ArmchairDM's page

Is this rules legal?

Take 7 levels in wizard (at level 7 take faith magic arcane discovery). Multiclass into Mystic Theurge as you have the ability to cast a level 2 divine spell using a level 3 slot. Put both levels of casting advancement into wizard, as I assume a class that can cast arcane and divine spells is a arcane and divine spell caster. Double your casting advancement for 10 levels. I am new to the game so my apologies if this is wrong.

No, Wizard is not a divine casting class even if a feat, discovery or other ability allows you to prepare divine spells with your arcane slots. So this would not provide double the advancement.

Quote:

A prone defender gains a +4 bonus to Armor Class against ranged attacks, but takes a –4 penalty to AC against melee attacks.

Easier to hit in melee, harder to hit at range.

And 50% miss chance either way.

Alexandros Satorum wrote:

Mikaze wrote:

I don't know....I can see a grappler managing a succubus-proof hold...

Attack from behind, grappler's arms up under the succubus' arms, reaching back and pulling those arms back, reach back under the succubus' wings, push them up, hands on the back of the succubus' head, holding that down, pin to the ground,...

After all these years, I hadn't noticed how Mikaze's words can be interpreted totally the opposite he intended to.

Tried that with Crimson, forgot about the tail....

Ok, picturing Crimson and Lathiira in this scenario...purely for rules reasons...honest! Is it getting warm in here?

You touch one living creature, singular, and the effect lasts 10 minutes. Unlike other spells, like Chill Touch for instance, this contains no language saying you can make more than one touch attack. I was unable to find any touch spells that specify they are discharged upon use. Rather those with multiple uses specify how many times they can be used. Chill Touch and other spells like it also note in the target line they can be used on multiple creatures and Touch of Idiocy does not.

Umbral Reaver wrote:

Is it okay to use Summon Monster just to get a likely outsider's number so you can call them later?

Depends on the GM of the game you're in. I've had to tell my players that "Summon Booty Call" is not a spell in the book.

But it could be!

Independent Research: A wizard can also research a spell independently, duplicating an existing spell or creating an entirely new one. The cost to research a new spell, and the time required, are left up to GM discretion, but it should probably take at least 1 week and cost at least 1,000 gp per level of the spell to be researched. This should also require a number of Spellcraft and Knowledge (arcana) checks.

Someone needs to get to work on this immediately.

This so belongs in the grappling succubus thread lol.

The problem is that animating dead is an evil act. Do it enough and local law enforcement or other groups opposed to such activities are going to come along and stop you either by killing you or tossing you in a nice cozy dungeon. If you are too powerful for them to lock up then you are powerful enough to attract a group of adventurers who come along and kill you and take all your stuff. If you are lucky and become powerful enough that they can't actually kill you they just imprison you beneath Gallowspire for a few hundred years.

There is an Artificer class for Pathfinder from the 3rd party publisher Adamant Entertainment. You can find the details for it on the d20PFSRD.

Matthew Downie wrote:

John Mechalas wrote:

This would be a welcome change to the rules if it gets adopted by the core game system.

It doesn't contradict or change the core rules, it only clarifies. The original rule is a vague about what happens in above-zero temperatures:

Quote:

An unprotected character in cold weather (below 40° F) must make a Fortitude save each hour

According to Core right now, the effect of cold weather gear is that it gives you a +5 on that save.

PRD wrote:

Cold-Weather Outfit: This outfit includes a wool coat, linen shirt, wool cap, heavy cloak, thick pants or skirt, and boots. This outfit grants a +5 circumstance bonus on Fortitude saving throws against exposure to cold weather.

The Reign of Winter statement says that you don't need to make the save at all. So, I'd call that a change.

The core rules just say unprotected characters have to make a saving throw. It doesn't say what counts as protection. The entry for cold weather clothing says it gives a +5 to any saving throws against cold weather if you have to make one.

