Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Goblin

DarkKnight27's page

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber. FullStar Pathfinder Society GM. 179 posts (180 including aliases). 2 reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 7 Pathfinder Society characters.


RSS

1 to 50 of 179 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Unless a creature has Blindsight or something of that nature you can use the stealth skill as long as you are not being observed, have cover or have concealment.

Blur says in the spell that it grants you concealment so that one would work. Displacement gives you a 50% miss chance "like" concealment but it's not concealment. Wind Stance I don't think would work because even though it provides you with concealment, it's only against Ranged Attacks. Walking through a Fog Cloud or Obscuring Mist spell would work because even withing 5' of a creature you have concealment.

Just my thoughts.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Personally I look at similar to wraithstrike. An animal companion is just an animal, it doesn't matter how "smart" you make them they're just an animal and their brains work differently. The only way for an animal to know a language is through the spell "Awaken" or something similar. So basically, you can have an INT 10 _____, but it will only be able to do things that it's commanded to or things that are natural to it like an INT 2 version.

Now if you do decide to Awaken and animal companion I use the Animal Archive as a guide and go with that the animal can no longer serve as an Animal Companion and you have to take the Leadership Feat and treat it as a Cohort.

To me, this keeps things simple and elegant.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
sageann wrote:
We did not know about the doubled carrying capacity at the time but I have found out about it since. However doubling the carrying capacity is not coming anywhere close to compensating for your gear's weight multiplying by 8. As it stands this spell is better for attacking a fighter then it is for buffing him.

Couple of things...

1) Going from say medium sized to large size only doubles the weight of armor and weapons (and other equipment).

2) The spell says

Quote:
This spell causes instant growth of a humanoid creature, doubling its height and multiplying its weight by 8.

So it's the creature's weight (not it's gear) that increases x8.

So if the fighter weighed 200 pounds it would increase to 1,600 pounds. Full Plate armor would increase from 50 pounds to 100 pounds.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

You could make the net a chain net, same effect, but maybe heavy enough to drag the PC's under and kill them all. It would also be harder if not impossible to break with a strength check.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Even it it was a dehydration effect, that's not something that Life Bubble protects you from as you still have to eat and drink while under it's effects so I don't think it would protect you from the fatigue or exhaustion effects.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Major Doom wrote:
Theconiel wrote:
Your mental stats (INT, WIS, CHA) are unchanged. You lose your +2 bonus to CON, and gain +2 DEX.
Are you saying I would not lose the +2 racial bonus to WIS and the -4 racial penalty to CHA when my character was a duergar?

Here's the spell's text:

Quote:
A reincarnated creature recalls the majority of its former life and form. It retains any class abilities, feats, or skill ranks it formerly possessed. Its class, base attack bonus, base save bonuses, and hit points are unchanged. Strength, Dexterity, and Constitution scores depend partly on the new body. First eliminate the subject's racial adjustments (since it is no longer necessarily of his previous race) and then apply the adjustments found below to its remaining ability scores. The subject of the spell gains two permanent negative levels when it is reincarnated. If the subject is 1st level, it takes 2 points of Constitution drain instead (if this would reduce its Con to 0 or less, it can't be reincarnated). A character who died with spells prepared has a 50% chance of losing any given spell upon being reincarnated. A spellcasting creature that doesn't prepare spells (such as a sorcerer) has a 50% chance of losing any given unused spell slot as if it had been used to cast a spell.

So any stat bonuses you had from your original race are removed and then you use the chart and apply the bonus to the physical stat as noted. So you would loose the Duergar's +2 CON, +2 WIS and -4 CHA because you're no longer a duergar and you get a +2 to DEX because you're not a half-elf.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I don't believe that Life Bubble would protect you. It would open up the door to Life Bubble protecting you from too many other things that it shouldn't protect you from. Think of it this way, if you don't have to breath in the spell or effect for it to harm you Life Bubble probably doesn't provide protection against it then.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Malovec wrote:

When you move diagonally, do you have to continue the 1-2-1-2 movement if you have started new series of diagonal movements?

Even though this question should be very easy to answer, explaining it always seems very difficult, so I am just going to link a picture and ask if it is right or not.

Picture to better illustrate what I am asking.

