Conspicuous's page

I'd say its not an outrageous idea--considering the conversion from True Mutagen--though it might (truthfully does) outshine Awakened Intellect. At lvl 20, you'd take the True Cognatogen in the morning and it would last halfway through your sleep cycle, thanks to Persistent Mutagen (arguably meant to include Cognatogens, of course).

I've been working to complete a hammer-throwing paladin of single-smiting justice. The thought of smashing someone in the face with a hammer (in-game) and sending them across the room delights me to no end, but mechanically there are some issues.

My primary concern is the Power Attack requirement for Pushing Assault. Power Attack only works with melee weapons, but there IS a ranged equivalent: Deadly Aim. These feats have identical effect, with the only exception being Dex instead of Str and affecting ranged weapons instead of melee weapons.

What do folks think of allowing Deadly Aim be a possible alternate requirement for Pushing Assault? (assuming the character meets the requirements of both)

I know RAW says no, but the concept is quite logical. Besides, combining this with Charging Hurler and Radiant Charge makes an incredible one-shot cannon (not overly useful, but awesome and full of character flavor)!

Polymorph Any Object

Aging Effects (scroll 1/3 of the way down)

Situation:
Half Orc Bob is an 18th level wizard. He's 31 years old (middle age), and he has low self esteem about people picking on his gross green skin. He decides to polymorph himself into an Elf--everyone likes Elves, right? Using Polymorph Any Object, he turns himself permanently into an Elf. (An Increase Duration Factor of 13 (see spell))

Related questions:
1: Is Bob now a middle-aged Elf?
2: Can Bob choose to Polymorph into a younger/older Elf as part of the spell?
3: Will Bob live to be 354+ years old?
4: Random: If Bob dies (Sarenrae forbid), will his corpse be that of a Half Orc?

Clearly, Bob is not the equivalent of a 31-year-old Elf (unless the GM in question is childish)

Surely this is an age-old argument, but it'd be wonderful to hear the community's theories.

Are there any uses of these that do NOT apply to spellcasting? Do non-spellcasters make any kind of Concentration check?

Absolutely!

Picking a lock, disarming a trap, balancing (arguable): just about anything that takes consistent thought. Difference is, most of these aren't factored in with the "Concentration Check"; outside interference while trying to concentrate on something instead just becomes modifiers on the original skill check.

EX: Picking a simple lock (DC: 20). Picking a simple lock while someone's trying to carry on a conversation with you (DC: 22+ (total DM call)).

A lot of things require concentration; it just makes performing that action harder. Since spells don't require a roll to accomplish, they need something else to reflect difficulties along the way.

"If a bag of holding is overloaded, or if sharp objects pierce it (from inside or outside), the bag immediately ruptures and is ruined, and all contents are lost forever"

Methinks this ruins any idea of long-duration storage. Once that Shrink Item wears off (if the weight/size goes over the limit for the Bag), then everything in it is gone. Regular, 1sp sack. 1/2 lb, fyi.

Being the example is Next Day, they HAVN'T switched back yet, and they turn into boulders once they touch a solid surface. I'm not one for physics, but the potential energy of a high-mass object falling vs a low-mass object falling would create a different impacting force (correct me if I'm wrong). The pebbles don't gain their mass until contact is made . . . so maybe it becomes force of impacting pebble + "stationary weight of boulder"?

Is anyone a physicist with a specialty in magic and transmogrification?

Ultimate Magic Spell Book Prices

For those too lazy to copy+paste :)

If you give an NPC PC wealth that adds one to his CR. Same thing applies to giving him PC class levels instead of NPC class levels, another +1 CR.

OMG . . . I did not realize this! Thank you for pointing that out! *alters "things" . . . *

Obviously late, but my chaotic perspective on the original questions (copied responses are obvious signs of genius):

First, the description says they get a reflex save each round to escape; is that like Glitterdust, where they get a Will save each round not to be blind for free? Or is it more like escaping a grapple, where they actually have to take an action to break free? (They are Entangled, after all.)

It’s more like an every-round Fireball, except a save equals no damage. Making a save vs a spell effect is a free action.

Second, suppose I end the sphere in or next to someone's square using my move action. (If I end it in their square, they presumably have to make the saves; if they make them, I assume they're hiding in one of the corners of the 10-ft square.) Now I cast Hydraulic Push or Telekinesis to attempt a bull rush on them. If they fail, are they automatically sucked into the orb? What if I use the "violent thrust" version of Telekinesis?

