|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
As the title, I'm wondering if Goblin Skull Bombs require a successful ranged attack or a touch attack. In the original RPG Superstar entry, it was clearly a ranged touch, but the SRD entry is a little vague:
A skull bomb can be used as a thrown weapon with a range increment of 10 feet. If the attacker hits, the skull shatters, immolating the target as described above.
Regular Thrown weapons require a normal ranged attack roll, while Thrown *splash* weapons only require a ranged touch attack. So which is the Goblin Skull Bomb?
I've always believed this was in the core rules; that in lieu of rolling one could accept the average of a die roll for a hit die, rounded down. So instead of rolling 1d10, a player could simply take 5 for example.
But, now that I'm looking for that option, I can't find any mention of it in the core rules. I even checked my old 3.X books to see if it was something we'd held over from previous editions, but I don't see it anywhere. Did my group simply imagine this? Was this ever a core rule?
As per the title, I'm just wondering whether this spell's effect might include big rocks thrown by giants or munitions fired from siege engines.
A magical field appears around you, glowing with a chaotic blast of multicolored hues. This field deflects incoming arrows, rays, and other ranged attacks. Each ranged attack directed at you for which the attacker must make an attack roll has a 20% miss chance (similar to the effects of concealment). Other attacks that simply work at a distance are not affected.
A player of a wizard PC in a game I run has asked to take this 1st level spell. I'm trying to decide whether to allow it or not. It's clearly modeled after magic missile, with identical range and number of missiles, but requiring ranged touch attack rolls in exchange for more damage of a selected energy type.
With up to five missiles, the choice of all five energy types and medium range, is it too good for a 1st level spell?
I'm running the Giantslayer AP in which all the PCs are dwarves. As such, I'm trying to tie as many elements of the campaign as I can into dwarven history and tradition of Golarion. One notion I had was to replace the swamp-dwelling Council of Thorns' druidic order with a stone & crystal mystery-cult centered around the dwarves' ancient subterranean origins and their mystical ties to the element of earth. Instead of having reincarnated as Will-o'-wisps, the dwarves of the mystery cult instead transformed themselves into earth elementals to safeguard their vualt. I'm going to change the interior of the Vault of Thorns in the second module from a lush woodland-themed pocket plane to a giant hollow crystal geode with with a giant fungi forest inside.
I was thinking that the lone surviver of the "Council of Thorns", now a venerable dwarf known only as Silverbeard, may try to initiate the PCs into his largely extinct order. To that end, I'd like to hear some suggestions for fleshing out the possible lore and doctrine of an elemental earth based cult as well as giving it an appropriate name which the party could adopt as their own if they're so inclined. Suggestions welcome.
As a GM I don't particularly care for the odd grab bag of spells wizards tend to have and so was thinking to change some of the fluff in spell descriptions so they adhere better to a theme. One of my players is playing a dwarven wizard and I thought it'd be more thematic to have his spells be earth based. To that end, I was thinking some of his damage dealing spells could have their energy component substituted with a spray of battering rocks or slashing obsidian shards; dealing blunt or slashing damage instead.
So my question is, if I take a cold-based ranged touch spell like Snowball and replace it with a ranged touch attack that deals blunt damage will game balance be preserved or is the notion too powerful?
Since dwarves are such a traditional people, I'd like include elements of dwarven ancestry to highlight the passage of time and to tie the dwarven PCs to their people's history. I figured a simple way to do that would be to refer to dwarven generations as a rough unit of time such "One hundred generations ago". I just need to figure out the overall average amount of time between a dwarf being born and the age at which he/she is most likely to produce offspring.
Naturally dwarves can marry and produce offspring and different times in their lives. But being a generally traditional people, I imagine there is a period of life in which it is considered most appropriate to marry. There are likely outliers who marry young or old but, given enough generations, such anomalies tend to iron themselves out over time.
According to the aging charts dwarves reach young adulthood at 40, proper adulthood somewhere between 50 and 64 (depending on vocation), reach midlife at 125 and the end of their reproductive years (if they're anything like humans) maybe somewhere around 150.
As per the title, I'd like a brief, spoiler free description for each of the Adventure Paths that I can send to the players in my group so together we can discuss which APs to examine more closely for eventual play.