In the picture you provided, assuming the creature can move 110' in a round, the picture on the right is the correct measure of distance. At least using the rules for movement. The 1-2-1-2 movement for diagonals resets with each round. So for one long continuous movement you have to keep track of your diagonals.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Rikkan wrote:
Spook205 wrote:

I'd argue that alchemist's fire is intrinsically a template attack though. It hits a central square/creature and the adjacent squares. As such, it would get the 1.5 bonus that gets applied and be on full damage.

Alternatively if you want to get all RAWy, you could throw it at a square, incurring the 1d6x1.5 (as a single square could qualify as an area for the swarm rule) and then still take the splash damage from other squares it occupies.

That is not how splash weapons work.

Here is how they work:

you either target a creature and the direct hit damage only hurts that creature (so if there are two creatures in that square, it'll still hit only 1).

Or you target a grid intersection (not a square) and if you target a grid intersection, creatures in all adjacent squares are dealt the splash damage, and the direct hit damage is not dealt to any creature. You can't target a grid intersection occupied by a creature, such as a Large or larger creature; in this case, you're aiming at the creature.

So I have one of the most narrow readings of the rules of most people I know but even I can see that the description of swarms specifically calls out and says that they take an extra 50% of damage inflicted by a splash weapon, and as others have pointed out it does not say that it takes an extra 50% of damage from the splash damage of a splash weapon.

There's also this;

Quote:
A splash weapon is a ranged weapon that breaks on impact, splashing or scattering its contents over its target and nearby creatures or objects.

So a splash weapon is not like a sword or an arrow that can only hit one target at a time. By it's own description a splash weapon covers and area.

I understand where you are coming from (since swarms made up of creatures smaller than tiny are immune to weapon damage. like a sword or an arrow) but the fact that the description of swarms says that it's vulnerable to damage dealt from a splash weapon and that the both in name and description say that it effects an area, seem to make it pretty clear that they can work on swarms. I think you just need to try and take a step back and look at this from a different angle.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Shameless bump.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Hoping to get more feedback/input on this.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

The problem is at 8th level, when you get the ability, combat usually doesn't last longer than 3 or 4 rounds. Also, there may be tactical reasons to drop it sooner than just letting it run out.

And yes, normally it is a standard action to dismiss a spell and it's also a standard action to concentrate on a spell.

So I'm wondering, is this ability an ability that lasts only as long as you concentrate on it (a.k.a. spend a standard action each round to maintain it) or do you "cast" it like it was a Wall of Fire and then have to spend some type of action to dismiss it?

Grand Lodge

3 people marked this as FAQ candidate.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Quote:

Evocation School

Evokers revel in the raw power of magic, and can use it to create and destroy with shocking ease.

Intense Spells (Su): Whenever you cast an evocation spell that deals hit point damage, add 1/2 your wizard level to the damage (minimum +1). This bonus only applies once to a spell, not once per missile or ray, and cannot be split between multiple missiles or rays. This bonus damage is not increased by Empower Spell or similar effects. This damage is of the same type as the spell. At 20th level, whenever you cast an evocation spell you can roll twice to penetrate a creature's spell resistance and take the better result.

Force Missile (Sp): As a standard action you can unleash a force missile that automatically strikes a foe, as magic missile. The force missile deals 1d4 points of damage plus the damage from your intense spells evocation power. This is a force effect. You can use this ability a number of times per day equal to 3 + your Intelligence modifier.

Elemental Wall (Sp): At 8th level, you can create a wall of energy that lasts for a number of rounds per day equal to your wizard level. These rounds do not need to be consecutive. This wall deals acid, cold, electricity, or fire damage, determined when you create it. The elemental wall otherwise functions like wall of fire.

So the Elemental Wall ability works like Wall of Fire with some exceptions, I get that, but does this wall require concentration each round to maintain it? Also, if it doesn't, what type of action is it to dismiss this wall (the normal Wall of Fire isn't dismisable) since you don't have to use all of the rounds available to you all at once.

Thanks for the input!

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Ah! I did misread it.

Thanks!

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

So I just got Book 4 in the mail and I'm flipping though it and start reading through the Treasure section and come across this item and I have to ask: Am I missing something with this item on page 62 or is this literally a useless magic item?

It allows you to deliver a touch spell without provoking an AoO, which you can do any way.

Can someone clarify this or errata/FAQ this item.

Thanks!

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I knew I saw it somewhere!

Thanks Nefreet!

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I'm sure this has been asked and answered before but I can't find it.