VERY wishy-woshy, and I’d say the DM is the predominant factor in all circumstances. If I were your DM, it would of course depend on the situation/positioning. Assuming optimal conditions, and you telekinetically pushing them into the middle, I’d follow the rules for the spell (Telekinesis) first (will save, right?), then demand a reflex save of some sort. Given the ambiguous nature, I’d skip the first Refl save IN THIS CIRCUMSTANCE and go straight to the sec. save vs Engulf—personal logic: you’re being thrust directly into the center of this ball of churning water, as opposed to being battered along the way to get there.

Third, suppose I end the orb next to or extruding 5 feet over a Create Pit spell. Does it hover there until I can direct it all the way into the hole? At that point, what happens? You'd think the rules for falling onto a yielding surface apply... or does the orb just dissipate due to the force of the impact? Can I dismiss the orb as they fall (and if so, does that require an action)? What happens if they fall into a spiked, acid, or hungry pit?

Create Pit specifically demands reaction only from Creatures:

“Any creature standing in the area where you first conjured the pit must make a Reflex saving throw to jump to safety in the nearest open space. In addition, the edges of the pit are sloped, and any creature ending its turn on a square adjacent to the pit must make a Reflex saving throw with a +2 bonus to avoid falling into it.”

I don’t know what impact you’re talking about, but guess you mean to engulf people and carry them over to the pit. If that’s the case, the components for Aqueous Orb does not specify that it can be dismissed:
“Components V, S, M”

If they fall into a spiked/whatever trap, then that has to do with the specific trap (be it spiked, poisoned, etc). Specifics at that point.

Fourth, if I use a Persistent Rod, they have to make 2 saves for the first effect and 2 for the last (if they fail the first) every time, right?

If they failed every save as it came, they’d make two saves total: first effect, second effect. If they succeeded at the first save, they’d have to roll a second time against the FIRST effect. IF they failed this, they’d have to roll against the second effect. If THIS roll failed, they’d have to roll a SECOND time against the second effect.

Quick synopsis: if they fail the saves for both the first and second effect, nothing changes.

Fifth, if I hoover up someone under the effect of Hideous Laughter, do they start drowning immediately? If I get a spellcaster, can they cast spells with somatic components?

EXTREMELY solid logic around this: “the creature continues laughing for the entire duration” if they fail the Hideous Laughter save. If someone’s laughing, their breathing, and breathing water is bad for non-fish-folk. As a DM, I’d say they are automatically rolling against being engulfed. If that fails . . . I dunno. Probably Constitution check vs the beginning stages of drowning. Laughing under water is bad, yo. Counter-point: stuff ceases to be funny when one is drowning. Most enchantments stop when it comes to damaging one’s self with actions . . . total DM call.

Fantastic question, btw.

Sixth, I can start the orb wherever I like within range, right? Including on top of some enemies?

Totally. It would behoove you to do so. Kinda like Wall of Fire. “Convenient placement = Wizard/Cleric Cannon Fodder”

The whole utility of Deft Palm is to have your weapon already drawn when the combat begins, but so that your enemy is unaware of it.

Deft Palm (Ex)

Benefit: A rogue with this talent can make a Sleight of Hand check to conceal a weapon while holding it in plain sight, even while she is being observed.

I don't see how Deft Palm allows you to have a weapon considered DRAWN that is concealed.

To me, this reads that you're finding a place to conceal it (secret pocket), even though someone is watching you do it. Nothing else in the game mentions concealing a weapon in a specific way--like, not in a pocket--then it seems odd to allow it in this case. You'd think it would mention "still considered armed for the purposes of Attacks of Opportunity"--or any other number of differences that come with having a weapon drawn--if it were the case.

There's definitely the whole "now you see it, now you don't" deal, but more is just conjecture.

Original writer comments?

EDIT: Just to be a hypocrite with my own conjecture, what about:
Glove of Storing

"The item is shrunk down so small within the palm of the glove that it cannot be seen"
"Storing or retrieving the item is a free action."

No one sees the weapon, it pops into your hands instantly, and you make an underhanded (har har) stab!

Eh? Eh?

I've been concidering for a time opening a Pathfinder system Digichat (like many others out there for 4th Ed or 3.5 or WoD games). Obviously however with the Pathfinder rules system and what will most likely end up being a home brewed setting.

