|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Only LazarX considers a level 7 spell trite and pat. ;p
I get what you are saying, but if it's a standard world the likelihood the paladin could get her back on her feet is pretty high.
On the other hand though: Her being "dead" could be a good thing -- if her spirit/soul/whatever is released while doing good who is to say that that didn't get turned into a different outsider under her deity?
Granted that's not a normal thing, but it's not outside the bounds of possibility either.
That helps but there are still plenty of things it could have been.
Something else I just thought of:
When did the paladin succeed on a knowledge(the planes) check to know what he was facing?
I mean detect evil is useful and all but it's rather limited and, lets face it, often not anywhere near 100% on accuracy.
If I was a devil/demon/evil outsider I would be interested in using some of those many low level magics to get this guy to smite the wrong target because "They detected evil!"
That's an assumption I would never make.
She could have easily have been not in disguise so as to show she is being honest with everyone about what she is. If a succubus was in disguise then was found out not many would believe her when she says she isn't evil, and she may personally find the idea of a disguise deceitful and not worthy of her status as a paladin.
With the situation as it was described by the OP:
I would say the paladin needs a lesson (not a player lesson, or even a YOU FALL lesson, but definitely a lesson). In my opinion the best role playing way to handle this would be for a herald of Sarenrae and of Abadar give the paladin a quest to restore the redeemed succubus to life.
Seeing as the body is there, this isn't going to be unduly difficult, he needs a true resurrection spell and it's done. Maybe a bit of a speech about listening to what others say and not jumping the gun too fast, but not take his powers away.
In regards to the oathbound paladins part:
Nothing states they must act immediately, and the oath in particular here states evil outsiders. Since this is a good outsider too there is definitely room for him to take a step back and ask for guidance before charging in.
Beyond that not acting on an oath just means loss of the class features related to the oath, not to being a paladin as a whole:
If a paladin violates the code of her oath, she loses the class abilities associated with that oath until she atones. If she violates her paladin’s code, she loses her oath abilities as well as her other paladin abilities.
Personally if I was the GM this is one of those situations I would set up just to see how the paladin responses. Immediate attack is not grounds for falling as he is intending good even if he doesn't know he's really not helping. Premediated attacks should make him drop though (in the same vein the Paladin from Order of the Stick fell).
Final note: Desna has nothing to do with this, you have your deities mixed up.
Hayato Ken wrote:
Hey all I wanted was my sith lord. More spells per day, and a means to rage to boost them. Angry magic. I didn't want this barbarian++ bizarro C'thulhu crap.
Simple answer is Paizo isn't a software company.
Developing apps of the sort you are talking about requires software people, who are dedicated to that task. You want them writing good code, and quite frankly a good coder will typically only get about 10 lines of good code out a day.
In addition to the cost sink that is there is also security concerns: How are you updating, how are you checking for valid copies to update, how do you monetize it securely, plus compatibility issues across the board and I'm only scratching the barest surface of the problems involved -- licensing, lawyers for copyrights and product protection as well as making sure your product is legit out the gate, and on and on and on...
Are there answers for all these problems? Absolutely. Are they easy? Somewhat for a software company.
Is that something that a publisher of what is still essentially a paper product is going to be specialized in and willing to shell out for?
It's rather telling that Fallout Shelter which has been available for months on apple systems is only now coming out on droid systems; in fact it is rather common for ports from one of the systems to the other to take several months (to years) before being completed.
Understand that most of the apps also have to be designed for completely different hardware set ups. Your phones and tablets run on RISC as opposed to labtops and PCs CISC and that makes all manner of difference in how you program the app. Current apps will have to run on both (for windows 10, windows phones, droid phones, and apple phones).
TL:DR -- it's much more complicated than you appreciate apparently.
What you consider "Not a valid problem" is much bigger than you think, and isn't even the biggest problem involved.
Another world I would like to play some time would be
As you can see magic tends to be from "outside" and raw, but plentiful and dangerous.
Races would probably be:
Leaves me one over.
Finally I've always kind of wanted:
With the classes of:
I think I might be the one referenced by the OP, however I know I am not the first or only person that likes to run like this.
For my most recent campaign world the classes and races were:
Magic in this world tends to be formulaic and those that don't follow such tenets tend to be "weird" and suffer from the raw magic.
The races are:
The dwarfs tend to like bright colors (to contrast with the dark of the mines and mountains they are use to) and are very family oriented. The ratfolk tend more to the hills but also tend to be clannish. Ratfolk and dwarfs tend to make natural allies.
The elves and Nagaji are jungle folk Barbarians, oracles, and brawlers tend to come from their numbers.
Humans and Androids are new to the planet while merfolk have been in the oceans and rivers for a very long time. Their nomadic ways and ability to reach areas the other races reside in makes them the natural traders of the world.
War. War never changes.
The Romans waged war to gather slaves and wealth. Spain built an empire from its lust for gold and territory. Hitler shaped a battered Germany into an economic superpower.