One or two sentences with the key themes, common environments and monsters types as well as any weak points would be greatly appreciated. Adding a 1-5 star rating for each would be frosting on the cake.
I myself don't familiarize myself overmuch with the various APs outside of those I've run or played in case I eventually get the opportunity to play through them myself. I know such description lists exist, but they usually lack the newest APs, so I thought a more current list would be generally helpful for those shopping around for their next AP.
This is sort of an odd request. I know there are countless threads covering this question and there's little to no disagreement since the rule in question is spelled out fairly clearly.
At 1st level, 2nd level, and every four levels thereafter, a master of many styles may select a bonus style feat or the Elemental Fist feat. He does not have to meet the prerequisites of that feat, except the Elemental Fist feat. Alternatively, a master of many styles may choose a feat in that style’s feat path (such as Earth Child Topple as one of these bonus feats if he already has the appropriate style feat (such as Earth Child Style). The master of many styles does not need to meet any other prerequisite of the feat in the style’s feat path." Please note that no prerequisites are required for the bonus feat beyond having its associated style feat*,* so all "Monkey feats" should be available.[
As written in the part I bolded, it seems that a Master of Many styles is free to choose any of the feats in a style's path while ignoring the prerequisites, except of course that he have the initial style feat itself. My question is, is there a citation somewhere from Paizo confirming this is the case? I'm trying to convince someone (no, not my GM) that this is how the class ability works but he contends that the path's feats must be selected in order and insists on seeing something official to that affect. Any help?
As per the title, I'm trying to flesh out my first barbarian character and I'm hunting around for a way to replenish rage rounds. Seeing as how most of a barbarians' abilities revolve largely around rage, running out of rage rounds during a long day of adventuring seems to be a significant issue. I know there's Barbarian chew, the Extra Rage feat and a few other ways to add rage rounds per day, but they aren't terribly effective or practical. There's also the Elemental Kin archetype, but setting yourself on fire before raging seems rather convoluted and odd. I'm surprised that I can't find a ready-made spell or magic item that replenishes rage; a slow burn spell, a bear-sark vest of mounting fury or an elixir of endless rage. Am I overlooking something?
I'm curious whether pairing these three elements is a viable combo.
While raging, as a free action the barbarian may leave herself open to attack while preparing devastating counterattacks. Enemies gain a +4 bonus on attack and damage rolls against the barbarian until the beginning of her next turn, but every attack against the barbarian provokes an attack of opportunity from her, which is resolved prior to resolving each enemy attack.
While using the Snake Style feat, when an opponent’s attack misses you, you can make an unarmed strike against that opponent as an attack of opportunity. If this attack of opportunity hits, you can spend an immediate action to make another unarmed strike against the same opponent.
Now assuming you're raging and have already spent a free action on your turn to activate the Come and Get Me rage power and an opponent indeed attempts an attack against you:
1. the attempt to strike you provokes an AoO from you.
Result, three attacks to your opponent's one. If your opponent is foolish enough to continue and attacks you a second time during his turn, you immediately repeat steps 1–5; skipping step 6 because you've already expended your next round's swift action; that is as long as you still have AoS left from your Combat Reflexes feat.
Is this correct?
Yeah, I know this has been addressed and debated countless times. That's part of my problem; I can't make heads or tails out of all the threads out there. I'm looking for help in connecting the dots and either confirming or refuting some confusing parts.
Let's say that the character is a medium dragon with monk levels. The idea is for him to fight with two monk unarmed strikes along with the two weapon fighting feat (not flurrying) along with his natural attacks (bite, claw, claw) as part of a full attack routine. The two monk unarmed strikes are, say, a horn butt and tail slap. Disregarding eventual iterative attacks from the unarmed strikes, this character would have five attacks: a bite, two claws, and the two unarmed strikes.
The questions are, what are the penalties to hit with each attack and which attacks receive the character's full Strength bonus to damage and which, if any, get only half the Strength bonus to damage? Does the following line from the monk's Unarmed Strike class feature affect this in any way:
"A monk's unarmed strike is treated as both a manufactured weapon and a natural weapon for the purpose of spells and effects that enhance or improve either manufactured weapons or natural weapons."