Mostly was curious of any legal things I need to do/accomplish before I do this. Also if there was anyone in the know possibly interested in being hired to work on the database/website/forum programming.

Thanks for any replies.

Bump on this. I'm actually alarmed more has not been developed here. Does anyone have any thoughts to share on a digi for Pathfinder?

I've played on a 3.5 chat--which wasn't bad--and Pathfinder is astronomically richer in story IMO. A chat for this awesomeness would probably explode in popularity

I apologize in advance; the following may not make sense to the structured mind (chaos FTW)

So here's the situation: Mr. Rogue Sniper is a jerk. Or maybe a businessman who's seeing to some 'business. Either scenario, he's about to make someone have a sucky day.

Scout + Sniper Archtypes (they don't overlap, far as I can tell)
(( Brief synopsis from these two: Opponent treated as flatfooted if you move 10 feet first, and Longer range on Sneak attacks. ))

Let's just say lvl 20 for simplicity (I assure you it makes sense that way). Mr. Rogue Sniper wants to get his Sneak Attack on with someone from a range--we'll say 60ft. With Sniper, he can make it happen easily. He's picky about weapons, and only uses with Crossbows--bows are for wimps and Elves, after all.

This dude's rocking the following feats/rogue talents (and their prereqs as obvious):

Feats:
Rapid Reload (particularly for the lt crossbow)
Parting Shot
Vital Strike
Bullseye Shot (just because)

Rogue Talents:
Fast Getaway
Crippling Strike (turns out he IS a jerk)
Stealthy Sniper (-10 instead of -20)

What I'm looking for is legitimacy + other options here. I'm not looking for broken--if I was, I wouldn't choose a ranged rogue with a crossbow!--just effective enough to be more than a waste of flesh and graphite.

FIRST QUESTION:
I fire at said dude (using Vital Strike). Does this action signify a Surprise round, or simply "my turns first, suck the damage"?
(( SRD on Surprise rules ))
The wording that catches me is the following:

"If some but not all of the combatants are aware of their opponents, a surprise round happens before regular rounds begin"

This seems (to me) to imply that at least one of the enemies has to know the good guys are coming, which seems stupid to me. Clarification from the community here would smooth things over dramatically.

* Assuming this IS a surprise round, am I screwed for hiding because I don't have the move action? I'd essentially need to make first initiative if that were the case.

* Assuming this is NOT a surprise round and I get the rest of the actions, we move onto exhibit 2:
I hit em with Vital Strike (standard, sneak attack or not), and get a free withdrawl. During that withdrawl, after 10 ft I get another attack from Parting Shot. The Parting Shot is made a sneak attack by Scout.

SECOND QUESTION:
Am I insane, or does this actually work? Can one make a coward ranged rogue into an effective combatant (once per encounter)?

THIRD QUESTION (multi-part, because I'm also a jerk):
All of that aside, I've seen a lot of people suggest Shot on the Run for ranged rogues. Is Shot on the Run truly necessary? It seems all you need to do for maximizing the Scout Archtype is to move first (up to 30ft or so), then choose to shoot (ideally with manyshot, but that's another issue). Does hiding and/or sniping ever really come up if that's the strategy?

FOURTH QUESTION:
With so many feats already necessary for making a ranged rogue "work" (there never seems to be a clear-cut-"Do This" layout), does a cool-LOOKING feat like Bullseye Shot ever actually end up being useful? Obviously it wouldn't with Scout, but what if you went the Burglar or Poisoner route? That's an attractive bonus to attack, but when they're flat-footed, is said bonus necessary?

If you've made it this far, I applaud your patience. If you have answers for these passing questions from a wayward soul, I'd giggle like a leprechaun.

I don`t get why he can`t use a longsword or scimitar though.

If you kindly redirect your attention to the following link:

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/dervish-dance-combat

THIS helps by an incredible amount. With Power Attack . . . ? Oh man!

Sort of an aside: Crippling Critical comes at lvl 10 Duelist, and is of course uber-sexy with its numerous options. My issue is with the feat Critical Mastery, which specifies that you can combine two critical "FEATS". Anyone else think the Duelist ability--which is named with the word Critical--should work with Critical Mastery? I can imagine that most would house-rule it even if the book rules disagreed, but I'm curious from the community's perspective.

