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

Diego Rossi's page

Goblin Squad Member. Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber. Pathfinder Society Member. 7,658 posts. 1 review. 1 list. No wishlists.


RSS

1 to 50 of 7,658 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

You have bolded the wrong part:

Secret Identity: At 3rd level, a mysterious avenger's force of personality and dedication to her cause give her the ability to keep her true identity secret, even from magical prying. She gains a +4 bonus on Disguise checks in a single disguise of her choice, typically her avenger persona. Once this disguise has been chosen, it can't be changed. She also gains a +4 bonus on saving throws against divination effect. At 11th level, she becomes immune to all scrying effects and other magical effects used in attempts to uncover her secret identity.

A blanket +4 save against divinations isn't bad, and the 11th level ability is even better, as most divination effects count as an attempt to discover the secret identity.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
PRD wrote:

Cover

To determine whether your target has cover from your ranged attack, choose a corner of your square. If any line from this corner to any corner of the target's square passes through a square or border that blocks line of effect or provides cover, or through a square occupied by a creature, the target has cover (+4 to AC).

When making a melee attack against an adjacent target, your target has cover if any line from any corner of your square to the target's square goes through a wall (including a low wall). When making a melee attack against a target that isn't adjacent to you (such as with a reach weapon), use the rules for determining cover from ranged attacks.

Low Obstacles and Cover: A low obstacle (such as a wall no higher than half your height) provides cover, but only to creatures within 30 feet (6 squares) of it. The attacker can ignore the cover if he's closer to the obstacle than his target.

Cover and Attacks of Opportunity: You can't execute an attack of opportunity against an opponent with cover relative to you.

Cover and Reflex Saves: Cover grants you a +2 bonus on Reflex saves against attacks that originate or burst out from a point on the other side of the cover from you. Note that spread effects can extend around corners and thus negate this cover bonus.

Cover and Stealth Checks: You can use cover to make a Stealth check. Without cover, you usually need concealment (see below) to make a Stealth check.

Soft Cover: Creatures, even your enemies, can provide you with cover against ranged attacks, giving you a +4 bonus to AC. However, such soft cover provides no bonus on Reflex saves, nor does soft cover allow you to make a Stealth check.

Big Creatures and Cover: Any creature with a space larger than 5 feet (1 square) determines cover against melee attacks slightly differently than smaller creatures do. Such a creature can choose any square that it occupies to determine if an opponent has cover against its melee attacks. Similarly, when making a melee attack against such a creature, you can pick any of the squares it occupies to determine if it has cover against you.

Partial Cover: If a creature has cover, but more than half the creature is visible, its cover bonus is reduced to a +2 to AC and a +1 bonus on Reflex saving throws. This partial cover is subject to the GM's discretion.

Total Cover: If you don't have line of effect to your target (that is, you cannot draw any line from your square to your target's square without crossing a solid barrier), he is considered to have total cover from you. You can't make an attack against a target that has total cover.

Improved Cover: In some cases, such as attacking a target hiding behind an arrowslit, cover may provide a greater bonus to AC and Reflex saves. In such situations, the normal cover bonuses to AC and Reflex saves can be doubled (to +8 and +4, respectively). A creature with this improved cover effectively gains improved evasion against any attack to which the Reflex save bonus applies. Furthermore, improved cover provides a +10 bonus on Stealth checks.

PRD wrote:


Line of Effect: A line of effect is a straight, unblocked path that indicates what a spell can affect. A line of effect is canceled by a solid barrier. It's like line of sight for ranged weapons, except that it's not blocked by fog, darkness, and other factors that limit normal sight.

You must have a clear line of effect to any target that you cast a spell on or to any space in which you wish to create an effect. You must have a clear line of effect to the point of origin of any spell you cast.

A burst, cone, cylinder, or emanation spell affects only an area, creature, or object to which it has line of effect from its origin (a spherical burst's center point, a cone-shaped burst's starting point, a cylinder's circle, or an emanation's point of origin).

An otherwise solid barrier with a hole of at least 1 square foot through it does not block a spell's line of effect. Such an opening means that the 5-foot length of wall containing the hole is no longer considered a barrier for purposes of a spell's line of effect.

You should use both rules to see if a item is protected against an effect or attack.

Darkholme wrote:

@The Indescribable:

So here is what I take away from that. Let me know if any of this seems incorrect:

1: Line of effect is based on being able to draw at least 1 straight line from a corner of your square to a corner of the square of the target that does not pass through blocking terrain.

True but incomplete.

Darkholme wrote:


1a) It doesn't matter if there is something in the way of the target itself, only if there is something in the way of a square it occupies.

False. "You must have a clear line of effect to any target that you cast a spell on or to any space in which you wish to create an effect."

and "A line of effect is canceled by a solid barrier."
So if there is something in the way and it is not part of the target it block line of effect (LoE for short)

Darkholme wrote:


2: Blocking terrain blocks /*squares*/ not the target.

It depend. Some terrain or item can block Loe to a target but not the whole square.

Darkholme wrote:


2a) Creatures provide cover and you cannot move through their squares, therefore creatures count as blocking terrain.

Imprecise. Creature provide soft cover and that isn't enough to block LoE.

Darkholme wrote:


2b) Because of 1a, In the case of a rat in a steel box in the middle of a 5 foot square, you have line of effect to the rat, it's not protected.

No. You have LoE to the square and the box, but the LoE to the rat is blocked by a solid barrier.

Darkholme wrote:


2c) Because of 2a, In the case of a rat, without a steel box on the other side of a doorway, with a creature standing in the doorway, you do not have line of effect to the rat, and it is protected.

No, soft cover is insufficient to block LoE.

Darkholme wrote:


2d) RAW, it doesn't matter if you are in the way of a direct line to the target, so long as it is still inside a square they can target (IE your square, as a medium creature) then they have line of effect on it.

If with "you" you mean a creature, barring some exception that should be adjudicated by the GM (like a kaiju sitting between you and the target), creatures only provide soft cover.

- * -

While I don't think that it is written anywhere, containers and their content or people and their clothing count as a single target, so if you can target the container you can target the content.

There are exceptions that require GM adjudication or the use of common sense.

The content of a backpack generally can't be targeted simply because you can target the backpack. Same thing for a sack or any other container containing several different items. Same thing for targeting a room or a box with people in it. The basic assumption is that you can target target a container and its content at the same time only if they work as a single unit: water and waterskin, vial and potion, beef can and the Spam in it and so on.

A tower shield give total cover to the guy using it in the right conditions, but normally it only give a bonus to AC, and it never block LoE to other people (barring special abilities that change that rule).

- * -

Typing with a young lady cat walking on the keyboard is hard and slow work, so maybe I have missed something. I will reread this piece alter and eventually add another post.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Umbranus wrote:

I guess that normally a flask and its contents count as the same object. In this special case it can not harm (or even target) the flask but the contents, which still destroys the object (the potion of whatever) even if the flask part remains.

So completely RAW it should not work on stuff in containers but I see the intend clear enough to use it that way. A potion in a backpack on the other hand should really be save.

As this is the rules board I bolded the RAW part. The rest is, in a way, a house rule.

Yes, container and content and people and their clothes count as a single target. Without that assumption the best defense against a large number of spell would be head to toes robes, with gloves and a gossamer veil on the face. Cover 100% of your skin and no spell can target you :P

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Feragore wrote:
Kobold Cleaver wrote:
A big disadvantage of Reincarnate is that, regardless of how cheap it is, the two Restorations remain a factor. A low-level party might be able to get the funds for a Reincarnate, but the equivalent of three Reincarnates? Overall, you still get hurt a lot by death. It's not huge, but it's worth keeping in mind.

While a Raise Dead and its two Restorations costs 7k. Like I mentioned in the OP, you can reincarnate twice and still come out with gold to spare over Raise Dead.

Mechanics wise, you're ignoring the physical trait bonuses. Natural armor, natural weapons (!) or even just better sight. Granted a kobold is still pretty bad, but that's why you can just reroll the table for another 3k total if it damages the build that much. A human doesn't even lose anthing; the feat and skill point isn't a physical trait.