If the character's unarmed attacks count as natural weapons, would that make all his attacks primary?
As per the title, I'm looking to make a human character with the ability to change into a wolf; only those two shapes, no werewolf hybrid form. Does such a thing exist anywhere already?
Assuming it doesn't, I was looking at how I might do this using the Advanced Race Guide. I figured the easiest way to go about it would be to create a wolf and then simply add the lesser change shape ability to give it a human form. However, I find the point total rather high considering that all the canine bonuses aren't normally usable while in human form. Anyone have a better idea how that might affect the Race Point cost? Here's my preliminary writeup for the race. And suggestions are welcome. Thanks!
Power Attack is one of those feats which I've read is a statistical must-have for melee builds but which I'm always hesitant to make use of since the penalty to hit makes me nervous. How do you properly gauge when to use it? People will say it depends largely on the AC of your target but, for a combat that lasts only 3-4 rounds, spending a round or two trying to determine the exact AC and then running some numbers to figure out whether you've reached a viable Power Attacking opportunity seems too time consuming to be worthwhile. Can someone to whom Power Attacking is second nature help me figure out how I should go about getting the most out of this feat?
For reference, I'm playing a 5th level Synthesist who is large, with 20 Str, and with four claw attacks; dealing approximately 1d8+5 per hit.
I'm looking to have created a crown which allows the wearer to grow in size as if under the effect of an enlarge person spell at will and to remain so as long as the crown is worn. I'd just like confirm the price for such an item. Since it's "Use-activated or continuous" item the cost would be Spell level x caster level x 2,000 gp x 2 since the duration of the spell is normally 1 minute/level. So a 1st level spell x 1st level caster x 2,000 x 2 = 4,000 gp. Is this correct?
Our group just picked up this trinket in the Reign of Winter AP. Just looking to clarify its function.
"Once per day, if used as the focus or divine focus for a summon monster or summon nature’s ally spell, the cauldron automatically conjures 1d3 additional creatures of the same kind from the next lower level list. For example, if a user casts summon monster III to summon 1d3 wolves, he could also summon 1d3 additional wolves (or other creatures from the 2nd-level list)."
Since it only grant "additional creatures of the same kind from the next lower level list" it seems that what's implied, but not outright stated, is that the cauldron has no effect when summoning creatures of the same-level list as that of the spell or when casting the 1st level version of either spell (since there's no lower level list to choose 1d3 creatures from).
I'm also wondering whether the cauldron would work in conjunction with a summoner's Summon Monster spell-like ability seeing as it doesn't require a focus though since, according to the general description of spell-like abilities, it "functions just like a spell. Further, would the Cauldron function in conjunction with appropriate spell-completion or spell-trigger items such as scrolls and wands?
I don't think there's any official ruling on this item, so conjecture is welcome.
I searched but couldn't find an answer. The claws evolution states: "An eidolon has a pair of vicious claws at the end of its limbs, giving it two claw attacks." No problem there; spend a point and you get two claws. But what if you've reached a level where your eidolon is allowed an odd number of attacks and you'd rather add an extra claw rather than say a bite, slam, tentacle or what-have-you? You're free to buy as many pairs of limbs as you can afford, but can you spend 1 evolution point to add claws to one of those limbs or, alternatively, add claws to both limbs but only use one of them in battle to make your odd number of attacks?
Our group is about to start a new Pathfinder Adventure Path at 1st level with four 15-pt buy PCs. The GM encouraged one of the players to try out a gunslinger and, due to an elaborate background, is considering giving him starting access to a modern 5-round capacity rifle rather than a gunslinger's typical firearm options.
I'm not terribly familiar with Pathfinder firearms or the gunslinger class. For those who are; what effect would this modern technology have on the the gunslinger's overall class balance at low and higher levels?
I've searched the rules forum and got bogged down in inconclusive similar-though-not-quite-the-same questions. Hopefully someone can clarify the issue for me.
Say I have a character with the fey bloodline's laughing touch power...
Laughing Touch (Sp): At 1st level, you can cause a creature to burst out laughing for 1 round as a melee touch attack. A laughing creature can only take a move action but can defend itself normally. Once a creature has been affected by laughing touch, it is immune to its effects for 24 hours. You can use this ability a number of times per day equal to 3 + your Charisma modifier. This is a mind-affecting effect.
