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

Gauss's page

Goblin Squad Member. Pathfinder Society Member. 7,280 posts (7,288 including aliases). No reviews. 1 list. No wishlists. 1 Pathfinder Society character. 1 alias.


RSS

1 to 50 of 7,280 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

After. However, you do not start out at middle age or older. The ages you start out at are on CRB p169.

Now, many people might try to game the system by getting extra age bonuses but then you have to explain why you have not had any kind of career (even an NPC class of Commoner) until you are middle age.

Frankly, any GM should immediately tell you no.


In the future either cite the source or the full text. Providing only part of the text misses a lot of the context.

In any case, no, bombs become inert if not used in the round they are created. You cannot use the bomb the next round.


The internal volume of the extradimensional (not mundane) space of the Pathfinder's Pouch is set at 2cubic feet, how can you say it is not set when you then quoted how much it can hold?

You are correct, a full or empty bag of holding is the same size. Specifically, 2feet by 4feet.
What is not stated is which measurement is the diameter. So it will either an exterior volume of ~12.5cubic feet or ~25cubic feet.

Since empty or full has no bearing on that exterior volume and the rules define the exterior volume and there is no rule stating that you can do so then you cannot scrunch it up to fit a smaller space.

You are trying to apply real world physics to a game rule. The rule is that a bag of holding is 2feet by 4feet in size. There is no rule that allows you to reduce this size.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Aranna, Snowblind, it may not be a rigid body but it has a specific external volume that is larger than the internal volume you are trying to put it in. It is not about fitting it through the opening.

To put it another way, you can fit an empty burlap potato sack through the opening in your pants pocket but there is no way you are putting the entire thing in there.


Actually Cevah, the pouch IS a bag of holding. It states it is.


Which...defeats the OP's purpose of 'no magic aura'. :P


Purple Dragon Knight, that would defeat the OP's purpose of 'no magical aura'.


Bag of Holding wont fit either. It's size is listed as 2feet by 4feet.

Depending on which measurement is the diameter that gives us either 12.57 cubic feet or 25.14 cubic feet.


There is no written rule saying you can apply feats to the caster level of the staff.


You cannot put a Haversack into a Pathfinder Pouch, the haversack is the size of a backpack and a backpack holds 2cubic feet (thus, it must be larger than 2 cubic feet).


What more evidence do you require? It specifically calls out using a feat to bump up the Spell DC.

It does not specifically state you can use any spell related feat as normal.

Where does it stop? Do you want to apply metamagic feats to spells in staves?

Spells in a 'can' cannot be normally affected by any of the spellcasters normal abilities. There are three specific exceptions here.

1) The spellcaster's ability scores can be applied to the DC's of the spell.

2) Feats that apply to spell DCs can be applied to the spells of a staff.

3) That the spellcaster may use his caster level. What it does not state is that you may also apply feats or abilites that modify caster level.

While your interpretation is a great houserule, and one I would probably use, it is not within the rules.


Barachiel Shina, comparing how easy it is to destroy magic items in the game to other fantasy sources is a poor comparison at best and apples to oranges at worst.

First, there are many elements of standard fantasy genres that this game breaks.

In normal fantasy genres magic weapons are RARE. They are often the equivalent of a Pathfinder artifact in rarity. Of course they would be difficult to destroy.
In Pathfinder magic items are commonplace. Break a magic weapon? No problem, youll get a replacement soon enough or can just fix it with a spell!

Second, you have to look at the internal consistency of a game, not consistency against external elements such as other fantasy games or settings.

In Pathfinder it was inconsistent that you could not damage a magic weapon when just about every other magic item could be readily damaged or destroyed. It was effectively an "I am immune" button to one aspect of the game.

Is it a part of the game that is not always fun? Sure.
Does that mean that there should be a rule to make it nearly impossible to break weapons? No.

Especially since, as ZZTRaider stated, there are numerous ways around it. Adamantine, hardness, etc.

Ultimately, if you have a GM that is constantly sundering your weapons then the issue is probably with the GM and not the rule because a GM who really wanted to destroy or remove your weapon can get around the old rule rather easily.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The line that allows you to use feats specifically calls out using them for DCs, nothing else. So, no. However, it wouldn't be an unreasonable houserule imo.


Because it doesn't make sense in the context of all the other rules of the game. Magic items should not be immune to damage just because they are magic. They are not artifacts.

GM: The Titan does 200 damage and sunders your weapon!
Player: What is the Titan's enhancement bonus?
GM: He doesn't have one.
Player: The Titan fails, he cannot sunder any magic weapon.
GM: That...doesn't....make...sense.

(In this context titan and damage are fictional examples of some creature doing ridiculous amount of damage and still failing to sunder a weapon).