How is the DC for an Aasimar's Spell-like ability? In my case I have a Peri-blooded Aasimar with the Pryrotechnic Sp Ability. I know that it uses my class level as the caster level but how is the DC set?

I would guess that it's 10 + Spell level + (something), but I'm wondering if that "something" is the character's CHA bonus, WIS bonus or INT bonus? Or does the character get to use the better of the three?

Please let me know where this is stated too.

Thanks!

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Mojorat wrote:
All the spells.listed.in non detection are for detecting simone remotely. It doesn't make you invisible.

Since when is Detect Evil (or other alignment) spells or Detect Magic "remote viewing"? They are AoE divinations that come from you. See Invisibility and True Seeing are both divinations and even though they're not called out specifically they would still be blocked by Nondetection.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Korthis wrote:
if that's the case then wouldn't invisibility + nondetection work against see invisible/ trueseeing

It sure does. It still allows a caster level check at least, but it does work.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Of course Nondetection works against True Seeing. Think of it this way, someone or something cast any of the polymorph school of spells on themselves, normaly True Seeing would discover this as it would see right through it, but the the person or creature then casts Nondetection they at least have a chance as the person or creature with True Seeing now has make a caster level check to get past the Nondetection spell and automatically see through the polymorph spell.

If it didn't then any spell that True Seeing works against, even higher level spells would be useless. And since True Seeing is only a 5th level spell (for clerics) that's a lot of high level spells that would be "trumped" by a mere 5th level spell.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

It's unclear if this is an EX or SU ability of the Mohrg, but since it's not a poison something of that nature I'd be willing to bet it's a SU ability. In either case though I believe that Remove Paralysis is what you'd need to get rid of it.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
GoldEdition42 wrote:
So I can have my opponent shaken for dozens of rounds by the time combat is over? Can someone please tell if this is correct and, if so, where the heck it reads this?

It looks like you're right, that you could potentially use Intimidate to demoralize an opponent for dozens of rounds. However you have to keep in mind that every check you make after the first has the DC increased by 5 so your DC will get extremely hard extremely quick and your GM may rule that if you fail the opponent is no longer demoralized or that you may not attempt to demoralize the opponent again until the DC reset (I've seen GM's rule this way).

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

When a creature has a slam attack, is it considered a weapon? I'm curious if the spells Magic Weapon, Greater Magic Weapon or feats like Arcane Strike would work on a creatures slam attacks since these call out "weapons" as their targets.

Thanks!

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Thanks all I appreciate the links!

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I am almost positive this has been asked and answered (by Devs?) before but I can't seem to find the thread.

If a druid or ranger increases the INT of their animal companion to 3 or more (either through stat bumps or magic like Anthropomorphic Animal that's made permanent) does the druid or ranger still need to make Handle Animal checks to command or push his animal companion and can the companion still be considered an animal companion?

If you could post links to previous thread that would be great!

Thanks!

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Ok, so then summoned animals are more useful, in this regards, than Animal Companions? Because with an Animal Companion you would need to "Push" the animal to attack an "unnatural" creature unless it had the "Attack Any Target" trick.

That doesn't seem right to me.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I have a question on summoned animals and how they interact with "unnatural" creatures.

Summon Nature's Ally:
This spell summons to your side a natural creature (typically an animal, fey, magical beast, outsider with the elemental subtype, or a giant). The summoned ally appears where you designate and acts immediately, on your turn. It attacks your opponents to the best of its ability. If you can communicate with the creature, you can direct it not to attack, to attack particular enemies, or to perform other actions as you command.

A summoned monster cannot summon or otherwise conjure another creature, nor can it use any teleportation or planar travel abilities. Creatures cannot be summoned into an environment that cannot support them. Creatures summoned using this spell cannot use spells or spell-like abilities that duplicate spells that have expensive material components (such as wish).

The spell conjures one of the creatures from the 1st Level list on Table: Nature's Ally. You choose which kind of creature to summon, and you can change that choice each time you cast the spell. All the creatures on the table are neutral unless otherwise noted.

When you use a summoning spell to summon a creature with an alignment or elemental subtype, it is a spell of that type. All creatures summoned with this spell without alignment subtypes have an alignment that matches yours, regardless of their usual alignment. Summoning these creatures makes the summoning spell's type match your alignment.

