|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Seems to me everyone's in agreement because of past discussions on this--give us a FAQ that says:
"Spells can be noticed being cast, and thus identified with Spellcraft, even if the spell has no somatic, verbal, material, or other components."
You can let the reasons be up to our imaginations, just put the rule somewhere official. Please and thank you~!
The only reason I've ever seen anybody look seriously at those tables is to get a good idea of comparative sizes. I.e. we're generally familiar with what the height and weight of a small, big, and average human are, but a dwarf, halfling, or half-orc are a little harder for us to get a full grasp of.
So it helps you see the reasonable limits of how big or small a race is, and let you modify for what makes sense to you--a high STR and CON character's probably gonna be a bit heavier for their size, and one with low STR high DEX will probably be lighter.
There's no one answer for this because it really depends on the specific type, and if it's not mentioned in their entry feel free to make your own consequences. It's rare for anyone to go the "soul is destroyed" route, because generally destroying a soul is considered a very evil act and nobody wants to get thrown into that in a random encounter. Typical possibilities include:
A) The incorporeal undead isn't technically the creature's soul even if it has their shape and (possibly) memories, so destroying it is no different than killing a zombie--their soul has already moved on.
B) Destroying the undead creature releases the being's soul, allowing it to move on to the afterlife.
C) The being is/contains the creature's soul, but defeating them only dissipates the energy--they may or may not be able to come back, but their soul won't move on until something is done to put them to rest.
There's more options and variations of course, but that's the general umbrellas of how these are handled. If you want a little help in deciding what course to take, usually the harsher endings are reserved for those who became the creature because of evil acts in life, and kinder endings are used for those who were turned into those beings against their will (i.e. shadows created by another shadow's Create Spawn ability).
Yup, just like with living creatures, any specific wounds or damage (that aren't called out because any special qualities of the attack that caused them) are all for flavor and have no actual effect. Anything past that is a house rule.
Yes, a more realistic player could argue that something fragile like a pegasus figurine's wings would break off before the whole object's HP hit 0 (just like so many of our minis), but then you would also have to include things like if a character falls 200 feet and takes 80 damage, their legs should be broken at the very least. And not many people want that level of realism if the game system doesn't have specific rules for how it works.
One I used to start a somewhat goofy campaign (and one of the few I actually started at level 1)
73) The party is hired by a group of adventurers to keep watch over their horses while they explore a dungeon and to help haul all the treasure out once they're done. Unfortunately the adventurers didn't think to leave them any food or supplies, so the group will have to fend for themselves in the wilderness until their employers return.
I'd go with survival as the go to thing (as someone else mentioned, it's a common hunting technique), with the caveat that any appropriate profession or perform should work too--i.e. singing, hunter, ventriloquist. I'd allow disguise too, since that does include throwing your voice. Linguistics I probably wouldn't go for, but an argument could be made.
I think what they were probably going for was the idea that a full grapple involves grabbing and wrestling and restraints and such, which arguably takes a little bit longer than the second or so in your round at the end of a charge.
It may also require a bit more attention than you could manage while running headlong at someone--your momentum probably isn't as helpful as it would be for anything that involves a good swing at the end (the sunder, disarm, trip--and of course bull rush and Overrun are all about the momentum), so the bonus on your grapple attempt wouldn't make a huge amount of sense.
If you're thinking a charge and tackle someone to the floor, that could just as easily be a trip, where you attempt to grapple them the next round.
The grab 2 people with penalties I can see being a thing (although obviously you'll need someone who's insanely good at grappling to offset the penalties you'd rationally have) and banging their heads together could just be a flavorful way to describe an unarmed strike against two separate opponents (since generally you don't hold on to the people after banging them together).
That said, all of this is fairly logical and I'm certainly not saying that your argument isn't sound. In fact my primary gripe about grapple being standard action only is not being able to use it as an AoO--I feel you should be allowed to try to grab someone when they're doing something you don't want them to do. But devs decided it made more sense this way I guess.
There's obviously the money problem--and even if you did find a handful of mages willing to use for free what they worked years to get (and probably spent alot of gold to get the education to do) just to make people more pretty, there's only so many people they can get around to every day. Many of the patients (for lack of better words) that come to them are going to be people who, by all accounts, already look perfectly fine--think how many Hollywood stars go in for plastic surgery.
I occasionally get players ask me why NPCs charge you for spells that don't have a material component, and even in the most benevolent of temples (i.e. one of Sarenrae or Shelyn) it comes down to very basic kind of supply and demand. If it were free, then every overbearing parent would be knocking down your door for healing every time little Timmy fell down and scraped his knee--if you blow all your magic for the day helping with tiny, unnecessary things like this (and everyone will argue what constitutes "unnecessary") what happens when someone comes staggering in at death's door, bleeding all over the place from a freak accident at work? In my games any good-aligned temple will waive the fee if it's literally a matter of life or death, but if it's "My cat scratched my cheek and prom is tomorrow night" they're most certainly going to charge you full price for that--maybe even extra.
