Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ

Archaeik's page

1,398 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS

1 to 50 of 1,398 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Tels wrote:
Concentration Checks wrote:

Injury

If you take damage while trying to cast a spell, you must make a concentration check with a DC equal to 10 + the damage taken + the level of the spell you're casting. If you fail the check, you lose the spell without effect. The interrupting event strikes during spellcasting if it comes between the time you started and the time you complete a spell (for a spell with a casting time of 1 full round or more) or if it comes in response to your casting the spell (such as an attack of opportunity provoked by the spell or a contingent attack, such as a readied action).

If you are taking continuous damage, such as from an acid arrow or by standing in a lake of lava, half the damage is considered to take place while you are casting a spell. You must make a concentration check with a DC equal to 10 + 1/2 the damage that the continuous source last dealt + the level of the spell you're casting. If the last damage dealt was the last damage that the effect could deal, then the damage is over and does not distract you.

Well... it doesn't say 'attack' it just says 'damage'. So you would add all of the damage together before determining the DC of the check. So add up all the damage from the different acid arrows to total up the check; same as with magic missile.

Even if it's reasonable to adjudicate that you total Magic Missiles (I don't think it is), the continuous paragraph indicates "source", singular, so it's lots of individual checks.

I think it's individual checks per damage roll anyway, which is much more favorable to the caster and likely intended.


TheIronwolf wrote:
GinoA wrote:

If you want a flavorful reason, think of it as a brain limitation.

You've granted yourself an extra arm and learned to manipulate it. But a humanoid just isn't capable of coordinating that many actions at the same time.

With practice (i.e. BAB >= 6 or 11), anyone can learn to juggle more strikes in the same time period, but doing so while also coordinating a third arm to attack is just too much for a simple bilateral-focused brain.

Isnt that what Multiweapon fighting is for? Training your brain to do it?

No, MWF trains you to do it better, it does not unlock the additional offhand attacks if you don't already possess them.


FrodoOf9Fingers wrote:
Snowlilly wrote:

Usually stealth is negated when concealment is removed.

HiPS is an exception to the usual rules.

I don't believe anyone is arguing for keeping stealth when using concealment against a monster with blindsight. We're debating if you can use partial cover.

Are we? Are the rules for (Ex) LoE somehow different from what's described in the magic chapter?

Quote:
An otherwise solid barrier with a hole of at least 1 square foot through it does not block a spell's line of effect. Such an opening means that the 5-foot length of wall containing the hole is no longer considered a barrier for purposes of a spell's line of effect.

A normally sighted creature would still maintain LoE to you regardless of your successful stealth check.

It's not unreasonable as a houserule to say that "stealth" means you ducked completely behind a low wall or some such, but the printed rules only deal in increments of "squares" on a grid.

Partial and normal cover simply are not enough to block LoE.


Chemlak wrote:

Assume no TWF feats, but two vestigial arms. Here's what you're holding in your arms:

1 A longsword
2 A dagger
3 A battle axe
4 A shortsword

You can attack with any two of these using fighting with two weapons. What you can't do is attack with three of them.

Even with TWF or MWF that's all you could do.

It should be noted that all of them still threaten.


TheIronwolf wrote:

If multiweapon fighting works like and replaces two weapon fighting. And two weapon fighting gives "extra" attacks with offhand weapons.

Then it wont work.

Correct?

This is where you're misinformed

the TWF feat does not grant extra attacks, it only reduces the penalty for "fighting this way".

similarly, MWF does not grant extra attacks, but only reduces the penalties.

The extra attack potential comes from having full-functioning "hands", which vestigial arms don't grant.


You can make attacks with the arms, but you can not make extra attacks with the arms (which is what TWF/MWF attacks are).

This has been rehashed to death already, do some searches. I'm done.


If it always takes a standard action, you could never do it as part of a bite attack.

It's clearly not intended to work multiple times a round through FCT, but RAW it does.


Mark Montgomery 980 wrote:

So reading Vestigial arm on the Pathfinder SRD it explicitly states if you put a weapon in that hand, you get an attack as part of an alchemists attack action.

So...

