|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
I would allow it simply because you end up "casting" an augmented spell.
If I say I am casting my Augmented spell, the alchemical item is now a required Material Component, no different than Casting a Reach boosted Metamagic Spell now has a Required +1 Spell level. I think of it along the lines of Metamagics & it looks more clear to me.
Well to be fair, its actually the Dragon Disciple that would need to be updated (previous to these classes no other class had bloodlines I believe). As it is, strictly speaking if a Bloodrager took a Draconic Bloodline, by your reading they would be forced to either change their original Bloodline, or adopt 2 Draconic Bloodlines.
I personally think the RAI is more in line with allowing Bloodrager to stack its BR bloodline with the DD boost.
Many GM's will be somewhat permissive & allow you to choose them the first time, but after that they are meant to be static, every time you put that headband on it will be calculus & Ancient Thassalonian
I only used inference based on Sorcerer being a Parent class, I imagine a lot of inference is needed with these Quasi combo classes when integrating old content. As far as I can tell the bloodline is supposed to be essentially the same as a Sorcerer's Bloodline.
so, nothing official, but if they wanted to disallow it to work with all of their old content they could have just said so.
First Interaction: the bloodline you have via Bloodrager is Draconic, the Variety of Draconic is unimportant, as the bloodline would prevent you from using Eldritch Heritage for a second Draconic bloodline,
Second: Blood of Dragons adds your DD levels to your BR levels for determining powers, claws & all.
Third: If he can use claws during Rage, he can use Bite during Rage.
Fourth: Eldritch Heritage, by my reading, would not be able to be taken with a second Draconic Heritage (you already have a Draconic Heritage after all)
Fifth: Final Tally: BR levels + DD levels +4 for powers. If something does not Cue off of the Draconic Heritage then the Robe will not help it.
If it was a single strike at 15th level with a light or piercing weapon its more like very light damage. The quoted text is vague but it sounds more like, Clustered Shot, where you roll all your attacks, then roll the damage & treat it as a single attack.
Typically a single attack at 15th level even for a Dex based swash is going to be about 1d8+10 max, so your "almost dead" person needs to be pretty low.
I actually only inferred no further action was needed after reading the rules on Bardic Performance, & I didn't recall reading anything about extra abilities needing extra actions unless they were specifically called out. If there was an Extra action needed contrary to the rules of Bardic Performance, I would expect it to be spelled out in the new ability.
Since there is no active intervention on the players part (aside from Holding it) I would pose him 2 options, only the one bound, or you can roll 1d3 & it is done randomly, basically, whichever one activated first to catch the soul.
1. I do not think it takes any extra actions as you have to already be using your Bardic performance to control the water via Watersong, which has already taken your standard action & a free action each round to continue it, you expend one extra round for each hit.
2. Those feats indicate you are using the slam, which for all intents & purposes, you are not. I do not think you'd qualify for either as the character has no natural Slam attacks to qualify with.
3. I think for the purposes of Flanking the manipulated water could almost (but not exactly) be thought of as its own creature (akin to a Water Elemental) your feats would not be used for it.
well the problem with AC & the CMB examples is that, as I said, if you have shield, armor & Nat Armor, you have 3 seperate parts of the formula being filled. Its like if you have an enhancement bonus to Strength only when grappling, it would stack, because the bonus is to the Strength portion of the CMB formula, or if you have a spell cast on you to make you Larger it boosts the CMB for Grapple by adding a size modifier. (side note, the +2 to strength from getting bigger is also a size mod so it would stack with the enhancement bonus)
Ultimately it comes down to the detail saying that they are both the exact same part of the CMB formula, much like stacking a Shield & the Shield spell would be, both fill the Shield portion of the AC formula.
I think it would. Demoralize actions do not stack shaken effects to get further levels of fear, however this is not stacking, it is just staging up. However it would take 2 actions on your part of course as you stated.
The Duration goes all the way back to the original Intimidation roll.
DC= 10 + the target’s Hit Dice + the target’s Wisdom modifier.
