|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Dealing with swarms would be fine, if their touch AC's were actually mimicing the size of what you're trying to hit.
The mere fact a level 1 character, could spend all of their starting wealth on alchemical items, and still fail to kill a CR 1 swarm, due to not being able to hit the touch ac, is a problem.
If the same swarm had a touch AC modifier for a large creature (as it rightly should) this problem would go away and the low level PC's would have a chance to fight something they supposedly prepared for.
I agree that this seems a fundamental error in the design of swarms.
And part of what makes them suck so badly for low level players.
The fact you are not allowed to target an individual creature sort of implies that the individual creature size bonus shouldn't apply.
Hmm... In theory, the 5th level spell Control Winds could take out an army.
At CL 15, the area of effect is roughly the size of 4 football fields (600' radius). If your army could realistically be in an area that size, then you can easily wipe them all out with one spell if its a windy day.
You just need the right caster level, and ambient wind conditions to get up to Tornado level, and its game over for most human-sized targets.
You're talking 6d6 damage per round for 1d10 rounds... that averages about 115 damage.
Go with the updraft variation ... and since it lasts a two and a half hours, even if they survive the first 1d10 rounds, they're still inside, and likely to continue getting sucked in.
Add in various metamagic effects, or multiple castings, and it gets even worse.
In theory =)
Remember that the ghost will have no material components... so if you want a spellcaster, make sure you give it eschew materials. Even then, that only covers the mundane stuff.... no spells with expensive components.
Have said it before, will say it again:
1 - allows a save (targeting what is usually the good save)
As it stands now, its almost never helpful to cast it, and is a waste of a spell slot.
This spell really needs to be given the force descriptor (to negate item 3 above) to make it at least have a chance of doing what its designed for.
So I know most spells that offer elemental resistance specifically state that that resistance is extended to any equipment the target might have.
But does this apply to racial resistances in general that don't specifically have that language?
Would an Erinyes devil's fire immunity apply to her bow?
Does an aasimar's PC's acid resistance apply to their weapons?
The reason I ask of course, is if a fire elemental risks destroying anything it possesses due to its general nature.
Blinding a witch is the best defense, so the fact that your enemies are doing so makes perfect sense... especially if they know your tactics ahead of time.
Try approaching it from the other side... ie: what means are they blinding you? There are not alot of options for it, but the blindness/deafness spell seems the most likely... and there are lots of ways to protect yourself from that.
a ring of counterspells (with blindness/deafness therein). They're pretty inexpensive.
spell immunity (lvl4 cleric spell). Though the duration isn't perfect and would require some foreknowledge of an upcoming fight.
Remove blindness is a 3rd level spell, so can be made into potions. Have a few of those. Or make a wand of the same.
Hell, just use dispel magic.
Also, Fly-By has no prerequisites, so it not being quite as good as spring attack or ride-by from an AoO perspective is not out of line.
Though it does allow any standard action (not just attacks) which is nice.
A masterwork obsidian weapon is not enough to ignore the fragile quality.
Other fragile weapons masterwork is enough, but not for obsidian.
Also, a gun is neither a slashing nor a piercing weapon, and as such, is not eligible to be made of obsidian. (The bullets are, the gun is not)
Am assuming we can still offer ideas here!
Would love to see a boon that allowed one to purchase (or add to an existing item) an effect equivalent to that gained when creating items using the Create Reliquary Arms and Shields feat?
Normally, this is just a 250 gp cost adjustment on an item, so seems like it might be in the range for a boon.
If I want to have my bonded item to be a quarterstaff with one silver end. (I'm picturing a silver tip on a regular wooden shaft)
Is this doable, and how does one get there?
The quarterstaff, being a double weapon, would require both ends to be masterwork... does the basic level 1 arcane bond cover that, or is just one end of it masterwork?
Making one end alchemical silver of course is not possible at level 1 as the arcane bond description states no special materials at level 1.
But that seems to imply that special materials would be possible later.... how does one go about that?
Can one have a quarterstaff where one end is wood, and the other metal?
Could I just get the masterwork quarterstaff (for free) via the class feature, and then pay the extra 90 gp to have one end silvered?
Other then Magical Knack, what other ways are there to get a +1 caster level for an entire class?
Am making a mystic theurge, and would really like the caster level on both the arcane and divine sides to be equal so I don't have to worry about making math errors! =)
Ya, I almost instinctively do a select all, and a Cntrl-C copy, before I hit the Submit button if I've been typing for a while now, just to try to avoid that sort of thing.
All that literary gold, lost to the internet gods!
A few problems still.
Claws (Ex): An eidolon has a pair of vicious claws at the end of its limbs, giving it two claw attacks. These attacks are primary attacks. The claws deal 1d4 points of damage (1d6 if Large, 1d8 if Huge). The eidolon must have the limbs evolution to take this evolution. This evolution can only be applied to the limbs (legs) evolution once This evolution can be selected more than once, but the eidolon must possess an equal number of the limbs evolution.
Note the bold part.
You are applying claws to legs three times. You can only do it once.
Not to mention you're over your attack limit by 1, as others have pointed out (you can't ignore the bite you get for free)
You have the choice to use it to replace a d20 roll you are required to make not one you have already made.