4 Arms, 4 weapons, 4 attacks?

In the hopes that this was an actual misreading

Benefit: The alchemist gains a new arm (left or right) on his torso. The arm is fully under his control and cannot be concealed except with magic or bulky clothing. The arm does not give the alchemist any extra attacks or actions per round, though the arm can wield a weapon and make attacks as part of the alchemist’s attack routine (using two-weapon fighting). The arm can manipulate or hold items as well as the alchemist’s original arms (for example, allowing the alchemist to use one hand to wield a weapon, another hand to hold a potion, and the third hand to throw a bomb). The arm has its own “hand” and “ring” magic item slots (though the alchemist can still only wear two rings and two hand magic items at a time).

Essentially the intent is: if you couldn't make that many attacks (including natural attacks) without the arms, you can't make any more than that with them.


Quote:
Page 131—In the Sacred Fist archetype’s Weapon and Armor Proficiency, before the last sentence, add “When wearing armor, using a shield, or carrying a medium or heavy load, a sacred fist loses his AC bonus and flurry of blows.” In the AC Bonus ability, in the third sentence, change “deflection” to “dodge”. At the end of Pathfinder RPG Advanced Class Guide First Printing, Update 1.05 the ability, add the sentence “This counts as the monk ability of the same name, and the sacred fist’s warpriest levels stack with monk levels for determining the benefits.” In the Flurry of Blows ability, at the end of the second sentence, add “, except the sacred fist’s attack bonus from warpriest levels does not count as his warpriest level.


Considering this line from the same paragraph you quoted

Quote:
Other polymorph spells might be subject to this restriction as well, if they change you into a form that is unlike your original form (subject to GM discretion).

This speaks strongly toward intent to me, that if your shape is unchanged, you gear shouldn't meld.

Anyway, Battle Form doesn't actually indicate anything about type/form, only size, so I'm skeptical that that paragraph comes into play at all.


I've had a bit of difficulty following the various confusions

Stealth wrote:
You are skilled at avoiding detection, allowing you to slip past foes or strike from an unseen position. This skill covers hiding and moving silently.

This is why stealth is ineffective vs forms of detection other than sight and sound.

Charon's Little Helper wrote:
Of course it has a use without them auto-detecting. It lets you make stealth checks against them without cover or concealment. Very handy - especially since virtually no concealment works against them.

This is very much untrue; instead, the feat makes cover/concealment work against them.

Dampen Presence wrote:
Benefit: You may use the Stealth skill to hide from any creature attempting to perceive you using blindsight or blindsense, even if you are clearly in that creature’s perceptual field. This feat does not confer any advantages against other forms of perception, such as scent, vision, or tremorsense.

"clearly in that creature's perceptual field" refers to being within line of effect, which is the only thing those senses care about.


The issue with doubling the result is that it leads to a quantized distribution that heavily rewards/penalizes unlikely outcomes (ie a really good or bad roll) rather than skewing everything toward the middle.


Skylancer4 wrote:

The trick flank isn't a prerequisite.

The animal doesn't flank unless trained or pushed to do so normally. Having the feat doesn't change that. It just gets a better benefit when it is in such a position.

Agreed, Precise Companion says "for this feat" not "for this action".


Shining Child

1.

Quote:

Melee 2 touches +19 (4d10 fire plus burning touch)

Ranged searing ray +19 touch (10d6 fire)

I'd say it's pretty conclusive that the ranged attack does not also trigger Burning Touch.

To the heart of the question however, simply targeting "touch AC" does not convert every attack of that kind to an actual touch.

2.

Multiplying Damage: wrote:
Sometimes you multiply damage by some factor, such as on a critical hit. Roll the damage (with all modifiers) multiple times and total the results.

3. Yes this works.

Darkness wrote:
Nonmagical sources of light, such as torches and lanterns, do not increase the light level in an area of darkness.
Shining Child wrote:
Blinding Light (Ex)


Jason hall 573 wrote:
But would their Acid Arrows stack with each other? Keep in mind they are not casting it each round in this scenario. They think their damage should stack with each other so that they can roll 4d4 on each of their turn and then continue stacking it like that.

Each instance of Acid arrow deals 2d4, the damage per instance does not increase for multiple instances.


LazarX wrote:
Dallium wrote:

It doesn't make any logical sense for an AC to have feats that enhance it's ability to flank without knowing how to flank.

But it makes PERFECT Pathfinder sense.

The animal doesn't have to know.. remember it's an animal companion so you get that druid speed bonus in pushing it into maneuvers you need to have it done, which I think is a swift action? There actually IS a reason to make some investment in Handle Animal for Druids, Rangers, and Hunters.
Handle Animal wrote:
Action: Varies. Handling an animal is a move action, while “pushing” an animal is a full-round action. (A druid or ranger can handle an animal companion as a free action or push it as a move action.)