…and multiple natural attacks per round (bite/claw/claw for instance), since touch attack effects can be delivered with successful natural attacks, can I full attack and successfully inflict a laughing touch effect on multiple opponents as a full attack?
As a secondary question, does a failed attack roll on a laughing touch use up one of the daily uses of that power or does the 3 + Cha limit only apply to successful attacks?
Thanks for the help.
A player in our group is looking to play a humanoid woman who can naturally change shape into a wolf as a part of her character concept; though she isn't infected with lycanthropy. Since she's supposedly been doing this since birth, is there any way for a character to effect that transformation at 1st level?
I'm working on a PC fey race called the Meliae; a type of dryad bonded to an ash tree in Greek myth. I started with a half-elf, kept some of its base traits, adopted some of the half-elf's alternate racial traits and swapped out others traits for those from the Race Builder chapter of the Advanced Race Guide to maintain balance.
It ends up being a low-calory PC-friendly version of the dryad which, by my count, maintains the ARG's 10 r.p. guideline for a standard PC race. I'm just looking to get some feedback on it.
• Type: Fey (2 RP)
Perennial: Meliae are creatures of all seasons, and so are as accustomed to harsh winters as they are to easy summers. A melia can move through natural snow and ice at her normal speed and gains a +4 racial bonus on Fortitude saves to avoid nonlethal damage from cold environments.
I'm trying to rough out my Synthesist's feat progression from level one. Although I want to be combat-effective, the GM prefers to focus more on role-playing so there's some room for some non-combat diversity.
Thing is, the more I look at it, the Extra Evolution feat seems to be a better option than most feats. Compare the +3 bonus of Skill Focus vs the +8 racial bonus from the Skilled Evolution. Evolutions are strong, versatile, can be repurposed every level and generally superior to individual feats.
My question is, if available at the current level, isn't the Extra Evolution feat a solid and generally better choice for a synthesist to take?
If my character has natural reach, say of 10-ft, and uses a special ranged ability like the Tanglevine power from the Verdant Sorcerer bloodline; "you can create a 15-foot-long, animated vine that springs from your hand". Does the vine's range remain fixed at 15-ft or, since I can reach my hand out 10-ft from my body and the vine is described as starting from my hand, does that mean the vine actually has a 25-ft range?
It seems that most new playable races introduced by Paizo also have alternate Favoured Class bonuses which are, in some cases, a big draw for prospective players; something that isn't reflected in the Example Races' Race Point Totals of the Advanced Races Guide. It seems something of an oversight to prospective race builders.
I'm wondering whether there's a (semi-) official system for buying/assigning alternate Favoured Class bonuses to new races or if it's simply something that can be added for 0 RP by the race(s) creator.
I'm reposting this to the correct forum. I'm working on a new Summoner build and would like some help developing an Evolution before I pitch it to my GM for consideration. I'd like to know if it makes sense, what works and doesn't work with it and how many points it might be worth. Here it is:
Any damage inflicted on the effigy remains with the eidolon once it is summoned again though the effigy can similarly be healed of damage up to the eidolon's full hit point total through application of the rejuvenate eidolon spell or its equivalents. If the effigy suffers sufficient damage to kill the eidolon, it crumbles apart and the eidolon cannot be summoned again for 24 hours. Due to the presence of the effigy in the material world, summoning the eidolon in its place is easier than normal; requiring only half the usual time, to a minimum of 1 round.
A summoner with the Merge Form power or the Synthesist archetype may remain comfortably encased inside the effigy after dismissing her eidolon for as long as desired, and is free to exit or enter the effigy as a standard action. While inside the effigy, the Synthesist cannot move and is effectively Paralyzed. Although she cannot see outside of the effigy, the Synthesist can make perception checks at a -5 penalty to distinguish sounds.
The notion behind the evolution is to grant an eidolon a permanent presence in the material world instead of disappearing and reappearing at the summoner's whim. An eidolon with an angel or gargoyle theme might appear to transform into a stone statue while the summoner sleeps, a treant eidolon could appear to take root and remain a normal tree while inactive or a beast eidolon might simply curl up and appear to slumber.