Handle Animal: Attack Trick:
Attack The animal attacks apparent enemies. You may point to a particular creature that you wish the animal to attack, and it will comply if able. Normally, an animal will attack only humanoids, monstrous humanoids, giants, or other animals. Teaching an animal to attack all creatures (including such unnatural creatures as undead and aberrations) counts as two tricks.

So if a druid cast's Summon Nature's Ally V and summons an Dire Lion, in my mind there's no question that this animal would attack any humanoid, monstrous humanoid, or animal (such as a Fire Giant, Human, Goblin, or even a Medusa) because the Handle Animal skill says it will but here's where my question comes into play.

What if the druid want's the Dire Lion to attack a Demon, Ooze, Dragon or Zombie? Would the druid have to "push" the animal using the Handle Animal skill's rules (a DC 25 check)? Or would the spell "just work" and override the fact that an animal won't normally attack an unnatural creature?

Again, I don't see this as a problem if the the druid summons an Elemental, Magical Beast or Fey with the Summon Nature's Ally spell but I'm asking specifically in regards to the normal animals that can can be summoned with this spell.

If this has already been covered somewhere please post a link.

Thanks for the thoughts.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Thymus Vulgaris wrote:

ZOMG GUYS, I JUST DISCOVERED SOMETHING!!!

Judgment wrote:
Justice: This judgment spurs the inquisitor to seek justice, granting a +1 sacred bonus on all attack rolls. This bonus increases by +1 for every five inquisitor levels she possesses. At 10th level, this bonus is doubled on all attack rolls made to confirm critical hits.

The inquisitor's judgment grants a +1 sacred bonus on ALL attack rolls. There is no specified target and no range, which means that all attack rolls in the world receive this bonus for as long as the inquisitor is in combat. Isn't that amazing!?

</sarcasm>

lol, yeah that's about the sum of it.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
yumad wrote:

"If this target is evil, the paladin adds her Cha bonus (if any) to her attack rolls and adds her paladin level to all damage rolls made against the target of her smite. If the target of smite evil is an outsider with the evil subtype, an evil-aligned dragon, or an undead creature, the bonus to damage on the first successful attack increases to 2 points of damage per level the paladin possesses. Regardless of the target, smite evil attacks automatically bypass any DR the creature might possess."

Now I am aware that the intent of smite evil was likely only to apply to the paladin, but with the wording the way it is the RAW interpretation is that any damage roll against a smote target gets the paladin's level in damage and bypasses DR. This is outrageously strong and how we have been using it in my campaign (I am the paladin). Looking over the aura of justice class feature and also the oath of vengeance archetype feature powerful justice it is very clear the intent of smite evil isn't to give the bolded benefits to the party out of the box but require the use of the two mentioned class features to do so.

Has there been any official developer response to this silly wording

So I've emphasized the first sentence;

"If this target is evil, the paladin adds her Cha bonus (if any) to her attack rolls and adds her paladin level to all damage rolls made against the target of her smite."

This ENTIRE sentence refers to the the Paladin (only) who has smote an evil creature. There's no wiggle room here and no need for anyone to FAQ it. It refers to "her" (a.k.a. The Paladin) four separate times in the above sentence and can only be misconstrued if you try to misrepresent what it says by separating out a single sentence into different sentences that don't exist.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Doesn't the Thassalonian school specialization stuff have opposed schools? Or are they just truly banned schools?

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Sure, Improved Familiar reads:

"Improved Familiar wrote:

This feat allows you to acquire a powerful familiar, but only when you could normally acquire a new familiar.

Prerequisites: Ability to acquire a new familiar, compatible alignment, sufficiently high level (see below).

Benefit: When choosing a familiar, the creatures listed here are also available to you. You may choose a familiar with an alignment up to one step away on each alignment axis (lawful through chaotic, good through evil).

Improved familiars otherwise use the rules for regular familiars, with two exceptions: if the creature's type is something other than animal, its type does not change; and improved familiars do not gain the ability to speak with other creatures of their kind (although many of them already have the ability to communicate).

There's nothing that calls out what type of caster you need to be other than you need to be an arcane caster of at least "x" level to get "x" familiar. If your alternate class feature says you are treated as a wizard (or whatever arcane caster) of "x" level then you're good to go.