Duration: 1 round +1 round for every +5 you beat the DC by.
my apologies, I was just trying to ensure I was clear about things.
IMO, better to take Bred for war & a second trait that does something different as BfW covers what Serpentine Squeeze does already.
As to the OP's Dilemma, CMB is a form of attack, I would say they do not stack as they are both attempting to augment the attack action be it a CMB attack (grapple, Bull Rush, Trip) or a Full Attack Action. If they were different values such as a +2 competence to CMB & a +1 to attack, the +1 would only be active when using FAA (or other similar attacks) while the +2 would take over when using a Bull Rush (take the greater of the bonuses)
a few things to note:
1. These are not Competence Bonuses, they are Trait bonuses (this distinction is important for other stacking purposes).
2. Serpentine Squeeze would take priority for Grapple Checks. Howver Bred for War would aid in ALL other CMB uses.
The problem you are running into is that technically speaking your Armor is not an AC bonus it is an Armor Bonus with a static AC value same with a Shield Bonus & a Natural Armor Bonus, they are 3 separate bonuses that add into the Final AC formula.
These 2 feats are Both Trait Bonuses that add in the exact same slot. Think of it like a Formula: A=B+C+D+E the 3 ac boosts fit into a different letter of that Formula, these 2 feats both fit into the SAME letter in the formula.
I would think that if you are going to use the claim that UAS is both Manufactured & Natural, then the 2 may not be separated. As such if ANY aspect of the attack is considered Manufactured you relate that as a Manufactured attack. since the remaining natural attacks are not in any way considered Manufactured you relegate those to the place of Secondary attacks. By doing so they are required to be made at the -5 that all Secondary attacks are made at.
Belt of Giant Strength is an Enhancement Bonus to your Strength
+1 sword is an Enahncement Bonus to your attack,
same type, but affecting 2 different things, they stack
Amulet of Nat Armor is an Ehancement to Natural Armor, +1 Armor is an ehancement Bonus to Armor, +1 Shield is an ehancement bonus to Shield all 3 are different types, they stack
Bracers of Armor are an ehancement Bonus to Armor, +1 Armor is an ehancement Bonus to Armor, take whichever offers the greater Bonus, they do not stack.
Character Level is in most cases synonymous with Class Level, some exceptions include Multiclass characters (who add all classes to gain Character Level), any race that may have a Level adjustment (though I do believe PF completely got rid of ECL races), Horses (or other mounts) purchased at random often do not have a Character Level as they do not have 1. an NPC class, 2. a PC class 3. a Monster Class. exceptions include mounts obtained via class features, or Leadership feat which usually Follow the rules for Animal Companions (I believe)
Both Bite & Claw are considered Primary attacks which means both receive full BAB & Full Strength. If either was a secondary it would probably be far less an issue as they would also be at a -5 BAB & at half Strength.
Realistically a Rogue could be putting out 3 attacks as well, & only one at a -5, full level Inquisitor by lvl 9 who is dual wielding can have Bane on both weapons & Bane is a bit stronger than Holy, & also can change their bane target with a swift action, so they get Bane on all attacks against pretty much any type of opponent. All in all, not while you may be getting full BAB, I don't think it is too much damage (as a note, that Inquisitor can also add Flaming to both weapons so they are tossing essentially +3d6+2 damage/hit on every strike for far less expense)
in the long run it probably wouldn't make much difference, giving shield potions to your main tank means he doesn't NEED to buy a shield most of the time, also makes the tank less likely to be the recipient of Magic Missile other spells...who knows, players can be inventive. But remember that whatever the PC's use the enemy can use too.
it essentially would invalidate Mithral as a material & do a much better job also make Rogues have soooooo much better AC's than they have already by using much more of their Dex for AC (or really anyone who has good Dex for AC)
Actually looking at that section in the PRD it says that it grants "Improved Cover" of +8, not Total Cover
Attacks from Land: Characters swimming, floating, or treading water on the surface, or wading in water at least chest deep, have improved cover (+8 bonus to AC, +4 bonus on Reflex saves)
Actually Total Cover doesn't give any AC bonus, you cannot attack someone with Total Cover period. So around a corner gives melee cover, which is handled as a normal cover (the term melee cover comes from the PRD) as a side note, it only marginally doesn't count as total cover as only 1 corner would be able to be used to determine attack.