Quote:
Plus, of those eight races, every single one is shunned in polite society. Have fun getting stuff thrown at you, Mister Kobold. Have fun getting trampled by horses, Mister Goblin. Have fun not being allowed near the nursery, Mister Bugbear (hell, bugbears might just get shot on sight).

That's entirely DM fiat. Somewhat mitigated too by the fact you're still you. That goblin is curiously well-mannered and not trying to eat the town's young. And he's also travelling with a party of experienced adventurers. Maybe, just maybe, he's not evil.

Nevermind the value compared to Resurrection. I'd sure as hell pay 9k less to Reincarnate if I happen to get Disintegrated. Even if the race is worse, I still have that 9k gold to try again two more times. Or use the gold to buy magic items. Or buy a casting of Polymorph Any Object.

Reincarnate wrote:
So long as some small portion of the creature's body still exists, it can be reincarnated, but the portion receiving the spell must have been part of the creature's body at the time of death.
Disintegration wrote:


Any creature reduced to 0 or fewer hit points by this spell is entirely disintegrated, leaving behind only a trace of fine dust.

A trace of fine dust isn't a small portion of the creature body.

- * -

The part where you return in "an entirely new young adult body" is way more powerful than the change in race. It is ticket for agelessness and a potentially unlimited lifespan.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

[derail]

blackbloodtroll wrote:

Actually, the term "Negro" and "Colored" are deemed offensive.

Originally an American problem that is overwriting the use of those words in all the world. At least in part of Europe they hadn't the offensive overtone they have in the Americas. In the last decades the influence of the US films and serials has made them offensive and made Black or its translations the non offensive term.

[/derail]

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
master_marshmallow wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
Zark wrote:

I don’t get it. Wraithstrike, Gauss, Diego Rossi, Aelryinth and others have already explained it. The most respected rules interpreters on the forum agree.

Why do others keep on questioning it?

When someone wants to see something a certain way, sometimes no amount of logic will convince them otherwise. I have seen people say the PDT(people that make the rules) was wrong(with regard to how the rule actually works) after they spoke on an issue.

With this situation we are really only debating how it would be if that item could be affected by the rules. Since it is not even a PF item it should not even be discussed in the rules section. It is just like discussing how psionics from DSP and a PF rule interact.

It not being a PFRPG item is very irrelevant, we could just as easily be talking about Celestial Armor being transposed to full plate.

Custom made magic items threads are for the Advice or Suggestion section of the forum.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Crozekiel wrote:


The closest thing to rules the "order of operations" people have quoted is that you can't enchant something with armor enchants that isn't armor (even if it will be armor later). Nowhere in the rules you have quoted does it say that the order of operations come into play when determining statistics... It also doesn't say anything about armor enchantments overwriting the statistics of the armor being enchanted.

Excuse me, but overwriting the statistic of a steel chain mail isn't exactly what Celestial armor do?

It change the basic statistic of the armor but the item description don't say "it reduce weight by x, increase maximum dexterity by Y and reduce arcane spell failure by Z", it say "the new weight is x, the new maximum dexterity is Y and the arcane spell failure is Z".
That is overwriting for me.

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Mydrrin wrote:

The thing you aren't getting is that the reason Mithral has the general rules is because you can make anything from it. With a base of steel you do "this". So it works for scale mail or chain mail or breastplate.

Then you want to apply this general rule against a different material. It's what the problem is. The conception that you just somehow derive how much those bonuses are worth from the different material and cost it into a new and improved item.

Celestial is a certain item, not a general rule, even third party from paths. To me, in my games, they are semi artifacts either given as a major boon or ripped off the body of an angel general. That anyone with major ranks in religion or planes would see your armour and know it's history or even what you might have done by seeing the item. It takes the power of a good god to imbue these attributes into the gold and silver.

Celestial is a material and acts like a material and costs like a material. There is no way to gain improved Armour Check Penalty and Max Dex and Arcane Spell Failure in Pathfinder through enchantment/enhancement, only through change in materials. To allow this improvement through a cost of just gold pieces changes the game. Anything that changes the rules/game to allow isn't kosher in my games.

Especially just to build an overpowered item. IE - truestrike goggles, some people allow them but it just ain't kosher and isn't supported within the game.

Sorry, but the requirement to make celestial Armor are fairly mild:

PRD - Ultimste Equipment wrote:

Celestial Armor

Price 22,400 gp; Aura faint transmutation [good]; CL 5th; Weight 20 lbs.

This +3 chainmail is so fine and light that it can be worn under normal clothing without betraying its presence. It has a maximum Dexterity bonus of +8, an armor check penalty of –2, and an arcane spell failure chance of 15%. It is considered light armor and allows the wearer to use fly on command (as the spell) once per day.

Construction Requirements

Cost 11,350 gp

Craft Magic Arms and Armor, fly, creator must be good

Technically it even break the rule that the CL of an armor should be 3 times its enhancement bonus. If we follow that rules the CL should be at least 9.

PRD wrote:
The creator's caster level must be at least three times the enhancement bonus of the armor.

Thanks to LordSynos for pointing out the difference in Ultimate Equipment, I have missed it. That remove the special material argument, but not the sequence in which you craft an item and then enhance it.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Chengar Qordath wrote:
Diego Rossi wrote:
stuff

And now you're quoting James Jacobs saying:

James Jacobs wrote:
Celestial armor is not mithral—it's actually made of silver or gold (as mentioned in its description), and thus doesn't gain any of the standard modifiers for being mithral at all. It's its own thing. Its lower arcane spell failure and higher max Dex bonus are a result of its magical qualities, not what it's made out of.

And concluding:

Diego Rossi wrote:
Notice how he say that the armor has its how set of special material.
I'd be interested to know how you reached that conclusion.
Quote:


Celestial armor is not mithral—it's actually made of silver or gold (as mentioned in its description), and thus doesn't gain any of the standard modifiers for being mithral at all. It's its own thing.
Quote:
In any event, celestial armor isn't an armor quality. It's a unique kind of armor, and thus has a unique pricing. It does weird stuff; it's really light, it's made of gold, it's REALLY nice looking, it lets you fly, and so on. Its pricing is a result of ALL of these elements, and that's pretty much that.

Both times James has pointed out that being made of silver or gold is part of what make the armor what it is. If you take an item and change its composition you make a different item.

If we take what James is saying into account being made of silver or gold is part of the rules of the celestial armor. As we don't have a rule about what happen if we change its composition we can't make a celestial armor out of steel or mithral or adamantine. It would be like trying to make a adamantine full plate out of wood. Being made of silver or gold is part of the celestial armor composition and creation.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Darkholme wrote:
Mysterious Stranger wrote:
By the same reasoning a rust monster should also be able to kill any living creature because we all have iron in our blood. There is a big difference between containing liquid and being liquid. Besides liquid is a state of being not a substance. Water like any substance can and does exist in all three forms (Solid, Liquid, and Gas).

In the case of the rust monster, living creatures may have iron inside of them, but they cannot be said to be a "metal object" which the rust monster can "touch". The Blue Dragon, on the other hand "destroy an equal amount of liquid [to what they could create with create water] in a 10-foot burst. Unattended liquids are instantly reduced to sand. Liquid-based magic items (such as potions) and items in a creature's possession must succeed on a Will save or be destroyed."

If you want to pursue that line of thought:

PRD wrote:
A burst spell affects whatever it catches in its area, including creatures that you can't see. It can't affect creatures with total cover from its point of origin (in other words, its effects don't extend around corners). The default shape for a burst effect is a sphere, but some burst spells are specifically described as cone-shaped. A burst's area defines how far from the point of origin the spell's effect extends.

Your bodily fluids have total cover against the dragon, like your blood cells have total cover against the rust monster.