You just may not be able to pick a familiar off the list that Improved Familiar has until you're 9th level or higher because of the "-x" clause.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Not all feats are necessarily meant for PC's. This feat jumped out at me as a great way to add extra damage to a sniping assassin (prestige class assassin).

Is it the be all, end all of archery feats, nope, but it's nice for flavor.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Changing Man wrote:
DarkKnight27 wrote:
Can you provide more info, such as the feat/ability text or at least what book it's out of.

That's referring to the Tattooed Sorcerer from Inner Sea Magic.

I'm quite glad for the clarification on this as well. On a related note, could a Tattooed Sorcerer 'call' his/her dead familiar back to tattoo form, to try and raise later (like if it was killed in the middle of a dungeon, and they needed to get someplace safe, for example)? Would being in tatt form for X amount of time count as 'time dead' for raising purposes, or would it be 'in stasis' until then?

I don't think that the caster can "call" her familiar back into tattoo form. The ability says that it's a move action on the familiars part to turn into a tattoo and back again. So if the tattoo is dead it can't take the required move action to turn into a tattoo.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Alright, so it looks like if it's in tattoo form, other than granting the caster the familiar bonuses, it's just a tattoo. It can't be targeted or take any action other than to transform itself back into an actual creature.

So I'd say that if the caster is killed while the familiar is a tattoo it doesn't matter for the familiar, it's the caster who's dead. If the familiar dies while it's in it's familiar form, then it's dead because at the time it was a creature that could be targeted and take actions so it's just like any other familiar that can die.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Can you provide more info, such as the feat/ability text or at least what book it's out of.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

There's a feat from Ultimate Combat called Cleaving Finish that you would want.

It's basically the old version (D&D 3.5) of Cleave, here's the text;

Cleaving Finish:
When you strike down an opponent, you can continue your swing into another target.

Prerequisites: Str 13, Cleave, Power Attack.

Benefit: If you make a melee attack, and your target drops to 0 or fewer hit points as a result of your attack, you can make another melee attack using your highest base attack bonus against another opponent within reach. You can make only one extra attack per round with this feat.

This would allow you to use TWF on a full-round attack and still cleave if you drop the opponent to zero or less.

I think there may be a "Greater" or "Improved" version of Cleaving Finish, but I'm not 100% sure.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

What about circumstance bonuses (penalties)? They stack with each other unless they come from "essentially the same source". Also, Dodge bonuses stack with each other as well.

These are two examples of the same "type" of bonus stacking with itself.

When it comes to the miss chance from Displacement and Blur stacking I would say that they stack because they come from different sources (one from not being where you seem to be and the other from concealment).

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
jlighter wrote:
The thing is, the Displacement spell specifically calls out that it's functioning as Total Concealment, with only the listed exception to that condition. Entropic Shield has similar, although slightly different wording: "20 % miss chance (similar to the effects of concealment)."

I disagree. If Displacement said that if functions "as Total Concealment" there wouldn't be any disagreement about the spell. But it doesn't, it says that if provides a miss chance and unlike actual total concealment you can still target the subject of the spell. Hence it does not provide total concealment.

Anyway, I think we've driven this discussion not just into the ground but right through it and out the other side.

I do get your point on stacking miss chances, I'm not sure if I completely agree with it in the case of Displacement/Blur but I can at least understand it.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Darksol the Painbringer wrote:

What I said was Total Concealment applies when you have line of effect, but not line of sight. In this case, Magic Missile has clear line of effect, but when you have no line of sight, Total Concealment applies, and Magic Missile states it always hits, except in cases of Total Concealment or Total Cover. Ergo, you would technically still fire the spell, but it would not hit. There's a joke in here somewhere...

The thing is, when said Wizard is Blind, the Wizard treats all other creatures as if they had Total Concealment from the Wizard, and unless the Wizard has Blindsense, he cannot target creatures with Magic Missile. I'm not sure how that's tripping you up.

Also remember that, as you gladly pointed out, Displacement treats the target as if they had Total Concealment, with the granted exception of being able to be targeted. Problem is, being able to target them doesn't mean you are able to see them, which means we're running right back into square 1 again of Blur's effects being superseded.

Of course, that's just following the RAW interpretation of the matter, in which is about as coherent as trying to understand what this clown is trying to say or do.