The text from Reign of Winter and Jade Regent further clarifies. There are situations where wearing cold weather gear eliminates the need for a save entirely, i.e. in temps between 0° and 40°. In polar conditions however, cold weather gear alone is not enough protection and so saves would be required but in this case the cold weather gear gives a +5.

So RoW and JR are not really changing the rules but just providing additional details.

A dreadnought can enter a dispassionate killing spree as a free action, granting her additional combat prowess. The dreadnought gains only half the usual bonuses from her rage but takes no penalty to her AC, can use all her normal skills and effects that require concentration, and is not fatigued when her rage ends. The dreadnought cannot enter a rage for 1 minute after she ends her rage, and she cannot charge or run while under the effects of her rage.

Greater Rage (Ex): At 11th level, when a barbarian enters rage, the morale bonus to her Strength and Constitution increases to +6 and the morale bonus on her Will saves increases to +3.

At 20th level, when a barbarian enters rage, the morale bonus to her Strength and Constitution increases to +8 and the morale bonus on her Will saves increases to +4.

Greater and Mighty Rage both specifically state that they apply when the barbarian enters Rage. You don't enter a Greater Rage or Mighty Rage. You enter rage and Greater Rage or Mighty Rage just changes the usual bonus you get for doing so. Dead Calm changes rage so that you only get half the usual bonus from Rage. So if you have Greater Rage and use your Rage ability the usual bonus is +6 but Dead Calm halves the usual bonus so it drops to +3.

Quote:

an unprotected character must make a Fortitude save once every 10 minutes (DC 15, +1 per previous check),

This rule is actually dumb, this increase never resets while you are still on that enviroment.

You are correct that the DC increase doesn't reset while you are in the environment but per the text above having a campfire and either cold weather gear or a tent is considered out of the environment. The intent is that characters have to stop every so often to make a fire and warm up to reset the DC.

The Shackled Hut from the Reign of Winter adventure path also has some input on cold weather travel that may be relevant to the discussion.

Rules for cold temperatures appear on page 442 of the Pathfinder RPG Core Rulebook, and you can assume it is always cold weather (0°–40° F), with occasional spells of severe cold (below 0° F). In general, however, characters wearing cold-weather gear or using daily alternatives such as endure elements should not have to attempt regular Fortitude saves. Food is always scarce in the Irriseni wilderness, adding 5 to the DC of any Survival checks to f ind food.Staying warm at night requires establishing a camp to provide shelter and building a f ire to stay warm. This requires a successful DC 15 Survival check and an hour of effort in the cold. A result of 20 or higher reduces this time to less than an hour. Once a camp is established, characters inside shelters can remove their cold-weather gear, study, pray, and rest to recover damage. Characters outside of a shelter but in a camp can stay warm with cold-weather gear even if the temperature drops below 0° F.

Matthew Downie wrote:

Wrong in what way?

On earth terminal velocity is around 1200 feet per round. In Golarion it is 500 feet per round unless you have some source saying otherwise. That's no more 'wrong' than the rule that a Roc or Giant Wasp can fly, even though physics tells us it that couldn't happen on earth.

Wrong in that if terminal velocity is 500' per round, you would only fall 1/2 that in the first round, so you could get a spell off if you were over 250' from the ground.

It's wrong in that the math and physics are not consistent with each other, so one of those rules messed up the math. Considering that 1000' per round is consistent with earth physics, and there's no reason to believe that Golarion gravity is half that of earth, or that Golarion air density is twice that as earth, given that other stats like projectiles, jumping, and other physics dependent activities seem to be within earth norms, it's likely that the "terminal velocity is 500' per round" rule got it wrong.

Where do you get that you would only fall half the distance in the first round? Is there a rule that states this. All of the rules indicate you fall 500' per round.

Does this reflect real world physics? Of course not, nor is it intended to. If you want a closer approximation of reality in your own game you can certainly house rule it but as far as the actual published rules are concerned you fall 500' per round from the moment you start falling.

My grievance is I never get sick. I want to lay in bed all day, and eat copious amounts of icecream/Jello/soup/crackers, while being coddled as I flip through magazines and watch T.V. But my RL +2 Constitution modifier makes that near impossible.