More simply, the ability say:
- "Unattended liquids are instantly reduced to sand." - your bodily fluids aren't unattended liquids;
- "Liquid-based magic items (such as potions)" - not liquid magic items
- "Liquid-based" "items in a creature's possession" - not a item, you are a person.

None of those descriptions apply to a person bodily fluids.

Edit: Ninja'ed by Bob.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Morgen wrote:

Don't forget about like Vance, Howard and Leiber. Plus many more.

Really...here is a list.

The trolls regeneration come from Three hearts and three lions by Poul Anderson. They are very different from Tolkien trolls.

Ioun stones and Time stop from Vance (and several ideas for high level magic).
Simulacrum (and again several ideas for spells) from de Camp & Pratt: "Harold Shea" series.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
grimdog73 wrote:
I'm going to chime in here, but I think there is a point being missed. According to page 155 on the CRB, a person wearing a suit of mithral full plate must be proficient in the armor type. It lists specifically mithral full plate in the rules as an example. Unless the barbarian takes heavy proficiency he would get all the armor check penalties. Even if he did take it, he would not get his fast movement bonus, because it is classified as heavy armor. At least that is my understanding of the rules.

It was cited a few times. Mithral don't change the armor proficiency needed. Elven chain change it (and it say it explicitly).

Celestial armor say it is treated as light armor (and medium for celestial plate) but it is unclear if that is limited like for mithral or not.

In every instance, even stacking the rules, the celestial plate wouldn't become a light armor for proficiency, as mithral don't change the proficiency.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Chengar Qordath wrote:
Diego Rossi wrote:
I think that the Creative director opinion has a lot of weight in this matter.
And yet, every time the James Jacobs quote about Celestial being magic and not material comes up, he goes back to being "not a rules guy." Funny how the weight of his opinion varies like that.

You don't see a difference between the Creative Director that is not a Rule Guy saying "I would rule this way" an "As a Creative Director I would have this as jet undeveloped part of the game developed this way"?

In one instance he giving his interpretation of a rule, in the other he is giving his opinion on how a as jet undeveloped part of the game should be developed.

As a added bonus as "fusing" is a mechanic developed by a 3rd part developer it can't be made a official rule by Paizo unless they buy the rights. As it exist it is almost granted that it will not become a Paizo official rule. The same thing that happened for all the non open content 3.5 stuff.

James citations:

James Jacobs wrote:


Celestial armor is not mithral—it's actually made of silver or gold (as mentioned in its description), and thus doesn't gain any of the standard modifiers for being mithral at all. It's its own thing. Its lower arcane spell failure and higher max Dex bonus are a result of its magical qualities, not what it's made out of. In addition, this magic allows folks to wear it as if it were light armor—the mithral versions don't do this because mithral isn't fundamentally magical like the enhancements on celestial armor.

Mithral full plate of speed is more expensive because haste is a VERY powerful effect. Anything that adds an additional attack is going to be guaranteed expensive, regardless of its other effects.

James Jacobs wrote:


In any event, celestial armor isn't an armor quality. It's a unique kind of armor, and thus has a unique pricing. It does weird stuff; it's really light, it's made of gold, it's REALLY nice looking, it lets you fly, and so on. Its pricing is a result of ALL of these elements, and that's pretty much that.

Elven chainmail and the mithral shirt are nothing more than armor made of mithral. They're listed as examples of types of armor made of mithral... we could have also listed mithral breastplates or mithral scale mail or mithral half-plate, but we didn't.

In the end, the prices are fine the way they are. At least as far as I'm concerned. If they're weird to you, by all means change them for your game.

Frankly, the over-examination of tiny fiddly rules bits in an attempt to "solve" the equation of how things are priced is more or less destined to cause only greater confusion. Magic item pricing is equal parts math and art, since the game itself wasn't designed from the ground up by mathematicians.

Notice how he say that the armor has its how set of special material. If you change the special material it isn't Celestial armor anymore.

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Crozekiel wrote:


There is nothing in the rules for crafting magic items or for changing the material of magic items that even brings up order of operations. Literally nothing. If there was, one of you guys would have posted it in the last 3 pages you have been claiming it.

You can enchant a piece of mithra before it is made into an armor?

PRD -Creating Magic Armor wrote:

To create magic armor, a character needs a heat source and some iron, wood, or leatherworking tools. He also needs a supply of materials, the most obvious being the armor or the pieces of the armor to be assembled.
Armor to be made into magic armor must be masterwork armor, and the masterwork cost is added to the base price to determine final market value.
Additional magic supply costs for the materials are subsumed in the cost for creating the magic armor—half the base price of the item.

The rules are clear: you need the armor or its pieces before enchanting it. You can't enchant a piece of mithral with armor powers and then make it into armor.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Suichimo wrote:
Mydrrin wrote:
Fusing is an enhancement bonus of +2. And is from Dreamscarred Press, a 3rd party material.

A 3rd party material that Paizo has said is how they would do Psionics if they put them into the game.

Actually it is a 3rd party material that Paizo has said is how they wouldn't do Psionics if they put them into the game.

James Jacobs wrote:


...

My personal preference would be, of course, to build psionic characters VERY similar to how the sorcerer or the bard works for the power users, or the barbarian for how the soulblade non-power users work. Spell slots and "psionic powers" (instead of rage powers). Then the actual mechanics work fine, and we don't have the concerns about psionic characters being able to nova and make the core classes feel lame.

...

Dreamscarred Press knows a LOT about psionics, and I really hope that they're able to pull off a Pathfinder version of the rules, but they won't be "official." I would rather let them do their thing without involving a Paizo series of approvals and the like, since what Paizo wants from psionic rules is unlikely to be what Dreamscarred Press wants. Furthermore, it's kind of against the whole point of the OGL movement to micromanage other products by other companies.

So while I am stoked that Dreamscarred is doing this, I am not interested in making them "official" for Pathfinder.

....

When and if we do something with Vudra will have to wait for us to decide when and if we ever want to do something with psychic magic. If we do, then it waits until after that's done. If we don't we may or may not use Dreamscarred's psioncs rules... but frankly, as much as I don't like the power point method and the fact that it basically forces the player and the GM to learn a new system in order to do effects in the game that would already be covered by existing methods of using magic... I doubt we'll use those rules. We'll see.

...

We already have a functional system for handling magic, which is what psionics would be in a Paizo psionics book. That means psionics would be handled just like spells. Probably a lot like how spontaneous casters work.

This is, of course, a HUGE departure from how psionics have worked in the past, and that's one reason we're so hesitant about doing much with psionics.

Fortunately, the game's open. And that means folks like the ones at Dreamscarred can step in and do some good work on psionics instead.

...

I think that the Creative director opinion has a lot of weight in this matter.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
master_marshmallow wrote:

It can't replace the stats and also be an adjustment on the stats. That is the point, either it is an adjustment, or it replaces the base stats.

Per the strict interpretation of RAW being heralded as correct by the "no" crowd, it would seem that the armor has it's stats replaced with the new base. Mithral's rules always adjust the base.

If that is not the interpretation, could someone please explain it to me?

It has been explained several times, but you don't want to hear:

- the mithral adjustment is made during crafting.
- the enchantment adjustment effect is applied when enchanting something that happen at the end of crafting, not before.

You can't enchant a piece of mithral with armor enhancements before turning it into an armor.

As it was said several times, the order of the operations matter.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Flawed wrote:
Peet wrote:
Crozekiel wrote:
+1 Peet. I think you summed up my thoughts perfectly... (although, doesn't mithral drop ACP by 3, not 2, so you actually run into 0 ACP with the full plate version as well?)

The reason is that the -3 ACP benefit of Mithral armor includes the -1 benefit from having a suit of masterwork armor.

All magic armor starts as masterwork armor. So Celestial armor already includes this -1, and you cannot get that benefit twice.

Peet

Good catch Peet! Totally forgot the masterwork quality being provided twice. So Mithril Celestial Armor would drop to a 0 and Mithril Celestial Plate would drop to a -1 and you could grab a trait to hit 0 with it if you were planning this.