But war never changes.
In the 21st century, war was still waged over the resources that could be acquired. Only this time, the spoils of war were also its weapons: Posts. For these resources, Spambots would invade Paizo.com, the Rules Forum would annex the advice forum, and the General Discussion Forum would dissolve into quarreling, bickering nation-states, bent on controlling the last remaining resources on Earth.
I regret that I have but only one flag to give per post!
Ask not what your forum community can do for you, ask how many spam threads you can flag for your community!
Well part of the reason for the question is I want to run my warlock as spell caster by day, blaster/ bomber by night. So he seems a nice if not too good wizard normally and his alter ego doesn't cast spells but has blasting ability.
Night guy wears armor, two weapon fights has bombs, day guy doesn't wear armor and is a scholar.
To me a large part of this class relies on the GM and player agreeing before had what roles each identity plays.
I think if you had two specializations, (in effect we do, it is just one is mandatory social) it could make for a richer class with more nuance and character spread.
Kind of saddens me he isn't a candidate for master chymist.
All of them? The Bookish Rogue Feat means you can change to what you need at that moment.
Granted it takes 10 minutes, but hey grab a minute cast what you need spend another 10 changing it back for the next combat and move on, or leave it.
Marc Radle wrote:
So ... is it possible to just remove those Asian characters as options from the site? It feels like doing that would hinder these jerks' ability to spam the site quite a bit ....
Limiting the unicode available wouldn't help as it is too easy to build a post generator. The only ral ways to stop it are an automated post evaluator or the tag and slag method currently in use.
Ultimately only the second method is tried and true as with any automated system can eventually be played.
StIll a post evaluator would help.
I'll ban if it doesn't fit the setting.
For example (one I use fairly regularly in these sorts of threads) I had a campaign where all magic came of two flavors: Academics (wizard, witch, magus, alchemist, investigator) or Oracle (weird with "you-aren't-doing-it-right" curses due to method of access). Thus in such a world you couldn't be a summoner, cleric, or sorcerer because those simply didn't exist (no gods for one).
Usually what I try for in a campaign is 11 classes available, 7 races available. That way there are options without leaving things too open.
Setting tends to dictate what those 11 classes and races are.
Yeah when the discussion came out where the devs spoke up they seemed to completely ignore that part the entire time it was being pointed out to them (and the rest of the thread). It wasn't that they said it doesn't happen, they just flat out didn't address this part one way or another.
Personally I would (and have and will) say that being unable to see the components is equivalent to terrible conditions for each missing component and gives a +5 to the DC for each such component missing from what is normally required for the spell.
It actually is the same thing.
I fully agree they flubbed the wording here very badly, and should have used the term "type of bonus" instead of "source of bonus" as that seems to be the source of your confusion (in retrospect understandably).
If you read the FAQ you'll see they've simply used the wrong word -- what they are saying is bonuses of the same type don't stack. Instead of using the word they should have though they called it the 'source' of the bonus. Using that wording it would be accurate to say that the luck stone gives a bonus with a 'source' of luck while the racial ability gives a bonus with a 'source' of luck.
In the way the wording the FAQ each bonus has the "source" that gives it and the "source" that it is (aka type that it is) and that is very poor wording in this case.
Source doesn't matter -- effect does. What is the effect?
Obviously we have multiple sources -- there would be no question if we didn't.
It isn't charisma as a source -- it's the effect that divine protection has -- namely "add charisma to save throws". Anything else that has "add charisma to save throws" is the same effect and therefore won't stack no matter if it's a feat, spell, or class feature.
If it instead said, "Add a sacred bonus equal to your charisma modifier to the save throw" that would be a different effect since you are adding a specific type of bonus and not your charisma modifier.
We have had multiple sources before -- for example you could have a luck bonus from a stone and a luck bonus from your race. The effect is the same -- a luck bonus to (x). That effect regardless of its multiple sources doesn't stack, unless specifically granted.
It's the same with the multiple ki pools FAQ -- the class feature gives you a ki pool (the effect of the class feature) if another one gives you a ki pool you follow the rules involved in combining the two as you can't have two.
The weird exception to this is channel energy, which you can have from multiple sources.
Heck even the animal companion points to this -- if you have multiple sources of an animal companion unless one of the gives you two specifically you don't get two you stack the levels.
Combining effects wrote:
I've pointed it out multiple times. From the core rule book we have same effect from multiple sources, which doesn't allow that.
This FAQ is simply an extension (at the worse) of what is already explicitly ruled out in the core rule book.
Namely you can't (normally) have the same effect multiple times.
If you use the built in search feature on the pfsrd website it will populate as a google search. However if you look right below the "web" and "image" tab you'll see subtabs for the different sections on the pfsrd website.
This will allow you to search for "pain" related feats, spells, skills or magic equipment (and so on) separately.