Which since it is not a Rogue/Ninja means no, as a side note, my interpretation was in favor of trying to let a Multiclass Rogue attempt to stay competitive, which made sense in my mind as the way it gets ruled, means Rogues should beware multiclassing more than other classes.
so Rogue Levels (ignoring everything else about the Rogue) are all that matter. I think I am starting to see where my flaw in the logic is coming in. So realistically, any Rogue who takes a Prestige Class will never be able to Sneak Attack anyone who has IUD as a Class Ability.
No it doesn't the closest interpretation of a Hard Corner I could find was in the example of fighting around a Corner, everything indicates that a corner gives total Cover & means that you cannot attack, which means you do not threaten & do not flank.
So bottom line is this: IUD stops anyone from Flanking. The exception is anyone with Precision Based damage attacks who also have IUD, in this case, count all of your Uncanny Dodge class levels, if they total +4 over the opponent's levels then you may Flank (if you have a partner who also may flank) & use your sneak attack.
I will try to answer some.
1. It gains the Zombie Template except where it specifies the differences
2. I imagine it would keep the normal types from before.
3. I believe since it is dead, any attempts to heal it would meet with failure, you would need something to the extent of Raise Dead or better to actually revive the target.
4. I am unsure on this point, however if it does, it has no ranks in Perceptions or any other skills (as part of the Template) so it would be stat only.
Its any class that offers IUD, if a Rogue & a Fighter approach a Barbarian in flanking position & the Rogue is not 4+ levels above the Barbarian, the Rogue does not Flank the Barbarian (& the Fighter does not Flank the Barbarian at all)
As I am reading & understanding this- IUD makes anyone who has it Immune to Flanking period. The exception to this is if a Rogue has 4 more levels than the Barbarian has levels. However this would mean that you would need 2 Rogues to do this.
Any Levels from a class that offers Uncanny Dodge are added together to determine total level (such as an 8Rogue/5Barbarian counting as level 13 for purposes of Flanking as opposed to an 8Rogue/5Fighter only counting as lvl 8)
My question then becomes this. if 2 level 15 barbarians come across a level 10 Rogue...Do they flank him?
According the the rules, if the target has Cover (in this case Total Cover) you cannot attack the target, if you cannot attack the target u do not threaten the target, which means you & the player in question are not flanking the target which means neither of you receives the +2 bonus for flanking.
Sneak Attack does not overcome IUD, Flanking is a condition that happens before Sneak Attack is even considered, if the conditions for Flanking someone with IUD are correct then Sneak Attack activates as it would on someone without IUD.
Actually it does there is a special rider on the Multiweapon fighting feat that reads "Special: This feat replaces the Two-Weapon Fighting feat for creatures with more than two arms." so if you find a way to get more than 2 arms, it would auto change to Multiweapon Fighting feat (From the PRD)
The original Question was about overcoming IUD, my post was simply about IUD, if you are moving on to some other aspect that is different. For the purposes of Sneak Attack Damage, if Precision Damage ability says it stacks with Sneak Attack it stacks. However, when it comes to overcoming IUD only classes that offer Uncanny Dodge count (& only after they get the Uncanny Dodge ability, I would think.)
Essentially you have to divorce the idea of Sneak Attack & Uncanny Dodge from each other. Your sneak Attack effective level is meaningless when it comes to dealing with Uncanny Dodge, only your Uncanny Dodge levels matter. If your Uncanny Dodge levels are +4 over the other persons then you do your Sneak Attack Damage. As far as using your Sneak Attack in other ways...
Feint works, Invisibility does not (called out specifically in Uncanny Dodge), Flanking does not, Immobilization does, any method of forcing the Flat Footed status does not. Other options not mentioned that fall into other categories may work.