Enhancement bonuses still add hardness and hitpoints, that is reasonable. Being immune to damage is not reasonable.


James Gibbons, any creature that does not exist in the real world or that the person looking at the Animal Companion entry is not familiar with. Without looking at the Bestiary, do you know what every dinosaur looks like?


BigNorseWolf, apparently you are NOT reading ALL of my post. You are clearly not reading the part where I am saying "by some".

Let me spell it out for you: I am NOT arguing for what I was saying. I was providing a rationale for why some people may be arguing for that.

Perhaps you should try to read ALL of my post rather than focusing only on the part you can argue with.


Brf, there are creatures that are not clear if they are Large long or Large tall without looking at the Bestiary.


BNW, please re-read my post. I did not state that there is no reach category. I stated that since it is not listed some people could interpreted as minimum (ie: 5' for large).

The logic for that being that, like other abilities not listed, if it isn't listed you don't get anything extra.

Lune, the line that says 'personally' doesn't give it away? :P

I swear, people read too much into what I write rather than actually reading what I write.


Lets turn this around slightly.

Assume for a moment that the Bestiary entry for a creature lists an ability that the Animal Companion entry does not list. Do we add the ability to the Animal Companion? (Examples: Tigers racial stealth bonuses or a Tyrannosaurus' Swallow Whole ability.)

What a creature's Reach is *could* be interpreted by some as the same thing. Ie. if it does not list that it has reach it defaults to the minimum amount for the size (5' for large).

Personally, I just look up the stats in the Bestiary and compare them to the AC listing and apply some logic.


No, because there is no one right way to play Fighter. Typically, I pick a focus...either damage, defense, or 'tricks' (combat maneuvers or other special stuff).

That is not to say that you ignore other types of feats. If you are going defensive you still want the basic damage feats (Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization and Power Attack).

Regarding defense, get 3 ranks in Acrobatics so that if you go fight defensively or go into total defense your AC is higher.


Not really, Armor Master does not actually buff your AC and the DR/3 is not going to save you if you take big hits.
The really big bonuses are beyond the scope of most campaigns (most campaigns terminate about level 13-15).

Additionally, not all forms of 'defense' are based on AC/hp. You should also consider saving throws.

For example, the Unbreakable Archetype has bonuses to mind-affecting Will saves and gives you several bonus feats which result in longer survival. Eventually you can reroll some saves.
The bonus Diehard and Endurance feats can get you into the Deathless Initiate feat tree which allows you to fight (or drink a potion or run away) until dead (Note: Deathless Initiate requires the Racial Heritage feat to claim Orcish heritage).

Shielded Fighter can allow you to go into a defensive mode where your AC jumps up a lot.

Phalanx Soldier allows you to simultaneously use a heavy or tower shield and a reach weapon (polearm). At level 9 you can give yourself and adjacent allies partial cover (+2 AC).

Tower Shield Specialist gives you a huge bump in AC via a tower shield that has some advantages.

It really all depends on what you want and what your group needs.


I would focus primarily on defense considering you are out of the campaign if you die.


Ok, to summarize (your wall of text is difficult to read):

Human: traded out bonus feat and skill point for a +2 stat increase.
Favored Class bonus: hp
Feats: Power Attack and Weapon Focus Great Sword (fighter)
Traits: Robot Slayer and Defender of Society

So what do you want out of this? Damage, Defense, or Combat Maneuvers?

As for not coming back until raised, you are looking at weeks or months of gameplay (assuming 4-6hrs a session) until you guys are high enough level to be able to raise/resurrect someone. What's worse, anyone who dies early will have to wait even longer until resurrect can be cast because of Raise Dead's time limit.
So the question has to be asked, why would your GM choose to basically kick someone out of the group because they died?

Edited to ask the raised question.


Since you have already created this character can you give us your full current build (race, alternate racial abilities, favored class bonus, feats, traits)?


There is no rules support for a deity preventing a spell from being cast because it violates the code of conduct. Put another way: B, not A


Uhhh, not a magic item, it is a mundane item and provides total cover.

Ultimate Equipment p64 wrote:

FAMILIAR SATCHEL PRICE 25 GP

WEIGHT 6 lbs.
This armored case provides total cover to any Tiny or smaller creature contained within it. It includes air holes (which can be plugged with cork stoppers if you need to go underwater) and two receptacles for food and water.

The troll would have to make a sunder attack against the satchel to destroy it, then it would have to attack your familiar.

I don't know about your GM, but most creatures aren't going to go after an armored case strapped to your backpack when you are casting spells on them.