What is your Charisma modifier? Do you have any ranks in bluff? It is an opposed Bluff vs Sense motive to fake being sick to take a day off work. The benefit is that you get to lay in bed all day, eat copious amounds of whatever, flip through magazines, watch TV or play video games and you don't have to feel like crap while doing it.

The falling rules under environmental dangers imply a speed of 500' per round because at that height or lower you can't cast non-immediate spells.

The only place I know of where an actual speed for falling is explicitly stated is in the text for Ace Trip.

If the combat maneuver succeeds, the target falls at a rate of up to 100 feet per round (assuming it is conscious and attempting to remain airborne; otherwise, it falls at a rate of 500 feet per round) until it hits the ground.

So a creature who is not trying or is unable to remain airborne falls at 500' per round.

Minor nitpick, with greater grapple you only need to succeed at one of the grapple attempts to successfully maintain. Ie you can fail one and still be grappling as long as you spend the other action to maintain and succeed.

I was sure that was wrong but then went and looked up greater grapple and by George that is right after all. I've been running it wrong. Learn something new every day!

There is no "Schrodinger's Grapple" scenario. The act of grappling changes what you can do with all roads pointing to one of two decisions.

[1.]I wish to MAINTAIN.
[2.]I wish to END.

Grappling is normally a standard action so unless you have grab or something similar you do not perform full round actions while attempting or maintaining the grapple. As the "defender" you still can take full round actions since you do not need to maintain the grapple.

If you want option 1, first order of business is that grapple check. Then you do whatever actions, or not, maybe you failed.

If you want option 2, they are released at the start of your turn or sooner if you so wish.

There is nothing in the rules that says anything of the kind. When grappling you remain grappled until one of two things happens, you release the grapple or you fail an attempt to maintain it. If you do anything else before the maintenance roll you are still grappling and whatever action you take suffers all of the consequences of being in a grapple.

You could indeed draw a weapon as a move action and then maintain as a standard. With greater grapple you could cast Bull's Strength on yourself, assuming you succeed the concentration check for casting while grappling, and then as your move action maintain the grapple. There is nothing in the grapple rules that says the actions must be performed in a particular order.

Bleed is a condition that causes damage not damage itself and does not multiply on a critical hit. The creature takes the listed damage at the beginning of each of its turns until the bleeding is stopped in the manner prescribed.

Bleed: A creature that is taking bleed damage takes the listed amount of damage at the beginning of its turn. Bleeding can be stopped by a DC 15 Heal check or through the application of any spell that cures hit point damage (even if the bleed is ability damage). Some bleed effects cause ability damage or even ability drain. Bleed effects do not stack with each other unless they deal different kinds of damage. When two or more bleed effects deal the same kind of damage, take the worse effect. In this case, ability drain is worse than ability damage.

I would strongly caution against using real world physics to adjudicate magical effects. How well water carries sound compared to air is completely irrelevant. The spell does what the spell does regardless of how absurd that is in reality because it's magic. The spell explicitly designates what materials will block it and under what conditions. Outside of those it works.

The GM must respect the wishes and desires of the players. There are respectful and disrespectful ways to say no.

Is this considered a respectful or disrespectful way?

The mere act of prohibiting a particular race or class does not make one a bad GM. I'm currently working on a campaign in which the monstrous races were hunted to extinction by humanity ages ago so half-orc characters aren't permitted because there are no orcs left to produce them.

That said the GM does need to work with the players to make sure that he is creating a game that they want to play. Both sides have to realize that the game must be fun for everyone, not just the players or just the GM, for it to work. If my players just aren't interested in playing in a particular setting, game system, etc.. then the GM should not run a campaign using that.

Ahh, I did miss the part about it still doing 50% of the normal damage. So channel smite would still work but would only apply the 50% damage. It still would not apply the additional effect at all. It only deals additional damage equal to your channel damage. Notice it doesn't say the creature is effected by your channel...just that the smite deals that much additional damage.