About Balance:

This being more optimal for rogues is kinda true. Celestial Armor already exists for rogues and Mithril Celestial Plate is only slightly better than that armor providing +3 AC, -1 ACP, -5% ASF. It also costs about 13,000 gp more for the mithril Plate over the regular Celestial armor. Sure that sort of money doesn't matter when you're level 20, but at level 11 that's almost 50% of your characters WBL and likely you wouldn't afford it for a couple levels or even find it as I don't know what store you're buying a 35k suit of Mithril Celestial Plate from so you're waiting on a GM drop. Celestial Armor at level 11 is just over a quarter of your WBL to almost the same benefit. With that extra money you could be buying items to get the other benefits that matter.

About wizards taking it and grabbing Arcane Armor Training the wizard would also have to spend a feat or dip a level to get Light Armor Proficiency which is a prerequisite for the former. A wizard could also use their traits on Armor Expert (Combat) and Armor Master (Regional) and still buy a suit of Celestial Armor only they now need to spend more feats (Or a single level dip) to grab Arcane Armor Training feat line and armor proficiencies. Arcane Armor Training also uses up a swift action which...

Mithral don't change the proficiency needed to use the armor. It will stay a medium armor for that and for arcane armor training.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Crozekiel wrote:

Also, As Marshmallow pointed out when someone first brought up the idea that the magic for Celestial Plate turns the target armor specifically into Medium armor, and doesn't drop the weight class of the armor. You could then just apply the Celestial Armor magic to Plate armor instead of chainmail and end up with full plate as light armor. If you claim it works one way for one of them, then it works that way for the other, and honestly, that is FAR more broken than what we have been suggesting...

In truth, its obviously more likely that there is one magic that drops the armor by a weight category. What else, specifically, it does, is a bit muddy, but it does alter the armors "similarly". Ultimately, still, we just don't know. Until Paizo says something, we can't know for sure.

"You could then just apply the Celestial Armor magic to Plate armor instead of chainmail and end up with full plate as light armor." I suppose you mean breastplate, as there isn't something called "plate armor" in the game.

But a celestial breastplate is simply a reskinned Celestial armor using a breastplate instead of a chain mail.

Abut your claim that there isn't a "celestial armor" enchantment. Very well, if the reduction in encumbrance isn't determined by an enchantment it is determined by special materials, so you can't apply another special material to that armor. Simple, don't you think?

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
master_marshmallow wrote:

Um, sir. No where in the rules does it say that the words "treat as" don't mean that you treat the item in question as what it is to be treated as.

If you treat the armor as medium, then the armor counts as medium. It doesn't count as heavy for the sake of it being inconvenient.

Everywhere in the rules when it say "treated as if" it mean "treated as if" and not "it become".

Let's make an example where your reading will be disadvantageous:

PRD wrote:
Armored Defense (Ex): At 5th level, an armor master gains DR 1/— when wearing light armor, DR 2/— when wearing medium armor, and DR 3/— when wearing heavy armor. At 19th level, this damage reduction increases to DR 4/— when wearing light armor, DR 8/— when wearing medium armor, and DR 12/— when wearing heavy armor. This damage reduction stacks with that provided by adamantine armor, but not with other forms of damage reduction. This damage reduction does not apply if the armor master is stunned, unconscious, or helpless. This ability replaces weapon training 1 and 3, and armor mastery.

Mithral say:

PRD wrote:
ost mithral armors are one category lighter than normal for purposes of movement and other limitations. Heavy armors are treated as medium, and medium armors are treated as light, but light armors are still treated as light. This decrease does not apply to proficiency in wearing the armor.

If we use our reading, the armor is "treated as" but its category don't change, a mithral full plate will give DR 12/- at level 19+, if we use it and translate "treated" as "become" it would provide DR 8/—.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Peet wrote:
I have read elsewhere that in the process of casting a spell, if the spell requires a focus or a material component, then that component may be held in the hand that performs the somatic component. So in the case of a spell that requires a holy symbol, you do not need to hold the symbol in one hand and make gestures with the other. Instead, you wave the symbol around and that comprises the somatic component.

1) The problem is that "elsewhere" is the forum. If you read the rules, they don't say that. Almost everyone hand wave the problem but it exist.

2) Having the material/Divine focus component in the same hand that is making the gestures is very different from making the gestures with a shield.
You can't make the gestures with a shield, even if it is the divine focus you are using.
I can keep my cell pone in a hand and compose a number to make a call.
I can keep my cell pone in a pouch at mi waist, but the pouch can't compose the number I want to call.

Peet wrote:


So if an object counts as a divine focus, the hand holding it CAN normally also be used to perform the gestures for the spell, if such is required.

Yes, that is how most GM rule, but you are trying to go a further step saying that a shield would be usable to make the precise gestures required by spellcasting, something that is not supported by the rules in any way.

Peet wrote:


Wearing an ordinary holy symbol on a string around your neck also fulfills the requirement for the purpose of channeling and spellcasting, and only costs 1gp.
PRD - Channel Energy (Su) wrote:


A cleric must be able to present her holy symbol to use this ability.

Simply wearing the holy symbol on a string on your neck don't work, you need to present it.

Peet wrote:
So frankly making a shield into a divine focus doesn't seem to achieve any mechanical benefit whatsoever under your interpretation. In my mind, adding this property to the item should really do something.

It do "something", the problem is that you want it to "do something more".

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Thomas Long 175 wrote:
LazarX wrote:
KainPen wrote:

DM call, I would say yes it works. As objects has and should have weak points also this is the whole point of Martial artist monks archetype find weakness ability that allows them to ignore DR and hardness of objects.

Damaging object rules state they are only immune to.
Immunities
Objects are immune to nonlethal damage and to critical hits. Precision damage is not listed

You can't do precision damage on something without vital organs.
Indeed, you are flat out incorrect on that. You can sneak attack skeletons, constructs, and a few other such creatures that have no organs at all.

You can sneak attack most creatures. Non animated objects aren't creatures.

PRD wrote:


Sneak Attack: If a rogue can catch an opponent when he is unable to defend himself effectively from her attack, she can strike a vital spot for extra damage.

A non animated item isn't an opponent.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Thomas Long 175 wrote:

May I point out that there specifically are monsters that are immune to criticals but not precision?

(Aeons and swarms btw)

Since objects do not call out immunity to precision, sneak attack does not limit itself against objects, and there specifically are monsters that are immune to crits but not precision I'd have to say that you can sneak attack an object.

PRD wrote:
A swarm has no clear front or back and no discernable anatomy,
PRD- Sneak Attack wrote:
The rogue must be able to see the target well enough to pick out a vital spot and must be able to reach such a spot.

I don't think that it is possible to find a vital spot in a swarm. You can find the vital spot of a single creature that is part of a swarm, but that will not affect the damage dealt to the swarm.

The problem is that "precision damage" is ill defined. KainPen definition was taken from the PSRD20, but it is not an official definition, is something that they made up, so it is the site curators opinion. Well informed but an opinion.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Crozekiel wrote:

Gauss... By your logic, you could not make a set of +1 Mithral Full Plate (or any specific magic item...), because +1 steel plate armor has a set of stats assigned to it (instead of modifiers) and because you can't retroactively apply mithral to a set of +1 steel armor "because you don't make it in that order". That just isn't how stats for magic items are done. You don't apply them in the order it has to be made...

Unless you have some specific part of Celestial Armor (or Plate) that explicitly states the material from which it is crafted gets wasted or altered to become something new in the process, then your argument doesn't work. It just doesn't.

He is speaking of the order in which the stat should be applied.

