Ultimate Equipment Errata

[Sayt]

There's nothing wrong. You're comparing apples and pears - there are no iouns that copy the benefit of a slotted item.

Actually, there are Enhancement bonus to [Ability] Ioun stones, at the very least for Con and Int, but there isn't, IIRC, a complete set, they're easy to cancel, and generally speaking it is double for slotless, see also Thorny Ioun Stones and gauntlets of the Skilled Maneuver.

That said, I also like the 50% increase, as it means a fighter that wants relaible flight can get Wings of Flight without giving up his resistance bonus, and doesn't have to settle for a magic carpet or winged boots.

[Psyren]

Er, can you expand a little? I'm not sure what you're saying there. The only "final" is that I'm looking at the most possible abusive this thing could get (wearing a whole s***-ton of them, use outermost, take it off to make one under it able to be used; or mechanically identically, changing your shirt after every encounter), then seeing that it's not that powerful.

Whether it's really powerful to do such things isn't the point - rather, the very actions you describe just feel silly and metagamey and kill my immersion in the game itself. Speaking personally, as a GM I'd rather just let a player research a custom version of the shirt that can be used multiple times per day than to have them layering or stripping every fight.

The first one in particular feels especially ridiculous - layering on stacks of shirts with no penalty, the player removing their armor after every fight to get to them, and it also raises design implications about other shirts - does that "outermost layer" technique of multiple items occupying a slot work? Should it? Should I stack shoes and hats and amulets and belts the same way? Should I feel like I have to or else be playing suboptimally?

[Anlashok]

Given the restrictions in place that doesn't sound metagamey to me. It actually sounds like someone with enough money and time might actually try to do themselves.

Actually I'd go further and say that sounds even less metagamey than the current version of the item. Attunement is a really bizarre silly concept and I can't help but imagine some fighter asking "Wait, why can't you make a version of this shirt that works right away?" And the magical crafter couldn't do anything more than shrug and say "Balance?". It's strange and immersion breaking, but I suppose immersion and game-feel are secondary concerns for PF. Which is fine. Lots of games are like that. Tetris isn't particularly interested in immersion either.

[Psyren]

"Wait, why can't you make a version of this shirt that works right away?" And the magical crafter couldn't do anything more than shrug and say "Balance?".

How about he replies "that's how magic works ninny, if you don't like it why don't you spend a decade in apprenticeship to a curmudgeonly senex/be born with magical blood like I did?"

I view the printed items as the way everyone is taught to make them (or the logical consequence of the methods that are most common), just as the printed spells are the ones that are widespread. Custom items and custom spells are possible, but they require supreme craftsmanship or artistry to pull off, and are the product of either eccentric genius or painstaking research. The fighter in your example might as well be asking "Wait, why can't you make a car that runs by clapping?" Because nobody invented it yet.

[Necroticplague]

Whether it's really powerful to do such things isn't the point - rather, the very actions you describe just feel silly and metagamey and kill my immersion in the game itself.

Doesn't put a dent in mine. Thus, only whether it's powerful to do such a thing matters. If an item has limited uses, it seems perfectly reasonable, IC and OOC, to have redundancies. You have more than one healing potion in case you need more healing than one can provide, you keep an extra shirt in case you need more than one burst of speed in the day.

Speaking personally, as a GM I'd rather just let a player research a custom version of the shirt that can be used multiple times per day than to have them layering or stripping every fight.

I don't see why both can't coexist. The multiple-charge-shirt is strictly stronger (in case you need the burst more than once per encounter). Thus, one improvised cheaper option with some downsides, and a better, premium option can both exist.

The first one in particular feels especially ridiculous - layering on stacks of shirts with no penalty, the player removing their armor after every fight to get to them, and it also raises design implications about other shirts - does that "outermost layer" technique of multiple items occupying a slot work?

Actually, re-looking through the magic item rules, it would actually be the first shirt put on that's the active one, so you'd probably need to take off the innermost one, not the outermost.

Of course, a character may carry or possess as many items of the same type as he wishes. However, additional items beyond those in the slots listed above have no effect.

Should I stack shoes and hats and amulets and belts the same way? Should I feel like I have to or else be playing suboptimally?