To connect this, someone who has made it their personal goal to rid the world of ugliness might be willing to do a free magical procedure (assuming they've invented one) to "cure" someone of a horrible deformity, but they'll get a bit burned out after the hundredth teenager comes up begging him to get rid of their pimples.
Of course, you can say in your campaign world this has somehow happened on a national or even global scale--ugliness as we would define it has been somehow obliterated. As about half of the other posters have said, everyone will still have preferences, and some people will still culturally be considered ugly (for us: Hollywood Homely ) simply because they look average or a bit pretty in our society but they live in a world made of supermodels. People will try to rid the world of these peoples' ugliness too, and it will eventually get to the point where everyone has the nymphs' Blinding Beauty, and still people will be able to find others unattractive. The best you'll ever be able to say is that "everyone in this campaign world looks attractive...to my standards."
The players I've always had never really cared about a character mysteriously popping in and out of existence, just the occasional joke of "Hey, where'd that guy with the shiny purple gloves go this time?" Of course, the players I run with tend to be goofy types, so most of them didn't feel a huge need to have everything make total sense in-game.
Realistically, you'll rarely (if ever) be able to seamlessly fit a player's attendance record into the game world--someone has to leave due to their master's commands halfway down a dungeon and comes back (one missed session later) after the group's done three fights and solved the deadly puzzle trap, which may have only taken an hour or two in-game. "Yep turns out he just wanted me to put this scrying mark on a tree outside. And no, it couldn't have waited three hours for us to finish what we were doing." However, if your group really gets into that kind of immersion, it can become a practice in creativity--explaining why and where they're gone while leaving it open how long they could be absent.
Edit: the bigger issue as a GM is making sure you can balance encounters on the fly depending on whether your extra character is there or not. You don't want to make it so everything's a breeze because she's there or extra difficult because she's not. Of course, with it just being one player it shouldn't be that drastic, but an extra minion or two you can add in would probably help balance it.
Correct on the whole realistic likeness thing, but back to the original question.
The only real problem I can see on the twins character is you could confuse the GM who's reporting it if you're going as a different name than what's connected to your character number. Then you're also going to have GMs who say you can't do that (likely quoting the 3 things you mentioned originally--but not everyone is gonna take your word for it).
That said, as a flavor thing it wouldn't really be a problem--you have all the same stats, you're not going to argue for free "extra life" etc. Similarly to what someone mentioned above, the easiest way to go about it is to claim, in character, that you're not the person the party was told would be coming, you're actually their twin--whether or not you decide it's true.
Not 100% sure, but I think this part was kept completely the same from 3.5 (which I believe wasn't changed from 3.0). So was more a case of Paizo not caring enough about a little piece of rules that most people don't bother with to make it more realistic.
I work outdoors in Pennsylvania, and in the summer it'll still pretty frequently get above 90 degrees (and pretty humid, being by the coast) and while it's certainly tiring, nobody's really in danger of passing out unless they weren't smart enough to bring any water along.
It's hard to make rules on this realistic because it would all depend on things like: how heavy the work you're doing is, how much shade you get, how often and long you take breaks, how much water you're drinking, how humid that particular climate&day are (conversely, intensely dry is also a problem), etc. But I would agree that for general purposes the minimum temp for each category should probably start at least 10 higher, and the DC should start lower.
Ok, not entirely sure where this thread should be posted, since from the looks of it you're using 3.5 rules instead of Pathfinder (and this is the Pathfinder Rules Questions forums), but I will try to answer anyways, to a limited degree.
Using your tail to trip would count as tripping while unarmed--remember that an Unarmed Strike uses any part of your body, not just your hands. So sadly, while a very cool image, using your tail as a tripping tool really just comes down to fun flavor.
For your free attack after the trip, by the 3.5 description I would say yes, any conditional modifiers (such as the opponent being flatfooted) would still count for your attack after the trip, since it says as if you hadn't used your attack for the trip attempt.
And nothing says you can't use a ranged weapon for that free attack, assuming it's what's in your hands at the time. I don't remember 3.5 saying prone people can't make AoOs (if I'm understanding your last sentence correctly), but in this particular situation the target wouldn't be able to make that attack because they're flat-footed. Aside from that, you usually won't want to be making ranged weapon attacks in melee for the standard reasons.