Lastly, on the AC bit, I've worked an Elven Duelist--best choice, imo--up to having 44 AC at lvl 20. It takes a bit of cash, but totally do-able:

Dexterity 28 (6 from gloves, 4 from leveling, 18 base Elf) = +9
Intelligence 24 (6 from headband, 1 from leveling, 17 base Elf) = +7
Bracers of Armor +5,
Ring of Protection +5,
Amulet of Nat Armor +5, (sucky, but if you need the AC . . .)
Dodge (from Free Hand Fighter) +3 (only up to lvl 10 Fighter, based on wording)
10+9+7+15+3 = 44.

Heck, if you're paranoid of dieing, you could throw Combat Expertise in there (which you should get for disarming anyway), the bonus Dodge from the class for using it(another +3) and fight defensively. Won't be able to hit anything, but nigh-untouchable.

Requirements

Alignment: Any chaotic.
Base Attack Bonus: +7.
Feats: Cleave, Great cleave, Power attack.
Skills: Intimidate 7 ranks.
Special: Strength Surge and Intimidating glare rage powers

Just to throw this out there: if you wanted to go Fighter/FB, you would have to have 4 levels in Barbarian--two rage powers. This is BEASTLY for a prestige class requirement, and reminds me of PRC req's attached to Forgotten Realms classes (personal shudder). The particular with these is Intimidating Glare. Yes, Barbarian scary, rawr. Simple enough; that'll be the case already if you require 7 ranks in Intimidate--another large amount. When you really break it down to in character logic, the PC does not need to have an "Intimidating Glare" to know how to make people bleed more profusely.

The original class--which has Deathless Frenzy--is stronger than this one, and yet only requires a couple totally useless rage feats (which only require a rage/frenzy ability from somewhere). It may sound complicated, but basically the PRC goes from needing 1 level in Barbarian to 4 levels and would get less out of it.

PF Cleave sucks. I'm just going to throw that out there.

... And flavorwise, you need to be really endurant to push your body's adrenaline non-stop like that, you get my idea.

Could a couple ranks in Survival help in this way? Perhaps Acrobatics (if a bit of a stretch) ?

Tireless frenzy: The Frenzied berserker is no longer fatigued after ending her frenzy.

Prerequisite: 3rd level.

Comparing for a quick second: Barbarians get this at level 17. This way would be level 10 (7 bbn, 3 FB). 17 -> 10 = HUGE jump. You can't say it's to help counter the whole "possibly attack party members" schtick, because the extra Frenzy strength already does that. Even at 5th (total lvl minimum 12), the level disparity is way too large to justify. IMO? Chuck this and replace it with something else.

Berserker warrior: At 2nd level, Frenzied berserker levels stack with Barbarian levels for purposes of choosing new rage powers and their effect.

(( placed bold for emphasis )) By this, it may imply that your progression of acquiring rage powers continues through the Frenzied Berserker levels. If that is the case, you'd likely gain one at FB 2, 3, 4, and 5 (being that FB gives some of its own). Clarification would be groovy.

On the whole, an inspiring idea. These gaming companies spend a LOT of time and money on balancing these classes, feats, spells, and class features to cut off Ub3r Numb3r 0bs3ss0rz from ruining games for others. To say numbers aren't important is to simply be limited in point of view. It would be nice to think that everyone plays Role Playing Games to role play, but I'll retain my skepticism.

That aside, I think this class adds a unique kick to a Barbarian's options (which are non-existent beyond archtypes). Bear Warrior was fun as well, but this classes needed this lovin'.

Arbitrary comment about "fear of TPKing": how about limiting the "OMG BLOOD ORGIE". Until you're out of fuel or everyone's dead seems harsh, so try "for the next X rounds"--I'd try 2 rnds. That way, the danger is DEFINITELY still there, but you don't need to worry about destroying small villages. Or the entire party. One or two is just fine; they knew what they were agreeing to, after all :)

The skeleton summoning feat requires spell focus necromancy, whereas augment summoning requires spell focus conjuration. I'm just waiting for someone to argue they come from different sources of magic and therefore don't work with each other.

Homerule: Not to be used in game unless accepted by the DM

With things like "Requires Toughness"--most specifically Dwarven Defender--I would always allow "Improved Toughness" in it's place. The concept is the same, after all.

With something like this, I'd totally allow a 'skewing' of the wording. Truth be told, Spell Focus doesn't help a summoner at all anyway.

Consider Magical Lineage (Chain Lighting), and casting a Quickened followed by a Twin. On average comparable to Maximize, but if you like to see lots of dice hit the table . . .