Don't see why not, if they are also of the 'limited use per day of abilities'.
No, but you don't even if this works. All it means is that you can invest if you want the effect more. If you're content with one burst of movement, you buy one shirt. If you want more, you buy more. Considering that redundant magic items cost money, this just leaves you more consistently using weak abilities, instead of less consistently using strong ones.

[Shackel]

I think with such a nerf to the Quick Runner's Shirt and the like it might've been better to make them consumable-type items to help with flavor. The shirt just losing its magic after one use(but you can buy many of them) makes a lot more sense flavor-wise than inexplicably needing to wear it for 24 hours(while sleeping I guess) just to get a single use out of it for that day, repeat the process. 800-1000gp would be fitting, considering 3.5's Psionic Tattoo costs(Hustle being the closest comparison) and adding being able to activate it as a swift action.

[Psyren]

Doesn't put a dent in mine. Thus, only whether it's powerful to do such a thing matters. If an item has limited uses, it seems perfectly reasonable, IC and OOC, to have redundancies. You have more than one healing potion in case you need more healing than one can provide, you keep an extra shirt in case you need more than one burst of speed in the day.

Potions aren't worn in item slots though. I don't think slotted items should be quite as consumable as that, especially when they're inside all your other clothing/armor.

I don't see why both can't coexist. The multiple-charge-shirt is strictly stronger (in case you need the burst more than once per encounter). Thus, one improvised cheaper option with some downsides, and a better, premium option can both exist.

I'm fine with both existing; what I find silly is ripping your shirt off after every fight (or perhaps even multiple times in the same fight.) I'm in favor of them trying to prevent that by adding a mechanic (attunement), even if they went a little overboard.

Actually, re-looking through the magic item rules, it would actually be the first shirt put on that's the active one, so you'd probably need to take off the innermost one, not the outermost.

Which makes the entire layered-shirt scheme so impractical that you're better off just researching a custom multi-use solution in my mind.

[Anlashok]

How about he replies "that's how magic works ninny, if you don't like it why don't you spend a decade in apprenticeship to a curmudgeonly senex/be born with magical blood like I did?"

I view the printed items as the way everyone is taught to make them (or the logical consequence of the methods that are most common), just as the printed spells are the ones that are widespread. Custom items and custom spells are possible, but they require supreme craftsmanship or artistry to pull off, and are the product of either eccentric genius or painstaking research. The fighter in your example might as well be asking "Wait, why can't you make a car that runs by clapping?" Because nobody invented it yet.

That'd make sense were it not true that a significant number of magic items do work that way. It's less "Why not make a car that runs on clapping?" and more "Why not make a car that runs on gasoline instead of requiring me to brave the depths of the nine hells to recover ichor made from the blood and anguish of a billion sinners condensed down into tar over millennia to get out of the driveway?"

[Florian]

@upho:

The item creation rules might provide some useful formulae, but they also contain the very important rule that you have to look at the final result and compare it to the example items to see how the actual pricing should turn out.

Look at the overall discussion taking place right now to see what happens when the cost-benefit-ratio of an item turns out to be wrong and an adjustment happens.

Both rules are RAW, the 50% markup for additional abilities on one slot and the x2 multiplier for going slotless (you might have gotten me calling that the Ioun Stone phenomenon wrong). The third rule is is also RAW: After crunching all relevant numbers, you´ve got to do the necessary step of comparing the result with the benchmark items and use your judgement when assigning the final price tag based on how efficient it will prove to be.

A major point here is that the RAW always falls back to referencing the core rules, disregarding other developments that have taken place, else stuff would change too fast and the reference points for pricing things would change to quickly.

In the long run, that will mean that things will either get more unbalanced with new source material, or that existing items have to be "devalued" to correlate with the now existing new reference points.

To stay with your example, ranged martial combat is powerful as it always allows to full attack. Thrown weapons are powerful as they don´t have any inherent limits on how damage is calculated, unlike, say, a Comp. Longbow does unless you have actually paid for it being Adaptive.

