|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
My take is that you can only do what you could do normally, but at a 30' range.
Ie: your keyhole example is fine, while 'around the corner' (I assume not near the corner) is not.
Ultimately, it would also seem to fall under the targeting rules. You must be able to target it in some fashion. A lock is a visible, targetable object while a lock around a corner that you cannot see is not.
Saethori, if being petrified means you are an object then stone to flesh would not work.
CRB p350 Stone to Flesh wrote:
Target one petrified creature or a cylinder of stone from 1 ft. to 3 ft. in diameter and up to 10 ft. long
There is nothing in the rules that states a creature, having been turned to stone, is now an object.
Further evidence that petrified creatures are not objects:
CRB p284 Flesh to Stone wrote:
The creature is not dead, but it does not seem to be alive either when viewed with spells such as deathwatch.
CRB p265 Deathwatch wrote:
Using the powers of necromancy, you can determine the condition of creatures near death within the spell’s range.
It is clear that the petrified creature is still a creature, albeit with the status condition petrified.
The term is not 'stoned' it is 'petrified'.
CRB p568 wrote:
Petrified: A petrified character has been turned to stone and is considered unconscious. If a petrified character cracks or breaks, but the broken pieces are joined with the body as he returns to flesh, he is unharmed. If the character’s petrified body is incomplete when it returns to flesh, the body is likewise incomplete and there is some amount of permanent hit point loss and/or debilitation.
So, if the petrified creature has had significant defacing (body parts removed etc) that will probably kill or disfigure the creature when it is returned to flesh.
The key phrase is "same casting". Your example has you casting fireballs multiple times. Those are not the "same casting".
Even if I send it away to attack something else and then bring it back to attack the enemy.
Now, if I cast a SECOND Spiritual Hammer spell that is new casting and thus I roll a new SR check.
Summary: You roll SR for each fireball.
Heimdall666, as usual, Pathfinder has left off the rules that explicitly stated this and in its place left 'hints' as to the rules.
3.5 DMG p204 section on Suitable Mounts wrote:
At least one size category larger than the character.
In Pathfinder the hints, repeated throughout the rules (including the feat Undersized Mount which is also part of the rules), clearly indicate that a mount should be a minimum of 1 size larger than the person riding it.
You can choose to ignore that RAI, but it is RAI.
As for the feat not being a rule, you are being obtuse. Feats are rules. Even guidelines are rules (according to the Devs).
The mounted rules are pretty badly written.
However, the intent of the rules (backed up by the feat Undersized Mount) is that the mount must be at least 1 size larger than the person riding it which would mean that once that is no longer the case you are no longer riding your mount.
As a GM I would probably rule that either you use a move action to dismount (or quick dismount) or you fall off (as per soft fall).
I suggest just taking the feat and won't have an issue with it your undersized mount any more.
Additionally, carrying capacity is an issue. Your mount's carrying capacity needs to be sufficient to carry your x8+x2equipment weight.
Assuming your character weighs 200lbs and has 100lbs of gear that works out to 200*8+100*2 (generally gear is double weight for a large creature) = 1800lbs.
I could see two interpretations the way it is written.
CRB p349 Stone Shape wrote:
Target stone or stone object touched, up to 10 cu. ft. + 1 cu. ft./level
CRB p349 Stone Shape wrote:
You can form an existing piece of stone into any shape that suits your purpose. While it’s possible to make crude coffers, doors, and so forth with stone shape, fine detail isn’t possible. There is a 30% chance that any shape including moving parts simply doesn’t work.
A) The stone object touched must not be larger than the target size.B) The stone object can be larger than the target size but the area affected is 10cu ft +1cu ft/level.
The comma between the two halves in the target line seem to be two different elements, not one combined element.
Additionally, the description would make less sense if it were A because you would not be able to make a door in a wall (the most common application of making a door).
My take is that it is B.
Dave Justus wrote:
I would take video of the walking, talking corpse and sell it to the highest bidder. Perhaps line the lich player up on talk shows.
First level familiars have an intelligence of 6 and are therefore capable of learning a language due to the high enough intelligence score (they do not need to spend a skill point in linguistics to do this). This was covered in the blog Rub-Eta linked above.
Monkey See, Monkey Do blog wrote:
Once a creature's Int reaches 3, it also gains a language.
The "Speak with Master" ability does not have any wording precluding this.