@ Cevah: While Blur, as you kindly pointed out in JJ's 2nd, negates Sneak Attack and Displacement does not, Blur still gives a miss chance via Concealment, and Displacement gives its own miss chance. JJ's 1st, which mentions 3 separate types of miss chances (Entropic Shield, Displacement, Blink), all only amount to the highest amount (50%), meaning that while Blur still grants Concealment miss chance of 20%, it won't increase above the 50% mark set by Displacement. I could also then throw in there that since Blur's Concealment miss chance being amplified by Displacement equates to the character receiving the Total Concealment condition, Blur's effects would cease to function. But at this point it doesn't really matter.

If a wizard or any other caster or character that is blind is trying to cast a spell, use an ability, or whatever that has to be targeted (such as; Target: One or more creatures) they can't use that spell, power or ability at all because all targets have total concealment and cannot be targeted (without the help of some other type of magic or extraordinary senses).

You claim that targeting a creature doesn't require sight but then I'm going to need you to walk me through how you are targeting anything if you can't see it. The rules provide targeting a square that you suspect a creature is in, but that is NOT the same as targeting a creature. So please explain this to me, is your sense of smell enough to target a creature you can't see? Your sense of hearing? Your sense of taste? Please, explain this to me.

Also, please don't put words in my mouth to try and twist this into something it's not. I NEVER said that Displacement provides total concealment. Quite the opposite I've said repeatedly that it provides a miss chance but it is NOT the same as total concealment.

So, again, unless you have something new to add (that doesn't involve misrepresenting what I've previously stated) I think we're going to have to agree to disagree.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Darksol the Painbringer wrote:
Mojorat wrote:
You and the images are not seperate they can't be targeted seperately. If concealmdnt works there are no benefits to the hit.

Except the book calls them out as entities different from the caster, ergo they are separate from the caster himself. They have their own rules, such as they stick in your square, mimick (but not replicate) your actions, movements, etc., and calling them out as "not separate," even though yes, they occupy the same square as the caster, is horsepuckey. (Even now, we're referring to the images and the caster as two separate subjects, which is more than enough proof that they aren't one and the same.)

That bolded part is a lie also. If I miss via Concealment, effects such as Snake Style (or whatever it is Monks use these...

Mirror Image says that it creates illusory doubles that inhabit your square. These doubles are supposed to be just that, doubles. That means that if you are effected by a Blur spell of Fire Shield spell your illusory doubles look like they are as well. Otherwise you just target the one that looks different and ignore the rest because they're obviously not the right one to attack.

That being said I still say it goes in this order:
1)Roll to attack
2)Roll Miss Chance (if successful go to step 3)
3)Determine if the attack is a hit, near miss, or miss
4a)If it's a hit, roll for images and resolve normally
4b)If it's a near miss (a.k.a. by 5 or less) destroy an image
4c)If it's a miss resolve normaly

Because the images are doubles of you and look like they're under the same effects as you then if you have the benefits of concealment so do the images. Simple as that.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Darksol the Painbringer wrote:

How about you change the spell, which Magic Missile would specifically call out in this instance as being unable to target:

Magic Missile wrote:
The missile strikes unerringly, even if the target is in melee combat, so long as it has less than total cover or total concealment.

Since the Wizard is Blind, all enemies are treated as having Total Concealment, ergo he cannot cast Magic Missile unless he possesses Blindsense to the respective range, and even then, by RAW, Displacement would cover this base too, unless he dispels it. To be honest, this would be another great topic for discussion. Perhaps you should make a thread for it?

How about you change it to a more fitting spell, such as Scorching Ray or Acid Arrow: Even Blind Wizards can still cast these spells at enemies, targeting the squares he thinks they're in, and this enemy has Displacement cast on him. Since he gets the Total Concealment condition (regardless of how altered) from both the Wizard's Blindness, as well as Displacement, only one miss chance is rolled, because these two separate, yet equal levels of Concealment, don't stack to a 75% (or 100%) miss chance.

You'd be correct, if Displacement was not supposed to function as a(n) (slightly) altered Total Concealment. It's also important to point out that being targeted normally isn't really clearly defined, nor does it solve all of the qualms you say it does

Magic Missile is an appropriate spell for the example I'm using. You are saying that you don't need to see the creature that you're targeting. Scorching Ray and Acid Arrow are not targeted spells like Magic Missile is.