Once we start combining those, like Blinkback and Mighty Hurling without comparing that to the overall reference points, we can simply drop the notion that "balance" is a positive thing we all aim to try and achieve out of the window, along with the bathwater and the actual baby.

[Necroticplague]

Potions aren't worn in item slots though. I don't think slotted items should be quite as consumable as that, especially when they're inside all your other clothing/armor.

Why not?
What makes you think the fhisrt has to be inside your other things?

I'm fine with both existing; what I find silly is ripping your shirt off after every fight (or perhaps even multiple times in the same fight.) I'm in favor of them trying to prevent that by adding a mechanic (attunement), even if they went a little overboard.

What's inherently silly about it? It's not much different from carrying a brace of pistols, drawing, firing, and tossing to the ground to avoid reloading mid-combat. Something which was done in real life back when pistols took forever to reload.

Also, there's literally no point to ripping off a shirt mid-fight. That would be a move action to remove the shirt, and the shirt only gives you a move actions, so your actually losing out on actions doing so (considering the swift action to use, you're giving up a swift and move to get a move).

[Psyren]

Why not?
What makes you think the fhisrt has to be inside your other things?

Because stretching it over your armor or wearing it on the outside of your robe is silly and immersion-breaking.

What's inherently silly about it? It's not much different from carrying a brace of pistols, drawing, firing, and tossing to the ground to avoid reloading mid-combat. Something which was done in real life back when pistols took forever to reload.

Hand-held guns and worn shirts are not the same, just as hand-held potions and worn shirts are not the same. You keep using analogies that just don't mesh for me. You can't just say "all items should behave identically regardless of form or function." (Well, you can - I certainly can't stop you - but I won't be boarding that train with you either.)

That'd make sense were it not true that a significant number of magic items do work that way. It's less "Why not make a car that runs on clapping?" and more "Why not make a car that runs on gasoline instead of requiring me to brave the depths of the nine hells to recover ichor made from the blood and anguish of a billion sinners condensed down into tar over millennia to get out of the driveway?"

There is a whole category of items that "attune." It's not a new or revolutionary concept. UE pg. 206:

SLOTTED WONDROUS ITEMS
When a character wears a slotted wondrous item he cannot gain the benefit from a wondrous items of the same slot until the first item is removed. Of course, a character may carry or possess any number of slotted items of the same type, but additional items have no effect until they are worn. Sometimes a slotted wondrous item must be worn for a period of time (typically 24 hours) before the item’s full effect manifests.

All the errata did was say "we intended Quickrunner's Shirt to be this type of car" (or however the analogy needs to be phrased to get across.) Which ones get put in this category is completely arbitrary, like many other laws of magic, but that doesn't stop them from being laws (unless of course you houserule otherwise, which is perfectly valid.)

It's not just wondrous items either - several rings need to "attune" as well, like Ring of the Maker and Ring of Heroes. And even some unslotted items like Minder's Coin.

[Triskavanski]

I'm fine with both existing; what I find silly is ripping your shirt off after every fight (or perhaps even multiple times in the same fight.) I'm in favor of them trying to prevent that by adding a mechanic (attunement), even if they went a little overboard.

"It's anime law: whenever a male shōnen protagonist takes off his shirt, all of his attributes increase exponentially."
— Kurama, Yu Yu Hakusho Abridged

Or if Anime isn't your thing, there is also Hulk Hogan, or Jason Stathem who constantly take off their shirts.

*********************************

I'm not against nerfs. Sometimes yes, things do need to be nerfed. What I'm against is going too far with nerfs. I'm also against doing only nerfs, and then sitting back and calling it balance.

I can't think of anything off the top of my head, but I'm sure there were items that are not desirable because mechanically they don't really function. I know other things like Rogue's talents like Esoteric Scholar is pretty bad

[Psyren]

"It's anime law: whenever a male shōnen protagonist takes off his shirt, all of his attributes increase exponentially."
— Kurama, Yu Yu Hakusho Abridged

Or if Anime isn't your thing, there is also Hulk Hogan, or Jason Stathem who constantly take off their shirts.

Thank you for perfectly illustrating my point

[Necroticplague]

Because stretching it over your armor or wearing it on the outside of your robe is silly and immersion-breaking.