You start with the stat of a steel full plate.
Then you apply the materials steel full plate -> mithral full plate.
Then you apply the enchantment mithral full plate -> Celestial Plate Armor

So you have:
Full plate heavy armor, move 20, weight 50 lbs, max dex +1, armor check penalty -6

it become

Mithral Full plate heavy armor that count as medium for purposes of movement and other limitations. but not proficiency, move 20, weight 25 lbs, max dex +3, armor check penalty -3

then you enchant it and get

Celestial Plate Armor
Mithral Full plate heavy armor that count as medium (maybe for everything), move 20, weight 25 lbs, max dex +6, armor check penalty -3

Adding special materials is in the equipment part of the rules and it is done when the item is crafted, not after it is enchanted.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Crozekiel wrote:
Diego Rossi wrote:
[...] the armor is still a chain mail or a full plate, and the mithal modifier is applied to the chain mail stats or the full plate stats, so the mithral effect overlap and don't stack.
Also, nowhere does it say mithral changes stats from the base armor and not the stats the armor actually has. At best, this argument would say it gets the stats from mithral, but still only counts as medium because mithral is dropping full plate (a heavy armor) down to medium. Which is ignoring the fact that nothing says that Celestial Plate is considered heavy armor in any way at all...
PRD wrote:
Most mithral armors are one category lighter than normal for purposes of movement and other limitations. Heavy armors are treated as medium, and medium armors are treated as light, but light armors are still treated as light. This decrease does not apply to proficiency in wearing the armor. A character wearing mithral full plate must be proficient in wearing heavy armor to avoid adding the armor's check penalty on all his attack rolls and skill checks that involve moving. Spell failure chances for armors and shields made from mithral are decreased by 10%, maximum Dexterity bonuses are increased by 2, and armor check penalties are decreased by 3 (to a minimum of 0).

Chain ail is a medium armor that is threated as light when made in mithral, plate armor is am heavy armor that is treated as medium when made in mithral.

You threat the class of the armor as the next lower step. But you start with the armor category.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I haven't thread the whole thread, so maybe it was already cited, but there is a single kind of armor that is trated in all ways as a lower level of armor, and it has a specific description in its entry:

Elven Chain wrote:


This extremely light chainmail is made of very fine mithral links.
This armor is treated, in all ways, like light armor, [b]including when determining proficiency.

Look the celestial armors:

Celestial armor wrote:


This bright silver or gold +3 [b]chainmail
...
It is considered light armor and allows the wearer to use fly on command (as the spell) once per day.
Celestial Plate Armor wrote:


This bright silver suit of +3 full plate is remarkably light, and is treated as medium armor.

Without the added text, that "in all ways", the armor is still a chain mail or a full plate, and the mithal modifier is applied to the chain mail stats or the full plate stats, so the mithral effect overlap and don't stack.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Dot

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

See this thread:Do you need your material component(s) in hand to cast a spell?.
There are a few comments about the use of material components and/or divine focuses. It is not clear cut.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
PRD wrote:
The DC to create a magic item is 5 + the caster level for the item.

Pretty straightforward.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Under A Bleeding Sun wrote:

Its tough! Assuming you need to manipulate components and wave your hands around, assuming it takes a hand means anyone without eschew material can't use a rod, and no one with a bonded weapon can ever cast spells.

I asked this very question on the boards and got "you do them both with the same hand." and that kind of ended it. Never got a RAW ruling for it. I feel like thats probably right (must have one hand free) and have never had an issue with it, but I could see a GM in PFS saying something about it based off RAW.

Note that eschew materials work only for components worth 1 gp or less and it don't work for focuses. It would become a mandatory feat for all the spellcaster that don't depend on divine focuses.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
wraithstrike wrote:
So basically we should follow the intent for the spell pouch because the book says so, but for material components we get to ignore the rule despite what the says about manipulating it?

AFAIK It don't say anywhere that you need to manipulate the components with a different hand from those doing the gesture.

For some use of a holy symbol it say the opposite, it describe the cleric brandishing it as part of its use.

As a general rule I think that it is appropriate to allow people to cast spells using one hand even if they use components.

It would be fun to hear the screaming if a Dev came here and said "no, you need to use 2 different hands".

Let's see:
- no spell with a material component and metamagic rod;
- a magus using spell combat would be unable to use spells with a material component;
- a wand, weapon or other hand held items would be a suicide as a arcane focus for a wizard;
- an Arcane Duelist bard would have problems casting spells with material components from level 5 onward (weapon as an arcane bond, luckily for him he can make the gesture with the weapon);
- Cleric with shield and weapon? Better having that shield that work as a divine focus or the birth mark trait.

And those are only some of the possible examples.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
DM Beckett wrote:

Not sure that the stealthy TWFer was ever the Rogue's to steal.

Way, way back in the day Rangers didn't get TWF, but neither did Thieves. I honestly can't remember if there was a specific rule or a common house rule that a Thief could fight with two daggers (and only a pair of daggers), but that's about it. The only reason that the Rogue/Thief was a "skill monkey" was because up to 3.0, they got exclusive skills, no one else could take them. And the Bard was basically a Rogue/Fighter/Druid/Wizard prestige class, (as in you had to be all of those classes to eventually become a Bard).

:P

Way back the TWF was modified only by the character dexterity and raising it was fairly difficult (unless you were a cavalier). So thieves, that generally had a good dexterity, where the characters that used it more.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
wraithstrike wrote:
Raymond Lambert wrote:
I think dipping your fingers into a spell component pouch to retrieve and manipulate the material component is considered part of the standard(whatever) action of casting a spell.

I think everyone agrees with that. The point being raised, not that I think it matters in actual play, is whether or not you actually need to have it in your hands.

I agree that it is very hard to make precise movements while holding something in real life, but the game is not realistic.

I generally rule that manipulating the materials for the M or DF component and doing the fine gestures for the S component are part of the same set of gestures and can be done with the same hand but an explicit rule about that would be nice.

For bulky or weighty components you merely need to touch them.

I am following a rerun of Fringe. You know Peter Bishop? He is constantly doing this trick with a coin even when under stress and while doing other things. In one of the episodes we see him as a child learning to do it and fumbling.
I think it is a good example of fine manipulation of a item while doing precise hand gestures.
It require training, something that we suppose the spellcaster get.

- * -

About your spell pouch argument: we can suppose that the enemy spell pouch had the right components for a few castings and the the guy learning a new spell has to spend time learning it, so there is soem time to get the needed components.

Some spell has components that while they don't have a set price aren't readily available everywhere:
Infernal healing (I know, people will hate me for saying that, but devil blood is not a 0 value component and the alternate component has a price, it is unholy water, 25 gp to the bottle);
The XX shape spells, as they require pieces of the creature in which you want to transform
and so on.

As a player I don't assume that I have the pieces of every creature ever existed in which I can turn or that I can have an exemplar of everything without a listed price in my spellpouch simply because the rules say "Spell Component Pouch: A spellcaster with a spell component pouch is assumed to have all the material components and focuses needed for spellcasting, except for those components that have a specific cost, divine focuses, and focuses that wouldn't fit in a pouch."
Is assumed isn't the same thing of has everything.
If I invent a spell that use a club as a spell component I don't have an infinite number of weightless clubs in my spell pouch.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
wraithstrike wrote:
I am sure fabricate causes problems with other things also. of course it could be ruled that certain things can't be created. The intent is clear even if it won't make sense at times. If we want to use real world limitations all of those material components won't fit into a spell component pouch.

They fall under expensive stuff.

I can have 20 cubic feet of pyrite and cast fabricate to get iron an sulfur. Both th starting mineral and the end product have a value, so thy aren't part of the normal content of a spell component pouch

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Cranefist wrote:

So, I'm getting ready to run a big adventure that is suppose to go from levels 1-13 or so.

As a part of my game prep, I rolled up the magic items for sale in the town and surrounding area. Using the suggested spread for an area a size larger, there is a 75% chance any item of 4000gps or lower is available, plus 10 minor, 7 medium and 4 major magic items.

Without getting into the nitty-gritty, I rolled up a bunch of crap. Most of it was just potions and scrolls. The stuff that wasn't, half was still just crap no character in the group would want.

By the time they are 13th level, if they start packing close to 140,000gps a piece, they won't be worrying a whole lot about their 4000gp magic items.