Of course, if nobody realized Pathfinder does trips differently than in 3.5 (which, trust me, happens all the time for many things when people make the switch) let me know. Main differences are that you'd need Greater Trip for the free attack, which is technically an attack of opportunity now with all the normal rules that apply there.
Basically all the ideas I thought of were to make the sole guy very sad. What can I say, I watch a lot of RomCom anime.
Create water/drench–to cool off the guy when he’s getting too frisky
Also for a cursed item, a Medallion of Thought Projection would be fun.
While it's not specifically said in either spell's description, it can be pretty easily inferred from the raise dead description--it doesn't work.
Raise Dead wrote:
While the spell closes mortal wounds and repairs lethal damage of most kinds, the body of the creature to be raised must be whole. Otherwise, missing parts are still missing when the creature is brought back to life.
Since the body itself stays in the same general condition it was in when it died, casting raise dead on a pile of ashes would give you a live pile of ashes--which obviously doesn't work out, not having the organs and such something needs to stay alive.
On top of that, Resurrection specifically calls out that it can be used to bring back a disintegrated target.
The condition of the remains is not a factor. So long as some small portion of the creature's body still exists, it can be resurrected, but the portion receiving the spell must have been part of the creature's body at the time of death. (The remains of a creature hit by a disintegrate spell count as a small portion of its body.)
So yeah, needs resurrection or higher if you're just a pile of ashes.
I was GM'ing Skull and Shackles, and the party was fighting the final boss. I'll make this spoiler-free :)
The party's rogue wins initiative, jumps in invisibly to sneak attack the boss, does pretty well.
The boss goes second, has 3 attacks and has only the rogue in range. First attack deals crap for damage. Second is about average. Third attack criticals with a x4 weapon that also does additional problems on a crit, rolls nearly max damage. Rogue drops to -10.
Minions go third and have absolutely nobody else in range to target, and are well-known evil bastards.
The party all agrees what would logically happen next. I hand the player the NPC cleric that had been going with them.
Sandara Quinn then proceeds to kick all of the ass.
I would say yes, simply because punching dudes into the air should be rewarded whenever it happens.
Seconded. I'd say the Rule of Cool applies here.
Same to the whole Trunks-style combo. In my game, you would be allowed to do this simply for describing it as such, even if someone comes in and proves that it's fifty kinds of illegal and/or impossible.
I'll put in another vote for the avatar-type campaign. Single-player campaigns, while difficult for the GM to make, do lend themselves very well to the "chosen one" kind of stories.
And as a solution to the whole lower surviveability issue, you can take that right out of old kung-fu movies too! Instead of just being dead at the standard -con HP, you'd get knocked out/down and can't get up, villain gives monologue and leaves you for dead, hero is found by kindly farmer/village elder/etc who nurses them back to health, hero realizes they need another training montage/secret ability then challenges BBEG to a rematch! Basically just ignore the difference between lethal and nonlethal damage, and use defeat as a learning experience.
The alignment thing makes me sit there and think for a bit. "Chosen one" stories almost always have the good guy literally be Good, but being LN...hmmm...you might be able to make Balance be a big theme of your campaign. After all, the shadow is greatest when you stand closest to the light...
Because that was what the OP asked for--big HP and ways to get it back fast. Also the Unbreakable fighter he mentioned as the suggested starting point gets both those feats for free at first level, so it's not nearly as much of a waste as it would be for others. If you know another good combo of feats he could take for his concept instead feel free to suggest them.
However, it is true that you're going to get a lot more mileage out of Fast Healer at the lower levels. As a very quick estimate by level 6 you'll probably be sitting on around 60 HP if you've centered yourself on huge CON and extra hit points, and that extra 2 or 3 from fast healer won't mean too much. To get the most use out of Fast Healer, whenever possible you'll want to take advantage of multiple lower-level heal spells instead of fewer high level ones. I.e. if you've got 22 con a 6th level caster using Cure Serious will get you 3d8+15 (avg 28.5), and cure lights will heal 1d8+10 (avg 14.5) making two cure lights a slightly better heal than a single cure serious--assuming you're outside of combat and have the time. Wands of CLW will be your friend for a long time, as will a healer carrying a metamagic Intensify Spell rod for his cures.
Edit: the math on the cures also counted in Fey Foundling. Without it lower cures become even better (3d8+9 avg 22.5 vs 1d8+8 avg 12.5)--but your build will definitely want it.
I'm planning on running a game that has one of its main themes being the seductive, corrupting power of evil, where the players will see the "merits" of joining the dark side for power. Don't worry, the players have all said they would like this kind of campaign and nobody is playing a Paladin or anything that has to worry about falling from grace.