No matter how you look at it this does not work as you are thinking. There won't be any table variation in PFS, the feats just don't work like that.

No, it isn't an accurate assessment.

Lingering smite: "Instead of the normal effects of successfully hitting with Channel Smite, you may choose the following effect. Starting on your target’s next turn, it takes 1d8 points of damage each round at the beginning of its turn. This effect lasts for a number of rounds equal to the number of damage dice you use to roll your channel energy ability."

So Lingering smite replace your normal effect. The replaced normal effect include the daze effect.

Diego is correct. Also channel smite is useless with the rulership variant. It says when you hit with an attack you deal additional damage equal to the damage dealt by your channel. The rulership variant replaces the damage dealt by your channel with other effects. Since the damage dealt by your channel with the rulership variant is none channel smite adds nothing.

Edit: Also that would trickle down to the lingering smite as the dice you roll for your channel ability with the rulership variant is now 0 the number of rounds the lingering smite effect lasts would also be 0.

Not explicitly, but it's an extension of the rule you quoted.

Actually found the answer to my own question :)

Multiplying Damage: 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.

Note: When you multiply damage more than once, each multiplier works off the original, unmultiplied damage. So if you are asked to double the damage twice, the end result is three times the normal damage.

Exception: Extra damage dice over and above a weapon's normal damage are never multiplied.

A critical hit means that you roll your damage more than once, with all your usual bonuses, and add the rolls together. Unless otherwise specified, the threat range for a critical hit on an attack roll is 20, and the multiplier is ×2.

Exception: Precision damage (such as from a rogue's sneak attack class feature) and additional damage dice from special weapon abilities (such as flaming) are not multiplied when you score a critical hit.

Precision damage does not multiply and damage dice from special weapon abilities do not multiply. Nothing about extra damage dice from other sources such as creature or class abilities, spells, feats, etc...

Is there a rule I'm missing that states these other sources of damage do not multiply on a crit?

ArmchairDM wrote:

Ravingdork wrote:

Clearly you're confused; the point of the game is to placate and amuse the GM. :P

At my table this is appropriately accomplished with liberal offerings of Oreo cookies and heaven help the poor fool who brings those double stuffed or mint flavored abominations!

What about the orange Halloween ones?

<gasp> Heretic!

Clearly you're confused; the point of the game is to placate and amuse the GM. :P

At my table this is appropriately accomplished with liberal offerings of Oreo cookies and heaven help the poor fool who brings those double stuffed or mint flavored abominations!

Whether the animal would start eating the character would depend on the situation. That isn't really the question. If the rest of the party had fled, if the character had been separated from the party, or any other scenario where the monster is not threatened and the PC is unconscious it could happen.

If an animal starts to eat a PC I think it should be handled as a coup de grace, not that the monster is deliberately trying to perform one but the effect of a monster spending a full round doing nothing but trying to rip off as much of your flesh as it can should have about the same effect.

Not sure if it is intentional but some of the posts sure seem overly hostile to a new GM trying to get his bearings.

Desert Rose, racial traits are just innate aptitudes and weaknesses. Just like real people that doesn't mean that they have to play into those aptitudes. Sort of like the stereotype that "tall people make good basketball players". That doesn't mean that all tall people want to play or are even good at basketball just that being tall gives an advantage. Likewise, a pyromaniac gnome is good with fire spells but that doesn't mean that they even have to be a caster much less a caster who uses fire spells. Just because someone excels at something doesn't mean that they must take advantage of their natural talents.

The monster eating the downed PC would be handled as a coupe de grace

If the archer has the snap shot feat he can take the AoO with the bow.