Not necessarily. While the shirt very definitely has certain qualities (light, very thin, embroidered with winged feet), it's specifics of how it looks aren't specified much. It's entirely possible that it's a shirt that isn't like a t-shirt, and can be worn over mail sensibly. Here's a couple of example pics that seem to fit in perfectly with a typical dnd world (though admittingly, they tend towards paladin-type aethetics for some reason).

Spoiler: Pictures

Show

Just replace crosses with winged sandals, and you're good to go.

Considering that the Chest slot also includes items that very obviously can go over armor, like bandoliers, there's zero reason to assume the shirt is in some form that makes it unable to be worn over armor. Maybe take some advice from your own signature, and change the assumption of what the shirt looks like.

Hand-held guns and worn shirts are not the same, just as hand-held potions and worn shirts are not the same. You keep using analogies that just don't mesh for me. You can't just say "all items should behave identically regardless of form or function." (Well, you can - I certainly can't stop you - but I won't be boarding that train with you either.)

Why not? Why is the slot so important? You keep making the incredibly arbitrary point over it, when that's mostly irrelevant to the function of the item (because slot assignment is mostly arbitrary). They're the same in the most important way that matters; they have a limit of use that means having backups would be useful. Backup gun for more firing without reloading , backup potion for more healing, backup shirt for more running.

[Psyren]

Not necessarily. While the shirt very definitely has certain qualities (light, very thin, embroidered with winged feet), it's specifics of how it looks aren't specified much. It's entirely possible that it's a shirt that isn't like a t-shirt, and can be worn over mail sensibly. Here's a couple of example pics that seem to fit in perfectly with a typical dnd world (though admittingly, they tend towards paladin-type aethetics for some reason).

Spoiler: Pictures

Show

Just replace crosses with winged sandals, and you're good to go.

Considering that the Chest slot also includes items that very obviously can go over armor, like bandoliers, there's zero reason to assume the shirt is in some form that makes it unable to be worn over armor. Maybe take some advice from your own signature, and change the assumption of what the shirt looks like.

Shirts are not bandoliers, regardless of what my sig says. They are different english words.

We'll have to agree to disagree because this isn't going anywhere.

Why not? Why is the slot so important? You keep making the incredibly arbitrary point over it, when that's mostly irrelevant to the function of the item (because slot assignment is mostly arbitrary). They're the same in the most important way that matters; they have a limit of use that means having backups would be useful. Backup gun for more firing without reloading , backup potion for more healing, backup shirt for more running.

Because guns and potions aren't clothing.

[Triskavanski]

But sometimes, guns are potions.

[ATalsen]

Not necessarily. While the shirt very definitely has certain qualities (light, very thin, embroidered with winged feet), it's specifics of how it looks aren't specified much. It's entirely possible that it's a shirt that isn't like a t-shirt, and can be worn over mail sensibly. Here's a couple of example pics that seem to fit in perfectly with a typical dnd world (though admittingly, they tend towards paladin-type aethetics for some reason).

Spoiler: Pictures

Show

Just replace crosses with winged sandals, and you're good to go.

...Those aren't shirts, though, those are tabards. I mean, specifically the pics you have chosen are pics of tabards.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tabard
A tabard is a short coat common for men during the Middle Ages. Generally used while outdoors, the coat was either sleeveless or had short sleeves or shoulder pieces. In its more developed form it was open at the sides; and it could be worn with or without a belt.

Google:
historical
a coarse sleeveless garment worn as the outer dress of medieval peasants and clerics, or worn as a surcoat over armor.
a herald's official coat emblazoned with the arms of the sovereign.

There is at least one tabard magic item, which exactly fits the pics you chose, and it in fact uses the BODY slot, not the SHIRT slot.

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/...ard-crusader-s

Sorry, if its not entirely on topic, but to me this is like comparing armor to a headband and expecting the same functionality. Since 3.0 (and maybe even earlier D&D versions) slots have been intended to have different functions (admittedly that has been blurred by authors not sticking to the original intent, but we should not propagate that blurring).

[Psyren]

...Those aren't shirts, though, those are tabards. I mean, specifically the pics you have chosen are pics of tabards.