Not as good as people want it to be.


Forseti wrote:
Dallium wrote:
Urath DM wrote:


Yes, but the question is "do you have to use one of those to teach the AC to flank, or does having the Outflank feat as a bonus selected here include the AC knowing how to flank when needed?"

Does the AC know how to flank? Yes. Does it know what you mean when you say "Fluffy, flank that thing!" No. You didn't teach it what you expect it to do when you tell it to flank something.

Do dogs know how to sit? Yes. Does a dog that is either untrained or was trained in anything other than English know what you want when you tell it to sit? No.

So you basically taught your companion animal to become very, very good at flanking, without teaching it to flank?

Sure, that makes sense.

without teaching it to flank automatically


J4RH34D wrote:
Archaeik wrote:
Jodokai wrote:
Reduce Animal Potion on a small?

This doesn't work since Wild Shape is a polymorph effect.

Polymorph wrote:
In addition, other spells that change your size have no effect on you while you are under the effects of a polymorph spell.
Take animal soul as a feat, then it does work. if you take wild spell, you can even cast diminish animal on yourself without the need for the potion

Not even before the animal soul errata, it would still break the polymorph rules. (Animal Soul did not grant an exception for those)


It's a bit of a stretch to suggest that the 5ft step includes the fall, they seem to happen sequentially even if the fall is an instantaneous consequence.
Part of the issue parsing this seems to be that 3 dimensional movement is not well defined, but it's not unreasonable to adjudicate that the 5ft step was into the cube at roughly the same altitude as your starting position, which is then complete before gravity takes effect.


This is like asking if your animal companion needs to know the Attack trick in order to be willing to attack without spending an action to push it; yes, of course it does.
Likewise, the AC needs to know the flank trick to automatically seek out flanking without needing to spend the action to push it.


Jodokai wrote:
Reduce Animal Potion on a small?

This doesn't work since Wild Shape is a polymorph effect.

Polymorph wrote:
In addition, other spells that change your size have no effect on you while you are under the effects of a polymorph spell.


Just a Guess wrote:
Edit: Do magical tattoos merge with your body, too? If not a tattooed version of the quick runner's shirt would work 1/day, too.

Even if they don't merge, you'd still need Wild Speech to activate items.


Barachiel Shina wrote:
Ok I cannot find this rule in the PRD anymore, did they take it out?

Yes, this was removed, you can damage any weapon normally, regardless of enhancement bonus.


Father's Forgehammer wrote:
the total time to craft the item is decreased by 25% (minimum 1 day)
Master Smith wrote:
and can craft magical metal items in half the normal amount of time.

The way I read it, Master Smith adjusts the normal time to half, and the hammer reduces that amount by 25% (to 37.5%[3/8], minimum 1 day).

I say this because the "total time" when crafting with Master Smith is always "half"; I just don't see how you can possibly apply the hammer reduction first without major mental gymnastics.


Mighty Glacier wrote:

The rules that My Self quoted are from control undead spell description. Ghasts are intelligent, so they don't follow suicidal orders. Unintelligent undead like zombies and skeletons, however, would follow suicidal orders.

For the record, I don't recommend giving suicidal orders even for unintelligent unead unless your party really dislikes the idea of having undead companions with them. They are more useful enslaved than destroyed.

Control Undead wrote:

This spell enables you to control undead creatures for a short period of time. You command them by voice and they understand you, no matter what language you speak. Even if vocal communication is impossible, the controlled undead do not attack you. At the end of the spell, the subjects revert to their normal behavior.

Intelligent undead creatures remember that you controlled them, and they may seek revenge after the spell's effects end.

The rules previously quoted are from the command undead spell.


Davick wrote:
Using them with armor and weapons is fine.

Although, certain specific benefits may only apply to unarmed strike.

Take Dragon Style: it grants a bonus to certain saves and allows certain types of movement in more situations, but the damage bonus applies only to UAS.

Also, despite similar names, Ranger combat styles are not related to [Style] feats.


AFAIK, if you are proficient with your deities favored weapon, it is listed under your class proficiencies.
Of the top of my head, this list includes Cleric, Inquisitor, and Warpriest.


I'm not sure the specific oracle ability you are referring to.