I'm not asking you what rule you use or how you interpret the game. I'm asking which you would rather see in the book.
I would rather the second, but would prefer that instead they actually do something else entirely. Not that I have an absolute on what that is yet. I'll try to be a bit more informative in my next post here once I have the stream of consciousness into a more coherent form.
Polypurpose Panacea wrote:
Analgesic: You do not feel minor aches and pains, such as from arthritis, a cold, or a hangover, for 1 hour. For the duration, you gain a +2 resistance bonus against pain-related spells.
Not quite nerve block level but close.
There is also Delay Pain.
So not a cure but it can put it off until you have time to scream your head off.
While the rest of us are saying, "Dude, slitting someone's throat is not battle (what is actually listed as having a -10 DC check)."
If I snipe someone and they die not everyone between us should have a -10 dc check to know that someone just got sniped.
If I'm killing a chicken for supper not everyone in the 100 foot vicinity is going to know I just did it.
It's not "WHAT? I CAN'T HERE YOU OVER THE SOUND OF BATTLE FROM SOME GUY SLITTING BOBBY'S THROAT TWO ROOMS OVER!"
"GUYS THERE WAS A GRAPPLING HOOK ON WALL BATTLE BE READY!"
I thought the clarification was premised on the following (from this section):
The effect being "add charisma bonus to reflex save throw"
You have that ability twice, once from divine protection and once from prophetic armor. So that part doesn't happen twice.
I can understand some argument with the "replace dex portion" though.
Basically if I understand that argument correctly it would be:
reflex_save == base_bonus + dex_mod_bonus + (other)
How ravingdork would like them to work:
if divine_protection then
I believe this is consistent with another FAQ they put up too:
On the alternate ability modifier on check specifically, where they stated changing the ability that is applied means the check becomes the new ability modifier type of check.
Alternate Ability Score-Based Checks: If I change the key ability score of a skill (or other check), for example, if I change Knowledge from Intelligence to Charisma, is it no-longer an Intelligence-based check? Is it now a Charisma-based check?
Generally yes—at the time of rolling a check, if you substitute the ability score, the check is now based on the new ability score. In the example, at the time of rolling, Knowledge would now be a Charisma-based skill and not an Intelligence-based skill for you, which would affect things like feats, spells, or items that grant bonuses on checks based on their key ability score (like circlet of persuasion). However, if you are adding a second ability modifier to a check, this is not the case. For instance, when adding both Wisdom and Dexterity on initiative checks, initiative is still a Dexterity check, not a Wisdom check. Also, this changes the check only at the time of rolling, so this does not change static class features or options made during character building such as your class’s class skills. Classes that receive “all Intelligence-based skills” as class skills, for instance, are the victim of sloppy writing, and furthermore sometimes effects might muddy the water by only changing the ability dependency sometimes and not others, which is why you check the new dependency only for a specific given roll.
The prophetic armor ability makes it a charisma check. You can't add your charisma ability modifier to the same check twice without something explicit saying you can. You could add a deflection bonus equal to your charisma ability modifier, or add an enhancement bonus equal to your charisma ability modifier, but you cannot straight up add your charisma ability modifier to the roll twice.
Also wants and wishes compared to reality.
I want my nation to always do the right thing, no one to suffer if possible, there to be plenty for all.
I know that's not what's always going to happen.
Most sane people relying on those sentries or being that sleeping person (or the one beside him) might want that -- I assure you the person doing the eliminating does not, and is just as sane in that desire.
Personally Transmutation is one of the schools I would never oppose. To me giving up enchantment is easy -- most of the spells are iffy to start with due to NPC interaction with them and their almost universal attribute of being mind affecting (meaning there are lots of things either flat out immune or with huge bonuses).
Illusion while nice is easy to survive without, in this case I think that and enchantment would make an easy choice.
I'm pretty confident that any instance in which one person is stabbing another person would be defined as combat.
Ah, so slitting someone's throat in the night is combat?
I think not. It is certainly an attack, but not all attacks are combat.
There are plenty of situations where you might be attacked but not be in combat, especially not noisy, and immediately noticeable from 100 feet away combat.
The rule was always there. if you chose to houserule or ignore before ultimate intrigue, you can continue to do so after.
But that rule did not suggest that one person being stabbed in a surprise round was a full on battle that could be heard by everyone.
That's the part you are ignoring in your haste to say people are housruling or ignoring what was going on.
An unusual case of the handedness rule is an ability that allows you to treat a two-handed weapon as a one-handed weapon. For example, the titan mauler's jotungrip (which allows you to wield a two-handed weapon with one hand) allows you to wield a bastard sword in one hand even without the Exotic Weapon Proficiency, and (as the ability states) treats it as a one-handed weapon, therefore it is treated as a one-handed weapon for other effects.
My thread I referenced earlier has all the FaQs involved listened and is exactly about this issue. Effects have also already been defined to include class abilities, feats, spells, magic items and even favored class bonuses.