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

1,495 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS

1 to 50 of 1,495 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

I don't see Spell Perfection in the build, so Spell Focus/Greater should only be granting +1 each


That's not how the rules work. They have been written in a specific way to prevent what you are attempting to accomplish.

"effectively invisible" is not the same thing as "actually invisible"

I have no idea where you are construing the implication of invisibility affecting sound... the DC boost is ostensibly because you are only detectable by sound.

Some GM's may run effective == actual, but it's not in the rules.

Re: darkvsion
Invisibility does not care about range, only about the possibility provided something was in range.
If you could be seen with darkvision, you are not invisible.


Invisible is a specific status, unless you are actually invisible, you do not get that bonus.

Invisibility wrote:
Invisibility makes a creature undetectable by vision, including darkvision.


Hear the sound of battle [DC]–10

If you are making attacks, no matter what kind, it is very easy to detect you, even if you can't be seen.

The stealth rules do not quite work the way you think they do.


Matthew Downie wrote:
Since it's not that type of spell, 'concentration' here must refer to concentration in the normal English sense (as it is in the Barbarian rage ability) and not in the 'concentration check' sense.

Certainly not "must", it's ambiguous enough that it probably needs clarification given that it's a specific rule for that spell and that the language used is very suggestive of using normal concentration rules.


The intent certainly seems to be that if something inflicts the "dead" condition on you independent of suffering from "hit points equal to your negative Con score", that your hit points are then reduced to an amount equal to your negative Con score.

The rule simply seems to be covering all possibilities, such that you don't have people arguing that hit point loss stops at a value equal to -Con (or is always adjusted to that once you die).


Fist2Jaw wrote:
What about both attacks being done with the Armor Spikes? It's not a double weapon, so what if I brought two sets of armor spikes?

There are ways to flurry with armor spikes, Brawler being the easiest.


N. Jolly wrote:
Going to bump this, as well as asking if burn is doubled when using with a conductive weapon or not.
Conductive wrote:
he may choose to expend two uses of his magical ability to channel it through the weapon to the struck opponent, which suffers the effects of both the weapon attack and the special ability. (If the wielder has unlimited uses of a special ability, she may channel through the weapon every round.)

Consuming two uses is not the same as activating twice, I expect burn is applied only once.


Technology Guide wrote:

Skills

No new skills are introduced to the Pathfinder RPG to model how characters interact with technology-rather, existing skills are expanded to allow for such interaction. Additional rules for how skills interact with technology are listed below. Without the Technologist feat, a character is treated as untrained in the skill in question when using it on technology.
Technologist wrote:
Normal: You treat all skill checks made against technology as if they were untrained skill checks. This may mean that you cannot attempt certain skill checks, even if you possess ranks in the skill in question.
Improvisation wrote:
Benefit: You gain a +2 bonus on all skill checks for skills you have no ranks in. Furthermore, you can use all skills designated "trained only" untrained.

The way it's phrased, Technology treats you as untrained, but does not also make those checks "trained only".

But Improvisation coupled with Technologist would let you make untrained checks for skills uses that require both Technologist and skill ranks (like disable device).


If I'm reading the ring correctly, it only grants the "Sustained Force" option from telekinesis.

The normal formula is spell level * caster level * 2000, or 5*9*2000, which would be 90k; so the ring got an ad hoc reduction of 16.6%(1/6) for only granting a portion of the spell.


Death Attacks wrote:
In case it matters, a dead character, no matter how he died, has hit points equal to or less than his negative Constitution score.

It's easiest to adjudicate hit points == -Con if you don't actually know that they should be lower.

The answer is #2 if they survived long enough to receive the fort save and then failed.


3. This depends entirely on the source of the damage.

Since ability damage doesn't actually reduce your score, first reduce the score from ability drain, then apply any damage.

Certain sources of ability damage(namely penalties - but some spells) can't reduce your effective score below 1, so add up all other ability damage that isn't restricted in this way first. Finally, if your score is still positive, add in this restricted ability damage, reducing your effective score to 1* if applicable.

*This is only for the purpose of determining if you qualify to become unconscious/die; penalties for ability damage still only accrue at a rate of -1 per 2 points of damage, but the effective maximum damage is equal to your ability score(after reduced by drain).


Touch of Corruption does not offer a save in addition to the touch attack. (This parallels Lay on Hands not offering saves to undead.)

Converting uses of ToC into Channel Negative Energy does offer a save for half. Cruelties do not apply to this.

I'm not sure what you mean by "through your weapon", but if you mean the Conductive weapon property, that would consume 2 uses of ToC but otherwise function as if you had used it normally (no save, cruelties apply).
Conductive can only function with ToC however, not Channel Energy.