Tense is important =)
So ya, once you roll the dice, you can no longer replace it.
And as mentioned, you are missing a key phrase on the crafting of weapons.The caster level of the Keen property DOES have to be met as it is a requirement.
See posts above.
The CL is indeed a requirement for crafting the item.
If you look in the magic crafting rules, under weapons, it says:
Creating a magic weapon has a special prerequisite: The creator's caster level must be at least three times the enhancement bonus of the weapon. If an item has both an enhancement bonus and a special ability, the higher of the two caster level requirements must be met.
So the CL 10 prerequisite does indeed need to be met.
Now whether you can bypass this with a +5 to the DC, that's a different thing. Just wanted to point out that the CL for weapons is not just to determine the DC.
Because then it would have just said 'druids'... just like every other line on that same table.
Instead it says: only druids, and is the only line in the table to make that very important distinction.
Why do you not agree that it might be different for a reason?
Since you're the only one here arguing the contrary... I'm going to just assume you're not going to change your mind, and leave it at that.
As it is the only source of languages in the Core book... its kind of necessary to list all languages there.
Again, the fact its the only one that specifies 'only' is kind of telling. There would have been no reason to state that otherwise.
Anyone ignoring the 'druid only' portion of the linguistics skill is not following RAW or (IMO) RAI.
There is a big difference between 'druids' and 'druids only'.
Druidic is denoted differently for a reason.
The fact that Alchemists can use spell trigger items for spells on their formula list and Investigators cannot, kinda leads one to infer that the Alchemist is more caster then the Investigator.... =)
So if the Alchemist can't, then the Investigator shouldn't!
As long as the troop of zombies stays together (and thus remains a troop) you can abstract it in a way that even though you might only be controlling 'some' of them ... the others kind of follow along. Move mentality and all that. So its more like you're controlling a few key individuals, and the rest are following their lead.
If you were to split up the troop... like by having each of the individuals separate from the others... the troop would break down, and the zombies that were before just following along, now have no one to follow, and start acting like individual uncontrolled zombies.
Its not overly difficult to explain how you could control them as a hoard, but not as individuals, this way.
Hmm.. not sure if it has a reduced cost (like the bane (horse) one did... actually that one was added for free)... I do not think it did.
Scenario in Question:
Day of the Demon ... was made by devils to beat on demons, so there was a thematic reason for it not to be Evil Outsiders as a whole
I might like to join in on this if there's room.
With a level 5 dwarven ranger and his animal companion.
I have to check some stuff before I can fully commit, but wanted to post for now.
Should know tomorrow.
Jaklyn the Red wrote:
You're ignoring part of the text that you quoted.
Lets requote it:
The strangler is always considered flanking her target for the purpose of using this ability.
The important part bolded...You are not considered flanking for all purposes when you grappling them. You are *only* considered flanking for purposes of the Strangle ability. So the sneak attack from the Striker archetype would not apply as you are not flanking for purposes of that ability.
The sneak attacks from the two archetypes wouldn't really work together would they?
The Stranglers sneak only happens when its grappling, so the Strikers won't apply as it does not. The Strikers sneak applies to normal sneak scenarios... so the Stranglers won't apply as it does not.
Suppose there's the odd case where you're grappling a flat footed/flanked opponent where they both might kick in.
Seems like you won't get more sneak attack damage... just the ability to use some form of sneak attack in a few more situations. Martial Flexibility seems way to handy to give up for this.
Master of Shadows wrote:
Take 1 level of sorcerer, cast magehand before fighting. As long as you can maintain concentration and point a finger between shots then mage hand can rotate the barrels for you. This should allow you to get up to your full number of attacks granted by your 2 weapon fighting feats.
As MoS mentions, mage hand requires concentration to maintain.But he missed the fact that concentrating is a standard action in and of itself.
So the number of shots you'd get while using mage hand to rotate the barrels, is zero.
The fact the grab ability only works on creatures one size category smaller is somewhat limiting (this is different then the universal grab rules!)
I've tried making grabby eidolons, but usually get hung up on that size restriction and abandon the idea.
Having four legs via evolutions does not qualify you for quadruped evolutions. You have to be a quadruped to start with.
All evolutions limited to quadruped or serpentine base forms a PC can never qualify for.
This is a small list mind you, as there are only 4 restricted to non-bipeds (Pounce, Mount, Constrict, and Rake)
You are missing part of the Large evolution description. The important part being: The eidolon must be Medium to take this evolution.
So it can not be taken at all on a small, large or huge sized critter.
Giving your troop shields and allowing them to use bows seems kinda like cheating... because you know their ac isn't going to change depending on if they're using ranged or not.
Be a lot less paperwork if you didn't make it necessary. Lose the shields!
Personally, as someone building up a PC for a similar sort of schtick, I view it as this:
The weapon attack only has one of the wierd words attached to it. If the weapon hits, that word hits... and all the other words follow, each requiring their own seperate attack roll, and all having to target the same person.
So delivering it via the weapon really isn't that advantageous (it only affects one of the words (the rest resolve normally), you have to hit normal AC with that one (instead of touch), and all the other words go towards the same target (instead of being able to split them up). The upside being one of action economy as you get to do both instead of just one).
I like to think of it as a tracer round =)