Seaweed Leshy

Cuuniyevo's page

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber. Organized Play Member. 625 posts. 9 reviews. 2 lists. 3 wishlists. 1 Organized Play character.


RSS

1 to 50 of 625 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I just went back and read a few of the other posts you mentioned, and yes, they do seem to be needling you in a couple of them. The keep civil advice applies to everyone, and it's on the moderators to step in if they have to. Let's not make them have to. We all want Pathfinder 2 to be the best it can be. =]


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

A toned down insult is still an insult. Let's keep it civil, please.

Vidmaster7's opinion that we need more info isn't objectively wrong or insulting and theory-crafting for a set of rules we don't fully have yet isn't worth getting upset over.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Have you ever tried your hand at painting miniatures or making 3D terrain/maps for your games?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Does Tonya live on an airplane? o__o

Also,'grats GM's! =]


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
TheAlicornSage wrote:


How much of it was conveyed via numbers, stats, and mechanics?

The tools used to convey info is an entirely different issue from the info conveyed.

I.E. telling the a character is a great leader is far more vague then telling you that they have a charisma of 16 and a leadership score of 19. The latter is less vague.

The module, much like Emerald Spire, doesn't detail all of the NPCs to that degree for space reasons. Some have page number references to other books, while some are left as blank canvases. In Emerald Spire, the Fort Inevitable hub has several key NPCs with class and level listed but no stats whatsoever, while Halls of Undermountain usually doesn't give their level. For example, there's a weakened captive elf wizard in one area that the book recommends using elf scout stats for from Monster Vault page 112. It doesn't explicitly mention what stats to use if they get healed and regain their magic, but again, that's for space reasons.

Quote:


How about using traditionally non-combat abilities in combat? What about vague or unspecific abilities, like Silent Image.

...

4e doesn't allow something to be used in such a variety of ways like that. You use it exactly as the rules say, or you are throwing a wrench in a well oiled machine.

I don't understand how the rules prevent players and GMs from rolling with that. Does 4E simply not have spells like that anymore? Are players somehow prevented from fashioning makeshift camouflage or distractions? I'm having a hard time imagining a group playing through this module and the GM telling their players, "no, you can't do that, you're only allowed to do what this page says you can." Maybe people who like miniature board games did play it that way, but I don't see anything to stop roleplayers from playing their style instead.

Quote:
Quote:
It seems most of us here view these RPGs not as singular tools that must be taken or left exactly as they are, but toolboxes or bags full of a variety of tools that can be picked and utilized as needed and as preferred.

But this isn't actually what happens. And even for those who do something like this, they take chunks and use them exactly and consider this stuff that must be decided upon beforehand or if an unexpected problem arises only. Things like deciding how initiative works, but never making on the fly decisions customized to particular situations.

Basically, people avoid gm rulings in favor of solid rules. It isn't seen as good enough to make a one time call, it must always be a rule that always applies with full force.

This part of your concern seems like something that already applies to PF1, and almost every other RPG, so yes, it will probably still bother you in PF2. You seem to be critical of the way some people play, but honestly, that's not actually a problem. It's just a diversity of opinion and preference.

On the subject of initiative though, PF2 is explicitly moving toward making customized on-the-fly decisions instead of a basic +Init bonus that everyone has based on Dex + Feats.

Quote:

This at once is a step in my direction and yet also points out that you aren't there.

This is a list of mechanics. Why is this a list of mechanics, and not options seen by the character?

Why is it not a list like this: look for a footpath, use a spell, have the barbarian carry you, use a grappling hook and a pully to hoist yourself up, make a hot-air/lighter-than-air balloon, etc?

Do you see the difference between the lists? Not the specific options, but that your list is a list looking at the mechanics for an answer vs a list looking at the world for an answer.

Yes, I see the difference and could easily have phrased it in that way, but as the GM, I see my job as being to interpret and facilitate what my players want, for the fun of the whole group (hopefully while also having fun myself). One of my players might think of something their character wants to do and phrase it in-character, but another might look at their character sheet and wonder what the optimal path forward is. I have to cater to both players, because both are valid and compatible play-styles.

This same sort of thing comes up in Numenera, which I also play. Characters have far fewer skills and skill ranks, but each one means more. Each "rank" is equivalent to a +3 to your check with that skill, so players are incentivised to use what they're good at. They can still attempt most things untrained, but +3 or +6 is a pretty big deal in that system. A diplomatic character will usually try to talk their way into a building rather than sneak or parachute or teleport, for instance and that's not a failure of imagination on the players' part.

Quote:

Certainly, every option in my list could easily have mechanics chosen to suit them, but my list isn't a list of mechanics, it is a list of narrative milieu based options. My list could be be for any system. Some might be good for as there would be mechanics easily adapted or used directly (survival skill check for finding the footpath), while other options and systems might require something to be cobbled together (hoisting with the pulley).

My list is system agnostic, but relies on a an understanding about the narrative milieu, i.e. obviously magic exists as that is on the list.

Agreed, and I assume your list would also work in 4E or 5E, and will also work in the PF2 Playtest.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Leyren wrote:
Quandary wrote:
Leyren wrote:

We're likely going from 12+con-modifier (e.g. elven wizard) to 22 (dwarven barbarian). With the elven -2 con and the dwarven +2 this results in a range of 12 points at level 1. [12 vs 24, 1:2]

Seems like a lot, but relatively, it stays about the same as in Pf1, only with higher numbers. Nevertheless, I don't feel comfortable with this huge difference.

PF1 actually had MORE proportional difference...

6 vs 14 (12 + 2 CON DIF) i.e. < 1:2 ratio (~133% increase), while what you described was exactly = 1:2 ratio (100% increase) including CON differential.
So introduction of racial HD/HP to 0HD races is LESS disparate than existing PF1 differential between Wizards/Barbarians.
There just isn't much difference vs. P1E starting play at Level 2 or with 1 NPC level to avoid swinginess except the extra HD is racially defined here.
You also ignore that one can choose to put floating bonus into negating racial penalty, CON in this case, if that is important to PC concept.
I tried to express that the relative difference is more or less the same, but not completely. 33% is a huge difference, I seem to have underestimated those 2 hit points there :P

Am I misunderstanding something or wouldn't the HP numbers in PF1 actually be 5hp vs 13hp? Assuming a base CON of 10, Elves' -2 makes for CON 8, or -1hp per HD. Dwarves' +2 makes for CON 12, or +1hp per HD.

So, at level 1 the difference between a basic Elven Wizard and a basic Dwarven Barbarian would be 160%, not 133%.

Since we don't know the numbers for PF2 classes, that part of the equation is guesswork.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Thanks for giving more detail. =]

I haven't played any 4E and don't own the main books, but I do own a few modules from it, so that's what I'll be looking through to compare with your points.

TheAlicornSage wrote:

Okay, so the reason the new edition worries me,

D20 was always about being descriptive and giving tools that you could pluck and manipulate at need to serve any situation, and even had the expectation of the rules being bent in favor of narrative.

4e is a good example of the opposite. 4e has no tools for description of the world. The numbers in 4e do mot relate to anything at all, I.E. the difficulty of a trap depends on your level, not the skill of the trapmaker.

4e is however, a good combat minis game. It became a good combat minis game because it didn't even try to be useful in way other than act as a combat minis game.

With the caveat that I don't have the rules in front of me, or experience at the table, I don't see evidence of this in my 4E modules. For example, my copy of Halls of Undermountain has information on the world above, backstory and NPC's, as well as possible story hooks and advice on how to improvise more of these elements. Pages 14-15 (devoted to GM advice) mention at least 6 different times some variation of "you can and should add, remove or modify anything you want in here, to fit your group's needs/preferences and flesh out the details." Traps early in the book tend to be low-level, while traps later in the book are higher level, just like in a Pathfinder module. Room details and statistics seem to be presented similarly to the Emerald Spire PF1 module. There are suggestions on how certain factions of NPC/monsters might react to non-combat solutions or taking someone captive instead of killing them, as well as history and motives for quite a few of them, which an enterprising GM could easily expand upon. One module may be better or worse than another, but from my surface-level reading of it, I can't see anything about this that would prevent me from GM'ing the way I do PF1. The stat-blocks are formatted differently than what I'm used to but apart from that, it could easily have been released this year from Paizo instead of 6 years ago from Wizards.

