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

Dolanar's page

284 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS

1 to 50 of 284 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>

I believe there are also feats that can allow you to make a reach weapon threaten squares around you.


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)


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Black Market...I thought everyone knew about John Shieldtower the Gnome scientist.


maybe +1 cr at best


I knew one of them lasted hours, my mistake lol.


Shield lasts hours, he may not have to waste a turn.


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.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

do you really want the low level 2-h fighter baddie to down a Potion of Shield, getting his huge Armor AC & a Shield bonus without actually using a Shield?


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)


It should work, you have 7HD & the +2 compensates for the 2 dipped levels


Actually looking at that section in the PRD it says that it grants "Improved Cover" of +8, not Total Cover

PRD wrote:
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.


Naturally only if it happened in a permanent way.


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)


I don't see a reason why Multiweapon Fighting would not be used in that situation.


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.


one thing...if you have Two Weapon Fighting & gain an additional Limb, that is capable of combat, you automatically upgrade Two-Weapon Fighting into Multi-Weapon Fighting I believe.


Also note, if the PC Rogue is 4 levels above the opponent who has Improved Uncanny Dodge, he can still sneak attack.


Also if you plan to swap spells to help each other...keep in mind each spell takes up its own spell level in pages in your spell book (most books have 100 pages by default)


Rules as Written (RAW) Rules as Intended (RAI)


go figure, the Swarm subtype is immune to the Grappled condition & the Web spell causes the sticky part by giving the grappled condition...


Per the rules, the swarm would make a saving throw, if they failed they would normally be considered Grappled but since Swarms are immune the the Grappled condition it would not effect them. Their movement would be impacted, as per the rules on "Difficult Terrain" but otherwise they would continue their attack.


No, the Arcane Discoveries are the Purview of the Wizard Class, not the Magus Class. If you want to change that, that is up to a GM, but by RAW, no.


According to some quick research your Wizard ally cannot bind the Suli, as Suli are part of one of the Genie Lineages & the Genies are not susceptible to the same True Name bindings as other outsiders like Devils or Angels.


If a player asked me about this, I would take the player aside & go over their Feats & WBL totals to signify how long their character would have had the feat, which is the same as I would do for anyone else with a similar, if the feat was taken at level 8 & they are now 12, they would have only had 4 levels of the feat.


I am not seeing anything wrong with it from a quick glance.


When 2 Rogues meet, they Compare their Uncanny Dodge (or more Specifically Improved Uncanny Dodge) IUD is the Class Ability that grants the immunity to Sneak Attack by other Rogues, Not Sneak Attack. Classes that offer Uncanny Dodge stack to determine who has priority (as stated in the Improved Uncanny Dodge entry)

just to be clear- a 15th level Rogue & a 16th level Rogue meet on opposite sides of a fight, the 16th level Rogue sneaks up behind the 15 & stabs him (no sneak attack), meanwhile the 20th level Rogue who is 4+ levels above either of the other Rogues would get his Sneak attack against both.


http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items#TOC-Magic-Item-Creation has the information you are looking for I believe.


The first section makes no mention of only working in the moonlight or only when the moon is out, so the 60ft Darkvision will work regardless, the true seeing portion however has the stipulation of needing to be touched by moonlight. (just as a note, the Darkvision would naturally need to be used only in dark places where Darkvision would normally work)


the wording on Improvisation (at least the wording in this post) says nothing specifically about Diplomacy, it simply states "if you have no ranks in a skill, you get a +2 bonus to it" If you have ranks, you get no extra bonus


Improvisation would give you a bonus to Diplomacy alone as it has no ranks in the skill, however once you use Versatile Performance you are technically no longer using the Diplomacy Skill but the Perform skill that you have Ranks in so the Improvisation would not come into effect.


from RAW view? No.


I imagine since it is not stated that it is a free action to dismiss it. Generally speaking if an ability states it acts as a spell except in certain ways, use the spell as a basis & then use the exceptions where needed.


only if the Evildoer was also at the top of the initiative count, the spell states that the new saving throw is not attempted until their turn. so if they are 5th down on the initiative count then 4 other people have their turn before he may make another saving throw, in the mean time the evildoer is helpless.


Dominate Person is handled as such (by my interpretation). Spell is cast, Person is dominated, & a command is made, on the dominated target's Next initiative count (assuming it had an initiative count to begin with) it will enact the command to the best of its ability.


for #2 I would say it is partially a GM decision as Free actions can be limited by the GM. If the GM has no issue with you using 3 free actions in a single combat round then go for it.


I dunno your average 2-h fighter focused on Str would be putting out somewhere around 2d6+6 upwards to +9 at first level granted the Fighter has to make an attack Roll vs the free hit of Magic Missile, but still not anywhere more powerful than a fighter can put out.

a twf fighter might have 1d8+4-5/1d6+2 which can still overshadow the damage a mage using magic missile might put out at first level fwiw.


Once the creature appears it has its own separate actions completely separate from the person who summoned it. I would treat it just as if you had used a Full Round Action & it appeared right before your turn on the next round.


Again I suggest creating a Challenge for a Min/Max player because they will usually take a minimal role like a bard & make it relevant in combat, but those same Min/Max players are often useless in a social setting as they min/max most often for combat which often means sacrificing social abilities.


Concentration is used to keep some spells active.


You would stop dead as the Levitate spell does not allow for Lateral Movement. However, since you are aboard a ship, it can be assumed you have a decent wind & therefor were you able to make a sail from clothing or whatnot you could feasibly sail along with the ship, or you could lift yourself to press against a Mast to propel yourself forward with the ship.

Note: Most of this would become DM Fiat unless you can find rules on sails & how they react to wind & their movement speed based on what wind.

1 to 50 of 284 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 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.