This is the only other thing I could find that comes close to what you're asking about.
If Energy Channel is what you're asking about combining with cruelties, the answer in no; it consumes a use of channel energy to grant specific bonuses, and does not count as channel energy or ToC.


The expanded slots aren't restricted to casting the spells learned from the spirit, so yes.

But since you intentionally picked a controversial example, expect table variation on whether it's easy to obtain a 2nd level lattice of haste.
Related: I see nothing in the lattice description that indicates the spell contained in the lattice must be cast at the same spell level that the creator used, so a Medium using a 3rd level lattice of Haste should still be able to cast it as a 2nd level spell known.

Lastly, 4k is 2/3 your WBL at level 4, which may be disallowed.


Blood of Dragons advances your 'effective sorcerer level' for Bloodline Powers by your DD level, therefore you would effectively be level 4 for calculating which powers you gain and how strong they are. (Yes, you get Dragon Resistances)

The breath weapon still functions off your [effective] sorcerer level, 4d6 in your case.


RAW, no, BB expressly functions on water and not oil.
Oils are also distinct from potions despite sharing item creation rules... any interpretation that suggests the bottle could be used for oils must also assume that they aren't included in the description for brevity or forgetfulness, which would require input from the author (but that input would not change RAW or be considered authoritative).

It's likely not mechanically problematic to allow it to function with oils as a houserule.


There is no other reason for the spell text to indicate "concentrating on the spell" if it does not intend you to use the concentration rules, and simply a poor choice of language if it's flavor text.


Concentration: The spell lasts as long as you concentrate on it. Concentrating to maintain a spell is a standard action that does not provoke attacks of opportunity. Anything that could break your concentration when casting a spell can also break your concentration while you're maintaining one, causing the spell to end. See concentration.

You can't cast a spell while concentrating on another one. Some spells last for a short time after you cease concentrating.

Concentration wrote:
To cast a spell, you must concentrate. If something interrupts your concentration while you're casting, you must make a concentration check or lose the spell. When you make a concentration check, you roll d20 and add your caster level and the ability score modifier used to determine bonus spells of the same type. Clerics, druids, and rangers add their Wisdom modifier. Bards, paladins, and sorcerers add their Charisma modifier. Finally, wizards add their Intelligence modifier. The more distracting the interruption and the higher the level of the spell you are trying to cast, the higher the DC (see Table: Concentration Check DCs). If you fail the check, you lose the spell just as if you had cast it to no effect.

A pedant might attempt to argue that Call Lightning falls under neither of these categories because you "aren't casting"(no indicated VSMF components during the action) and the spell's duration isn't "concentration"... but given that it calls out "concentrating on the spell", there are really no other rules elements available to cite. So either, it literally is not covered by RAW, or they intend you to use these rules. RAI is heavily in favor of the latter.


Targeted spells are "see or touch".

Further, targeting is done after you finish casting, not "as part of". (even if it is commonplace to know your targets before you start casting)

I don't read Spring Attack to require target acquisition before movement (but it is allowed to facilitate moving passed/behind for flank).


RAW says lose the spell.
RAI possibly indicates "just that bolt", but it sounds like it's simply not the best option for all situations.


You do not lose a Wizard's bonus feats, and they are not tied to being a Universalist.

Arcane Reservoir (Su) wrote:
This ability replaces arcane bond.
Exploiter Exploit wrote:
This ability replaces arcane school.

Essentially you give up your familiar or bonded object, and you give up school powers/extra spells per day(for specialists).

Depending, on level and what you're trying to do with the Reservoir, it seems like it's more or less worth it... that is to say a situational +4 CL (through Spell Specialization/Potent Magic Reservoir) is pretty good, and it's available from level 1(without needing to be human in PFS); then Magical Lineage something good that also benefits from this trick and have some metamagic fun (Intensified or Empower work nicely).


generally, this is the problem

Sneak Attack wrote:
The rogue must be able to see the target well enough to pick out a vital spot and must be able to reach such a spot. A rogue cannot sneak attack while striking a creature with concealment.

The only difference in language for URogue is total concealment

Also, it leads to arguments about whether all of a creatures insides are "vital spots", so there's a lot of interpretation involved, period.


The problem is that the Scroll entry doesn't expressly mention anything about granting a caster level, only using it "as if you had it on your class spell list"...