Diego Rossi: Look at Touch attack under AC:

"Touch Attacks: Some attacks completely disregard armor, including shields and natural armor—the aggressor need only touch a foe for such an attack to take full effect. In these cases, the attacker makes a touch attack roll (either ranged or melee). When you are the target of a touch attack, your AC doesn't include any armor bonus, shield bonus, or natural armor bonus. All other modifiers, such as your size modifier, Dexterity modifier, and deflection bonus (if any) apply normally. Some creatures have the ability to make incorporeal touch attacks. These attacks bypass solid objects, such as armor and shields, by passing through them. Incorporeal touch attacks work similarly to normal touch attacks except that they also ignore cover bonuses. Incorporeal touch attacks do not ignore armor bonuses granted by force effects, such as mage armor and bracers of armor."

A touch attack is one that "makes a touch attack roll (either ranged or melee)." If the attack is a spell, that's a touch spell [ie, a spell that uses a touch attack]. Then you have the touch spell in combat section talk about both melee and ranged touch attacks and it doesn't seem as clear cut as you make it seem. You can't say 'well the quote is about touch attacks' when the sections says otherwise touch spells in combat].

If it is meant to be as you say, it would be MUCH clearer is it sais 'when the winter witch casts a spell with a range of touch'.

Touch Spells in Combat specifically says it applies to "Many spells have a range of Touch". That is the very first sentence and is what the rest of the rules given in this section apply to. Just using a ranged touch or even melee touch attack does not make it a touch spell. It must have a range of Touch per this text. So they do not need to say "when the winter witch casts a spell with a range of touch" because Touch Spell means very thing that by explicit definition.

I thought of another question that hasn't been asked here. If the oracle has DR does it reduce the Life Link damage? If so does the damage from each bonded creature get added together before figuring in DR or does each count as a different instance of damage?

James Risner wrote:

You can take the same archetype for different classes because they don't interact.

Can you give an example of that for non-third party material?

Ectar did given an example that James was responding to. The Seeker archetype for Sorcerer and Oracle.

I am running a We be Goblins Campaign, and my group kinda wonders around alot. So I've been thinking of additional encounters.

One of my players recalled a being in Arizona and seeing a wild pack of Chihuahuas ambush a swan and just decimate it.

So, I quietly took notes, and planned evilly.

Here are the official stats on a dog size small.
http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/bestiary/dog.html#dog
I assume a Chihuahua would be Tiny.
I couldn't' really come up with the stats.

And as a pack do they get any feats, like teamwork style feats?

Help me make a few Goblins day just miserable.

Thanks guys!

Weasy.

You should really mess with them and make a Chihuahua swarm!

Edit: As to your original question I would use the small dog and give it the young template and that should be about right for a chihuahua.

That follows under the category of if I teleport does my dinner come with me.

Usually dinner isn't willing.

I don't know about you but normally my dinner isn't alive lol.

The existance of magic makes miracles mundane.

This! Well said.

In the real world with satellites, round the world air travel, etc... you still have people who believe in a flat earth. So why would it be surprising to have a character that didn't believe in the gods. For example maybe a character could deny the existence of the gods and believes that extreme faith simply allows clerics to subconsciously tap into the same energies that Sorcerers, Wizards and such use. I mean they still have to say the magic words (verbal components), wave their hands (somatic), and use special materials. Even many of the effects are the same or similar. Obviously it is just sorcery by another name!

Not aware of any other similar abilities. However, one of the great things about being a GM is you get to just make stuff up =) You don't have to give your new weapon one of the predefined properties.

In my own campaign if the players want to create an item I use the tables as guidelines for them but if I am personally creating an item for the campaign I don't even look at them. I just decide what I want it to do and give it a name and go with it.

You don't need spell sharing to cast spells like magic fang. An animal is already a legal target for magic fang.

I keep on rereading those first two sentences of spell sharing, and if my interpretation is wrong then I think it could have been written better. It could be made more clear if the second sentance were changed to "The druid may cast a spell with a target of “You” on her animal companion (as a touch range spell) instead of on herself. When she does so, she may cast spells on her animal companion even if the spells normally do not affect creatures of the companion’s type (animal)." If my interpretation is right, then it could still have been written better.

You do realize that you inserted your interpretation into what you say the text should be changed into right? The way you worded it "When she does so" refers to the druid casting a spell with the target of "you" so that would be the only time it applies. It only makes it clearer if your interpretation were the intent in the first place.