To do this, I'm going to have a dark patron that watches over the PCs and wants them to succeed for its own reasons--probably a powerful devil, but haven't decided yet. My main idea is to have this work by the patron grant Hero Points as a reward for completing tasks for her (think the faction missions from pre-season 5 PFS). The tasks are going to start out innocent enough--make sure this enemy dies or this person survives, and gradually get darker as the campaign runs on to where by the end they are actively hunting people down who have angered the patron.
So there's two things I would like suggestions of:
1: How often should they have opportunities to get these Dark Hero points? One per level/module seems like it would be too slow and so they wouldn't really see these as big opportunities to gain power (also the side effect I've seen in too many games where the players just hoard their points for Cheat Death), but too many and I could see it getting out of hand--not to mention they'd end up spending more time doing "side tasks" than the actual main story.
2: Any suggestions for what kind of things would make good tasks, and how far along? For reference, the campaign will probably go from level 1 to about 12. Keep in mind nothing should be "burn down orphanage" kind of stuff--the PCs will be staying in one region for nearly all of the campaign, and so I want to avoid anything that will draw a lynch mob (big evil things are ok as long as they can reasonably be hidden from the public eye). If all goes well I want the public to see the PCs as heroes even while they slide into evil.
If it matters, the region for this campaign is the Darkmoon vale, starting with all the modules taking place in Falcon's Hollow and going from there.
I don't see anything in Inner Sea Gods that brings up his burial rites specifically, so I imagine it could be anything you want it to be.
For my take, I envision a Gorumite funeral to be pretty much like a viking one. Lay him down on a funeral pyre in his armor and weapons (other equipment can be removed) and light the pyre while telling tales of the great battles he fought. Longboat optional.
It would need Speak with Animals--main reason being that you can only speak one language at a time which does, in fact, require the other creature to speak/understand a language. Of course, if an intelligent animal/beast has a language, truespeech works just fine. Just remember that many intelligent magical beasts can understand not speak, so you could speak to them and they couldn't respond (with words).
I.e. Wildshaped druids understand language but can't speak them--so no special bonus there. Familiars of a high enough level are odd--by RAW I would say no since technically it says they speak with their master "as if they shared a common language" but not that they actually have a language they share, though I would probably allow it to work in my games.
If you mean drawing the weapons, then no--it's a move action to pull out both of them at the same time assuming he takes the two-weapon fighting feat. Once he has a BAB of +1 or more, he can also draw them both as a free action while moving (I don't know if this is written in the beginners' box though).
Anyone who knows me as a GM knows I do my best to play enemies appropriate to their mental scores and background (i.e. a pack of wolves may not have high intelligence, but they are pack hunters and definitely know to flank--though solitary hunter animals don't even if you run into multiples), though for new players I will occasionally see someone surprised and/or frustrated to see enemies using actual battle tactics. Usually though, everyone's mature enough to realize that yes, this enemy is reasonably about as smart as me and should use terrain/tactics/etc to their advantage.
Of course if they're fighting mindless enemies like zombies, oozes, etc, my players know they can expect them to act appropriately, and some of my more clever players have figured out ways to use it to their advantage. My favorite example was the group fighting a necromancer type with a decently large group of mindless zombie minions. The BBEG commanded the minions to focus on one particular PC, then hid behind a wall so as to avoid attacks. The targeted PC ran into the next room and cast Create Pit in the doorway, and watched with glee as all the mindless zombies charged into the hole. I was more than willing to give that one to him.
As for prestidigitation being used to make a disguise...kind of. As you quoted, the materials it makes are pretty fragile, and so this this kind of disguise basically being facepaint, you could probably use it short-term as long as you kept anyone from getting too good a look at you. No specific rule though.. I think everything else you asked was covered.
Hmm...I'm mostly making this suggestion because from what you've said, you have the same kind of playstyle as me. (I love casters and tactical characters and find straight-up damage to be boring)
Maybe it's a Maneuver Master, maybe it's a Cad, maybe it's just a vanilla fighter or some such that took alot of the maneuver feats. But being good at a wide range of combat maneuvers makes you able to cripple your enemies in a way that might not be magical, but is extremely helpful to your party.
My favorite for this was my Freebooter (ranger)/Cad (fighter), who dual-wielded and had Quick Greater Dirty Trick, Greater Trip, Improved Disarm. In one round, step into flanking position, blind them with a dirty trick, trip them--which provokes an AoO to Disarm them. Still have two attacks left--trip or disarm adjacent enemies or slash away. All achievable at level 7.