If it is the Command Undead feat, the undead "obey[s] your commands to the best of their ability, as if under the effects of control undead", which spell doesn't seem to have any proviso about self destructive commands.


Here is the relevant part of the class feature.

Nature Bond (Ex): wrote:
At 1st level, a druid forms a bond with nature. This bond can take one of two forms. The first is a close tie to the natural world, granting the druid one of the following cleric domains: Air, Animal, Earth, Fire, Plant, Water, or Weather.

It doesn't matter which deity a druid worships, he is still restricted to the listed domains.

Druids do not gain proficiency in a favored weapon, it is not part of their class description (nor is it tied to gaining a domain).


The Qinggong SLA's should activate as normal (standard if not noted otherwise), costing ki.

Combat wrote:
Spell-Like Abilities (Sp): Using a spell-like ability works like casting a spell in that it requires concentration and provokes attacks of opportunity. Spell-like abilities can be disrupted. If your concentration is broken, the attempt to use the ability fails, but the attempt counts as if you had used the ability. The casting time of a spell-like ability is 1 standard action, unless the ability description notes otherwise.
Qinggong wrote:
Spells: These ki powers duplicate the effects of a spell, and are spell-like abilities. A qinggong monk’s class level is the caster level for these spell-like abilities, and she uses Wisdom to determine her concentration check bonus.


Damage reduces a target's current hit points.

Ability Damage is covered under this section but seems to its own category of damage. I'd say it's likely, based on this, that you use the 50% chance to affect them rather than always dealing 1/2 ability damage.

Ramanujan wrote:
As a corollary, when an incorporeal creature attacks another incorporeal creature, does it deal double damage?

Incorporeals deal full normal damage to each other (and their damage is not reduced vs corporeal targets, so there is no wonky math)

Also, regardless of whether shadows had a strength score to damage, they would be immune by virtue of their undead traits anyway. A shadow attacking a non-immune incorporeal with a strength score would not have any disadvantage.


Moving Through a Square wrote:
Opponent: You can't move through a square occupied by an opponent unless the opponent is helpless. You can move through a square occupied by a helpless opponent without penalty. Some creatures, particularly very large ones, may present an obstacle even when helpless. In such cases, each square you move through counts as 2 squares.

I see no exception in the rules for incorporeals, so Acrobatics is required to even accomplish this.

Now, "realistically", a material being probably couldn't actually stop them (and they won't end up prone if they fail), so it's not unreasonable to let them without the check (incurring all other consequences).

Re: Bull Rush

UMR:Incorporeal wrote:
In fact, they cannot take any physical action that would move or manipulate an opponent or its equipment, nor are they subject to such actions.


Gaekub wrote:
Gaekub wrote:
This is marked as answered in the FAQ, but I couldn't find it. Does anyone know where it is?
Sorry to bump this, but I have a character idea that depends on the answer, and I'd really appreciate any help.

Many of these threads have been marked similarly before they revised the FAQ system.

We were pseudo-promised errata, but it never arrived when UC was reprinted. Sorry, there is no official answer to any of the Furious Finish questions.


TWF works with thrown weapons, the issue with what you're asking has more to do with whether a rope dart can be used as a 1H (or light) weapon for the purposes of TWF.

Thrown Weapons: The same rules apply when you throw a weapon from each hand. Treat a dart or shuriken as a light weapon when used in this manner, and treat a bolas, javelin, net, or sling as a one-handed weapon.

I lean toward no, based on its description not mentioning this (also note that "dart" =/= "rope dart"), and that I'd expect this weapon to use both hands when maintaining control of the rope. (But to be fair, it doesn't actually say anything about hands, so ostensibly the rope could be tied to your wrist for iterative retrieval instead of using another hand? are there any demonstrations like this out there?)

However, even if it is compatible with TWF, you'd still need one for each hand since only Flurry attacks can be made with a single weapon.


Charge wrote:
You must move to the closest space from which you can attack the opponent.
Overrun wrote:
you can attempt to overrun your target, moving through its square

RAW, you no longer meet the requirements to make the charge attack against the target of your overrun. (nothing in overrun delimits this)


Raphael wrote:
It fails to say how big the swarm will be - instead, it tells you how small the individual creatures will be.
Creature Swarm wrote:
Space/Reach: A creature swarm occupies a square (if composed of nonflying creatures) or a cube (if composed of flying creatures) 10 feet on a side. Its reach is 0 feet. A swarm does not threaten creatures in its square and cannot make attacks of opportunity with its swarm attack.