As I see it, having an eidolon effigy is as much a liability as it is a benefit. I actually had trouble thinking of any benefit to having it around which would justify spending evolution points on it, which is why I had it reduce the time needed to summon the eidolon. As is the effigy's only use might be as a decent decoy. Summoners able to merge with their eidolons have the added benefit of being able to take shelter inside the effigy; which is about as effective as sealing yourself inside a wooden barrel. It's still a risky proposition though since damage inflicted upon the defenseless effigy is transferred to the absent eidolon and the summoner is limited to purely mental actions.
I'm working on a new Summoner build and would like some help developing an Evolution before I pitch it to my GM for consideration. I'd like to know if it makes sense, what works and doesn't work with it and how many points it might be worth. Here it is:
I'm trying to develop a PC for a friend's tabletop game; a dryad PC who's bonded tree is a treant. This is a bit weird but, if you'll humor me, I'll try to make this make sense.
The notion I have is to use a female half-elf summoner synthesist in the role of the dryad and have her eidolon counterpart be the treant. That is to say that the dryad would appear, act and be a veritable dryad, but she would be using a RAW half-elf's racial makeup to keep the character viable as a PC. In the same vein, her treant counterpart would appear, act and in all ways that matter be a treant, but would be stated from a synthesist's eidolon.
I'd be playing the un-melded dryad and her synthesist-melded treant form as two distinct entities; only one of which could be active at a time. So as not to have the treant simply disappear into the either when un-melded, I'm hoping to have my GM allow the eidolon to remain corporeal even when he's dismissed or "killed"; albeit as an otherwise normal rooted tree stuck in the spot he was where he should have disappeared.
So the dryad would remain a dryad until the moment when she steps into her tree and she herself goes dormant, at which point the treant (i.e. melded-synthesist) awakens and is free to move and act. So when one of the pair is active, the other is automatically asleep. If the melded eidolon were to be killed, the treant would go dormant and immediately root to the spot and the dryad would be forcefully ejected. The dryad is the soft social of the duo, while the treant is the muscle. Make sense?
I'm going to be playing this from level 1 onwards. What I'd like would be some feedback on this concept, as well as roleplaying ideas, suggestions for which base form and evolutions would help make the eidolon as much like a treant as possible. Likewise anything that'd make the half-elf as much like a dryad as possible would be helpful. Thanks!
I may soon be getting back into a Pathfinder campaign and had a notion for finally realizing a character concept I've had in the back of my head for a few decades, but which I never had the game mechanics to pull off: a tinker gnome piloting a clockwork armoured-knight mech which he builds and upgrades as the campaign progresses. The Synthesist, with an appropriate amount of backstory and aesthetic changes seems a good way to pull it off without needing to reinvent the wheel. Summoned creatures could similarly be adapted by describing them as various clockwork creatures the gnome deploys when needed
The only issue I have with the concept is the notion that the eidolon/mech and clockwork creatures appear and disappear regularly. Though it's a super convenient way of acquiring and discarding of the character's mechanical creations as needed, it's rather at odds with the idea that these are big clunky mechanisms that the character builds and maintains in his off hours. In battle, I'd imagine that the slaying of the eidolon would result in the gnome being knocked out of or being forcefully ejected from the non-functional knight-mech. Unfortunately the broken down mech-eidolon wouldn't stick around for the gnome to go about fixing it; it would immediately disappear. In fact, there seems to be no way for the gnome to step out of his eidolon-mech-suit without it immediately disappearing in a puff of smoke.
One notion I had was to imagine the eidolon as an animating spirit that, once it departs, leaves behind a big pile of broken and largely useless machinery; the actual knight-mech body. That seems easy enough, except that I wouldn't want the responsibility of carting around a big mound of scrap metal to become a burden for the party.
I'd like to hear possible solutions to this conundrum. Any ideas?
Following a few years of game-play over fifty-four sessions, our intrepid band of adventurers (the Sihedron) went up against the Runelord of Greed and defeated him after surprising him in the "Eye of Avarice". We began Spires of Xin-Shalast last session, though we only went so far as to perform a successful Harrow reading and discretely reconnoitered the Pinnacle of Avarice.