I'm afraid you're still a bit confused here--there is a definitive list of Combat Maneuvers, which cartmanbeck listed off. It's not a "do something different", although you could house rule in some new maneuvers, they just wouldn't be part of the actual rules. The "you must use an action appropriate to the maneuver you are attempting to perform" is because there are 3 combat maneuvers that are not standard actions like the rest of them--trips, disarms, and sunders are all considered attacks, so that you can use them in place of one of your attacks during a full attack action.
What you are talking about is tumbling using the Acrobatics skill. As others have mentioned this combo is not necessary or possible, because the 5' step doesn't provoke so you don't need to make an Acrobatics check to tumble for that 5' step. The tumbling rules are for when you'd be doing normal movement as a move action, moving through a threatened square which would provoke an AoO, and trying to beat their CMD with your Acrobatics in order to not get the AoO against you. If the Acrobatics check fails to beat them CMD, you take an AoO but get to finish your movement.
Also no, a 5' step is not a move action. It is movement, but is considered a special action of its own.
I've done my best to try everything out. But I have noticed two things my characters tend to have in common: about 80-90% of my characters have some sort of pet, and at least half of my characters focus on combat maneuvers in some way (even if it's just my constrictor snake companion's grappling).
I don't like straight-up damage types. Effective, but makes me bored.
Most of your questions are answered in the Magic Item Creation Section of the PRD but I'll help answer here too for your convenience (it can be alot to sort through for sure). Sorry in advance, this is a massive post.
Pathfinder Zoey wrote:
1) Would you recommend it? A feat for a crafting skill is kind of costly but half price magic items seems well worth to me.
This tends to be very campaign-dependent. Because of the whole "adventuring caster only puts in 2 hours of progress" thing that Brf mentioned, any big expensive stuff is going to take a long time to make if your campaign doesn't have much/any downtime. If it's the kind of adventure where you rush right from one thing to another, you might want to consider Brew Potion or Scribe Scroll, but you'll find for more expensive stuff in that kind of campaign the item you're making will be outdated by the time you finish making it (that 4k bracers of armor +2 will take 16 days to make, which in non-stop no-travel instances you could have gained two or three levels).
On the other hand if you're in a campaign where you travel for long periods of time or, even better, have days to weeks of straight-up downtime between adventures, making all your own magic items effectively doubles the amount of money your party has, which can arguably turn out to be a better feat investment than many combat feats.
Pathfinder Zoey wrote:
2) Whats the rule on upgrading things with craft? i have +1 bracers and i can make +2 for 2k from scrap so what if i just make my +1 into +2 do i still pay 2k or less?
As Band said, it's the difference between the current item and the item you're upgrading it into. In your specific instance, it would cost you 1.5k.
Pathfinder Zoey wrote:
3)What would you rule on if crafting was interrupted? like after 3 hours of crafting i get attacked and have to stop would i still lose half my mats as a failure or would it just count as 3/8 hours of work done?
That unfortunately is not mentioned in the crafting rules and so would be up to GM interpretation. Realistically you could say that you either go with whatever progress you made and can continue later in the day, or that the time is wasted and you lose the materials you used for that time/day (anywhere between the 37.5 for that 3 hours in the field at half progress to 500 for a dedicated day of work in town).
Pathfinder Zoey wrote:
4)Would I have to be in a town to craft or would I be able to carry the supplies to craft with me?
Brf's note is correct. You can carry supplies with you to craft but you only work for 4 hours a day, during random breaks in the action, and it only counts for half as much (for 2 hours and 250g worth of progress per day). Your GM could rule for realism's sake that you have to buy your materials in town before deciding on a project should you be heading out and working in the field, although other GMs simply don't care enough, similar to stocking up on expensive material components for spells such as Raise Dead.
Pathfinder Zoey wrote:
5)Do I need any special tools for crafting them? I saw craft alchemy had an alchemist table does craft Wondrous have something similar?
No special tools are needed nor exist by RAW, though if you happen to have a craft that'll help with that particular item, using the masterwork tools for that skill will give you a bonus on your final skill check.
Remember that Craft Wondrous Items is a feat, not a skill. The skill you use for crafting any magic item per the rules is Spellcraft, DC 5+item's CL, made at the end of the crafting time. You are also allowed to use another craft skill that your GM deems is appropriate to that item. While the other crafting feats are pretty easy to determine (craft: weaponsmith for magic weapons, alchemy for potions), wondrous items are far too varied to fall under any one skill--conceivably every listed craft could be used for a few of the wondrous items throughout all the published books, but none could be used for all of them. Just stick with Spellcraft and you'll be fine.
Pathfinder Zoey wrote:
6)Do I take any penalties while crafting? This is mostly Aimed towards perception as my character is ideally crafting while keeping watch.