If you are a non-caster, you don't have a caster level, and would need to account for that separately... (this is why I say, RAI, the check is a disguised emulate feature check)

Scrolls wrote:

Activate the Spell: Activating a scroll requires reading the spell from the scroll. The character must be able to see and read the writing on the scroll. Activating a scroll spell requires no material components or focus. (The creator of the scroll provided these when scribing the scroll.) Note that some spells are effective only when cast on an item or items. In such a case, the scroll user must provide the item when activating the spell. Activating a scroll spell is subject to disruption just as casting a normally prepared spell would be. Using a scroll is like casting a spell for purposes of arcane spell failure chance.

To have any chance of activating a scroll spell, the scroll user must meet the following requirements.

  • The spell must be of the correct type (arcane or divine). Arcane spellcasters (wizards, sorcerers, and bards) can only use scrolls containing arcane spells, and divine spellcasters (clerics, druids, paladins, and rangers) can only use scrolls containing divine spells. (The type of scroll a character creates is also determined by his class.)
  • The user must have the spell on her class list.
  • The user must have the requisite ability score.

If the user meets all the requirements noted above, and her caster level is at least equal to the spell's caster level, she can automatically activate the spell without a check. If she meets all three requirements but her own caster level is lower than the scroll spell's caster level, then she has to make a caster level check (DC = scroll's caster level + 1) to cast the spell successfully. If she fails, she must make a DC 5 Wisdom check to avoid a mishap (see Scroll Mishaps). A natural roll of 1 always fails, whatever the modifiers. Activating a scroll is a standard action (or the spell's casting time, whichever is longer) and it provokes attacks of opportunity exactly as casting a spell does.

UMD:Scroll only accounts for bullet points 1 and 2 (2 expressly, and 1 implicitly by virtue of putting the spell on your list). 3, it indicates must be rolled separately, so it can be inferred that if the single check doesn't grant every requisite component, you must account for it somehow; CL falls into this category RAW.

Further evidence is supplied by the Wand DC, which is also equivalent to emulating the Spells class feature with a CL of "zero" (which is all you need to activate a wand).


The argument I'm making is one of targeting.

A creature below the Unseen Servant should not prevent it from releasing an object from its "hands".

The simulationist in me says that this shouldn't also automatically prevent said object from interacting with said creature. (It merely wasn't targeted.)

Similarly, the simulationist in me says that it's fairly unreasonable to make a distinction between weapons and objects as long as you avoid targeting a creature, object, or grid intersection...
A strength check to "roll" the grenade away seems pretty reasonable (and likely leaves picking up and carrying it as the superior option).


A grenade is a small, cylindrical device that is designed to be thrown as a splash weapon or fired from a grenade launcher (see page 24).
Throw Splash Weapon wrote:

To attack with a splash weapon, make a ranged touch attack against the target.

You can instead target a specific grid intersection. Treat this as a ranged attack against AC 5.

Unless I've missed something, there aren't rules for targeting a specific square.

Now, I agree that it can't target anything as a splash weapon, but I'm less clear if its only option is carrying and dropping.... It seems a strange intersection(no pun intended) of the rules if the servant stops being able to toss an object simply because it is also a weapon (unless it simply can never toss anything, which isn't mentioned in the spell).
What about rolling (more like bowling) the object away?
Attack rolls only matter, and I dare say happen, if you care about targeting.

As a tangent, what happens if an Unseen Servant drops an object directly above a "target"? It can't make the attack roll, certainly, but does that negate all chance to hit?
Let's even take this to the extreme, and say the object is large, but not dense (regardless of if it should do damage), such that it would be excessively unlikely to miss without an act of God, what happens?


Names have no bearing on the crunch of abilities, they are the ultimate flavor text.


Please tell that to Surprise Spells of the Arcane Trickster, or is that capstone useless? How do you interpret it interact with the range limitation of SA (which it does not expressly delimit)?

I'm well aware of RAW.
Per PA, I'm primarily referencing the FAQ on this exact issue.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
UMD wrote:
Use a Scroll: Normally, to cast a spell from a scroll, you must have the scroll's spell on your class spell list. Use Magic Device allows you to use a scroll as if you had a particular spell on your class spell list. The DC is equal to 20 + the caster level of the spell you are trying to cast from the scroll. In addition, casting a spell from a scroll requires a minimum score (10 + spell level) in the appropriate ability. If you don't have a sufficient score in that ability, you must emulate the ability score with a separate Use Magic Device check.
UMD wrote:
Emulate a Class Feature: Sometimes you need to use a class feature to activate a magic item. In this case, your effective level in the emulated class equals your Use Magic Device check result minus 20. This skill does not let you actually use the class feature of another class. It just lets you activate items as if you had that class feature. If the class whose feature you are emulating has an alignment requirement, you must meet it, either honestly or by emulating an appropriate alignment with a separate Use Magic Device check (see above).