There is at least one tabard magic item, which exactly fits the pics you chose, and it in fact uses the BODY slot, not the SHIRT slot.

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/...ard-crusader-s

Sorry, if its not entirely on topic, but to me this is like comparing armor to a headband and expecting the same functionality. Since 3.0 (and maybe even earlier D&D versions) slots have been intended to have different functions (admittedly that has been blurred by authors not sticking to the original intent, but we should not propagate that blurring).

I was going to point all that out but decided it wouldn't be worth the effort, so thank you for saving me the trouble.

[Triskavanski]

Only one shirt is acceptable.

[upho]

@upho:

The item creation rules might provide some useful formulae, but they also contain the very important rule that you have to look at the final result and compare it to the example items to see how the actual pricing should turn out.

Look at the overall discussion taking place right now to see what happens when the cost-benefit-ratio of an item turns out to be wrong and an adjustment happens.

Both rules are RAW, the 50% markup for additional abilities on one slot and the x2 multiplier for going slotless (you might have gotten me calling that the Ioun Stone phenomenon wrong). The third rule is is also RAW: After crunching all relevant numbers, you´ve got to do the necessary step of comparing the result with the benchmark items and use your judgement when assigning the final price tag based on how efficient it will prove to be.

I mostly agree with your reasoning per se. Rather, it's what I suspect you believe should be the overall goal (or the lack of it) when designing/balancing mechanics of new options, and what seems to be your base assumptions about the game, which it seems I don't agree with at all (such as the balance quality of "core benchmark items", more below).

A major point here is that the RAW always falls back to referencing the core rules, disregarding other developments that have taken place, else stuff would change too fast and the reference points for pricing things would change to quickly.

In the long run, that will mean that things will either get more unbalanced with new source material, or that existing items have to be "devalued" to correlate with the now existing new reference points.

This is where I think the main difference between our viewpoints is found. Just to make sure I understand what you're you're suggesting here, in short: 1) the benefits of a new item (whether from new splat books or one-offs created by players/DMs via the markup or custom item rules) should be measured against the closest resembling benefits of "core benchmark items" preferably found in the CRB, and 2) the new item's price (potentially also including crafting prereqs/rarity etc) and whether it can be considered balanced or not should then be determined by this comparison. Am I correct?

If so, of course you're right that this is what the RAW on altering/improving/making new items suggests. Which I believe the 50% markup rule is kinda shorthand for when simply combining/improving benefits of already existing items, as seen in for example the prices of +stat belts and headbands which Paizo has kindly already calculated for us in the CRB tables.

I'm not disputing any of this. I'm basically saying that while this method might work fine as simple pricing/balance guidelines for less complex new items with benefits similar to those of the core items, this "vetting" method actually hurts the system when used to balance items with more unique new benefits, or maybe even a few of the more complex stacked item combos which can potentially be created via the 50% markup rule (though probably not the previously mentioned "Belt of Mighty Physical Blinkback Hurling +6"). The method simply wasn't designed to handle such new items (or when making more complex stacked items or making errata for older items, for that matter), and the text actually somewhat recognizes that limitation. And of course, the reason the method fails miserably in these cases is partially because it's based on over-simplified assumptions about the game, but worse, it's also based on simply false assumptions:

1. The method is fundamentally flawed by its inherent myopia, failing to take the rest of the rest of the system into account. If new items are created without taking the mechanics existing outside of the "bubble of core benchmark items" into account, developers, along with the more homebrew-happy players/DMs, are basically robbed of a whole category of tools which could've - and should've - been used to increase mechanical variety and improve balance.
2. The method is based on the assumptions that there is a good balance in the core system which new additions should strive to maintain, which is complete and utter BS. So using this method means new/errata-ed items will inevitably inherit most of the needless limitations and serious balance flaws of the "core benchmark items" when combined with the rest of the system, rather than having the potential to help fixing these issues.

Case in point: the latest QS nerf. I believe the nerfed QS is undoubtedly more balanced to "core benchmark items", while it undoubtedly also manages to worsen the balance issues the system as a whole suffers from (in this case the old martial/caster disparity).