We started off this session by buffing ourselves to the nines and then circumventing a quintet of lamia harridans to trigger the opening of a portal by touching a Runeforged weapon to a crystal mirror held by a statue of Karzoug. We next appeared inside the Eye of Avarice; surprising Karzoug, a huge blue dragon and another human wizard who I believe was an apprentice named Khalib. During the surprise round, my character cast antimagic field on himself and had his familiar carry him over to the Runelord's side. With all his magical defenses down, our rogue succeeded in hitting Karzoug with a devastating ranged sneak attack, followed by another arrow from our ranger. I was looking forward to the prospect of assaulting Karzoug with a tanglefoot bag (hey, not much else I could do right?) but our monk charged forward and hit the Runelord with a vital strike; ending Varisa's would-be conqueror's life. The Dragon proved a little more time-consuming to defeat while Khalib fell to the same antimagic/monk-attack combo as Karzoug.
And then five lamia harridans and six rune giants crashed our little party in the Eye of Avarice. The Battle of the Pinnacle will continue next session...
I'm reading up on using dispel magic (or greater dispel magic) to counterspell and am having trouble figuring out what the dispel check DC is supposed to be. The spell description says that dispel magic "targets a spellcaster and is cast as a counterspell".
Backtracking to the targeted dispel option of the spell it initially says: "One object, creature, or spell is the target of the dispel magic spell. You make one dispel check (1d20 + your caster level) and compare that to the spell with highest caster level (DC = 11 + the spell's caster level). If successful, that spell ends."
But then, reading ahead a bit, it says: "You can also use a targeted dispel to specifically end one spell affecting the target or one spell affecting an area. You must name the specific spell effect to be targeted in this way. If your caster level check is equal to or higher than the DC of that spell, it ends."
So which of the two applies to counterspelling? Is the check DC (11 + the spell's caster level) or the targeted spell's save DC? It seems to me that the second one makes more sense since it means that it's easier to counterspell lower level than higher level spells.
For that matter, why are two different systems used for setting dispel DCs? Isn't that needlessly confusing?
I was wondering whether using arcane eye to explore outer space was fair game. The spell description says: "You can create the arcane eye at any point you can see, but it can then travel outside your line of sight without hindrance." So, look up during a clear night, pick out a visible celestial body you'd like to explore, cast your spell and "create an invisible magical sensor that sends you visual information" at that location. Granted, you wouldn't be able to explore very far on the planet or moon of your choice since "An arcane eye travels at 30 feet per round" but it's certainly much better than using a telescope and easier than casting interplanatary teleport. Traveling Dream further increases the window of exploration by an order of magnitude (to hours rather than minutes) and even opens up the door to communicating with native extraterrestrials.
Looking at the Estimating Magic Item Gold Piece Values table, I see that an item which enhances an ability score costs "Bonus squared x 1,000 gp" with no mention of any limits. I seem to remember that in 3.X there was a maximum of +6 for any such (non epic) magic items, but I see nothing to that effect in Pathfinder. Is there any RAW reason one couldn't create +8 or +10 items?
My mystic theurge character is currently possessing a Shemhazian demon via a lucky casting of magic jar and I'm trying to figure out what his new attack routine is. On the one hand, Magic Jar's description states "A body with extra limbs does not allow you to make more attacks" yet also says "The body retains its Strength, Dexterity, Constitution, hit points, natural abilities, and automatic abilities." So do I get its full natural attack routine, my own +6/+1 two attacks or some other combination?
Also, in regards to the Shemazian body, what exactly are its "natural and automatic abilities"? Thanks!
I tried searching for an answer and couldn't find a consensus. So, is it feasible to improve similarly themed buildings; for example building a shrine and later improving it into a temple and eventually a cathedral? Would it save on BPs? Or must a building be demolished and a new building be erected for full BP cost?
I'm trying to figure out the price for an item similar to an eversmoking bottle which, instead of opaque smoke, constantly emits a thin mist akin to a mind fog spell except with triple the spell's normal area of effect (60-ft. radius spread),a Caster Level of 15 and save DC of 17.
Seeing as how the mind fog (normally a 5th level spell) has been enlarged twice over, it'd seem equivalent to an 8-9th level spell. When multiplied with its CL and then again by 2,000 gp and adjusted for its duration, it'd seem to be well over 300,000 gp. Is that right?