This is a tough call, kinda...

Those DC's are "equal", so ostensibly, the Scroll DC is an "emulate class feature" use of UMD that also gives you a caster level.

I'd say if you make the scroll check, you're good to activate without a CL check.

The real question is:
If I use UMD to emulate the Spells class feature, and my result gives me a Caster Level lower than the scroll I want to activate, may I make a CL check to activate the scroll instead of using the UMD:Scroll DC?

ps: I'd answer yes.


I don't see why the ability score it keys off of would change...
Arcanists derive all of their spellcasting through Int and their exploits through Cha; it should be no different for an Exploiter Wizard, if they had intended these exploits to key off Int, I expect it would have been mentioned.


Torbyne wrote:

also, id assume that a double weapon is three points but that should probably be spelled out.

The archetype also doesnt say anything about weapons needing to be sized appropriately for the character. so large bastard swords are two points? huge light weapons are one?

There is the Taiaha, which is a 1H double weapon, so they should retain cost according to handedness.

It should probably be expressed that they can also manifest doubled weapons at 7th, but it is strongly implied that the restriction is removed based on being able to "maintain" and already being able to manifest 1H and 2H weapons, which covers all double weapons.


TWR is a special attack. It is a separate source of damage (without an attack roll) that doesn't benefit from weapon properties or bonuses restricted to weapons, or abilities that require an attack roll.

Power Attack works because it universally adds to melee damage.
Sneak Attack is generally considered to require an attack roll, so it likely shouldn't apply.

In general, all forms of rend could use a little more clarification regarding what does and does not work.


Honestly, at this point, the answer is "ask your GM"...

but as I said above, it clearly indicates that you use the same result; the result includes modifiers.

Now what gets tricky is whether or not enhancement bonuses on the crossbow count as a "special ability"... I would argue that you still get them, but they are clearly magical, so I can see it adjudicated the other way as well.

However, barring things like Truestrike or Bane (which do appear to count as a special ability), the secondary bolts should still key off of both the attacker's BAB and his Dex since those aren't special. And even if you rule that the weapon enhancement doesn't count, any enhancement on the fired bolt should.

tl:dr
My take is that you'd use the +19 in your scenario, and that "special abilities" only refers to weapon properties of the crossbow, class features, or other special attacks/qualities that you might possess.


I'd agree there seems to be some discrepancy, but I don't think they actually conflict.

It says to use the "attack roll result", that seems pretty definitive to me that you don't need to recalculate anything about the roll.

The other rule is likely talking about special qualities such as Seeking.

Though, I suspect certain things, like True Strike, should only work on the initial attack.

This probably could use some clarification.


Death effects are typically ones that bypass hit points to cause instant death. Most of them explicitly say they are.

Death Attacks

The Assassin's Death Attack(Ex) class feature should probably count as a "death effect" when used to kill rather than paralyze, but keep in mind that some abilities that protect against death, such as death ward specify "magical death effects"


Actions provoke that say they do.
Some abilities change if an action provokes.
Some circumstances prevent an otherwise able attacker from being able to utilize provocations.

You absolutely still provoke from invis/stealth, they simply can't take advantage of it.


I'm quite comfortable saying it's #3, they're all different spells (albeit with a special rule about belong to the same family).

Undercasting Spells wrote:
Some psychic spells can be undercast. This means that the spellcaster can cast the spell at the level that he knows, or as any lower-level version of that spell, using the appropriate spell slot. When a spellcaster undercasts a spell, it is treated exactly like the lower-level version, including when determining its effect, saving throw, and other variables.


Conservatively, your Raging Song does not actually increase, you simply use better values during the performance. Skald's Vigor should likely not increase.

While it can be read that Raging Song "provides" the higher bonus by virtue of expressly permitting it to "be used", I would venture to say that it is not the case RAI, based on using the language "provides" generically, rather than saying "provides to you"

And actually, looking at it again, that might rule out other personal increases, since they aren't generically provided...

In short, expect some degree of table variation


I fairly skeptical of that interpretation. I quite expect them to have meant literal hands to prevent a few these, namely the beard...

However, they didn't actually place any limits on the handedness of Dual Weapons, so maybe they don't care if you manifest two 2H weapons, provided you could wield them.

Dual Weapons (Su): wrote:
At 7th level, a mindblade can maintain two psychic weapons at a time or a psychic double weapon


blackbloodtroll wrote:

Mindblade Dwarven Boulder Helmet?

Mindblade Boot Blade?

Mindblade Barbazu Beard?

Mindblade Clawblade?

Mindblade Tailblade?