What "Speak with Master" does is provide the familiar the ability to speak with the Master (which is important for familiars that did not have it before) and that that communication is unintelligible to others without magical aid.
A wizard (or sorcerer) can summon creatures of any alignment regardless of the wizard's alignment.
However, some classes are prohibited from using spells of a certain alignment and summoning an aligned creature makes the spell that alignment (summoning a Lemure = evil spell).
So a Cleric worshiping a good god could not summon a Lemure because the spell is evil but a good Wizard can summon a Lemure because it has no such restriction against spells of a certain alignment.
Note: some GMs may suggest a change in your character's alignment if you are regularly using spells of an opposing alignment. That is up to you and your GM.
Angel Hunter D, the need for handholds applies specifically to ceilings.
Without handholds you cannot climb a ceiling unless you can climb smooth surfaces (such as with Spider Climb).
For other surfaces handholds equate to a lower DC, they do not make the surface possible.
Bestiary p145 Malevolence wrote:
This ability is similar to a magic jar spell (caster level 10th or the ghost’s Hit Dice, whichever is higher), except that it does not require a receptacle.
CRB p309 Magic Jar wrote:
If you are successful, your life force occupies the host body, and the host’s life force is imprisoned in the magic jar. You keep your Intelligence, Wisdom, Charisma, level, class, base attack bonus, base save bonuses, alignment, and mental abilities. The body retains its Strength, Dexterity, Constitution, hit points, natural abilities, and automatic abilities. A body with extra limbs does not allow you to make more attacks (or more advantageous two weapon attacks) than normal. You can’t choose to activate the body’s extraordinary or supernatural abilities. The creature’s spells and spell-like abilities do not stay with the body.
Bestiary p301 wrote:
An incorporeal creature has no natural armor bonus but has a deflection bonus equal to its Charisma bonus.
The deflection bonus is not a mental ability, it is an ability based on being having the incorporeal sub-type. The body you are possessing is not incorporeal and thus does not have the deflection bonus.
I think you and your GM are overthinking the moving of rocks.
The questions for your situation are:
2) How many pounds of rock are in the way and need to be moved?
So, assuming you are level 4 you can move 20lbs per move action which allows you to clear 2 cubic feet of fire clay bricks in 15 move actions (7.5 rounds).
Of course, the material could be denser (such as marble) which would take you a bit longer (17 move actions @level 4) but would still be faster than the shovel.
CRB p91 wrote:
You need both hands free to climb, but you may cling to a wall with one hand while you cast a spell or take some other action that requires only one hand.
So you need both hands but can go to 1 hand while clinging to the wall.
You do not need tools to climb. With a climb speed you can climb any surface provided you can beat the climb DC.
Regarding making the check:
You can take double moves (-5 climb check penalty) but you cannot run while climbing.
Unlike people without a climb speed you keep your dexterity bonus to AC.
CRB p91 wrote:
A creature with a climb speed has a +8 racial bonus on all Climb checks. The creature must make a Climb check to climb any wall or slope with a DC higher than 0, but it can always choose to take 10, even if rushed or threatened while climbing. If a creature with a climb speed chooses an accelerated climb (see above), it moves at double its climb speed (or at its land speed, whichever is slower) and makes a single Climb check at a –5 penalty. Such a creature retains its Dexterity bonus to Armor Class (if any) while climbing and opponents get no special bonus to their attacks against it. It cannot, however, use the run action while climbing.
The same as if it was not shrunk down to medium size. The rules only account for the size of the creature to determine reach. There is no rule that states weapon size is relevant to reach.
If you take a Tiny 2handed weapon with the reach property and stick it in the hands of a medium character (counts as a light weapon) it would still have the reach property and still allow the medium character to threaten 10'.
Does this make "logical sense"? No, but this is the rules forum where rules do not have to make sense. :)
I am new to pathfinder and a GM and player> they party of player is a dm'ing are rule mongers. They always have detect magic going do end y thing magic (I,e, traps or item are pointless. I need a to know if there is a fix for this ? They have it running at all times. This has made magic raps pointless. help please
Texas_ogre, basically, traps have been progressively marginalized with each new version since 3.0 came out.
Back in the "good old days" you could have a dungeon full of traps and only a rogue could do anything about it. This had a number of problems.
I agree that traps need to become more relevant, but they should not be an encounter unto themselves (usually). That is bad trap design. The best traps are the ones that have a battle involved.