It may or may not be true that the players and GMs who gravitated towards 4E were more preoccupied with tactical board-game-style combat than others, but that seems from my view to be their personal preference and not a hard limitation of the system.

Quote:

My concern is that as pf2 heads away from d20 that'll go towards 4e, and lose more and more usefullness in these ways,

-it'll lose connection between numbers and the world milieu,
-it'll be more like legos and less like clay in terms of the scale at which flexibility is found.
-it'll try so hard to always have answer that it becomes harder to cobble together an answer when the system does fail to provide.
-it'll string things together so tightly, that it becomes a nightmare to make adjustments. I.E.,will the classes be so dependant on the class feat trees that it becomes impractical to alter a class to fit an individual's concept (not the greatest example given archetypes, but I figured simple and hopefully clear).

Basically, my concern is that it will become so much a game, that it's utility as a mere tool gets hindered.

Other systems, such as Savage Wirlds, Fate, Champions, Rifts, they all are less capable as tools than d20.

This bolded part, I believe, is the crux of this discussion. It seems most of us here view these RPGs not as singular tools that must be taken or left exactly as they are, but toolboxes or bags full of a variety of tools that can be picked and utilized as needed and as preferred. Many people even mix and match these tools from different systems entirely, collecting all of their favorites into one box or bag and discarding the parts they don't like. When I heard about the Advantage/Disadvantage system used in 5E, I thought that sounded cool and decided to let each of my Carrion Crown players have one non-combat skill of their choice be used with permanent Advantage. I know PF1 already has some abilities that grant the roll-twice-take-the-higher benefit, but the idea of allowing it on a regular basis hadn't occurred to me. They can still roll terribly, but it makes the clue-gathering phases of the campaign go a little more smoothly and doesn't hurt game balance. We also usually ignore the weight of any object that weighs less than 5lbs, with the tacit understanding that nobody tries to get too carried away with collecting junk.

At one point in a different campaign, one of my players had the idea to make their wolf companion try to cover for their poor stealth roll by pretending to chase a cat outside the building. I rolled a d100 and sure enough, there was actually a cat for them to chase. There's no rule in PF1 for that, but nobody needs permission to make the game more fun for the people playing.

The rules may say to use the Climb skill to scale a cliff, but someone can just as easily use a Survival, Knowledge: Geography or Nature check to find an easier path; a Craft or Engineering check to make a ladder; or a ranged attack roll to attach a grappling hook and rope. The rules present open paths with signs, not narrow hallways that must be traversed.

Quote:

D20 is not only the most capable as a mere tool, but it also is highly popular. I can find people to play it, and even when they don't play my way, we can still play together, and when I gm (in person at least) I can give an exoerience beyond the mechanical.

If PF moves away from that, then I can no longer play my way with others who don't play my way. I'll be forced into playing their way or playing by myself.

Edit: I play with d20 for it's utility as a tool and the ability to play others who aren't like me. Removing the utility from the system removes all the reason I even use a system at all.

"Most" is a strong word, much like "best" but I don't think a semantic argument is helpful. I understand the desire to keep the player-base from fragmenting, but I'm hopeful that what you're worried about won't happen. Looking forward to the official Playtest to start so we can see for ourselves. =]


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

@TheAlicornSage

Okay, so… accepting as a given that there are different ways to play, and house-ruling is not just allowed but expected, in what way do the Playtest rules presented thus far jeopardize your ability to play the way you want?

I've played in 4 distinct RPG rule systems (not counting editions or variations), and read the rules for many more, and while the "feel" changes from one to the next, the core of the game stays the same throughout. Some are more crunchy while others are more free-form, but the core experience is available in all of them.

I'm pretty sure I understand what you're trying to say about the difference between playing the rules and playing the game, but what I don't understand is how it relates to the Playtest.

I think stepping back and refocusing might be helpful here. =]


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Have you heard of True History, by Lucian, perhaps the first Sci-Fi book ever written?


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Also speaking of free will and fate, did you ever play Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning?

If you haven't, I recommend it for the Fae writing alone.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Happy new year!

Have you managed to find time to play in or run any RP's this year? Pathfinder or otherwise?

I think I've managed to run 3 sessions, but one of them may have been the last couple days of December. It's a little bit of a blur. =]


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Maybe in 16-24 years, Captain Brown Bear. Even if they do continue making the hardcovers, there are 7 other APs between Throne and Shackles, and they don't put one out every year. My experience with modules and AP's is that I use a lot of print-outs, notes and scratch-paper even with the books I own physical copies of, so I wouldn't let the PDF format stop you from getting this one. It's good. =]


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Did you get to see The Shape of Water yet and if so, did you enjoy it?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Have any plans this Friday the 13th, haunted house or otherwise? =]


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Spaceships are crazy awesome and I don't especially trust leaving by airplane anymore.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Do you have a favorite moment from Kong?

Mine's probably the

Spoiler:
bamboo spider!
Very unexpected and cool. :D

Also, for that end credits scene, which are you looking forward to most?
My favorite's

Spoiler:
Mothra, in large part because it's the friendliest and most defensive of the group; very atypical for a kaiju


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Proper Link.

Sometimes copy-pastes get confused and put spaces where they don't belong. =]


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Great pics all, but Ileosa's portrait link has a typo and should be 1021 instead of 10210.

Looking forward to my copy arriving. :D


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Mark Seifter wrote:
Eliandra Giltessan wrote:
I was actually curious about the story in the last picture, the one with the... less good iconics. I like that one a lot.
It's a spell, so I ordered it, and that means I have a crazy story for it. We're looking at the treacherous teleport ruse spell. Seltyiel partied up with Mel, Oloch, and Damiel for an adventure and told them he was going to teleport them all back to safety. They all thought he was casting teleport, even Damiel with his high Int, but it was actually treacherous teleport, leaving the other three in a prepared cell that Seltyiel rigged to set off an antimagic trap to hold them, thus allowing him to make off with all the loot for himself. But he couldn't help but send himself nearby to gloat (even though he could have gone far away), so he better hope Oloch can't bend those bars!

Speaking of Oloch, is he wearing a Meligaster mask on his forehead for some reason or is he currently under the effect of a Mesmerist spell effect?


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

After recently watching Crimson Peak, my group decided they were interested in running Carrion Crown. So, in light of this development, I wonder if you could offer some insight for a PC backstory. =]

A player decided he wanted to play a Dhampir Alchemist with the Subject of Study campaign trait, focusing on magical beasts. He was also interested in the idea of being descended from one of the minor noble families in Ustalav and, without any knowledge of major locations in the AP, pointed to the hills Southwest of Lepidstadt and the Shudderwood as the location of his family home. One thing led to another and we decided it made sense for the magical beast attack he survived to have attacked and taken that home. The Basilisk seems like a good choice, being a nice challenge for them once they finish The Haunting of Harrowstone and head North.

Rule of Fear has a nice section on Lozeri county, but it's mostly on the Shudderwood, with the section mentioning the hills near Courtaud just a paragraph long while the section on Canterwall county's Tamrivena doesn't give any details on the hills at all.

Is that area more like a highlands or a moor, flavor-wise?

Are there other appropriate magical beasts in the area? I know there are Worgs, but that seems a little on the nose.

After possibly reclaiming his family home and crest/signet, would it be too disruptive to the plot for him to have a shot at honorary membership on the Palatine Council of Lozeri? Not right away, but perhaps during or after Trial of the Beast?

Thanks! :D


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I suppose if you were to play in a campaign with rules like these, the ideal thing to do would be to make it an opportunity for a new story element. Maybe the party will have to find an NPC capable of casting Regeneration and willing to do it for a favor, or maybe a creature who can cast it as a Spell-Like Ability. That kind of story shouldn't happen all the time, of course, and such damage should be reserved for very important scenes with a major villain or monumentally poor decision-making on the part of the PC's.