Keeping up rolling randomly for treasure and the outrageous tedium of rolling up the items for sale if the party were to travel, I would spend hours making lists and it would still all be crap.

My point is, if you follow the suggestions in the book, the party would never have quality gear at higher level unless they make it themselves.

The only other option is for the GM to just use the hand of god to drop the party gear they want, or to constantly roll random gear for all the towns in the campaign until the party can find what they are looking for.

Randomly generating stuff can be a source of inspiration when creating a NPC and is acceptable to determine what is available in a settlement, sometime it can even be fun if you assume that something is misidentified (in a 1st edition game I had an enemy with a worn cursed Scarab of protection that he thought was working properly, there was a heated discussion about who would get the powerful item [in 1st edition it was very powerful] a much dismay when the use later discovered it was cursed), but you must assume that the people wearing some gear will be wearing useful stuff.

The random tables are exactly that: random. As the number of magic items and powers increase it become more and more difficult to roll what your players want and what you want to give them.
So the GM need to evaluate what he want to put in an adventure.

The AP generally give a lot of basic stuff and what the author feel is necessary for the adventure, but, as the basic assumption is that there are magic shops in the world, generally the author don't try to give everything that the player can want.

Another way o get what they want is to commission items. Generally that is how magic items are created initially: someone want the item X and commission it. It would be a interesting piece of role playing to play finding and befriending someone capable to make the different items. It that don't interest the group a magic shop owner can work as an intermediary for them.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
jhpace1 wrote:
And then there's the whole "you have to have the spell, and the caster level to cast it" problem. Take a Handy Haversack, one of the most necessary items in the game, and not too expensive at 2,000 gp. Of course, the Caster Level for that wondrous item is NINE, and there are no "stepping-ladder" spells to get to it, so your stickler of a GM can laugh at you behind the GM screen as your STR 10 Wizard struggles with a 100-lb pack until 9th Level. (Dreamscarred Press made the spell a 1st-level power, so at least you can make Belt Pouches of Storage before 9th Level.)

Before ranting it is a good idea to know the rules.

PRD wrote:

Note that all items have prerequisites in their descriptions. These prerequisites must be met for the item to be created. Most of the time, they take the form of spells that must be known by the item's creator (although access through another magic item or spellcaster is allowed).

The DC to create a magic item increases by +5 for each prerequisite the caster does not meet.
The only exception to this is the requisite item creation feat, which is mandatory.
In addition, you cannot create potions, spell-trigger, or spell-completion magic items without meeting their spell prerequisites.

The CL isn't even a prerequisite, it only set the DC of the crafting check.

PRD wrote:


Handy Haversack
Aura moderate conjuration; CL 9th
Slot none; Price 2,000 gp; Weight 5 lbs.
....
Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, secret chest; Cost 1,000 gp

So, base DC 14, +5 for lacking the spell, total DC 19.

Taking 10 you can manage that with ease at level 3 with a intelligence based spellcaster, level 6 for one with intelligence 10 if he has maximized spellcraft.

The simple fact that you can make a magic item with a CL higher than your one has been confirmed several times by the developers.

Note this too:

PRD wrote:


A creator can create an item at a lower caster level than her own, but never lower than the minimum level needed to cast the needed spell.

The CL of the magic items in the manuals are typical CL, they aren't mandatory. As long as the item CL is high enough to allow the casting of the spell it respect the rules.

Relevant FAQ:

FAQ wrote:

Pearl of Power: What is the caster level required to create this item?

Though the listed Caster Level for a pearl of power is 17th, that caster level is not part of the Requirements listing for that item. Therefore, the only caster level requirement for a pearl of power is the character has to be able to cast spells of the desired level.

However, it makes sense that the minimum caster level of the pearl is the minimum caster level necessary to cast spells of that level--it would be strange for a 2nd-level pearl to be CL 1st.

For example, a 3rd-level wizard with Craft Wondrous Item can create a 1st-level pearl, with a minimum caster level of 1. He can set the caster level to whatever he wants (assuming he can meet the crafting DC), though the pearl's caster level has no effect on its powers (other than its ability to resist dispel magic). If he wants to make a 2nd-level pearl, the caster level has to be at least 3, as wizards can't cast 2nd-level spells until they reach character level 3. He can even try to make a 3rd-level pearl, though the minimum caster level is 5, and he adds +5 to the DC because he doesn't meet the "able to cast 3rd-level spells" requirement.

Edit:

Yes, I started my rant as soon as I read the second post, I see now that other people had already replied, but I have cited several piece of information, so I will leave my post.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Actually there are times in which I fell that this question is a valid one. There is a lot of hand waving about the use of material components and focuses.
I am a magus with my one handed weapon in one hand and I want to use spell combat to cast fireball.

1 hand for the weapon
1 hand for manipulating the material components
1 hand for the somatic components.

I seem that I am lacking a hand.

Where is written that I can manipulate the material components and make the somatic gestures with the same hand? manipulating something don't seem to be the same thins as making "measured and precise movement of the hand" and having some material component in my hand don't seem to conform to "You must have at least one hand free to provide a somatic component."

Some material component is very bulky.
Take Fabricate:
Components V, S, M (the original material, which costs the same amount as the raw materials required to craft the item to be created)

So the material component can be "up to 10 cu. ft./level" of materials, as the target of the spell is, at the same time, the material component.

Exactly who can manipulate up to 200' cubic feet of material? Especially when that material can be something made by multiple , separated pieces, like 20 cubic feet of metal ingots or 200 cubic feet of fleece?

Unless we use a very loose definition of "manipulate", no one can do that.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
DrDew wrote:
Splendor wrote:

There are not alot of magical items in Pathfinder that allow feats, and most of these have variable costs because they are weapon enhancement, armor enchantments or meta magic items.

The ones I have found are as follows:
-Opalescent White Pyramid (Ioun Stone): Is 10,000 gp and grants A specific Martial Weapon Proficiency.
This would be 5000gp if it took up a slot.
-Dark Blue Rhomboid (Ioun Stone): Is 10,000gp and grants Alertness.
This would be 5000gp if it took up a slot.
-Scarlet and Green Cabochon (Ioun Stone): Is 10,000gp and grants the Endurance feat.
This would be 5000gp if it took up a slot.
-Gloves of Arrow Snaring: Grants the Snatch Arrow feat 2/day, and ignores snatch arrow's requirements (Dex 15, Deflect Arrows, Improved Unarmed Strike).
Should be 10,000 for 'at-will'
-Blessed Keepsake: Is 8000gp and grants the wearer the ability to detect a specific outside alignment and the Alignment Channel feat.
-----
I wouldn't make a feat price, I would make each item have a different cost, ones with no/minimal requirements would start at 5,000gp.
-----
For something like the Dimensional Agility feat chain (Dimensional Agility, Dimensional Assault, Dimensional Dervish, Dimensional Maneuvers, Dimensional Savant) I would put around 120,000gp. (Which is what a continuous blink magical item would cost).

This is about working with the rules and not trying to invent values.

PRD wrote:
Charges per day Divide by (5 divided by charges per day)
PRD wrote:
If item is continuous or unlimited, not charged, determine cost as if it had 100 charges.
PRD wrote:
No space limitation Multiply entire cost by 2

This says to me that if an item grants a continuous effect then you would divide the base value of the effect by .05. If it has no space limitation (ioun stone) then you multiply by two.

So to figure out the base value of the effect that a Dark Blue Rhomboid gives, you would reverse the math and divide by two and multiply by .05. Since the only properties of this magic item are "Alertness Feat", "Continuous Effect" and "Slotless; (10,000/2)(5/100)=250gp. This means that a tier 1 feat with no prerequisites has a value of 250gp.

It's the same situation with the other ioun stones that have been mentioned.

The Gloves of Arrow Snaring have two properties; "Snatch Arrows Feat" and "Use 2/day". (4,000)(5/2)=10,000. This means that a third tier (two feat prereqs) feat has a value of 10,000gp. This means if you wanted gloves that grant continuous Snatch Arrows, it should actually cost 10,000/.05 = 200,000gp.