This isn't mentioned specifically in the crafting rules, but it wouldn't be entirely out of line for your GM to say that crafting on your watch to count as "Creature making the check is distracted" in the perception rules, which increases the DC of perception checks by 5. There are ways to help yourself out in that regard (although less common since from your link looks like you're a magus) such as an Alarm spell or having a familiar to stand watch with you.
On a side note, if you do decide to get yourself a familiar and you want to go with the magic item creation route, I would highly suggest giving it the Valet familiar archetype. From the get go this lets it give you a +2 on your craft check at the end of item creation as well as doubling your progress every day. Arguably, because it gains all the item creation feats and skill ranks you do it could do a fair amount of your item creation for you (keeping in mind since its intelligence will be a negative modifier for awhile it won't be able to make very powerful items on its own).
Pathfinder Zoey wrote:
7)Would I be able to craft while under the effects of the Keep Watch Spell or would the crafting cancel the spell?
The description of the spell is somewhat vague so it'll be up to GM interpretation. If I were GM'ing I would rule that you would be allowed to use it for crafting, thus being able to put in the total 8 hours but still having the half progress for crafting while being out adventuring (and remember regardless of how much free time you have you can only work on it for 8 hours per day). However, I do know I tend to be very generous with rulings as a GM, and I wouldn't argue if a GM ruled that crafting counted as too "strenuous" for the spell.
Pathfinder Zoey wrote:
8)Is taking 10 allowed, Would taking 20 waste half my mats?
Taking 10 is allowed, taking 20 is not. Reasoning: Taking 10 is allowable any time you are not in a particularly stressful situation (such as combat), and crafting *requires* you to be in a non-stressful environment. Taking 20 is not allowed any time there is a definite consequence for failure--in this case, failing to create the item (or creating a cursed item if you fail badly enough) and losing materials. Even if you could, remember that taking 20 means taking 20 times as long. If you're out adventuring during your crafting process, do you really want to take 320 days to create those +2 bracers of armor?
Pathfinder Zoey wrote:
9)Do I need to take the craft feat and the craft skill? If not what would I level up to make higher dcs?
Guess I already covered that. You need the Craft Wondrous Item feat (or other magic item creation feat if you're going to make weapons, armor, etc) and the Spellcraft skill, DC5+item's CL--it mentions the item CL in its description. Also, each magic item generally requires one or more spells in its creation, listed in the Construction section at the bottom of each item's description. Note that you can make the item without having that spell prepared (yes, prepared not just known, unless you're a spontaneous caster) but it increases the DC by 5.
Pathfinder Zoey wrote:
Any tips or ideas about taking this would also be appreciated since I'm still figuring everything out, thanks.
My main suggestion is, if you do go with the item creation, pump up your Spellcraft skill like crazy. You should always be taking 10 instead of rolling to make sure that you don't waste thousands of gold on a single crappy dice roll, so it's easy enough to look at the CL and any requirements you don't have to figure out the DC and whether or not you'll make it at your current skill. If taking 10 will beat the DC by 5 or more, remember there is also the option to double your progress by increasing the DC by 5. If you combine this with my previous Valet familiar suggestion, this means you make 1k worth of progress per day while out adventuring or 4k worth per day during in-town downtime. Yes, by the wording of their descriptions, they do stack--technically one halves the time required while the other doubles your progress speed.
If you know ahead of time you're going to be making something you're a few points shy of making the skill check for, it may be worth it to grab a scroll of Crafter's Fortune or two (or better yet, ask your party wizard to cast it on you, should you have one). It costs you 25 gold for the first-level spell, but saves you thousands when compared to buying the item from a store. Of course, if you're making the DC already, you can always use this to do the speed-up option. Remember that the skill check only has to be made at the very end of the crafting process, so you can have the spell cast on you on the last day for it to take full effect (though the speeding-up +5 to DC option has to be picked at the beginning of the process).
Apparently whenever I'm asked a question I don't know the answer to I answer "hell if I know". One day, one of my players surprises me with a cleric named Hellih Feino--with the Knowledge and Travel domains, so that he always has the answer and will be anywhere an explanation is needed. Every time I say the line he plays it as me turning to him for an answer.
Doesn't seem so--it's an increase to caster level, and the familiar advances by class level, and is considered a class ability instead of anything spell-based. It'd be the same way that prestige classes with spell progression don't boost your other class abilities (familiars are often called out as a specific example as not getting improved).
You'd probably want a wand of Sanctuary or Peacebond (though you'd need your UMD high since it's not on the paladin list).
Are you including nonlethal damage in your "never knowingly deal HP damage"? If not improved unarmed strike would be a pretty good thing. If you can't do that either, focusing on grappling to restrain people would be a good way to go (though yes IUS will be a feat tax for you).