Playing with relatively realistic physical consequences and healing times is certainly a valid play-style, but encounter CR and character tactics would need adjustments to compensate for it, at the very least.

Personally, I would prefer the ability damage route for most circumstances.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

With the Academy Awards coming up again so soon, I was thinking about past winners and possible future winners of Best Picture. I've mostly given up on paying attention to the Oscars (simply due to how different my personal tastes are to the voting community in Hollywood, and not for any other reason) but with Fury Road being nominated this year, they've managed to briefly get my hopes up.

A few things that came to mind while thinking about it:
An adventure movie didn't win until 1956 (Around the World in 80 Days), and none have since;
A horror movie didn't win until 1991 (Silence of the Lambs), and none have since;
A fantasy movie didn't win until 2003 (Return of the King), and none have since;
A science fiction movie still hasn't won.

With that in mind, what do you think the odds are of any flavor of Lovecraftian film receiving the top honor in our lifetimes?

Bonus Question: There are many Small playable races currently available in Pathfinder, but only 1 Large that I'm aware of (Trox, which are only in a Bestiary but count as 0HD). Apart from logistical reasons relating to doorways, is there a reason for that?


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
N N 959 wrote:

You're also overlooking the "silly" situations where someone takes a feat that let's them do something as a swift or free action instead of a move action, and while nauseated, the person who has the feats can't do the act but the person without them can.

I disagree with this assessment. By my reading, Quick Draw et al give you a quicker way to perform certain options but do not prevent you from using the original slower option. In the link above, notice it uses the language "you can" and "you may" instead of "you [do]" or "you must".

If I were writing the feat and wanted the slower form to be disallowed, I would have written it like this: "Benefit: When you draw a weapon, use a free action instead of a move action. When you draw a hidden weapon (see the Sleight of Hand skill) use a move action."


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

In Golarion, are people able to "size up" threats beyond general flavor? Specifically, as far as I know there's no rule on this but GM-to-GM, would you allow your players to use a Heal or appropriate Knowledge skill check to determine how many hit dice an npc or creature had?

The reason this comes up is that one of my players has and uses the Sleep spell, which only works on up to 4HD worth of enemies. It seems slightly unfair to not allow them a quick estimate of whether or not it will even have a small chance of success. For reference, my players (with the exception of one that I trade GM duties with) don't read the bestiaries and therefore have no stat-block knowledge to draw upon for strategic purposes.

Thanks in advance for any insight! =]


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

It seems the discussion has spread a bit from the original question. By my reading, the FAQ merely upholds rules that are already written, and does not address the use of Acrobatics to avoid the AoO (or both AoO's, as the case may be), which I still believe is allowed.

For reference:

CRB pg 193 wrote:

Moving Through a Square

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

Ending Your Movement: You can't end your movement in the same square as another creature unless it is helpless.

Tumbling: A trained character can attempt to use Acrobatics to move through a square occupied by an opponent (see the Acrobatics skill).

Very Small Creature: A Fine, Diminutive, or Tiny creature can move into or through an occupied square. The creature provokes attacks of opportunity when doing so.

Square Occupied by Creature Three Sizes Larger or Smaller: Any creature can move through a square occupied by a creature three size categories larger than itself.

A big creature can move through a square occupied by a creature three size categories smaller than it is. Creatures moving through squares occupied by other creatures provoke attacks of opportunity from those creatures.

Designated Exceptions: Some creatures break the above rules. A creature that completely fills the squares it occupies cannot be moved past, even with the Acrobatics skill or similar special abilities.

A.) The part about being Fine, Diminutive, or Tiny overrules the part about being unable to end your turn in an occupied square, but does not modify the part about Tumbling.

B.) Tumbling requires that the user be trained in Acrobatics, which helps the Poison Frog but not the poor Stirge.

C.) Moving through occupied squares is called out as being a trigger for AoO's here, so it does make sense that the PDT would double-down on it with their ruling.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Alshoodone, yes, it is generally assumed that most of the loot your players will receive will not be exactly what they want, so they'll sell most of it. For instance, how many +1 Studded Leather Armors can they wear? How many magic swords can they swing at any given time? Those items help the NPC's who are using them, but the party is probably going to sell them so they can buy something they actually want.

To avoid things getting stale, you can sprinkle in consumables and the occasional custom-made item that you know one of your players will want to use and replace their old equipment with.

So yes, it should all more or less work out in the end. If they're +/- 15% WBL, that's fine, and and more can be brought back in line by a few loot-lite or loot-heavy encounters. Or, if you don't mind risking your players' wrath, you can have an NPC nemesis who makes clever use of the sundering rules. Don't over-use it, but in moderation it can make for a very hated villain. The inverse is a friendly NPC who can craft or enchant the occasional item as a favor.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

@Errant Mercenary and David knott 242:
You'd only need multiple casters if you wanted it to work on multiple ropes. The first knot you cast it on would light up the whole rope, because the knot isn't a separate object. I think it's a fine addition to the other strategies brought up above.

Regardless, it's only in the top level, so even if your characters aren't set up to deal with it specifically, once you get past it, you'll be back in business for months of adventuring.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

My party has a changeling, gnome, half-elf and aasimar. The changeling witch brought Dancing Lights and they all had torches. With some clever arrangement of the lights, they made it through without too much difficulty. If the whole mess of goblins had been alerted at once, I can see how the level could have been much more difficult but it didn't come to that. Once they reached the end, everyone got a little peeved that the aasimar completely forgot they had Daylight. :P

In short, there are many ways to play the game, and darkvision is not required. That said, if your players really want to change their race, it's certainly worth considering. Roleplaying is a collaborative affair, after all.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I was Lotus Leshy all the way. ;__;


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
kinevon wrote:
On the original issue, does a metamagicked cantrip, which is also affected by wayang spell hunter or magical lineage (or both) so that it remains a 0 level spell, remain infinitely castable?

Expect table variation because I don't think there's official clarification on that point. If you tried to abuse it, expect the table variation to weigh more heavily against the idea. If you're just thinking of extending the range (for example), the GM would be more likely to let you do it.

I do think that would technically be allowed though.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

@The Dragon:

Yes, I see what you mean. I didn't actually look up the Oracle-specific VMC rules last time and was basing my opinion on the assumption you could get it more or less the same as an oracle would. Having seen the restrictions now (including the inability to take the Extra Revelations feat AND the fact that you can only take revelations as an oracle of character level - 6!), I agree that it is totally impractical for this application.

I will say that in other circumstances, teleport+standard action can be quite powerful though. Some character builds do rely on one very powerful hit instead of a few smaller ones.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Sorry, I disagree. I think Time Hop is far superior to Shift.

• It can be used in increments of 5ft all the way up to your maximum of 10ft per level (capped at 200ft), as you please, while Shift can only move a maximum of 5ft per 2 levels (capped at 50ft).
• You don't waste any "uses per day" by choosing a short distance so if you only used 5-10ft increments you'd have far more uses available in a given day.
• You can take people with you by expending distance.

The only thing Shift is better at, apart from being a swift action, is that it's usable from level 1. This is, admittedly, a very useful feature and makes it a much better choice for dipping.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

The book Cheetah's Sprint is in had not yet been released at the time we were talking about this. It's nice though, yes. =]


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
HWalsh wrote:
Spellcraft is only trained for recognizing what the spell is, not recognizing that a spell is being cast.

Granted, my mistake. I do believe that spellcasting is ordinarily visible to people paying attention. I have no problem with people who rule still and silent spells invisible though; that's their table's prerogative.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

If you're looking for any more VMC options, I recommend an Oracle of Time. The Time Hop revelation at level 7 grants 10ft per level (usable in 5ft increments) teleportation as a move action that doesn't provoke AoO's. If you're judicious about it, that's enough to bounce around and provide plenty of flanking as soon as you get it.

For the base class, I'd probably choose Ninja. So many excellent talents. :D


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Freehold DM wrote:
Boomerang Nebula wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:

For this situation, I vote Neutral act unless there is some evidence of vindictive behavior on the PCs part. This creature was trying to kill them a moment ago.