You have missed the 4 before "If item is continuous or unlimited, not charged, determine cost as if it had 100 charges. If it has some daily limit, determine as if it had 50 charges." and the hyphenated 4 after "Spell has material component cost Add directly into price of item per charge"

The whole piece is:

Spell has material component cost -> Add directly into price of item per charge 4 -> 4 If item is continuous or unlimited, not charged, determine cost as if it had 100 charges

It is about adding the cost of the costly components to the production cost, not about the base price.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

AFAIK RAW you can.

If I get your idea right:

level 4:
retrain the feat you selected at level 3 into expanded arcana

then

retrain the lower level expanded arcana to another feat.

It is right?

Costly but feasible.

FAQ wrote:

Retraining: Can I retrain a feat to replace it with a feat I didn't qualify for at the level I originally gained that feat?

Yes. As long as the new feat is a valid feat for your current character, you can retrain the old feat and replace it with the new feat.

For example, if you are a 3rd-level rogue who took Improved Initiative at 1st level, you can retrain that feat and replace it with Weapon Focus. Even though Weapon Focus has a prerequisite of "base attack bonus +1" (which means you couldn't take it as a 1st-level rogue), it is a valid feat for your current level (3rd), and is therefore a valid choice for retraining.

(Note: Likewise, the fighter class ability to retrain fighter bonus feats does not require you to meet all of the new feat's prerequisites at the level you originally gained the feat.)

This feat say you can do it.

There is another way to do it: retraining directly the older expanded arcana. It is not completely clear how it work; a possible interpretation is:
retrain the feat - 5 days
as a part of the same retraining retrain the know spell, 2 days * new spell level.

- * -

That open an interesting option: let's say that I have taken extra arcana as a level 3 sorcerer, learning 1 extra 1st level spell.
Now I retrain it as a 4th level sorcerer. I can take 2 1st level spells? Essentially I could retrain a extra spell in every expanded arcana feat I have taken as soon as I get a higher level spell.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
DrDew wrote:

* (5/100)

there is no *5/100 for constant or unlimited use magic items. Tere is a *1.

As Splendor said, the Dark Blue Rhomboid would be worth 5.000 gp as a slot using item.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

First the golem appraise is keyed to the Thassilonian era. He will chose what was more valuable at the time, not what is more valuable in modern Golarion. That can make a difference.
The blueprint of a gauss gun would be very valuable, if you know how to make the components, but if have late XIX century technology the blueprint of a internal combustion engine would be worth more, as you can make it.

Second, translating and copying the books is a long, slow work. The library is worth a lot of money, but 20.000 books is something like 500 meters of shelves, probably something like 2.000.000 pages of written material.
Copying a book by hand take time and a quality copy would be illuminated and decorated, making the production even slower.

So I would make it a standard profession (scribe) check made to generate income, with the result being multiplied by a modifier generated by the appraise check. So it would be from some ten to some hundred of gp for each week spent copying the books, but the income would last for a very long time.

Note that selling the books for full price would require convincing the buyer that they are not a hoax. If someone was selling a copy of the sermons of Jesus as recorded by Saint Paul, you would buy it o you would thing that the seller is attempting a scam?

All included the library probably is worth millions of gp, but getting them would require a lot of work.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
cnetarian wrote:
Well since a peasant/commoner is unlikely to be able to afford a 2,000g+ amulet of natural armor, I would count most such magic items as 'jewelry' for noble & courtier's outfits. While you might not look like a fop who cares only about your appearance, you also wouldn't look like someone who doesn't have two coppers to rub together.

I think that those traits are meant to reflect someone that care about appearance and fashion. The "noble savage" outlook can be worth a lot of money but generally don't affect people that is used to Louis XIV fashion, while they would be impressed by a oriental stile dress with a ruby on the turban and bejewelled rings even if they aren't the usual fashion seen at court.

cnetarian wrote:


As for the extremely fashionable trait, I'm not so sure, but if anyone can make a fashion trend out of a patch of xorn hide hanging from a leather throng it would be someone with that trait.

True. I would use some of the downtime rules for that, those about gathering influence.

It would be nice in a campaign with a lot of downtime and the players staying in one relatively small area (like in Kingmaker), less appropriate in the typical AP.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Mikaze wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
Insnare wrote:
I noticed in the Player's Guide that androids are referred to as her which is very strange shouldn't they be referred to as it?
Uh...androids have sexes. They are anatomically correct and can have sex. They might not be fertile...but they have all other necessary prerequisites of having a sex. Why would you refer to them as 'it'?

Relevant

I imagine a lot of android characters would take offense to "it".

You read Freefall, the web comic from which that vignette was taken?

Deadmanwalking wrote:


This is also true, and I'd imagine they would. But while calling them 'it' would still be problematic, it would at least make some sort of sense if they had no sexual characteristics. They have such characteristics...so it couldn't possibly make less sense.

Florence is a geneenginered she wolf. She is considered an A.I. as her brain was created and programmed.

Insnare wrote:

It wouldn't be racist it would be specist(although I am not 100% sure that specist would be the proper term because a construct is neither a race nor a species, you could then call it lifist)... whether it is a dick move or not would generally depend on the gaming table, wouldn't it? What goes at your table vs. mine is up to your gaming group and conversely up to mine.

As a side note, you should probably refrain from saying people are racist anyway, which is prejudicial, by the way and I just was bringing up an interesting point, which may or may not be plain semantics anyways... :)

On the side, since Pathfinder is a Roleplaying Game, I would also say that especially in the first adventure if you have a character from anywhere outside of Numera or even those within, it would be legitimate to treat a construct like a machine until the ice has been finally broken, an esprit de corps if you will has been established

It is a great role playing opportunity, no argument about that, and can be a pleasure to play it at the table, on the other hand a lot of people have problems with de-personalizing creatures.

I refer to my cats as she or he or by name (actually I do that when using English as Italian don't have a gender neutral pronoun).
My characters would find rude referring to their animal companion or familiar as "it" and most of them would have a problem with people using it for most sentient creatures, even if they are monsters, unless they are Cthululesque monsters. I think I would not have problems with the player unless it was part of a more extensive behaviour that de-humanize real people.
Some people with more sensibility or personal issues can have problems with de-humanizing sentient creatures even in a game.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Kimera757 wrote:
ou either never use a shield, or you always use one and therefore never use a two-handed weapon. Naturally you can't use a shield and a longbow at the same time.

Buckler.

I think the historical name was different, but there was a target shield that was used by slingers and archers. In warfare crossbowmen used the palvese, a wall shield in our game.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Corsario wrote:

A nice Wired article, with applications in Encumbrance ideas/rulings:

All the Stuff Soldiers Have Carried in Battle, From the 11th Century to Today
How much your character carries with him?

Weird, I don't see canteens in those image until the 1916, Battle of the Somme, kit. There is a round container in the Waterloo kit but it don't seem to be a canteen.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Some item magic say that they have a specific value as jewelery (like the ring of splendor found in the Crimson throne AP) or that that they have some kind of gem in them, but generally the item description don't include that kind of details.

As I envision a amulet of natural armor it wouldn't qualify, as I see it as a pendant made with a perfect dragon scale or some piece of hide from an animal with a though skin. A ring of fire elemental command made by a band of red gold set with a perfect ruby would qualify.
Essentially, it is a GM call and it would be made singularly for each item.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I fully agree Finn. One of my preferred items in the 3.5 was the Cloak of comfort.
It did shed rain and water from the protected area (shoulder to ankles), it had an endure element effect, it produced a couple of liters of sugared tea every day and some edibles and, with a command word it did turn into a waterproof 2 man tent (having pulled down a old canvas tent when wet I would have loved it).