If i say, "You can use a dry erase grid to play Pathfinder. You can use printable paper miniatures in addition to plastic or pewter ones to play Pathfinder." You would not interpret those two sentences to mean that you were unable to play pathfinder on dungeon tiles, Gaming Paper, or an electronic grid. Both of those sentences present a complete thought. There is no contextual requirement to make one dependent on the other. Spell sharing works the same way:

1) The druid may cast a spell with a target of “You” on her animal companion (as a spell with a range of touch) instead of on herself.

2)A druid may cast spells on her animal companion even if the spells normally do not affect creatures of the companion's type (animal).

Spell sharing allows either or both of those as any time. There is no contextual reason to make the second sentence dependent on the first. The second sentence doesn't say "if he does", "when he does", "when casting spell with a target of you" or any other reference back to the first sentence. It just says "A druid can do x" period.

The stricter reading is that enlarge person doesn't have a range of "you", and that spell sharing only works with "you" spells.

If Spell Sharing is interpreted in this way then it would restrict all spells that are already appropriately typed for the companion. For example, you would not be able to cast Magic Fang on your animal companion because it does not have a range of "You". That phrase expands the spells allowed to target the familiar to include those that have "You" as the target nothing more nothing less. It has no bearing at all on those that don't have "You" as the target.

I think the OP is more worried about the possible interpretation that "bonus" is referring the bonus to attack rolls. He is worried that if he has something like Weapon Focus(x) that he won't get the +1 to hit because Whirlwind Attack says you don't get bonus or extra attacks from other sources. He realizes that there is no way to get more attacks after using Whirlwind Attack. He just wants to be sure he gets all of his bonuses to hit with the attacks that Whirlwind Attack gives him.

I think the intent is that you can't get bonus attacks, i.e. more attacks from high BAB, or extra attacks from spells, feats, etc. and has nothing to do with bonuses applied to rolls.

PRD - Explosive bomb wrote:

Explosive bomb*: The alchemist's bombs now have a splash radius of 10 feet rather than 5 feet. Creatures that take a direct hit from an explosive bomb catch fire, taking 1d6 points of fire damage each round until the fire is extinguished. Extinguishing the flames is a full-round action that requires a Reflex save. Rolling on the ground provides the target with a +2 to the save. Dousing the target with at least 2 gallons of water automatically extinguishes the flames.

Just a note that it does say CREATURES directly hit automatically catch on fire not objects.

Having a devil with poison immunity shot to death and killed by a living mist with armed zombies inside (we thought it was a poisonous mist, but it was a creature!)

I am definitely stealing that!

No, the fervor ability specifically says the spell cast must be one you have prepared.

Spontaneous healing specifically says the healing spells are ones he did not prepare ahead of time. He is sacrificing the energy from a prepared spell to cast an unprepared one but it doesn't change the unprepared spell into a prepared one so no fervor.

Does this really impact anything? If it is a typo and the range should be "you" rather than "touch", which seems to be the case, is that really FAQ worthy? Just curious.

When I was just starting out I was running a AD&D module and trying to describe a room to the players and they weren't understanding and asked me to map it out. So I did, including the secret door <facepalm>.

Lugo has about 100.000 inhabitants, maybe 120.000 and there is many people who enjoy role playing but we mainly focus on small gaming groups.

As most people that I know enjoy very combat focused adventures with zero roleplaying, zero decission taking, zero morality issues and zero creative thinking I don't fit very well in those kind of groups.

100,000!!! That is huge! Just kidding =) My town is much smaller though. We have less than 20,000 people. So I guess I should be glad to be able to find anyone at all to game with lol.

Same here. I live in a very small town in the Midwestern U.S. so no organized play here. I've played one PFS game on Roll20 and wasn't impressed so I don't really feel I am missing anything.

Poor unseen servant. Its fetch this, carry that, clean this, and wash that. Then you spill one little chamber pot all over the room...