Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 6,793
|
|
#21 |
Senior Member
Volunteer Data File Contributor
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Chicago, IL (USA)
Posts: 10,729
|
LOL that is a fun thing to do alchemists!
Hero Lab Resources: Pathfinder - d20pfsrd and Pathfinder Pack Setup 3.5 D&D (d20) - Community Server Setup 5E D&D - Community Server Setup Hero Lab Help - Hero Lab FAQ, Editor Tutorials and Videos, Editor & Scripting Resources. Created by the community for the community - Realm Works kickstarter backer (Alpha Wolf) and Beta tester.- d20 HL package volunteer editor. |
#22 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 830
|
|
#23 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Jersey City
Posts: 326
|
Quote:
Lone Wolf does not write the rules to Pathfinder. Paizo does. Ergo, Herolab does not define cannocial rules for the game. When the two are in variance, it is Lone Wolf's mistake, not Paizo's. |
|
#24 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 435
|
I wasn't commenting on where the error lies. I was talking about the definition of "nerf". I take no position on where the mistake lies.
|
#25 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 149
|
To be fair, Paizo's not exactly known for their clear and unambiguous language. I certainly wouldn't have interpreted the text as-written here to mean free exotic proficiency [hornbow] for anyone who has any type of bow proficiency, but I've been on the wrong end of ambiguous wording debates plenty of times, so I get it.
|
#26 |
Senior Member
Lone Wolf Staff
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 13,213
|
I doubt it was a deliberate choice on our end - we just have a simple "counts as" mechanism for weapons, so setting the hornbow to count as shortbows and longbows for other things probably just carried proficiency along with that. I don't think we're set up yet for a distinction as to what our weapon mechanism's "counts as" does and doesn't apply to.
|
#27 |
|
|