The Alignment scale shown above is interesting, but the good arguments are nothing more than Lawful and Neutral Evil arguments repeated in flowery language.

Can you expand on your post? I am particularly interested in the part about 'flowery language'.
what is there to expand upon? This is hardly the first time that the difference between good and evil has been portrayed as good having a long, responsibility-vanquishing dialogue beforehand before doing the exact same thing.

Assuming you were talking about my list of possible examples, I'm still not sure what you mean. I can certainly understand why the LN example could be seen as being the same as the NG or LG, but in what way are any of the G examples similar to LE or NE?

Even setting that aside, you seem to be coming from the perspective that the act of killing is more important to alignment than the intent behind the action, which I disagree with. Most societies make distinctions between complete accidents, negligent manslaughter, aggravated murder, and premeditated murder. In each instance, the same action may occur and in each instance the same result, but we tell them apart by the person's intent (and we try to tell intent by testimony and circumstance). I wrote more "flowery" language* for the last three examples because I hold Good to a higher standard than Evil or Neutral. The Good are expected to think before they act, while the other alignments are more apt to follow their gut with less care to the consequences. Also, those examples were meant as possible examples of how a Good character might justify the killing of a fleeing animal. They were not meant to be taken as factual or ironclad reasoning by any higher authority. Just possible character motives. If you like, I could easily provide several more examples of why characters of any given alignment would not kill a fleeing animal and feel justified as they did so.

*Now I will absolutely agree with the sentiment of disgust at "so-called good" people using flowery language to weasel their way out of responsibility. I know of examples of people pretending to be speaking from moral authority while actually being false and corrupt, and it's terrible every time, but my examples were not meant to be taken as cynicism or an indictment. They assumed the character honestly felt the way portrayed. Simplistic, perhaps, but it was off-the-cuff.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

My personal take on it is not that there are giant glowing runes but rather that there is a a magnetic attraction that draws the eye, a pulsation of power, subtle shifting of the light or even something as simple as a subtle aura about the casting (though for a particularly showy spell or if you have detect magic up, maybe there are actually runes in the air…).

Spellcraft is "Trained Only" meaning that the average commoner cannot see these signs and only notices if the caster is showing off or after it's too late. Only someone TRAINED in spotting and understanding magic can notice and identify spells without obvious visual cues. Still and Silent don't mention any modifiers to visuals so I don't apply any modifiers. If the spellcaster wants to roll for Stealth to be more subtle than they usually are, I feel perfectly justified in allowing it, but I don't allow already valuable metamagic feats to be more powerful than they already are.

Stealth seems to be the perfect fit. Spellcraft requires that you be able to perceive the casting, and Stealth is explicitly attempting to avoid or "oppose" Perception. If someone is actively observing you, a Bluff check is to be used first. It solves all the issues without changing any of the rules, in my view. Everyone's welcome to their own view, but this has worked for me so far.

I went ahead and hit the FAQ button but I do sympathize with those who would rather leave it to table variation.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I've never heard it called Wutenstag before. We get the word Wednesday from "Woden's-day", and Wuten could very well be a variant of Woden (known in Scandinavia as Odin). Regardless, all of my German relatives say Mittwoch, or "mid-week". =]


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
thorin001 wrote:
graystone wrote:
Cerberus Seven wrote:
thorin001 wrote:
It was going so well for a while with a couple of FAQs each week. Now there is a veritable FAQ drought.
It got errataed. They will now issue FAQs only on Fridays whose date does not end in a real number.
They issue them now on days that don't end with 'y'.
That is easy, I want my FAQs on Freitag.

The letter "g" is too similar to the letter "y"; it could cause confusion among anyone using a non-standard font. They'll have to schedule for Mittwoch instead.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

LazarX is correct, but I personally would allow Horse Lord Keleshite to be taken by someone who had been born and grown up there, because it has to do with the character's childhood instead of their ethnicity.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I think I see where the confusion was, graystone. I don't want to put words in LazarX's mouth but from my first reading of your earlier post I thought you were talking about allowing a human with Racial Heritage to use it to get the native outsiders' feats, which wouldn't be technically allowed (though I would personally allow it if the character in question were the "human" descendant of such an outsider from a previous campaign). It's now a bit clearer that you were talking about a native outsider character qualifying for Racial Heritage to take something like, say, an elven feat. I haven't bought Inner Sea Races yet so I'll take your word on the trait's wording. That does open up some interesting possibilities, especially if you threw in a sorcerer bloodline or two. With many of these features, there is the implication that the mixing of bloodlines happened many generations ago and are just rearing their head now, so it could certainly work.

As an aside, my family tree has something like 20 different countries represented on it (just for ancestors alone, not counting cousins), so I've come to embrace the idea of being a mutt. :P

The idea of a human with half-elven blood was one that especially popped out at me while compiling the list. Here could be someone who felt attached to their family origins but wouldn't be seen as "part of the club" anywhere they went. They certainly wouldn't be accepted as being elven and they wouldn't be seen as half-elven, but neither would they feel human. Hmmmm… I may need to introduce them as an NPC.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

@kyrt-ryder and Starbuck_II:

Hmm, good to know about the natural armor rule. I'd just like to point out that none of my suggestions above were made with any regard to game-balance. Even if I did think stoneskin would be a problem (I don't), I wouldn't have ruled against it for that reason. I just thought that you had to have some before you could "increase" it. Thanks for the heads-up!

Speaking of balance though, Born of Frost could be downright terrifying with the right build.

@Natan Linggod 327:
Good call, I had forgotten about that. Kind of embarrassing considering one of my players is playing a Witch at the moment. >_<

@M1k31:
That could be interesting. While making the list I was actually thinking of how interesting it would be to play a character with Racial Heritage: Goblin who wants to organize and improve his cousins' lot in life. Generally speaking, I'm willing to ignore or set aside a rule for the sake of RP, but it's nice when you can have your cake and eat it too. ;P

@Chris Lambertz:
You do good work, thanks! :D


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Sure, since this has gone on to yet another page, I'll again point everyone to the OP, which 17 people have hit the FAQ button on. The other thread is more general and therefore more difficult for the PDT to address so this is still the best bet for receiving an actual verdict on this topic.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

@captain yesterday

Non-mint is normally 25% off, which is why the $19.99 would normally be $14.99. At 50% off, it's now $9.99, so I don't see what the problem is?

@Mine…

Chances are someone bought the last couple non-mint copies. I happened to notice the discount a few days ago, before they posted the blog, and bought some stuff. Since then, at least one of the items I bought is no longer available in non-mint and a couple different items did become available.

Speaking of which, there went a couple hundred dollars. xD


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

@M1k31:

I don't read the feat as being written to give you a weakness, and that it instead says you still have the preexisting weakness. Since you don't actually have that preexisting weakness, I don't think you can take the feat. As you say, the point is fairly moot as nobody would want to take this feat on their human character.

@bbt:

Hmmm, I don't actually play in PFS, but Archives of Nethys is an easy way to check. Some feats that would be simple to call out as not allowed in PFS would be any that are for a non-PFS race, including:
android, boggard, catfolk, changeling, drow, duergar, giant, gillman, hobgoblin, kobold, merfolk, ogre, orc, svirfneblin, and troll.

Orcish feats are the only ones that would have an exception because half-orcs can take some of those.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Inspired by the recent kitsune thread over in the Rules forum, but in an effort not to clog it up more than it already is, I figured I'd go ahead and make a list of Racial feats and whether or not I personally think they are usable with Racial Heritage. To save time and space, I will exclude all feats from non-humanoid races as being obvious (with few exceptions where it may be in question), including but not limited to: aasimar, fetchling, gathlain, ghoran, ifrit, oread, suli, sylph, tiefling, and undine. Most of these are straightforward enough that I just provide a one word answer but notes are provided where I think them appropriate. As you may notice, Orcs and Half-Orcs have the most racial feats, but giants tend to have the most powerful. Fortunately for game balance, most giant feats have been written to require the giant subtype rather than just the race (so I didn't include them in the list), but there are still a couple very powerful options. Goblins and Ogres also get a bunch of nice feats, as do gnomes and dwarves.