It comes up often enough that Intelligence boosting items appear in modules in the hands of defeated NPCs. Rarely however to their descriptions detail which skills they enhance as a part of increasing a character's Intelligence. Certainly not every headband of vast intelligence is created the same since their creators have differing goals. And yet, some things are likely common to the majority of these items' creators. Their most likely creators are wizards since they stand to benefit the most from such items. Being wizards, they've certainly an interest in magic-related skills. And yet, having studied wizardry so as to eventually create magic items, they likely already have full ranks in Knowledge (Arcana) & Spellcraft and so wouldn't benefit from placing those skills in the headbands they create.
So my question is: what are the three skills, in order of priority, that are likely to have been incorporated into a Headband of Vast Intelligence during its creation by an unspecified creator?
I'm wondering whether anyone has or knows how to calculate the number of spells to be found inside of a typical NPC wizard's spellbook at various levels. Some modules don't list the full contents of NPC spellbooks in an effort to save space; leaving the matter up to individual GMs to flesh out on their own. Picking extra spells beyond those listed in an NPC's prepared spell list is easy; the only issue is how many is a reasonable number to add.
A simple formula could likely do the trick; say something like 50% or 75% beyond a caster's daily allowance of spells. Any suggestions?
I've always been a little sketchy on the "activate blindly" option of Use Magic Device and which actions, if any, a character *must* perform to activate a magic item.
You do have to perform some equivalent activity in order to make the check. That is, you must speak, wave the item around, or otherwise attempt to get it to activate.
Does that mean that, when attempting to activate blindly, a character can freely choose to babble gibberish or wave the item around or shake it wildly; whichever is most convenient regardless of the item's nature? That is to say, can a character attempt to blindly activate a scroll or wand merely by waving them around?
A follow up question: since constructs are created in the same way as magic items (with item creation feats, raw materials and spells) can a character attempt to command them via the Use Magic Device skill?
I feel it necessary to distinguish between in-game "goodness" and real-world "goodness". Since, I believe, a truly good person would have to adhere to some level of pacifism, I'd hazard to say that few of the characters we play could be considered truly "good" by real-world standards. A big focus of the game and the characters we make is combat-related; which weapons they use, what sort of armor they sport and the battle-tactics they favour. They also don't pursue non-violent careers. On the contrary, they usually go looking for trouble and so draw their (very lethal) weapons in combat regularly. Although some characters might be truly pacifistic, they're the rare exception rather than the norm. The best of adventurers only practice their trade when confronting monsters or truly evil people. But again, their first instinct is usually to beat their opponents to death with sharp pointy things rather than capturing them alive; even if the latter is feasible. When the grisly business is done, they then collect loot for their own personal use or for resale. Again, the best among adventurers may seek to share some measure of their loot with the bad guys' victims, the poor or a church of their choice, but most of the treasure usually remains with the PCs.
In the real world, such adventurers might be hailed as heroes by some people under the right circumstances. But would anyone hold them up examples of "goodness"? To measure up to real-world standards, it seems to me that an entire group (because good people who abide morally-deficient behaviour amongst their buddies aren't really all that good themselves) would strive to take anyone alive whom they consider redeemable, and then also take the subsequent steps to redeem them if possible. Of course abominations (such as undead and evil outsiders) might be exempted since they're considered irredeemable by their very nature and should be destroyed for the sake of goodness. In most campaigns however — with their horde of evil cultists, misguided cohorts and sentient "monsters" — that kind of kid glove treatment would quickly devolve into untenable tedium.
So, for the sake of keeping the game rolling and fun we generally accept a certain amount of bloodlust and self-serving greed in our "good" characters. In the real-world, such characters would, at best, be considered well-intentioned and possibly heroic.
I'm curious to hear whether others disagree with this assessment or if it's widely accepted (even if not discussed overmuch) as being self-evident.
I'm a fan of Paizo's Harrow Deck and am planning on introducing it via the Old Beldame; who would seem a natural pick as a Harrower. As was done in the Curse of the Crimson Throne AP I'm looking to tie the AP's modules into the six ability score suits of the deck. I'm looking for some suggestions to that effect from those more familiar with the AP. Thoughts?