To stay with your example, ranged martial combat is powerful as it always allows to full attack. Thrown weapons are powerful as they don´t have any inherent limits on how damage is calculated, unlike, say, a Comp. Longbow does unless you have actually paid for it being Adaptive.

First off, Adaptive costs how much, exactly? Less than 2k IIRC, not even remotely close to the costs involved in order for the thrown weapon build to be able to simply take as much advantage of its iterative attacks (or Rapid Shot etc) as the longbow build. I think you'll find it very hard to prove that allowing a "Belt of Mighty Physical Blinkback Hurling +X" through the markup rule would generally make thrown weapon builds broken or OP when compared to longbow builds... (Besides perhaps in the case of some exceptionally rare and very specific thrown builds (example best known to me) - which typically bloom late and also rely on additional specific expensive stacked item combos IME - an archer build is still mechanically more efficient in a large majority of combat situations during most levels. Not to mention the absolutely crucial items needed for the thrower build to be functional are a lot more expensive than those the archer build would need, meaning the archer is actually also likely to be more versatile on the whole).

More importantly and to the point, I would still fail to see why my "Thrice-Belt of Body Boni and Thrilling Throws^TM" (priced according the markup rule) would be a bad thing, even if it would actually enable say a thrown weapon fighter to be more effective than an archer fighter during most levels and in most combat situations. In fact, I would actually see it as a very good argument for allowing and fully endorsing the "Thrice-Belt of Body Boni and Thrilling Throws^TM" if that had been the case.

Once we start combining those, like Blinkback and Mighty Hurling without comparing that to the overall reference points, we can simply drop the notion that "balance" is a positive thing we all aim to try and achieve out of the window, along with the bathwater and the actual baby.

Of course you need reference points. I just think that in the case of new/more complex item benefits, those reference points should definitely not be only "core benchmark items", or even primarily based on items. At least if you'd like to see the mechanical variety and balance of PC builds improve.

Actually, there are Enhancement bonus to [Ability] Ioun stones, at the very least for Con and Int, but there isn't, IIRC, a complete set, they're easy to cancel, and generally speaking it is double for slotless, see also Thorny Ioun Stones and gauntlets of the Skilled Maneuver.

While I agree these examples are indeed close to being duplicates of slotted items, they aren't identical. For example, for an additional 500 gp (for a wayfinder), a Pink and Green Sphere (priced at 8/32/72 k for +2/+4/+6 Cha) also gives you an untyped +1 Will. Which, now that I think about it, might actually make paying an additional 8 or 18 k and having one of these stones replace a +4 or +6 stat on your belt or headband a sound investment during higher levels in some rare corner cases... A Thorny Stone in a wayfinder will actually give you the Acrobatic or the Athletic feat, which can actually be of some real value for most builds.

Still, I've yet to see a build making good use of the upgradable +stat stones, and IMO the stackable 24 k +2 stat stones are horribly overpriced, close to the point of uselessness even should you play in a game where the +50% markup rule has been banned (24 k being equal to that of upgrading a second or third +stat on a belt or headband from +4 to +6). But it does happen I find a Thorny stone on player's item wishlist for a higher level combat maneuver focused PC (or one of my NPC or experiment builds) that already has the gauntlets, and for a sound mechanical reason.

That said, I also like the 50% increase, as it means a fighter that wants relaible flight can get Wings of Flight without giving up his resistance bonus, and doesn't have to settle for a magic carpet or winged boots.

Yep, another example that having a liberal markup rule policy typically does much more to improve the weaker category of builds in the game than the stronger, and thus helps improve the overall game balance (and hopefully fun).

[darkdragoon]

The whole d20 system family has a very potent and flexible creation system at its core. Each and every unique item should be created using the underlying rules and the actual creator has the full right to explain how and why he created something, with what limitations in mind.

"Player Empowerment" in d20 has lead to the point that people feel entitled to abuse stuff even when the original creator tells them they intended otherwise.

The Holy Writers were wrong in the past and from their subsequent efforts most don't seem like they are going to change their habits. To say "well, they completely whiffed on it but their HEART IS PURE" is Tooth Fairy reasoning at best.