This matches the standard space for swarms.

Swarm subtype

Raphael wrote:
Also, no advice on HD for the swarm. The swarms in the Bestiary have more hit points than the base creatures.
Quote:
A creature swarm uses all the base creature's statistics and special abilities except as noted here.

Looks like HD remain unchanged.

Keep in mind this is 3rd party, so you might want to cross check the final creature against the bestiary guidelines for CR just to be sure it stacks up.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I disagree.

Quote:
If the weapon is wielded by a creature whose size matches that of the weapon's intended wielder, the weapon is treated as a light melee weapon when determining whether it can be used with Weapon Finesse, as well as with any feat, spell, or special weapon ability that can be used in conjunction with light weapons.

It doesn't actually change the weapon, it only allows a wielder to treat it like it's lighter for the listed purposes, not for every purpose.

Impact should be good to go.

Edit: I realize my point may not be clear enough.
It says "can be used ... with light weapons", it doesn't mention anything about restricting abilities that "can't be used with light weapons" (and this is ignoring that the weapon itself hasn't changed category anyway).


Rogar Stonebow wrote:
Archaeik wrote:

The rules aren't 100% clear on these points, from what I can gather

Incorporeal Touch seems to be treated as a primary natural attack for most purposes, but it is not expressly a natural weapon, only an "armed attack".

This also means it should be considered incompatible with Magic Fang or Feral Combat Training, since both requires a natural weapon. (FoB already disallows combining it with natural attacks.)

Lastly, it's not that the creature's base damage die doesn't increase with size, only that the Supernatural ability that arms the incorporeal touch doesn't also increase. (And that delivering it through a touch attack doesn't deal base damage.)

Feral combat training was where I ultimately wanted to go with this.

Well, I have somewhat of a conceptual issue with assigning class levels to creatures like a shadow. It's not expressly disallowed anywhere, but the fluff for the Greater Shadow implies that it's the natural progression/end state for a normal shadow.

Also, even though it's contraindicated, if you do end up adding FCT, I'd treat all class levels of monk as key at that point for determining CR. (I'd enforce that base Int score of 6 too.)


The rules aren't 100% clear on these points, from what I can gather

Incorporeal Touch seems to be treated as a primary natural attack for most purposes, but it is not expressly a natural weapon, only an "armed attack".

This also means it should be considered incompatible with Magic Fang or Feral Combat Training, since both requires a natural weapon. (FoB already disallows combining it with natural attacks.)

Lastly, it's not that the creature's base damage die doesn't increase with size, only that the Supernatural ability that arms the incorporeal touch doesn't also increase. (And that delivering it through a touch attack doesn't deal base damage.)


bbangerter wrote:
Triune wrote:
_Ozy_ wrote:
So, in your mind a creature with a reach 0 does NOT get an AoO when someone enters their square. Is that right?
No, that isn't right. The creature would in fact not get the AOO. The attack occurs directly before the provoking action. This is written in the FAQ if you'd like to look it up.

If a creature is 15' away from me, and I have a reach weapon, and it moves adjacent to me, do I not get an AoO because it was 15' away when it started its move - the action which provoked?

Movement and AoO's sometimes needs to be adjudicated differently. And even though the rules don't tell us to run them differently, we understand that that is actually how it works.

No, RAW disallows the AoO for entering a threatened square when the square they leave is not also threatened (since that square is the one your AoO must target, not the one they're entering), it's a bit wonky.

It has nothing to do with actual start position.

In your example, you would get an AoO when they move adjacent because they exited a threatened square. But if you had Unexpected Strike, RAW you wouldn't get that because you actually need to threaten both the exited square and the entered square.

The disagreement is whether RAW is also RAI in these cases.


Jeff Morse wrote:
So a wildshaped druid, in medium or heavy armor is limited to only 20 feet speed now? Tell me I am only tired and not getting this, please

There is a table under Additional Rules regarding the adjustment for base speeds higher than 30 (which many forms offer).

Magic:Polymorph wrote:
Your base speed changes to match that of the form you assume.

Keep in mind this will only apply if you have the Wild property on your armor.


But this is with Snap Shot, so all AoO's are assumed to be at range. The idea is to never actually let them close with you.

Also, I don't believe you can 5ft step as part of a Combat Patrol AoO, namely because it's off turn and it doesn't say you can.