Feedback is welcome but please note that I intentionally started this thread in the General Discussion section. =]

Adaptive Fortune: No, it requires a racial trait.

Agile Tongue:
Your long pink tongue is capable of manipulating small items and even stealing objects.

Prerequisites: Grippli.

Benefit: You have a prehensile tongue with a range of 10 feet. You can pick up items weighing no more than 5 pounds, make Sleight of Hand checks, perform the steal or disarm combat maneuvers, or make melee touch attacks with your tongue.

Yes. It's funny, but humans can indeed have long pink tongues, plus gripplis are humanoid and have no racial traits or abilities that mention their tongues being special in any way that a human's couldn't be. If anything, it's actually more plausible that a human could use Agile Tongue than a grippli because gripplis are only about 2ft tall while humans are roughly 3x that amount. Strange anatomy either way, but I know which body I'd think more likely to have 10ft reach.
Amplified Rage: Yes.
Ankle Biter: Yes.
Arcane School Spirit: Yes.
Arcane Talent: Yes.
Attuned to the Wild: Yes.
Aversion Tolerance: No, vampires are no longer humanoid; they have become undead. I won't mention any further vampire feats.
Bat Shape:
Your powers of transformation have been honed to the point where you can wholly become a bat.

Prerequisites: Cha 13, werebat-kin.

Benefit: You can take the form of a bat whose appearance is static and cannot be changed each time you assume this form. You gain a +10 racial bonus on Disguise checks to appear as a bat. Changing from werebat-kin to bat shape is a standard action. This ability otherwise functions as beast shape II, and your ability scores change accordingly.

If you wear a bat pelt (see page 31), you may choose to adopt a form resembling the bat whose skin you wear instead of your normal bat form.

By technical reading of the rules-text, someone could say yes, but the flavor-text strongly implies that the intent is no. The first line says "your powers of transformation" and "wholly become", heavily implying that you must already have the ability to partially turn into a bat. There is some debate about how important flavor-text is for determining how feats work, but with intent this blatant, I would personally say that using Racial Heritage to acquire this feat would be against RAW, and would require a house-rule to allow.
Battle Singer:
Your battle songs can drive your fellow goblins to new heights of frenzy.

Prerequisites: Goblin, bardic performance class feature.

Benefit: When using bardic performance to inspire courage in allies, you can choose to sing in Goblin—allies who do not speak Goblin gain no benefits from this performance. Allied goblins who hear your battle songs become more energetic and brave, and thus add the bonus granted by your inspire courage ability to all saving throws as a morale bonus.

Yes. The feat is even helpful enough to tell you how it works in combination with non-goblin allies.
Beast Rider: Yes.
Bewildering Koan: Yes.
Black Cat:
Bad luck befalls those who dare to cross you.

Prerequisites: Catfolk.

Benefit: Once per day as an immediate action, when you are hit by a melee attack, you can force the opponent who made the attack to reroll it with a –4 penalty. The opponent must take the result of the second attack roll. This is a supernatural ability.

Special: If you take this feat and don’t already have all black fur, your fur turns completely black when you takes this feat.

Debatable. Humans usually don't refer to their hair as fur, but I don't know of any scientific or logical reason why they wouldn't be equivalent. I would allow it.
Blood Beak: No, it requires a racial trait.
Blood Drinker, Blood Feaster, Blood Salvage: Yes. Gross, but yes.
Blood Tide: No, sahuagin are not humanoids, they are monstrous humanoids. I won't mention any further sahuagin feats.
Blood Ties: Yes.
Blood Vengeance: Yes.
Bloodmarked Flight: No, it requires that you use a racial ability to function.
Blundering Defense: Yes.
Born Alone:
You are so tough and vicious that you killed and ate the rest of your litter while still in the womb.

Prerequisites: Orc.

Benefit: Whenever you kill or knock unconscious an opponent with a melee attack, you gain temporary hit points equal to your Constitution bonus (minimum 1) until your next turn. These temporary hit points do not stack. You do not gain this bonus if the opponent is helpless or has less than half your Hit Dice.

Debatable. Humans don't usually refer to their young as a litter but the term could be used (probably with disparaging intent) to describe twins, triplets or more. Since the flavor-text and name of the feat do not have any impact on the actual functionality, I am inclined to allow it. It appears to be simply a suggestion of backstory instead of a required backstory.
Born of Frost:
You exude a chill that can harm other creatures.

Prerequisites: Frost giant.

Benefit: Your natural weapons and unarmed strikes deal an additional 1d6 points of cold damage. Creatures that strike you with natural weapons or unarmed strikes take 1 point of cold damage.

Yes, frost giants are humanoids and anyone can deal unarmed strikes or gain natural attacks. The feat does not require a specific feature of frost giants.
Breadth of Experience: No. Even though it is possible for a human to live past 100 years of age, it is very unlikely. There is no way to reconcile that with the feat saying, "still young for your kind".
Bred Commander: Yes.
Brewmaster: Yes.
Brutal Grappler: Yes.
Bullying Blow: Yes.
Burn! Burn! Burn!: Yes.
Burrowing Teeth: No, it requires Tunnel Rat, which in turn requires a racial trait.
Carrion Feeder: Yes.
Casual Illusionist: No, it requires a racial trait.
Catfolk Exemplar:
Your feline traits are more defined and prominent than those of other members of your race.

Prerequisites: Catfolk.

Benefit: You can take the Aspect of the Beast feat even if you do not meet the normal prerequisites. Furthermore, your catlike nature manifests in one of the following ways. You choose the manifestation when you take this feat, and cannot change it later.

Enhanced Senses (Ex): If you have low-light vision, you gain the scent catfolk racial trait. If you have the scent racial trait, you gain low-light vision.
Fast Sprinter (Ex): You gain a 10-foot racial bonus to your speed when using the charge, run, or withdraw actions. If you have the sprinter racial trait, your racial bonus to speed when using the charge, run, or withdraw action increases to a 20-foot bonus.
Sharp Claws (Ex): If you do not have the cat’s claws racial trait or the claws of the beast manifestation from the Aspect of the Beast feat , you gain the cat’s claws racial trait. If you have either the cat’s claws racial trait or the claws of the beast manifestation, your claw damage increases to 1d6.

Special: You can take this feat multiple times. Its effects do not stack. Each time you select it, you must choose a different manifestation.

Yes, but without other means, a human cannot benefit from the first choice. Nothing stops the other two choices from working.
Caustic Slur: Yes.
Cautious Fighter: Yes.
Childlike:
Your resemblance to a human child tends to make others trust you, perhaps more than they should.

Prerequisites: Cha 13, halfling.

Benefit: You can take 10 on Bluff checks to convince others you are telling the truth, so long as your story makes you appear innocent. You gain a +2 bonus on Disguise skill checks to pose as a human child, and ignore the check penalties for disguising yourself as a different race and age category while doing so.

Yes. It might sound funny at first but there are actually quite a few adult actors who are well paid for their naturally youthful looks.
Chilled Rock: No, it requires a special ability.
Claw Pounce:
You can charge and make an attack with your paws.

Prerequisites: Str 13, Dex 15, Nimble Striker, base attack bonus +10, catfolk, cat’s claws racial trait or Aspect of the Beast (claws of the beast manifestation).

Benefit: When you make a charge, you can make a full attack with your claws.

Normal: Charging is a special full-round action that limits you to a single attack.

Yes, but only if you first take either Catfolk Exemplar to gain the cat's claws racial trait or take Aspect of the Beast.
Cleave Through:
You are ferocious at hewing smaller opponents.

Prerequisites: Str 13, Cleave, Power Attack, base attack bonus +11, dwarf.

Benefit: When using Cleave or Great Cleave, if your initial attack hits, you may take a single 5-foot step as a free action before making your additional attacks. If doing so places a creature within your threatened area, that creature becomes a legal target for your additional Cleave attack(s) as long as it meets all the other prerequisites.