But of course it's more egregious when again after years of complied "this is good, this is bad, this is cheese" we still have books coming out with the equivalent of "it took the goblins a couple centuries to figure out bicycles need 2 wheels" Honestly a lot involved are either being disingenuous or are parodying themselves.

[upho]

Because stretching it over your armor or wearing it on the outside of your robe is silly and immersion-breaking.

Hand-held guns and worn shirts are not the same, just as hand-held potions and worn shirts are not the same. You keep using analogies that just don't mesh for me. You can't just say "all items should behave identically regardless of form or function." (Well, you can - I certainly can't stop you - but I won't be boarding that train with you either.)

Wait, something's definitely not right here...

Guys, I think someone's taken over Psyren's account and pretends to be the real Psyren!

But... Hmm...

@The doppelganger pretending to be Psyren: your impersonation is actually so dang good I think I'm fine with your faking it for now. Feels almost as good as real. Truly impressive, dude! Must've been hell learning all those tons of nerdy PF stuff by heart, and I think you're doing great so far, besides for one teensy little give-away: the real Psyren has no trouble hand-waving lamias (as in "snake-tail-people"), merfolk (as in "fish-tail-people"), and even intelligent snakes to have actual legs AND feet, and even as being fully capable of going all out Chuck Norris with those "feet"!

Whatever you yourself might think of this, it says quite a lot about the real Psyren's immersion which you should know - it's like frigging Fort Knox! So the real Psyren would hardly be bothered by someone going against a flavor detail as hilariously insignificant as when something called a "shirt" in the rules is portrayed by a player as being suspiciously similar to tabard and is worn outside of said player's PC's armor (like, you know, an actual tabard). In fact, I'd even say the real Psyren's rock-steady immersion wouldn't be the slightest disturbed even by a character simultaneously wearing an entire warehouse's worth of such "shirts", regardless of whether those are worn outside or inside armor, wrapped around fingers or toes, or even as very baggy underwear. Though he might very well take issue with the cheesy mechanical effects...

(As a sidenote in case it comes up again while you're doing your "doppelganging", I think Psyren would also say intelligent worms are able to make round-house kicks in PF, at least if they have levels in Un-Monk, but I'm pretty sure (and sincerely hope) even he draws the line before shao-lin jellyfish or Bruce Lee beholders, intelligent or not... )

Oh, and please return the real Psyren to us once you're done posting fun embarrassing stuff in his name here on GitP (may I suggest some shameless flirting with various regulars, I'd probably start with Snowbluff)!

Sorry Psyren, but I just couldn't resist!

[Psyren]

Nah, no embarrassment here. "PC Races should be able to take PC Classes unless otherwise prohibited" is a pretty basic underlying assumption of this game, one which has no bearing on the discussion at hand. But congrats on spending the time writing... whatever that was.

[Lord_Gareth]

Nah, no embarrassment here. "PC Races should be able to take PC Classes unless otherwise prohibited" is a pretty basic underlying assumption of this game, one which has no bearing on the discussion at hand. But congrats on spending the time writing... whatever that was.

I do believe it was a long and comedic highlight of your flagrant and persistent hypocrisy.

[Psyren]

I do believe it was a long and comedic highlight of your flagrant and persistent hypocrisy.

Ah, so trolling then, coupled with external thread baggage. Good to know.

[Lord_Gareth]

Ah, so trolling then, coupled with external thread baggage. Good to know.

Nobody makes you post what you post. That's on you. When stuff like, say, the candle of invocation argument happens, people remember, especially considering how long and involved that was. Repeat the same pattern of behavior elsewhere and it becomes associated with you. If getting to know a person is trolling then I dunno what to tell you.

[upho]

Nah, no embarrassment here. "PC Races should be able to take PC Classes unless otherwise prohibited" is a pretty basic underlying assumption of this game, one which has no bearing on the discussion at hand. But congrats on spending the time writing... whatever that was.

Heh, as I think you know, I totally agree. But when I read your views on the shirts my stupid little grey ones just couldn't keep themselves from making the rather tenuous connection to our silly exchange on the plausibility and proper anatomy of hypothetical "karate cobras", reminding me I had to leave that discussion somewhat prematurely. So I simply had to write... Uh, something...