Orfamay Quest wrote:
And this is why I ad-hoc CRs from traps. The existing CRs are almost always too high.
Not an official list, no.
In order to be made into a potion (or oil) the following must be true:
And that is why you can make a house rule, but that doesn't change the rules as they are written. :)
These kinds of contradictions are a product of a rules system that does not (and cannot) take every possible scenario into account. That is why the GM should work with the players to figure out what works for their table but that discussion has no place in this forum.
You cannot have it both ways Rysky. Either he is resisting the spell, thus requiring an attack roll and saving throw, or he isn't.
In any case, this is a futile discussion. You are ignoring several rules and trying to logic your way around them. You are free to houserule that you can use beneficial non-attack spells in an AoO, but that is not how the rules are written.
Here you go:
CRB p216 wrote:
(harmless): The spell is usually beneficial, not harmful, but a targeted creature can attempt a saving throw if it desires.
By declaring he did not want the spell (thus forcing an attack roll) the recipient has already declared that he is resisting the spell and thus is going to make the save attempt.
You cannot have it both ways, either you are resisting the spell (necessitating both the attack roll and the save) or you are not.
And yes, this is cheesing the system because this is clearly not the intent of the rules. Does that mean it is an unreasonable house rule? No, and I did not say it was.
So lets go with your logic: The "ally" acts like an "enemy" in order to be eligible for you to make an attack of opportunity to buff them.
Next, since they have already declared that do not want the effect cast upon them they must now roll a saving throw to negate/reduce the buff (most buffs have a save).
Yup, now your buff spell just failed altogether. Enjoy! :)
(Note: this is just me following your logic to it's conclusion, not that I agree with this stance..it is still an attempt to cheese the system.)
None of the language in these spells even suggest that I actually don't have to make an attack roll to use something beneficial against an ally, that's just an assumption that the Ally in question isn't dodging the beneficial spell.
Actually, the rules SPECIFICALLY state that you automatically touch an ally (friend) but require an attack roll to touch an enemy.
CRB p185 wrote:
You can automatically touch one friend or use the spell on yourself, but to touch an opponent, you must succeed on an attack roll.
Again, you have failed to show how touching an ally with a beneficial spell qualifies as an attack where I have shown in several places that the rules qualify an attack as something that is offensive in nature, harmful, or a hindrance. There is nothing in the rules anywhere that indicates a beneficial effect is an attack.
Note: you have tried to conflate things by bringing up inflict spells. While the wording is similar between inflict and cure the effects are dramatically different in most cases.
Again, if it is harmful it is an attack, if it is not harmful, not a hinderance, etc. then it is not an attack.
You took the section you bolded out of context. You forgot the bit about whether or not it is an offensive combat action.
Healing someone is not an offensive combat action.
As for the harming, there is another sentence there you are glossing over that defines what are attacks. "All spells that opponents resist with saving throws, that deal damage, or that otherwise harm or hamper subjects are attacks."
Spells delivering a beneficial effect are not attacks.
In short, anyone trying to use an AoO to deliver a beneficial spell is trying to sidestep the rules.
Hardness does not depend on thickness, the number of hitpoints is dependent upon thickness. However, that still does not apply to armor which has hitpoints equal to 5*armor bonus +10*enhancement bonus.
To determine the armor's hardness first determine the material the armor is made of then use the second table for the hardness and add +2 for every +1 enhancement bonus the armor has.
To determine the number of hitpoints multiply the armor value by 5 and add +10 for every +1 enhancement bonus the armor has.
CRB p208 wrote:
Attacks: Some spell descriptions refer to attacking. All offensive combat actions, even those that don’t damage opponents, are considered attacks. Attempts to channel energy count as attacks if it would harm any creatures in the area. All spells that opponents resist with saving throws, that deal damage, or that otherwise harm or hamper subjects are attacks. Spells that summon monsters or other allies are not attacks because the spells themselves don’t harm anyone.
Right there, if there is no harm, it is not an attack.
My take: the game does not clearly identify who is an enemy and who is an ally. That is up to the people playing to determine.
However, you still cannot deliver a held cure spell as an AoO if that cure spell has a positive benefit. You can only deliver it as an AoO if it has a negative benefit (thus constituting an attack).
While not a written rule there is a basic underlying principle here. NPCs and monsters are written as 1/2dX added together THEN rounded down.