By your interpretation of the rules attacking a creature that is under the effects of a Displacement spell is the same as attacking while blinded because it provides total concealment. So that would mean any targeted spell would not work against that creature such as Magic Missile, Charm Person, Charm Monster, Dominate Person, Hold Person, Feather Fall, etc. because the subject of the Displacement spell has Total Concealment. This is not how it's supposed to work because you are specifically allowed to target the subject of Displacement normally. You can run it however you want in you're own home game but no matter what you say the Displacement spell specifically says it's not actually total concealment that you are granted.

I understand how you're interpreting the spells but I don't think you're interpreting them correctly. So unless you have a new point that you haven't brought up yet I think we will just have to agree to disagree.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Darksol the Painbringer wrote:

How is being targeted normally equating to being seen? You can have line of effect, but not line of sight. That is the definition of having Total Concealment, and in that respect, RAW, Displacement does not change it.

That exception only allows enemies to target the character specifically, and not have to target the square in which he may or may not reside. He otherwise still isn't visible to the enemies, ergo Blur wouldn't function.

What? Wait, so according to you, you don't need to see something to target it? That's ridiculous.

Please explain to me how a blind human wizard with no other magical aid can target a creature with Magic Missile without seeing it?

If this is how you run the game and your players are OK with it, that's fine, this game is meant to be adjusted to the play style of those who play it (with the exception of PFS which tries to bring everything under one big umbrella) but that's not what the rules say.

Displacement Does not block line of sight or line of effect to the subject of the spell. It's not actually total concealment. You can clearly see the target of Displacement it's just about 2 feet away from where you think it is, hence the miss chance, but if you cast a Magic Missile at it you would hit it fine because you have both line of sight and line of effect to the target.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Darksol the Painbringer wrote:

@ DarkKnight27: I already linked both of the spell descriptions. Displacement says "as if the target had Total Concealment," and then says "Unlike Total Concealment, blah blah blah."

Except for the "Unlike Total Concealment" clause, the creature is, for all intents and purposes, treated to have Total Concealment, including being affected by the condition itself, as well as not able to be seen, except for creatures affected by True Seeing.

Blur says if you aren't seen by the target, its concealment doesn't apply. Since Total Concealment says you have line of effect, but not line of sight, you aren't seen, and when you aren't seen, Blur doesn't work.

In addition, other than the listed "can be targeted normally" clause, both effects grant a Concealment effect (Blur grants Concealment, Displacement affects creature as if it had Total Concealment, etc.), and Concealment effects don't stack.

@ Mojorat: Ignoring the whole "Miss by -X" argument, it doesn't change the factor that the miss chance only affects me, myself, and I. The images don't get that benefit, ergo they are still affected by the hit. My point still stands, whether I extrapolate it one way or the other.

So in order to make your side of this discussion work we have to ignore part of the description of the spell? That doesn't sound right to me.

You have to take the whole description of the spell, power, ability, ect, into account for determining how the thing works. There are plenty of powers and spell out there that if you ignore part of the description or drop off the last sentence or two work entirely differently than RAW.

So lets look at this again using your above argument; The subject of a Displacement spell cannot be affected by a Blur spell because the subject already has Total Concealment and cannot be seen. Well then how is the subject of Displacement able to be targeted normally? It's because Unlike ACTUAL total concealment, displacement does not prevent enemies from targeting the creature normally. This is the full quote from the spell which to me implies that the subject of Displacement doesn't actually have Total Concealment because if they did then they could NOT be targeted.

The spell Indivisibly provides Total Concealment. So if you had Invisibility and Blur cast at the same time you would NOT get the benefit of both. You would get which ever was more beneficial to you (or neither if the thing attacking you had True Seeing or some other way to ignore the miss chance).

Also, what if a caster had both Entropic Shield and Blur cast on them and an archer with Tree Seeing shot at the caster? Would that archer have a 20% miss chance?

Yes, because like I said, while all concealment provides a miss chance, not all miss chances are from concealment. That's the case with Displacement, it provides a miss chance but not from concealment.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Mydrrin wrote:

@DarkKnight27

I would rule no you can't get them to stack. RAW obviously points this being the case.

Please explain because I don't see it that way and the way I'm reading it would imply that the RAW obviously point toward it being allowed.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Darksol the Painbringer wrote:
jlighter wrote:
I believe his argument is that Blur and Displacement would stack, since Displacement gives a 50% miss chance that is functionally total concealment except that the creature can be targeted normally, thus negating that clause.