Normal: You may only make additional attacks with Cleave against creatures you threaten when you make your initial attack.

Yes, but on an unrelated note, this feat's flavor-text seems to imply that your targets should be smaller than you, which I'm not sure is actually intended as a rule. It's especially awkward considering some GMs might rule that dwarves are smaller than most other medium creatures.
Cloven Helm: Yes
Combat Distraction: Yes
Commander of Goblinkind:

You employ ruthlessness and malice to command other races of goblinoids to do your bidding.

Prerequisites: Cha 13, hobgoblin.

Benefit: You receive a +5 competence bonus on Knowledge (local) checks and Charisma-based skill checks regarding other goblinoids. If you have the Leadership feat, treat your leadership score as 2 higher when taking followers or a cohort with the goblinoid subtype.

I don't think so. It speaks of "other goblinoids" in the flavor text AND the Benefit text. While you count as a hobgoblin for the purposes of taking feats, Racial Heritage does not actually grant you other subtypes so you do not become "goblinoid".
Cooperative Rend: No, it requires a special attack.
Corrupted Flesh:

You have sickened, rotting flesh from some deformity or vestigial limb that has turned fetid and necrotic, yet refuses to heal or fall off.

Prerequisites: Con 15, 6 HD, ogre.

Benefit: You gain the stench special ability (DC 10 + 1/2 your HD + your Constitution modifier).

Yes, ogres are humanoid and this ability only adds a special ability; it does not require any.
Courageous Resolve: No, it requires one of two racial traits.
Dangerous Tail: No, the flavor-text says you train your tail to become a weapon. It does not give you a tail to use.
Dark Adept: No, the flavor-text AND the Benefit text speak of "additional" and "new" spell-like abilities. As a human, you don't have SLA's for the feat to add to. If those two words were not there, I would say yes.
Deafening Explosion: Yes.
Deathless Initiate: Yes.
Deathless Master: Yes.
Deathless Zealot: Yes.
Demoralizing Lash: Yes.
Dented Helm: Yes.
Derro Magister: No, the flavor-text AND the Benefit text speak of "additional" spell-like abilities. As a human, you don't have SLA's for the feat to add to. If those two words were not there, I would say yes.
Desperate Swing: Yes.
Destroyer's Blessing: Yes.
Dire Bat Shape: In my opinion, no. See "Bat Shape" above for my reasoning.
Discerning Eye: Yes.
Diverse Palate: Yes.
Dog Killer, Horse Hunter: Yes.
Dog-Sniff Hate: Yes.
Draconic Aspect:

You possess some of the qualities of your dragon ancestors.

Prerequisites: Kobold.

Benefit: Your scales take on the color and some of the resistances of one of the chromatic dragons. Choose one of the following chromatic dragon types: black (acid), blue (electricity), green (acid), red (fire), or white (cold). Your scales take on the color of that dragon, and you gain resistance 5 to the dragon color’s corresponding energy type.

Special: If you have the dragon-scaled racial trait, your scale color does not change and you gain a +1 natural armor bonus instead.

Debatable. Humans generally don't have scales, but it could be argued that some skin conditions (or inherited genetic traits) could grant them. Personally, I'd probably allow a player to take this, but I'm not confident that it would be RAW.
Draconic Breath: Debatable. See "Draconic Aspect".
Draconic Glide:

You possess draconic defenses and wings that allow you to glide.

Prerequisites: Draconic Aspect, kobold.

Benefit: You gain a +2 bonus against sleep and paralysis effects. You grow a pair of wings that you can use to fall and glide at a safe pace. You can make a DC 15 Fly check to fall safely from any height without taking falling damage, as if using feather fall. When falling safely, you may make an additional DC 15 Fly check to glide, moving 5 feet laterally for every 20 feet you fall.

Special: If you have the gliding wings racial trait, you don't need to make a Fly check to glide, and you can move 10 feet laterally for every 20 feet you fall.

Debatable. See "Draconic Aspect". It does not depend on any pre-existing feature of kobolds and instead specifically causes you to grow anatomy that you wouldn't otherwise have.
Draconic Magic: Debatable. See "Draconic Aspect".
Draconic Paragon: Debatable. See "Draconic Aspect".
Drow Nobility: No, it requires the ability to use drow spell-like abilities.
Earth Child Style: No, it and its enhancement feats require a racial trait.
Earthtouched: Yes.
Effortless Trickery: Yes.
Elven Accuracy: Yes.
Elven Battle Training: Yes.
Elven Spirit:

Although you are of mixed heritage, you are closer to your elven relatives and the magic in their blood flows freely in your veins.

Prerequisites: Half-elf.

Benefit: You possess the elven magic racial trait of the elves, granting you a +2 racial bonus on caster level checks made to overcome spell resistance. In addition, you receive a +2 racial bonus on Spellcraft checks made to identify the properties of magic items. Alternatively, you can instead gain any one racial trait that elves can exchange for the elven magic racial trait.

Special: You can only take this feat at 1st level. If you take this feat, you cannot take the Human Spirit feat.

Yes, and this seems to actually be a way to open up access to some other feats that require elven racial traits.
Empathy: No, its function specifically requires that you have a special quality.
Exile's Path: Yes.
Expanded Resistance: No, it requires a racial trait.
Extra Croaking: No, it requires a special ability.
Extra Feature: No, it requires a special ability.
Extra Gnome Magic: No, it requires racial spell-like abilities.
Fast Change: No, it requires a special ability.
Feline Grace.: Yes.
Ferocious Action, Ferocious Resolve, Ferocious Tenacity: No, it requires a racial trait.
Ferocious Summons: I think so. The flavor-text references ferocity but doesn't seem to require the racial trait. Anyone can be fierce.
Fetid Breath: Yes, see "Corrupted Flesh".
Fight On: Yes.
Final Embrace, Final Embrace Horror, Final Embrace Master: No, naga and serpentfolk are not humanoids. Serpentfolk are monstrous humanoids but that's not the same thing. I won't mention any further serpentfolk feats. You may be able to find another way to gain the constrict special attack to qualify (such as with the Anaconda's Coils), but not through Racial Heritage.
Fire God's Blessing: Yes.
Fire Hand: Yes.
Fire Tamer: Yes.
Flame Heart: Yes.
Focusing Blow: Yes.
Foment the Blood: Yes.
Fortunate One: No, it requires a racial trait.
Fox Shape: Debatable. I think so.
Giant Killer: Yes.
Giant Steps: No, it requires a racial trait.
Gift of Sight: Yes. Gross, but yes.
Gluttonous Gobbler: Yes, ogres are humanoids and it is easy to become large.
Gnawer: Yes.
Gnome Trickster: No, it requires a racial trait.
Gnome Weapon Focus: Yes.
Goblin Cleaver: Yes.
Goblin Gunslinger: Yes, but it's almost definitely not useful. It would only do you any good if you were first reduced in size.
Gore Fiend: Yes.
Gray Dwarf Magic:

You gain a new spell-like ability from the list of duergar racial traits.

Prerequisites: Duergar.

Benefit: Choose one spell-like ability that is usable once per day and is granted by a duergar racial trait you don’t have. You can use that spell-like ability once per day, with a caster level equal to your character level.

Special: You can take this feat multiple times. Each time you do, you must select a spell-like ability that’s usable once per day from a different duergar racial trait.

Debatable. The flavor-text says you are gaining a "new" spell-like ability, which can be read to mean you must already have at least one SLA. The rules-text, on the other hand, seems more lenient in that it only says you gain one from a trait you don't have, which you obviously satisfy. It seems technically allowable but against RAI.
Great Hatred: No, it requires a racial trait.
Great Rend: No, it requires a special attack.
Greater Drow Nobility: No, see "Drow Nobility".
Groundling: No, it requires a racial trait.
Grudge Fighter: Yes.
Guardian of the Wild: Yes.
Guardian of Tradition: No, girtablalu are not humanoids. They are monstrous humanoids. I won't mention any further girtablalu feats.
Half-Drow Paragon: No, it requires racial traits.
Halfling Slinger:

You have honed your racial talent for slingcraft.

Prerequisites: Halfling.