It is a pity that that kind of item are counted against your WBL and eat part it. I low that kind of items. Not powerful for combat, but great for comfort.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I think I would allow the magus to develop a new arcana that allow him to use its ability, but it would require money and time, a lot of time to practice with the ability to the point to be able to use it with spell strike or spell combat.
And I would limit him only to spell combat, not spell strike. A modified form of wand wielder, where the custom attack count as the wand.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Byakko wrote:

In this example, the medium creature with a reach weapon would need to threaten with something other than the reach weapon to take advantage of the provocation.

But there are many other situations that are poorly covered by the rules when it comes to Tiny creatures, such as (just off the top of my head):

1) Does the "5 ft step doesn't provoke" trump the "enter square provokes"?

Yes, see the above post, specific rule against general rule.

Byakko wrote:


2) Tiny creatures with reach weapons (yes, I know 0x2=0... but this is silly) Also, tiny whips.

Why it is sill? Because you don't like it?

As long as we use 5' squares as our unit of measurement adding another foot of reach to a creature with 1' reach don't allow it to attack outside its square.

Byakko wrote:


3) How acrobatics works in conjunction with tiny creatures entering squares.

As for any other creature entering a square:

PRD wrote:

In addition, you can move through a threatened square without provoking an attack of opportunity from an enemy by using Acrobatics. When moving in this way, you move at half speed. You can move at full speed by increasing the DC of the check by 10. You cannot use Acrobatics to move past foes if your speed is reduced due to carrying a medium or heavy load or wearing medium or heavy armor. If an ability allows you to move at full speed under such conditions, you can use Acrobatics to move past foes. You can use Acrobatics in this way while prone, but doing so requires a full-round action to move 5 feet, and the DC is increased by 5. If you attempt to move through an enemy's space and fail the check, you lose the move action and provoke an attack of opportunity.

Situation Base Acrobatics DC*
Move through a threatened area Opponent's Combat Maneuver Defense
Move through an enemy's space 5 + opponent's Combat Maneuver Defense

Byakko wrote:


4) A tiny creature can enter a small or medium sized creature's square, but a small or medium creature can't enter a tiny sized creature's square. (subject to 3 size category difference)

Specific rule for specific size. Exactly what is the problem? My 1 month old cat can enter my square and climb me, I have problem entering her square without stepping on her.

Byakko wrote:


5) Tiny vs tiny sized creature combat is very poorly covered in general.

Yes, because they are outside the base scale of the game: if you really need rules for that you simply change the scale to 1' increments, give the tiny creature 1' reach and then adapt the normal rules to the new scale..

Byakko wrote:


6) Tiny creatures and flanking. For instance, two tiny creatures within opposite squares of a huge creature's space... do they flank? (compare with two small sized creatures on either side of a gargantuan creature)

Tiny creatures normally don't threaten outside their square, so they can't flank.

Byakko wrote:


6) The general oddness that small creatures take the same amount of space as large creatures. Tiny creatures should really be able to fight small creatures with the same ease that a small creature can fight a medium creature.

Actually medium creature take the same amount of space as small creatures, not large creatures.

Byakko wrote:


7) The lack of pricing for tiny sized weapons. This is not some super-obscure edge case. There's a decent number of situations where tiny weapon are useful.

They are sometime useful to adventurers. A tiny fraction of the populace that can find them useful in a small number of situations.

So you will not find tiny weapons in a weapon smith shop, probably you can find them in one out of teen curio shops in a big city. Unless you are playing in a campaign with a large number of tiny creatures there is no reason for a shop to have them, they will be custom build items and priced as something custom build, i.e. priced by the GM as he see fit.
If you are playing in a campaign with a large number of tiny creatures you are playing in a non standard setting and it part of the GM job to decide how those things work in his setting.

Byakko wrote:


8) Many powers and effects call for a creature to move adjacent to a foe and then make a melee attack. Does a tiny creature enter their square instead?

Depend on the power. It it require to touch the target creature, yes they need to enter it.

If it has a range you use the range. Adjacent squares is a range.

Byakko wrote:


I don't think the excuse of "combat is designed around small and medium pcs" is enough to justify ignoring these issues. Would it really be that hard to add half a page in one of the bestiaries or in one of the hundreds of supplements to cover this a bit better?

LOL. Yes, because it wouldn't be "half a page". You speak of a campaign based around tiny creatures. At that point you need to redo the CRB.

The best solution is to change the scale of the game, treating the size of what is the standard creature in the campaign as the new basis for the medium creature and then adapting your game about the new scale.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Bob Bob Bob wrote:
Are you saying the line "Taking this 5-foot step never provokes an attack of opportunity." only refers to the act of initiating the 5-foot step? Because if so, you still provoke for moving out of a threatened square (if you do so). Which is clearly not the intent of the ability. If the moving out of a threatened square doesn't provoke because it's part of the 5-foot step, why isn't entering the opponent's square covered by the same rules? Nothing in the text says "does not provoke for movement", it just says "does not provoke".
PRD - Attacks of Opportunity wrote:
Moving: Moving out of a threatened square usually provokes attacks of opportunity from threatening opponents. There are two common methods of avoiding such an attack—the 5-foot step and the withdraw action.

It is fairly clear that the 5 fott step work only for the movement part when moving away from a threatened square.

PRD - Take 5-Foot Step wrote:

You can move 5 feet in any round when you don't perform any other kind of movement. Taking this 5-foot step never provokes an attack of opportunity. You can't take more than one 5-foot step in a round, and you can't take a 5-foot step in the same round that you move any distance.

Again, it speak of moving.

When moving provoke an AoO? When you you move away from a threatened square.

PRD - Moving Through a Square wrote:


Opponent: You can't move through a square occupied by an opponent unless the opponent is helpless. You can move through a square occupied by a helpless opponent without penalty. Some creatures, particularly very large ones, may present an obstacle even when helpless. In such cases, each square you move through counts as 2 squares.
...
Very Small Creature: A Fine, Diminutive, or Tiny creature can move into or through an occupied square. The creature provokes attacks of opportunity when doing so.

Fine, Diminutive, or Tiny creatures have a special rule that allow them to move into a square occupied by a non helpless opponent. The same special rule say that that provoke an AoO that is separated from that provoked by the act of moving away from a threatened square.

The first citation explain that the 5' step only work for the AoO generated by moving out of a threatened square. Not for other actions.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
OldSkoolRPG wrote:
Kirth Gersen wrote:
OldSkoolRPG wrote:
Its up to the GM to decide how far away you can hear said Yeth Hound through a closed door.

Only in 1e/2e. By RAW, in 3e we had the Listen skill instead, and in PF we have a skill called Perception, which includes DCs for hearing stuff, with modifiers for distance, intervening doors, etc.

Just as, when a character climbs a rope, it's not up to the GM to decide if he/she falls. It's decided by rolling a d20, adding the Climb skill modifier, and comparing to the listed DC.

Technically true but I don't know of a GM who is going to have a player roll a Perception check every 10' with increasing +1 DC until they succeed. Instead the DM is going to decide how far the PC may reasonably not be able hear the source and call for the check at that point.

Agreed, it would be madness to penalize the characters with the better perception.

To me making a successful perception check is more than simply hearing something. It implies having an idea of what you are hearing or seeing.
That noise in distance can be the Hound of Baskerville, a Hound of Tindalos or a normal hound. With a successful perception check you are capable to dismiss the normal sounds that aren't relevant.
Same thing for seeing something. That dot in distance is a elk, a centaur or a lamia? You need to concentrate on it or it is meaningless?

I agree with OldSkool, if you see or hear the creature you fear the panic resume. It don't matter if the panic was originated by a visula, sonic or spell effect.
After all if we are made fearful by a spell we don't see the spell being cast again the next round. The origin of the fear is the creature, not the effect that originated the fear.

@ AJAG
I am happy to see that we have cleared the misunderstanding.

questions wrote:


I don't know the Emoticon for smily face on this website but if I did I would insert it here.

We use :-) or :)

AFAIK there are no emoticon in this forum.

On the other hand I don't think that being a jerk to a jerk will "cure" him. Probably it will make him even more of a jerk.
:(

1 to 50 of 7,658 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 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.