|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Yeah, usually the short and long descriptions would disagree if there was a copy/paste error, but they both said Improved Trip. That doesn't mean it wasn't a copy/paste error, but I will talk to my DM and likely house rule that it should be Improved Reposition until there is a clear FAQ/errata on it.
Alright, so from what I can tell in the Core book, the only types of transmutation effects that are limited to one effecting a character at a time are from the polymorph subschool.
So, a few scenarios that I am trying to figure out:
It seems logical to me that Divine Vessel, which is alignment transmutation, could stack with fiery body, which is a fire transmutation.
On the other hand, even though I can't find anything that I think specifically prohibits it, I don't find it logical that fluid form, a water transmutation, would stack with fiery body, a fire transmutation.
Any one of those three, however, should stack with, say, Giant Form, since that is a transmutation [polymorph] (obviously size changes and bonuses do not stack).
So, something doesn't add up on the Wild Talents ability. first of all, it says it replaces the same thing as the rage powers ability replaces (favored enemy 2-5), and it starts at 6th level, gives a benefit every 5 levels thereafter, but says "(to a maximum of 4 times at 20th level)". maybe it;s my math, but 6 plus 15 is 21?
I allow charge attacks to be resolved with vital strike feats. I was looking at a build I was working on for a mounted character, and the lance and spirited charge feats multiply damage on a charge. How would you rule this interacts with the vital strike damage? does only the base damage get multiplied on the charge from these abilities, or would the vital strike damage as well?
What happens if the trip attempt from a toppling spell overcomes the CMD of a mounted character? Some options:
- He falls out of the saddle
Any ideas? or is this kinda a houserule situation?
So I have only skimmed the messages, didn't want to read 285, so pardon me if this came up somewhere else before... but as with all archers, their greatest weakness is WIND WALL.
My current campaign has a paladin in it, and I like giving him some evil stuff to smite, just for the fun of it, but the BBEG also has mercenaries in his employ... lots of CN mercenaries. So even if the BBEG is evil, a lot of his guard who can easily get in the way are not. They are just greedy CN merc's.
The other fun thing to do with Paladins, is have them fight an anti-paladin, and they can smite each other :)
Anywho, that's what I recommend, throw in some wind walls (even if they are easily dispelled, still takes up other actions, and prevents the one turn KO). Get some CN mooks to fight him (I find a Kensai who has the magus arcana that can make an attack a Touch attack to work well).
And if it has to be an evil dragon, he would know the peril of fighting a Paladin all to well. I don't think you played it stupid. And hey, sometimes it's fun to let the players have a gory quick victory... for now ;)
As the title says, we ran into a situation just a minute ago where my paladin player wanted to use both of his smite uses during the same battle, one on each of two different targets, one after the other.
RAW doesn't give any restrictions. So would you allow the Paladin to make a second smite declaration before the target of his first smite was dead?
Umbral Reaver wrote:
I don't care for the OP's post, but personally, I don't believe Paizo has the skill to create epic level rules that work. This is not an insult against them, because I don't believe anyone on the planet has the skill to create epic level rules that work. An overhaul of the 1-20 rules are required first, and I'd rather wait for Pathfinder 2 before seeing epic rules.
Actually, they can be done. I ran a 3.5 campaign up to level 35, houseruled a lot of it. But it worked, with parity of power. Two of the PC's were vorpal'd in the second to last fight, and three of them died in the last fight, even though they were able to resurrect them immediately.
It was fun, memorable, and one of the PC's became Bahamut, who had been killed by the BBEG.
The focus wasn't so much on creating more epic abilities, but making the abilities the players had more difficult to resist, and making them more competent through continued feat and ability score progression.
It can be done, done well, and can be fun!
That's the way I have thought in the past, and my players think too. but the more I look at the utility of them, as well as the fact that anyone with a high UMD check can make use of them, I'm becoming more convinced that they can be real game changers.
AS I have been preparing for my campaign I was building a higher level Kensai as a potential enemy for the players. I figured out that with some not too difficult UMD checks, he could use both versions of spell immunity, and he could use scrolls of globe of invulnerability (and lesser). The player's party's only full caster is a druid, otherwise they have a bard, kensai, and paladin caster. I do have a GMPC sorcerer with them right now, but that is a very fluid situation, and basically so I can learn and playtest wordcasting... and a wordcaster is also a very good option to use scrolls with.