Benefit: You gain a +1 racial bonus on attack rolls made using a sling.

: Yes, I believe so. The flavor-text mentions racial talent for slingcraft but slingcraft isn't actually a racial trait. There are some sling-based traits but they aren't called out as being required.
Hard-Headed: Yes.
Helpless Prisoner: Yes.
Hobgoblin Discipline: Yes.
Horde Charge: Yes.
Human Spirit: Yes. Funny, but yes and it seems to stack with a human's extra skill ranks.
Icy Stare: Yes, see "Born of Frost".
Improved Drow Nobility: No, see "Drow Nobility".
Improved Low Blow: No, it requires a racial trait.
Improved Stonecunning: No, it requires a racial trait.
Improved Umbral Scion: No, see "Drow Nobility".
Innate Flexibility: No, it requires racial spell-like abilities.
Invoke Primal Instinct: Yes.
Ironguts: Yes.
Ironhide: Yes.
Keen Scent: Yes.
Kobold Ambusher: Yes.
Kobold Confidence: Yes.
Kobold Sniper: Yes.
Lead From the Back: Yes.
Leaf Singer: Yes.
Ledge Walker: No, it requires a racial trait.
Letter Fury: Yes.
Life-Dominant Soul:

You gain unusual resiliency from your mortal heritage.

Prerequisites: Dhampir.

Benefit: You are healed by channeled positive energy used to heal living creatures and channeled negative energy used to heal undead, but both only heal half the normal amount. You still take damage from positive energy used to harm undead, such as that from channeled energy and lay on hands.

: No, I don't think so. The rules-text says "you still take damage from positive energy used to…". Since you aren't actually a dhampir, this rule isn't met.
Life's Blood: Yes.
Light Step: Yes.
Lingering Invisibility:

You remain briefly translucent after losing invisibility.

Prerequisites: Duergar.

Benefit: When your invisibility ends, you gain concealment for 1 round per minute of duration the invisibility effect had remaining (minimum 1 round). This only occurs if the invisibility is from your racial spell-like ability or a spell you cast. Effects that negate invisibility negate this concealment.

Yes. It says it can be from a racial spell-like ability OR a spell you cast. You can easily do the latter.
Long-Nose Form: I don't think so, as humans generally don't refer to themselves as having a beak, which is a major part of the feat. Yes, there is slang but no, I wouldn't allow it.
Lucky Halfling: Yes.
Lucky Healer: No, it requires a racial trait.
Lucky Strike: No, it requires a racial trait.
Mage of the Wild: Yes.
Magical Tail: Debatable. I think so.
Master of Wonders: Yes, the Wonderseekers accept members of other races.
Merciless Magic: Yes.
Merciless Precision: Yes.
Mighty Bite: No, it requires a special attack.
Mixed Scales: Debatable. See "Draconic Aspect".
Mother's Gift:

You inherit a special boon from your hag parent.

Prerequisites: Changeling.

Benefit: Your dark legacy manifests in one of the following ways. You choose the manifestation when you choose the feat, and once selected it cannot be changed.

Hag Claws (Ex): You gain a +1 bonus on attack and damage rolls with your claws.
Surprisingly Tough (Ex): Your natural armor bonus increases by +1.
Uncanny Resistance (Su): You gain spell resistance equal to 6 + your character level.

Special: You can gain this feat up to three times. Its effects do not stack. Each time you take the feat, you must select a different manifestation.

Debatable. The flavor-text refers to your "hag parent", not "ancestor" as Racial Heritage implies. Logically, your parent would count as your ancestor but why would a hag have a non-changeling child? How would that work? There's no strict ruling to be had here and it is up to the GM. Regardless, only the third option would normally work for a human, as they don't have claws or natural armor to buff.
Multitalented Mastery: No, it requires a racial trait.
Natural Charmer: Yes.
Natural Jouster: No, centaurs are monstrous humanoids, not humanoids. I won't mention any further centaur feats.
Neither Elf nor Human:

You have removed yourself from your heritage so thoroughly that even magic does not recognize you.

Prerequisites: Exile’s Path, Seen and Unseen, character level 11th, half-elf.

Benefit: You are not considered elven or human for the purpose of harmful spells or effects based on your type, like a bane weapon or a ranger’s favored enemy class feature.

Yes. Funny, but yes.
Night Stalker: Yes, if you can get darkvision and large size.
Nimble Striker: No, it requires a racial trait.
Noble Spell Resistance: No, see "Drow Nobility".
Ogre Crush: Yes, if you become large.
Orc Hewer: Yes.
Orc Weapon Expertise: Yes.
Pack Rat: Yes.
Pass for Human: Yes. Funny, but yes. Regardless, this doesn't actually provide any benefit to most humans because they already look like a human. The Disguise bonus is only for appearing as a human instead of your actual race. The only instance where this would actually help you would be if you took Racial Heritage: Half-Elf, Exile's Path, Seen and Unseen, Neither Elf nor Human, and Pass for Human. This would lead to you appearing to be completely human while counting only as a half-elf for the purpose of bane effects and favored enemy bonuses. Devious, convoluted, and apparently legal. To take it a step further, you could start as a half-orc because they're allowed to take feats intended for humans, like Racial Heritage. ;P
Quick at Hand: Yes.
Raging Brute: Yes.
Raging Regeneration: No, it requires a special ability.
Razortusk: Yes.
Realistic Likeness: No, it requires a racial ability.
Redeemed Kobold: Debatable, see "Draconic Aspect".
Regenerate Muscles: No, it requires a special ability.
Resilient Brute: Yes.
Resolute Rager: Yes.
Risky Striker: Yes.
Roll With It: Yes. Funny, but yes.
Saddle Shrieker: Yes.
Savage Critical: Yes.
Scaled Disciple: Yes.
Scavenger's Eye: Yes.
Sea Hunter: Yes.
Seen and Unseen: Yes.
Shadow Caster: Yes.
Shadowy Dash: Yes.
Shared Insight: Yes.
Shared Manipulation: Yes.
Sharpclaw: Yes.
Sharptooth: Yes.
Shatterspell: Yes.
Sleep Venom: No, it requires a racial ability.
Slurk Rider: Yes.
Smash: Yes.
Smell Fear: Yes.
Snapping Jaws: Yes.
Sociable: Yes.
Sonic Croak: No, it requires a racial ability.
Spider Climber: Yes.
Spider Summoner: Yes.
Spirit of the Wild: Yes.
Spit Venom: Yes.
Sprinting Troll: No, it requires a special ability.
Stabbing Shot: Yes.
Steel Soul: No, it requires a racial trait.
Stoic Pose:

You can hold yourself as still as a statue, evading detection.

Prerequisites: Svirfneblin.

Benefit: By spending 5 rounds finding a suitable location, you can hold yourself so still that you appear to be a Small object such as a pile of rocks. This allows you to make a Stealth check without cover or concealment, as long as you do not move or take any other actions.

Debatable. It says you can appear to be a "Small object" and it capitalizes the word small, meaning that it is referring to the game term. Humans are generally Medium, so I would rule that you would need to be reduced in size before gaining the benefit of this feat, by RAW.
Stone Awareness: Yes, stone giants are humanoids.
Stone Magic: No, even if you had a way to survive long enough, as a human you would not have a way to gain the stone giants' spell-like abilities the rules-text references this feat being in addition to.
Stone Singer: Yes.
Stone Soul: No, humans don't have a natural armor bonus to increase.
Stone-Faced: Yes.
Storm Soul:

Your attunement to storms grants you immunity to some of their effects.

Prerequisites: Cloud or storm giant.

Benefit: You gain immunity to electricity.

Yes. Powerful, but yes.
Storm Warrior:

Your weapons channel the fury of thunderstorms.

Prerequisites: Storm Soul, cloud or storm giant.

Benefit: You can transfer the power of storms from your body to any metal melee weapons you wield, dealing an additional 1d6 points of electricity damage.

