It's especially nice because it means that we get to find the bits that aren't clear or whatever and see about getting them squared away before it gets offered up for PoD and there's folks complaining about having bought the book and there being these errors/unclear parts.
I really look forward to the ultimate payoff of running a game with this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GlassJaw
Ouch. Looks like we should have done a search for "day" and addressed each one.
Scurvy, your notes here are very much appreciated. We are on it.
w00t! I feel like Dr. Zoidberg: Hooray! I'm useful!
Hmmm. I have to wonder, why would someone wind up taking "Trip" and "Disarm"? I guess with Disarm you're getting a +2 bonus which you'd otherwise only get if you got Improved Disarm, but... both maneuvers are normally available to a person whether they're using standard 3.x rules or Pathfinder.
All weapons can be used to Disarm, but some of them are better at it. (Flail.)
Not all weapons can be used to make Trip attacks. (Flail, yes. Scythe(!), yes. Greatsword, no.)
I hope that clears up the value of adding the maneuver to the weapon. My fighter-rogue just took Trip with short swords.
Quote:
Totally cool by me. I've been noodling at a "Monsters aren't PCs" project and I'll be giving some serious thought about some of the stuff in Trailblazer in regards to that. I really dig that (some) folks are willing to push aside that for the sake of their own games. We've had years of "Monsters follow the same rules as PCs", so I think it's time we had some stuff that finally breaks that.
I used to have a note to that effect in the Introduction. I wonder where it went...
The world's premier fan community for Dungeons & Dragons news and more!
Trailblazer is now available.
Linear Mode