Combat Patrol lets you move each time it triggers provided that the aggregate movement does not exceed your speed, so the tactic is somewhat viable, but the biggest issue is that a creature's movement counts as the same opportunity, so this really only has a large payoff against another ranged attacker who hasn't invested in feats to prevent provocations and also foolishly continues a full attack after being peppered with a couple of your arrows.

However, it would technically allow you to move your speed away (likely preventing them from reaching you), even though the design was intended to allow you to move toward them for melee.


BigNorseWolf wrote:

But you're not talking about a special ability, which by their nature break the normal rules. You're talking about the normal rules themselves.

Tiny creatures can have reach (teeny tiny pole arms. Lunge. Natural reach like pseudo dragons)

Nor is every creature that can have their square entered without reach: a very large opponent can enter a small or bigger opponents square.

The language is nearly identical, I'd expect them to work the same. I find it to be mental gymnastics to distinguish between mechanics language based on the source of the rule.


BigNorseWolf wrote:
Quote:
Hmn, while I understand your reasoning, I believe the AoO for entering a creature's square happens after the movement. Otherwise, a tiny creature would be unable to reach and attack a creature entering its square
If you need to change the order that Aoos happen in according to your working model its a good indication that the working model is wrong.

Barbarian's Unexpected Strike has similar issues since it grants an AoO for entering. The intent there is almost definitely that the AoO happens after they enter the threatened space, I find it likely RAI is the same here.


"Close enough"?

A couple of things:
I'd likely adjudicate the increase for what you are calling "half" as a standard action for the heavy xbow and a move for the light xbow.
Further, in the case of the light xbow, it makes more sense to me to exclusively increment with move actions such that you can always fire twice every 3 rounds.

But, such increases may actually be quantized in full-round increments(rounded down), who is to say?

Given that we only have rules for a single example of rules for a "creature smaller than large" using an oversized xbow, it's a bit sketchy to extrapolate anything, it just seems like a possibility.
Notice how a Large creature does not incur a penalty for reloading the Huge weapon?
It's also possible that winching the ballista is only viable for smaller creatures because it's mounted (most of them certainly couldn't wield it). Also note it's still 2 full round actions for a Fine creature to reload, even if that isn't logical (weight/bulk of the ammunition notwithstanding).

Lastly, given that the light xbow is 'lever action', it may make less sense to increase the load time in this case. I could see it going either way.


Given the extra load time for a ballista, it seems there may be implicit rules about increased load time for crossbows sized larger than you. This adds a wrinkle to offering a simple yes/no.

On the surface, you should be able to shoot them one handed --if only during TWF, since it's an inference to apply that rule outside of TWF, keeping in mind that "as if" indicates the item does not innately possess the referenced quality.


Bran Towerfall wrote:
our gm said that the 4 swarms could of all moved onto one character(square) and become a "swarm blender" . is this within the rules to have stacking multiple swarms on one square?
Swarm Subtype wrote:
It can occupy the same space as a creature of any size, since it crawls all over its prey.
Creeping Doom wrote:
Creatures caught in multiple swarms only take damage and make saves once.

It's possible for normal swarms to do this, but not those conjured by Creeping Doom.


Energy Drain and Negative Levels wrote:
For each negative level a creature has, it takes a cumulative –1 penalty on all ability checks, attack rolls, combat maneuver checks, Combat Maneuver Defense, saving throws, and skill checks. In addition, the creature reduces its current and total hit points by 5 for each negative level it possesses. The creature is also treated as one level lower for the purpose of level-dependent variables (such as spellcasting) for each negative level possessed. Spellcasters do not lose any prepared spells or slots as a result of negative levels. If a creature's negative levels equal or exceed its total Hit Dice, it dies.

Not every class ability is equally good for all creatures, this appears to be such a case.

However, disallowing use relies on interpreting that part class feature as "a level dependent variable", which I don't think it is, even if it is level-dependent.


Lastoutkast wrote:

Ok :/

So...share skin spell, would I be able to possess my animal companion and then cast anthropomorphic animal ?

Before or after, but you would have a lot of trouble casting it after since AA has components of VSM.

Anthropomorphic Animal wrote:
The animal's size, type, and ability scores do not change.


FYI, natural attacks and TWF do not interact, your hypothetical attacks would be at -2/-2/-5 for penalties assuming the TWF feat.

1 to 50 of 1,398 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2015 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.