Anyways, my point is, my preparations as a DM have led me to believe that a lot of potential danger for some characters can be muted or even removed by a scroll or two used in the right place, that a cloak of resistance, or armor, or anything else would not be able to accomplish.
So, I have come to decide that scrolls, and probably potions/oils, are the most overlooked magic items used in the games I DM for. I haven't used them much myself, to be honest. But the more I look at them, the more I am thinking they should be a very high priority for pretty much anyone.
I'm getting visions in my head of making a super charismatic fighter who can fill the roll of the caster via scrolls, but still lay the smack down as a fighter... because he's a fighter.
Does anyone else find that scrolls are overlooked? or how useful are they in your games, and how are they typically used?
Do you know how high touch AC can be on a lot of characters at level 20? I'm not 100% familiar with the bombs rules, but I am aware that through luck, morale, Dex, Deflection, and other modifiers, it is more than easy to get a touch AC over 30.
Also, I'd have to look this up, but do bombs make it through a wind wall or other such effects? And what about a wall of Force, or prismatic sphere? WHAT ABOUT THE EIDOLON BEHIND YOU READY TO BITE OFF YOUR HEAD!? Okay, now I am just making stuff up... but there are ways to counter it, I am sure, that would be pretty easy for any appropriately CR encounter.
PC's playing smart and using their abilities to their advantage is only really a problem when the NPC's are played without the same focus on intelligence and tactics. Everyone in the game world should know how important the spells fly and invisibility are, so everyone, in my opinion, would do something about it.
Why would the enemy not have flying monsters? Why would he not have See Invisibility or Invisibility Purge, or True Seeing? Why would he not make the entrance to his inner sanctum a tunnel that disintegrates you unless you step on the floor tiles in a certain pattern?
I have only ever read and played one adventure module, I run homebrew campaigns. My players use fly and invisibility all the time. Guess what? So do their advesaries. My NPCs fly, teleport, go invisible, use fog clouds, glitterdust, they set traps (even ones surrounded by permanent antimagic fields), employ or summon multiple types of creatures, get robes of eyes, etc...
Just because fly makes a lot of the normal normal environmental challenges less useful for a while, doesn't mean there aren't a crap ton of other environmental challenges and encounters that are viable and useful. You just need to find the ways to make their use of the spells benefit the experience, not take away from it.
Also, one more thing. I used to struggle with feeling like the PC's were ruining my plans a lot more when they came up with ways of circumventing dangers. But look, wheather they had to walk through it or flew over it, they beat the challenge, right? And you can always reuse the challenge in a different place since they don't know what it was now, right? And you as the DM should be the player's biggest cheerleader. Be EXCITED when they do things well, and push yourself to be more inventive and creative and make the challenges different and more exotic, and in the end, more fun.
I love what Monte Cook said at a seminar at GenCon a few years ago. Instead of restricting what the players can do, try making challenges that REQUIRE them to use their abilities. That way the players feel good that they can use them, and the GM feels good that he doesn't have to worry about them being used at more unexpected times.
Can they fly? make the enemy castle a floating one that they have to fly to, then they get to make the spell useful, and you get to keep it out of the way of the challenges where you don't want them to fly.
Read the teamwork feats from UC. There's teamwork feinting and AoO's. Also, not all assassins work alone...
I think by RAW I agree, it just seems odd to be able to use the same stat as a bonus to the same thing twice?
Matt Stich wrote:
well my computer is definitely capable of doing that pretty well, but I kinda don't even know how to go about finding a group, since I kinda made my group happen by getting my friends into it.
Actually.... that does sound wickedly effective... thanks community :) I was about to go and give all my guys scrolls of spell immunity, but you brought to light the usefulness of a spell that I almost never considered using, except when the Intellect Devourer is involved :)
Theo Stern wrote:
Any mid to high level wizard worth his salt will have mind protection.If its not a creature that has immunity to mind spells you are giving up a character action to make the monster/NPC give up its action. I only see this working well in a situation where there is one opponent and the party has action economy. In my experience, in those cases, the party usually wins quickly anyway
Mind blank doesn't give immunity to mind affecting effects, only a +8 to the saving through, and my point was that making the saving throw is the worse option. Mind blank is also an 8th level spell, so only high level Casters have access to it.
I am thinking spell immunity and/or globe of invulnerability is actually a more potent defense against both Frigid touch and Terrible Remorse.