And yeah, I think any embarrassments are totally on me!

[upho]

I do believe it was a long and comedic highlight of your flagrant and persistent hypocrisy.

Score!

Although I must say any perceived trolling was unintended and purely coincidental. Think of it more as a friendly reminder of how stupid these discussions can become, Psyren.

Nobody makes you post what you post. That's on you. When stuff like, say, the candle of invocation argument happens, people remember, especially considering how long and involved that was. Repeat the same pattern of behavior elsewhere and it becomes associated with you. If getting to know a person is trolling then I dunno what to tell you.

Please don't try to change Psyren, I like bickering about details with him!

And I find many of his posts kinda entertaining and often even insightful...

[Vyanie]

The Brawling change is one of the few that I can understand, especially from a game design perspective. Armor is an item slot intended almost purely for defensive bonuses, but for the half the cost of a +2 weapon you were getting +2 to attack and damage as well as +1 armor. The new cost of +1 Brawling Armor is still 2,000 gold cheaper than a +3 AoMF (using new costs) and the combined cost is 16,000 gold cheaper than a +5 AoMF.

Considering you're getting offensive bonuses in a slot you normally couldn't, that the bonuses are untyped and that the overall cost is still cheaper than an equivalent and standard item that's a pretty big deal. This also shuts down early access to a +2 attack/damage bonus when all other builds could only afford a +1.

@Fizban - There actually are some interesting magic items under 4k, but many are limited use and intended for higher-level game play. The items that do exist in that budget range are often quite interesting for more intrigue-based game play, which I happen to enjoy. If you're going pure hack & slash though you'll be out of luck.

I am just the opposite, considering there are really only 2 classes that use hand to hand for the most part it is rather a niche item. Not only is it a niche item but look at all the nice fun monsters that completely counter h2h combat, especially once you start hitting cr6+ creatures.... ohh you want to smack that Remorhaz... go right a head ohh wait you died from striking it... how about striking an ooze, or even low CR mobs like mimics or others that cause effects if you come into contact with them.

You are talking about classes that want to use their in class abilities (hand to hand) and do something. Remember classes that use hand to hand have to give up weapon bonuses. that is 1-2 less slots they can utilize. If you want to complain about AOMF then also remember they have to choose that and a pretty stupid price over what every other class can pick. Brawling at +1 was a good pick strong but not OP considering the niche and the counters to it. Now at +3 only an idiot would choose it... and even better you can't get it at low levels that everyone else is getting +1 weapons so you now just took away something HUGE for the classes that could use it.

[NightbringerGGZ]

I am just the opposite, considering there are really only 2 classes that use hand to hand for the most part it is rather a niche item. Not only is it a niche item but look at all the nice fun monsters that completely counter h2h combat, especially once you start hitting cr6+ creatures.... ohh you want to smack that Remorhaz... go right a head ohh wait you died from striking it... how about striking an ooze, or even low CR mobs like mimics or others that cause effects if you come into contact with them.

You are talking about classes that want to use their in class abilities (hand to hand) and do something. Remember classes that use hand to hand have to give up weapon bonuses. that is 1-2 less slots they can utilize. If you want to complain about AOMF then also remember they have to choose that and a pretty stupid price over what every other class can pick. Brawling at +1 was a good pick strong but not OP considering the niche and the counters to it. Now at +3 only an idiot would choose it... and even better you can't get it at low levels that everyone else is getting +1 weapons so you now just took away something HUGE for the classes that could use it.

Well no. We're talking about classes which can use hand to hand and wear light armor. These are niche cases with the exception of the Brawler. Even so, the AoMF was just reduced in cost again and is now equal to the costs of an enchanted weapon. You can get your +1 AoMF at the same time as other classes get their +1 weapon with the option of it being Agile instead of +1.

Regarding the scenario you pointed out regarding getting hurt when you hit a target... so what? A Monk or UnMonk will be worse off in this situation (than a class which can use Brawling) as they can only fight with their hands/feet while other classes can switch to a back up weapon. And even if they couldn't, how does Brawling help with this scenario?