Note that 1/2dX is not the same as X/2. It is average number which is the total sum of all possible rolls divided by the number of possible rolls. For 1d6 that is (1+2+3+4+5+6)/6 = 3.5
Example: 5d8 = 5*4.5 (4.5 is 1/2 of 1d8) = 22.5 rounded down to 22 (+mods).
So, non-PFS hitpoint average is as follows (used for NPCs and monsters):
PFS hitpoint average is as follows:
Edit: This information (average hps) was included in the 3.5 DMG on page 198.
3.5 DMG p198 wrote:
The table then went on to show what I have showed via math above (D6 gained 3 hp every even level and 4 hp every odd level, this being based on getting maximum hp at first level and the first 1/2 hp is at your first even level).
The rule regarding ending rage is wonky. By RAW, if you are unable to take actions (stunned, paralyzed, whatever) you cannot stop raging but that is clearly not the intent.
So, go with the intent here, which is that if your first thing to do on your turn is drop rage then you are not paying for another round of rage.
Is there an actual "Rules Question" here?
Perhaps this should be in a different forum such as the Pathfinder RPG General Discussion forum?
As per that forum's description: "This forum is for general comments about the Pathfinder RPG and discussing the system with other gamers."
This seems more in line with a discussion about the system as opposed to a Rules Question.
MeanMutton, Chess Pwn is correct.
A tiny creature (such as most Familiars) having Alter Self cast upon it would have +4 Strength and -2 Dexterity modifiers (as per the Table on CRB p212) before the Alter Self spell's ability score modifiers of +2 Strength or +2 Dexterity kick in.
CRB p212 wrote:
If a polymorph spell is cast on a creature that is smaller than Small or larger than Medium, first adjust its ability scores to one of these two sizes using the following table before applying the bonuses granted by the polymorph spell.
Just a note, staggered creatures CAN coup de grace, but it takes two rounds to perform.
CRB p186 wrote:
hasteroth, if you cast shocking grasp you are holding the charge until you discharge it. Spell Combat does not change this.
A couple examples of how this works:
2) I am a Magus and cast shocking grasp, I miss with my 2 sword attacks. Next round my attack hits and discharges the spell. (Note: I won't have a second attack because I wasn't using spell combat.)
3) I cast Shocking Grasp before combat, I am holding the charge. A couple rounds later combat starts and my first hit (either touch attack or through my weapon if I am a Magus) discharges the shocking grasp into the target.
Undone, you have completely failed to understand what I wrote.How do I know that? Because you think that I said you cannot use EFS during "step three". You absolutely can.
What I wrote was you cannot disrupt the spell during step three. That is completely different. Why can't you disrupt it? Because it is cast already and the opportunity for disruption has passed.
Please try to read what I wrote rather than taking a single line out of context.
Here is how I handle it: every step in resolving something is a point you can use an immediate (or readied) action but some immediate actions are only useful in certain steps.
Example (note: I might be missing a step, this is just a quick example):
Now, you could disrupt the spell in steps one and two but by step three it is too late.
With all that said, there are no rules covering when immediate actions can occur. It is all a judgement call. Some immediate actions are useful at certain points while others are not. Thus it is more common sense rulings than anything else.
Ultimately your options (without multiclassing) are:
Elemental Spell metamagic feat (or rod).
You can reduce the cost of metamagic by one by taking the Magical Lineage or (maybe both?) Wayang Spellhunter traits.
There may be other ways to reduce the cost of metamagic.
You cannot combine polymorph and size changing effects.
CRB p212 polymorph wrote:
You can only be affected by one polymorph spell at a time. If a new polymorph spell is cast on you (or you activate a polymorph effect, such as wild shape), you can decide whether or not to allow it to affect you, taking the place of the old spell. In addition, other spells that change your size have no effect on you while you are under the effects of a polymorph spell.
Additionally, enlarge person does not stack with size altering effects.
CRB p278 Enlarge Person wrote:
Multiple magical effects that increase size do not stack.
So, the following does not work:Enlarge Person + Polymorph (violates both rules)
Enlarge Person + Kinetic Form (violates the enlarge person rule)
Polymorph + Kinetic Form (violates the polymorph rule)
Not really, non-lethal damage in PF can still kill. Roll a crit on a level 1 NPC with 4 hp and an 8 con and you might very well kill him.