I know that an erratta/faq has already been posted about this spell, but I think there needs to be another look taken at it. If this spell is spammed, you can hold any creature not immune to mind affecting effects in place and make them do nothing if the save is failed for as many times as you can cast it.
I would think that wands of Terrible Remorse would be in super high demand, and weeping and wailing would be going on all across Golarion. Imagine a 3rd level party of 4 armed with 4 wands of terrible remorse, going up against a 20th level wizard... the wizard will pass every save, really, and therefore have 200 rounds of being able to do nothing? that is an imbalance of power, in my humble opinion.
Oh, and Frigid Touch, staggered with no save as a 2nd level spell? that will kill a spellcaster really fast if he is threatened by someone who has disruptive and/or spellbreaker, which the Magus can now get as arcana.
My first response would be, what do you mean by unexpected trouble? Do you mean, they get around your plans in a way that you didn't expect? That they become extra mischievous?
I, as a GM, have had to struggle through my players often trying to use things in "unconventional" ways. I am slowly letting the reigns out more and letting more of their plans succeed, because hey, if it makes sense, let them do it! It's more fun for them, and my role as a GM is in helping everyone have fun. That has pushed me to be more creative, pushed my "on the spot" GMing to newer levels, and put more inventive and difficult obstacles in their way.
I can't think of any spells that have caused any major issues. Detect Magic is always one that can be hard to remember exists. Detect alignment. A lot of little things. I would recommend you think more in terms of, "Hey, that's a great idea, and my villain didn't think of it, but now his boss knows, and next time will have counter-measures in place" I think you will be less frustrated as a GM, and the players will be more satisfied in overcoming more difficult obstacles.
I think it would be more appropriate to do the diminished spellcasting as it is done with other archetypes, where you get one fewer slot than what is listed. The spells known is already limited enough for a sorcerer, knowing one less than listed is a bit harsh.
This is especially true considering the additional penalty of the -2 to will saves.
Remco Sommeling wrote:
I hope he had prepared all the spells that way, or was he spontaneous caster? also, I am thinking like, almost every other square, not just a few. I think someone in Razmir's employ would employ such a dastardly tactic.
A Man In Black wrote:
Make them chase enemies into crowds,
You just gave me a fantastic idea to throw into my game... The "terrain" is actually helpless innocents tied vertically to posts in the ground. Let's see the Hero's use AoE attack effects then ;) Especially since my players have a Paladin in the group. Yummy idea, thanks!!
So, I asked this in the rules Q&A at GenCon, and was told to check the online FAQ, but it hasn't been posted yet... so I want to see what most people would say.
The crossblooded sorcerer archetype drawback says it knows one fewer spell at each level than is presented. This would seem to keep the sorcerer from knowing any spells of the next highest level on its progression until an additional level later. Getting spells one level later than the WIzard is already bad enough, but 2 levels later is kinda crazy. I have currently house ruled that it is minimum one, but would like some other reactions.
It's not a blanket denial of 3rd party stuff, it's more of a money thing, streamlining thing, and name brand recognition thing. For example, there are certain car brands I would not buy, I only buy nintendo Brand accessories for my nintendo systems, There are certain brands of computer and computer accessories I won't buy.
I know Paizo, I have a relationship with them, experience with them, and have found the balance to be very good in all respects, and my entire gaming group does min-maxing because we think it is fun. I allow lots of non core stuff, do plenty of homebrew stuff, and am willing to listen to any requests from my players on stuff they create.
That being said, I still would rather have more Words directly from Paizo than needing to rely on 3PP, since my group tends to stick more with the core products.
Typically, only the effect words change the level of the spell as per the chart on pg 164. The level of the Target word is the minimum spell level the wordspell needs to be to use that target word. The Same is true for the meta words, but the meta words might change the level of the spell, if it is listed in the description.
you got the right spell level, but for the wrong reason I think. In this case, you are modifying the word Burst with the word Boost, at which point you can select a medium range 20 ft burst for a +2 level adjustment, or a long range 40 ft burst for a +4 level adjustment.
I think the system is less useful for prepared casters, even if they do get to use more of the words. You won't be able to truly mimic regular spells, but you can get somewhat close. The main idea here is flexibility. Know you're going up against that pesky Red dragon? well instead of burst fire blast (3rd lvl spell), just swap out a word and apply a metamagic feat, and you have an intensified Burst Frost Fingers and you have an iceball spell, max 10d6 of dmg, 10ft radius, and possibly stagger a creature, 3rd lvl spell.