There's a feat in Faiths of Purity called Protector's Strike, where when you use your Smite ability you pick one creature other than you, and they get a bonus to their AC = your CHA mod against that target.
Definitely focus on your social skills to avoid as many combats as possible. Though make sure to work with your GM here, since you don't want to find yourself in constant combat with a pacifist character. Seems like you've already made the first step, but make sure with him that you're not shooting yourself in the foot with this idea.
Similarly, with your party to make sure they're ok with bringing a pacifist character along. Some players (especially combat optimizers) may get frustrated with someone who wants to avoid combat. Unless you're going to be the Technical Pacifist hero. Then they might love you.
Usually fashioned from brightly colored silk, a mummer’s ruff is a favored accoutrement of performers and con artists alike. The wearer of a mummer’s ruff gains a +10 bonus on Bluff skill checks when attempting to imitate another’s voice. In addition, once per day, the wearer of the mummer’s ruff can throw his voice as if using ventriloquism for up to 5 minutes
Now this makes it weird. Basically, Ultimate Equipment is claiming is saying this falls under Bluff, while Ultimate Magic is claiming it's under disguise. Most likely this is just a case of different writers believing it differently.
My personal take is that faking a voice falls under the "acting in character" part of Disguise. But there's certainly enough argument for bluff that I allow my players to use either. Hadn't thought of linguistics before, but there's certainly a good argument for it--I'd probably allow it to be used with a small penalty.
Why would the fire be invisible? For example throwing bag of flour against invisible enemy does outline him (UE). Why would fire be any different.
While admittedly the exact text in the item description is vague, it does mention that the flour does "momentarily" outline them. My groups took that to mean that you don't see the flour that's actually on the invisible person, but the puff of powder around them disperses in a person-shaped clear area.
EDIT: Though the rule that picking something up later doesn't make it invisible makes it difficult with this. It would seem that if the person is on fire when they turn invisible, the fire is invisible. If they are invisible and then catch on fire, the fire should be visible. I guess the flour assumes that it gets scattered in their area, not directly on them. Sticky, damp flour on the other hand...?
As far as I can tell by the description of the clasp, nothing RAW says they wouldn't.
Logically it would be hard to find any way for a bleeding swarm to make sense, since any "bleeding" individual would probably die first round. But then, magic items kind of break real-world logic, so I guess it could fly.
I haven't done any mythic campaigns myself (not including the one PFS scenario that gives you access to it) but I can give you one suggestion. Go slow with it--as far as I know, even Wrath of the Righteous doesn't give mythic powers until the end of the first module (level 3-4 depending on party size etc) and I would say that would be a bit early. I'm planning on running a campaign including mythic powers, and my plan is for them to get it at level 7 or so, and by the end of the campaign I probably won't give them more than 5 mythic tiers at level 15 (if they even get that many.
Mythic powers are extremely powerful, and if you have trouble building appropriate encounters this will definitely add to the difficulty. I would give them another mythic tier maybe every 3 or 4 levels while everyone gets used to it, and definitely don't feel pressured to let them get to 10 tiers by the end of the campaign--that would be like saying every campaign has to go until they hit 20th level. If it seemed like a big hit and you all can handle it, try for a quicker progression in the next campaign.
Also something that just occurred to me. The other option you might run into that is a good reason to mix it up--your party gets any sort of fire resistance. At level 6 they have access to communal resist energy, which will give them all enough fire resistance that your horde of burning skeletons will do absolutely nothing to them, except for the occasional natural 20 on an attack roll. Even 5 fire resistance (like being a tiefling) will make it so the skeles have to roll max damage in order to do a single point of damage, and if only one person has fire resistance, they'll quickly position themselves to make a chokepoint where the horde runs up to the effectively now-immortal character while everyone else uses ranged attacks. A tiny bit of fire resistance will turn this from a meat-grinder deathtrap into a five-plus-hour snorefest.
I'd highly consider adding some other kinds of undead into the mix, maybe having multiple waves over time with each being lead with some sort of "mini-boss"--depending on how many minions per wave, probably something with a CR of 4-5, with the last wave having a CR6 in it.
At the very least, it would be very difficult to explain why the Paladin would continue staying with that oracle. If there was no holy vengeance, then nearly any paladin would at the very least leave with a "you will pay for this." Even in ideal situations it's extremely difficult to make a party with a paladin and an evil character (or worshipper of an evil god) work out. EDIT: Ninja'd by Dominus.
And while the whole paladin-falling situation would obviously have some table variance, I hold with the others saying that a paladin has no obligation to throw their life away when it would not help anybody. They should be swearing vengeance, making a plan, and gathering allies to make sure this kind of atrocity never happens again. Case in point: there is a good number of paladins in underground resistance movements in Cheliax. If they were required to jump into hopeless battles every time they saw an injustice, every single one of them would be dead, and nobody would be helped.