I could then argue that even if you can attack him normally, you still technically do not have line of sight to him, the parameters for which the Blur clause specifies, and since that aspect of Total Concealment has not changed via its description, the clause of Blur would still take effect, i.e. it would cease to function. But I know better than to go into his silly semantics.

Here's what Displacement says:

Displacement wrote:
The creature benefits from a 50% miss chance as if it had total concealment. Unlike actual total concealment, displacement does not prevent enemies from targeting the creature normally.

Here's what Blur says:

Blur wrote:
The subject's outline appears blurred, shifting, and wavering. This distortion grants the subject concealment (20% miss chance).

Notice the bolded parts single out the relevant information we need to intake in terms of effects regarding Concealment.

In both cases, the creature is treated to have (total) concealment. Although Displacement has the "can be targeted normally" clause, nothing else about what it grants changes. Concealment is still Concealment. And Concealment does not stack. It even says so right here:

Concealment Miss Chance wrote:
Concealment gives the subject of a successful attack a 20% chance that the attacker missed because of the concealment. Make the attack normally—if the attacker hits, the defender must make a miss chance d% roll to avoid being struck. Multiple concealment conditions do not stack.
Both effects grant the target a separate type of Concealment condition, meaning only the highest applies at a given time.

There is a subtle difference though that I pointed out in one of my earlier post though;

Blur specifically calls out that it provides concealment (as the condition), But read the description of Displacement again, it says that that it provides a 50% miss chance but it's not actually Total Concealment (a.k.a. it does not grant the total concealment condition).

Also, from what you're arguing it would sound like ALL miss chances are concealment but what about Entropic Shield? The description says;

Quote:
A magical field appears around you, glowing with a chaotic blast of multicolored hues. This field deflects incoming arrows, rays, and other ranged attacks. Each ranged attack directed at you for which the attacker must make an attack roll has a 20% miss chance (similar to the effects of concealment). Other attacks that simply work at a distance are not affected.

To me this would mean that while all concealment provides a miss chance not all miss chances are from concealment.

So back to my original point Displacement provides a miss chance but not concealment so it stacks with Blur that provides a miss chance because of concealment.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
jlighter wrote:
Except based on precedent within the book, anytime it says "A functions as if B," it means treat A as if it were B with only the exception that follows listed differently. In this case, the exception is that the creature can still be targeted normally. That's the only difference from normal Total Concealment. Blur wouldn't stack because Blur offers a lesser miss chance.

Can you please list these "precedents" that you're referring to so we can make sure we're not comparing apples to oranges.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Paulicus wrote:
I usually roll miss chances before AC for simplicity. It also saves time at the table, as if I fail I don't have to bother adding up my attack roll and asking the GM if it hits.

Depending on the situation I will ask a player to roll the attack before the miss chance, it doesn't usually matter but it does one in a while.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Cool, that's how I thought it should work but I wanted to make sure I wasn't completely out in left field.

Thanks!

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
jlighter wrote:
DarkKnight27 wrote:
Quote:
The subject of this spell appears to be about 2 feet away from its true location. The creature benefits from a 50% miss chance as if it had total concealment. Unlike actual total concealment, displacement does not prevent enemies from targeting the creature normally. True seeing reveals its true location and negates the miss chance.
You get a 50% miss chance because you appear to be about 2 feet away from where you actually are. The spell even says it's not actually total concealment. Blur specifically calls out that it grants the target...
Incorrect. It says you get a 50% miss chance "as if it had total concealment." Meaning it functions as total concealment with the exception that it does not prevent enemies from targeting the creature normally. If actual total concealment were in effect as well, that would override the displacement effect because it's the more advantageous effect.

That's right, it's not actually Total Concealment because you can still target subject of Displacement. Total Concealment is a specific condition, Displacement is similar but different so it stacks with Blur which actually provides Concealment.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Ok, so say that I have a Ranger who comes across a Staff of Healing. The Staff has the spells Cure Serious Wounds, Lesser Restoration, Remove Blindness/Deafness, and Remove Disease.

Staves are Spell Trigger items so you need the spell on your spell list to use the item so does that mean that a Range can ONLY use Cure Serious Wounds and Remove Disease or can he use ALL of the spells on this staff (even the ones NOT on his list) because the staff contains a few spells that are on his list?

Thanks for the insight!

1 to 50 of 179 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.