Yes. Powerful, but yes.
Stunning Croak: No, it requires a racial ability.
Sure and Fleet: No, it requires a racial trait.
Sure on Ice: Yes.
Surprise Strike: Yes.
Swift Kitsune Shapechanger: No, it modifies a special ability humans don't have.
Swift Swimmer: Not unless you can gain a swim speed.
Sympathetic Rage: Yes.
Tail Terror: Debated in the past, but generally agreed to be no. Humans do not have the right kind of "tail" to slap with, regardless of how strong it became. You would need another method of gaining a tail before being able to benefit from this feat.
Tangle Feet: Not unless you reduce your size to Small or smaller.
Tantrum: Yes.
Taskmaster: Yes.
Tenacious Survivor: Yes.
Tengu Raven Form: Yes, see "Tengu Wings".
Tengu Wings:

You can grow wings that allow you to fly.

Prerequisites: Character level 5th, tengu.

Benefit: Once per day, you can sprout a pair of giant black crow’s wings, granting you a fly speed of 30 feet (average maneuverability). This spell-like ability otherwise functions as beast shape I (though you do not gain any other benefits of that spell) with a caster level equal to your level.

Yes. This doesn't call out any part of tengu anatomy that humans do not possess and instead causes you to grow new anatomy as a new spell-like ability.
Terrorizing Display: Yes.
Thrill of the Kill: Yes.
Throat Pouch: No, it requires a racial ability.
Threatening Illusion: Yes.
Tough as Iron: Yes.
Toxic Recovery: No, it requires a racial trait.
Trap Wrecker: Yes.
Tree Hanger: No, you have to have a proper tail, which this feat does not provide.
Tunnel Rat: No, it requires a racial trait.
Twin Thunders, Twin Thunders Flurry, Twin Thunders Master: No, it requires a racial trait.
Umbral Scion: No, see "Drow Nobility".
Uncanny Defense: Yes.
Unusual Heritage (Changeling):

Your heritage is strange or difficult to trace, and people fear your otherworldly powers.

Prerequisites: Changeling.

Benefit: Your mother was part of a powerful hag coven, and it shows when you are near your kin. As long as you are within 30 feet of at least two other changelings, you gain a +2 bonus on concentration checks and dispel checks. If at least two of these changelings also have this feat, these bonuses increase to +4.

Special: This version of Unusual Origin is a teamwork feat.

Debatable for the same reason as with "Mother's Gift". If you can get past the story-strangeness of a hag being a human's mother (or your human mother being part of a hag coven), this otherwise would work. It's up to the GM.
Unusual Heritage (Dhampir):

Your heritage is strange or difficult to trace, and people fear your otherworldly powers.

Prerequisites: Dhampir.

Benefit: Your undead progenitor left you with more than a hint of vampiric nature. You gain a natural bite attack that deals 1d4 points of damage. Once per day upon making a successful bite attack, you can choose to deal an additional 1d4 points of bleed damage to the creature struck.

Special: You can only select this feat at 1st level.

Yes.
Unusual Heritage (Gillman):

Your heritage is strange or difficult to trace, and people fear your otherworldly powers.

Prerequisites: Gillman.

Benefit: As a so-called “Low Azlanti,” you have abilities supposedly tied to mysterious ancestors who still watch over you and your ilk. Your divination spells and spell-like abilities manifest at 1 caster level higher. In addition, once per day while fully immersed in water, you can cast augury as a spell-like ability.

Yes.
Vampiric Companion: No, it grants traits to your animal companion or familiar related to your own weaknesses, which humans don't have.
Vandal: Yes.
Vast Hatred: No, it requires a racial trait.
Veiled Vileness: Yes.
Vestigial Head: Yes.
Vulpine Pounce: No, see "Swift Kitsune Shapechanger".
War Singer: Yes.
Warleader's Rage: Yes.
Warmonger: Yes.
Well-Prepared: Yes.
Witty Feint: Yes.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

This discussion has been had before. Here is the relevant rules text in the 5th paragraph down the page:

Quote:
When retraining multiple character options (class features, feats, classes, etc.) in one continuous period, all of the new selections are made at the end of that period in an order decided by the player. If this period is interrupted for any reason all choices must be made immediately. In this way players can retrain class features and their prerequisites at the same time.

Normally, you may not retrain prerequisites, but there is an exception if you retrain multiple things at the same time. Do you have anything that depends on Weapon Finesse? If so, retrain that at the same time as your Weapon Finesse retraining and you're good. The GM may even decide to give a discount as per the third paragraph on the same page linked above.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Diego Rossi wrote:

The text outside the rule mechanics generally give an indication about the RAI of the ability. It will not supersede the text of the rules, but sometime it clarifies them.

As we don't even have a unified definition of wielding, you really think we can get a codified way to make the feat and ability text so that what is "fluff" and what is "rule text" is always clear?

Let's take the Cleave through feat. it is a egregious example of a badly written feat.
The intent seem to be that it work against smaller opponents (BTW, Dwarves are medium sized, like human, so it being a dwarven feat isn't particularly limiting) but the rule text don't give any limit. As written it work against everything. it seem a reasonable way to use it too. But if that is the intention the descriptive text should be redone as it can generate confusion.

I agree that clarification on this point is a long-shot but it would be nice to have, even if the only response we received was more insight on Paizo's internal rules on how they write feats. If we got a better and more consistent idea of their intent, we could better interpret the fruits of their labor instead of having to turn every odd-numbered level into an exercise in debate and house-ruling.

I know dwarves are medium-sized, but so are most enemies they will face. They would not be able to use this feat against humans, for instance, or even other dwarves or duergar. That wording would be expected for a giant's feat, but seems odd in this context. If it had received a second reference in the Benefit text, it would be perfectly clear what the intent was.

Here's another example of a feat that has debatable descriptive text:

Born Alone

Quote:

You are so tough and vicious that you killed and ate the rest of your litter while still in the womb.

Prerequisite: Orc.

Benefit: Whenever you kill or knock unconscious an opponent with a melee attack, you gain temporary hit points equal to your Constitution bonus (minimum 1) until your next turn. These temporary hit points do not stack. You do not gain this bonus if the opponent is helpless or has less than half your Hit Dice.

Do you have to actually have the backstory described above in order to take this feat? For that matter, do you even have to have been born alone, or is it just artistic license?


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Here's an example I noticed while looking into racial feats recently:

Cleave Through (Combat)

Quote:

You are ferocious at hewing smaller opponents.

Prerequisites: Str 13, Cleave, Power Attack, base attack bonus +11, dwarf.

Benefit: When using Cleave or Great Cleave, if your initial attack hits, you may take a single 5-foot step as a free action before making your additional attacks. If doing so places a creature within your threatened area, that creature becomes a legal target for your additional Cleave attack(s) as long as it meets all the other prerequisites.

Normal: You may only make additional attacks with Cleave against creatures you threaten when you make your initial attack.

Are the enemies you use this feat against really required to be smaller than you? If so, this is an unfortunate racial feat for Dwarves.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Boomerang Nebula wrote:
For those of you who believe that killing the ape is a good act, how do you differentiate between a good act, a neutral act and an evil act in that circumstance?

I'll go ahead and address this because while I didn't say it was necessarily a good act, I did say I could come up with justifications for how members of any alignment could be justified in killing the ape.

Chaotic Evil: It looked at me funny.
Neutral Evil: We can't leave witnesses.
Lawful Evil: Anyone who attacks me dies.
Chaotic Neutral: They're running off with our loot!
Neutral: It's an enemy and it hasn't surrendered.
Lawful Neutral: They'll probably be a threat later. Better to deal with it now.
Chaotic Good: It's injured, just lost its only friend, and we have next to no hope of getting through to it. We have to put it out of its misery.
Neutral Good: We managed to defend ourselves against this threat but the next people to encounter it might not be as strong as we are. We must do it for the public good.
Lawful Good: Its master was evil and taught it to do evil. Though ultimately not its fault, we must stop it, tragic though that may be.

If it's all the same to everyone else, I'll stay out of the real-life analogies. All I will say is that I would expect many different beliefs and opinions on this topic, and that the GM should try to work with the players to craft a story they all can enjoy.

1 to 50 of 625 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>