You'll really want to know your players for something like that. Some may find it exciting to wade through a horde of exploding enemies, but most players I run with would get bored of fighting the exact same enemy by the time the 20th one shows up, much less the 200th. They would see the exploding thing as a waste of their AoE heals and attacks (and they WILL run out), or just a cheap way of killing them.
And I'm sure you designed it this way, but this module would be a killer. By my quick math a party level 6 would probably have somewhere between 35 and 60 HP depending on their CONs, so squishier members would be able to take roughly ten rounds standing next to their fiery aura before going down--before counting fiery deaths and assuming that in such a horde the party manages to keep all but one skeleton from ever standing next to the wizard. Fighters would be able to take up to double that, but unless they're able to create a chokepoint they'll probably end up being adjacent to 3 or more of the skeletons every round, and so be taking 3d6+ damage at the start of every round with no save. Obviously they'll be healing during all this but it's going to be a huge resource burn, and a very quick one. I'm not too familiar with the idea of a graverobber's switch door to get the setup of the mass fight, but this would have to be staggered pretty well to not come across as a more fiery and drawn-out version of "rocks fall everyone dies".
Other than that, the points everyone else has made are very valid. Troop subtype/mass combat will work well to avoid being bogged down with hundreds of enemies and rolls at once, and saying the only XP in the entire module is the necromancer himself will make your players feel cheated.
I know there would be plenty of players who would get a kick out of this idea, and if you know your players are all that type then go for it. I just know that I and the players I tend to run with would flat-out refuse to play this one.
Generally how Cheat Death works in my games becomes one of two things, and both come down to action movies:
A: The other characters are aware there is a *chance* that the other player could be alive--and so try against all hope to save them ("Live, damn you!"). By some miracle, they are alive but will certainly need some help/healing. This is usually when the Death Cheating character's "body" is easy to access, though maybe not without taking a few rounds and maybe a couple of skill checks. See: the dramas you were talking about before
B: The other characters believe there is no way the Death Cheating character could have survived that fall/cave-in/explosion/etc, and so gloomily continue on without them. After a certain period of time (preferably during a time the party is in a pinch or some other dramatic moment), the "dead" character reappears, battered and bruised, with a shocking tale of how they survived. If the player is able to come up with a particularly compelling/exciting story of how they survived, they get one of their Hero Points back (which hugely boosts creativity!). See: Gandalf falling into the pit and fighting the Balrog, Aragorn being pushed off the cliff and being saved by his horse, millions of other fantasy/action movie near-death fake-outs.
It sounds like you prefer your games to be more of the edge-of-your-seat action movies where the hero defies all odds and always wins in the end (like me!) whereas your GM prefers their games to be the darker action(/horror?) movies filled with gritty realism. Neither is the "wrong" way to play, but it will cause some frustrations at your table if there's a split on what genre your games are. It's a discussion that should include your GM and all your players at the table that basically boils down to "how realistic do I want my fantasy?"
I've never run a one-person game myself, but I've done a two-man Gestalt campaign and I've discovered a very important rule when choosing your enemies: completely throw out anything with "save or suck" abilities.
It seems obvious when said, but it's easy to forget this when you throw something fairly simple like a CR 4 Harpy at a level 8. Anything that can stun, paralyze, fascinate or otherwise incapacitate a character for more than a single round very quickly turns it into a "save or die" scenario. No matter how low the save DC is, at some point your solo character is going to roll a nat 1, and nobody likes ending a campaign over a single crappy die roll.
This came up during a game where we had to go to a fancy dinner, and bringing in an Anaconda was frowned upon. Not wanting to be completely separated from my companion, I used the handy Carry Companion spell.
If combat breaks out and I return my companion to full size, when does he get to act? Does he go immediately, or wait until my next turn? The spell description mentions that it is similar to Flesh to Stone, but I'm not able to find any clarification in that or in Stone to Flesh.
Also for what action it is to return your companion to full size: it says "you may return the creature to its normal form at any time simply by placing the figurine on the ground, touching it, and uttering a word of command"--we went with the general rule that if it doesn't mention a specific action type consider it a standard action, but I would like to know if I was wrong in that assumption.
Forgive me if these have been asked, but a search through the rules forums wasn't able to find anything on it.
The big question is: What exactly does "interact with" mean?
This does become a *huge* issue, especially in home games. Some GMs take it as little as "looking at it for a couple seconds" while others say you have to physically touch the illusion first. The articles listed there give a good idea what *I* think it should be, but you'll see alot of table variance.