I like the way you think, but unfortunately, it relies on this meaning a metaphorical hand :(

Psychic Pool (Su): wrote:
This psychic weapon can last indefinitely, but it vanishes if it leaves the mindblade’s hand.


RAW:
Size is not indicated, so they can still share space, even when polymorphed.

Sharing is adjudicated per square, with only 2 ratfolk able to occupy any given square. (2 Large Ratfolk could occupy the same 4 squares).

When tiny, the sharing limit is superseded(overlaps with) by the normal limit of 4 tiny creatures, but the flanking provision should work for all occupants.

Ostensibly, the attack could be ranged or magical(including targeted spells), the language does not seem to care.
As for timing and duration, I'd say ask your GM. (I'd run it as starting after the 1st attacker(including if the 2nd attacker moved into that square after their ally attacked) or after a readied action to "attack simultaneously"; and then persisting until actions changed.)

RAI:
I don't see why it should care about size per se... They innately know how to share space with each other.

Polymorphed(shape/form): possibly not RAI, it would be kind of hard for some creatures to share space, but that's exactly what ratfolk understand how to do.

Tiny: I could potentially see the interpretation being "double normal occupancy", but it's not supported anywhere.

"Attacks" likely means "melee/threatens", but I also see no major issue with it functioning as written... ranged attacks do not receive the flanking bonus (and typically provoke).


1. I don't even think it's RAI... it says "that can be used with Weapon Finesse" not "that the rogue can use with Weapon Finesse".

Quite frankly, they've gone out of their way to make oversize TWF expensive and difficult, so this doesn't particularly surprise me. (Also, keep in mind that Effortless Lace is not legal for PFS, which tells you something about the overall value/quality of its effect.)

2. I think fast healing would increase because Amplified Rage also says it increases the Str bonus.
2b.I don't see any provision for doing this during Raging Song, only for using Rage Powers granted from non-Skald levels.
For the sake of argument, let's even say you doubled up and spent rounds of Rage/Bloodrage at the same time as rounds of Raging Song... I would expect your Str bonus to increase accordingly, and allow for any actions restricted to those features, however, since Skald's Vigor expressly ties its fast healing to your Song's bonus, it still would not increase the FH value.


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.
Milo v3 wrote:
You can be a psychic wordcaster without much issue, use the Bard, Inquisitors, Oracles, Sorcerers, and Summoner learning rules and replace the verbal component with the thought component.

Those rules reference these lists is the issue. Given that the psychic casters get their own spell lists, it makes sense they would get their own word list accordingly.

Now, you might potentially do something with Pathfinder Savant to also pick up a few words, but otherwise it seem very difficult to get spellwords added to your class list.


Let's take it a step further as well, and say that RAI is "chosen class" must be both a class you have levels in and one that has a 'class word[spell] list'... (which, reading it again, I'm sure this is the intent)

The Sorcerer Psychic bloodline arcana converts that class to psychic casting, so there is at least 1 RAW option to accomplish this.


I dunno, this kinda seems to backdoor it... (provided your table uses the optional wordcasting rules)

Experimental Spellcaster wrote:

Despite casting spells, you dabble in the art of wordcasting.

Prerequisites: Ability to cast spells.

Benefit: Select one class that grants you the ability to cast spells. You can now use the slots from that class to cast a limited number of words of power spells. Add all of the target words to your spell list and your spellbook, familiar, or list of spells known. In addition, add the boost meta word and one effect word of any level you can cast in the chosen class.

Special: You can take this feat multiple times. Each additional time you select this feat, add two effect or meta words to your spellbook, familiar, or list of spells known.


I'm not sure that should work... Usually you burn incense, but you typically want to aerosolize drugs (without heat consuming them).


Recharge Innate Magic wrote:
You channel magic energy into your own aura, recharging your innate magic abilities. You regain one use of all 0-level and 1st-level spell-like abilities you can use as a result of a racial trait.

Also it was designed for Gnomes, if it matters.


While I would concur that it's rather strange for a resonant power not to have [significant] use to the occultist...

Mental Focus (Su) wrote:
The implement grants its resonant power to whoever possesses it; the occultist can lend the implement to an ally to assist that ally


An expensive option, but for high risk prisoners, tattoo both a Hand of Glory and this ring attached to it. (The granted SLAs shouldn't be problematic generally -- AND you don't have to tell them the command word anyway)


I actually don't think order of operations matters, RA applies a x2 to (hardness)


It's only truly an issue when you mix it back into 3.5 imo. If you manage to reduce an Undead Synthesist to 0 hp it is still destroyed as normal.
Outside of flavor, I can't see 1 thing that's actually problematic with this.

1 to 50 of 1,495 << 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.