If your GM really did make every monster go after your familiar satchel then you may want to find a new GM because that should not be the primary focus of 99.99% of creatures. Only creatures who are aware that your familiar is in that AND is aware what the loss of your familiar would do to you when you try to memorize spells AND actually has plans for you to walk away from this battle would do such a thing. For anyone else this would be an idiotic move.


Why would the familiar be skewered? The only way that happens is if you decided to use it in combat. Normally it should be safe and protected in your familiar carrier.


Galnorag, there are other ways to dodge the 'witches familiar death' problem. Namely, any familiar with regeneration. :)


Some rules:

CRB p188 wrote:

Swift Actions

A swift action consumes a very small amount of time, but represents a larger expenditure of effort than a free action. You can perform one swift action per turn without affecting your ability to perform other actions. In that regard, a swift action is like a free action. You can, however, perform only one single swift action per turn, regardless of what other actions you take. You can take a swift action anytime you would normally be allowed to take a free action. Swift actions usually involve spellcasting, activating a feat, or the activation of magic items.

So, those people stating that you can take a swift action anytime you can take a Free action are correct.

CRB p189 wrote:

Immediate Actions

Much like a swift action, an immediate action consumes a very small amount of time but represents a larger expenditure of effort and energy than a free action. However, unlike a swift action, an immediate action can be performed at any time—even if it’s not your turn. Casting feather fall is an immediate action, since the spell can be cast at any time.
Using an immediate action on your turn is the same as using a swift action and counts as your swift action for that turn. You cannot use another immediate action or a swift action until after your next turn if you have used an immediate action when it is not currently your turn (effectively, using an immediate action before your turn is equivalent to using your swift action for the coming turn). You also cannot use an immediate action if you are flat-footed.

Immediate actions are effectively interrupts. They happen immediately, before anything else is resolved. However, the immediate action determines at what point things can be interrupted. It is pointless to interrupt an attack to add AC AFTER the attack is resolved.

In the OP's case, your player should have declared he is using the cover option before the dice are rolled (or the results are revealed). Afterwards the attack roll is made and the results are revealed. However, there are some specific immediate actions that do allow you to see the results and then declare the immediate action.


zainale, no it wouldn't work. The stone familiar teaches the familiar the spells, it is not a replacement for the familiar.

It basically guarantees that you do not lose your spells if you have to replace your familiar.


I already answered that LtSmokin. In that case you have one class with a Familiar and one class without. It would be no different than if you had a Sorcerer/Fighter.


GinoA, the problem here is that this is not two different class features. They are the same compatible class feature.

It is the player's choice of choosing an incompatible familiar archetype that is the problem. The familiar archetype should go.

To put this another way:
Lets assume you are a Sorcerer3/Witch3 and you had a single (effectively level 6) familiar.
The familiar dies.
Can you select a new familiar with the Figment archetype? No.
Can you take two familiars to get around the figment archetype restriction? No, the classes familiar abilties stack because they are compatible so you must select a familiar that can be used for both classes.


A FAQ on Animal Companions may supply some insight.

Based on that FAQ, if the two class abilities (that normally stack) are incompatible then they don't stack.

However, this is not that situation. Instead of being forced into an inappropriate familiar type due to a class ability you have selected an inappropriate familiar type.

In short, your familiar cannot have the figment archetype if you want it to function correctly for a Witch. Select a new familiar.

As for the Gravewalker archetype, Gravewalkers do not have a familiar so there is no conflict. You have your familiar ability from your other class and it does not interact in any way with a Gravewalker Witch.


calagnar, I can think of several possible reasons for the PDF to not be released until the second printing.

1) If they release the second printing PDF now and then make changes before the physical second printing they have to release an updated second printing PDF. That means there would be two second printing PDFs floating around which would be confusing for people.

2) You are assuming that the second printing is already created. The errata does not mean all the text fitting is completed already, it could just mean that they know what they want the new text to say.

3) Those people who want the physical copy may feel slighted that the PDF is published before the physical copy. IE: why would Paizo alienate one group (hardback purchasers) over PDF purchasers?

These are just possibilities, I am not a publisher so I don't know the industry specifics but there are probably very good reasons not to publish a PDF until the physical book is also published.


If they are part of a class ability they do not have a CR nor give experience. They are part of the total package of the class.

Example: Level 7 Human Ranger with an animal companion is a CR 6 encounter.


Here you go:

Core Rule Book Errata Fourth Printing Update

4th printing Errata p4 wrote:

Page 468—In the Weapons Section, delete the Damaging Magic Weapons paragraph. Add the following paragraph in its place:

Hardness and Hit Points: Each +1 of a magic weapon’s enhancement bonus adds +2 to its hardness and +10 to its hit points. See also Table 7–12 on page 175.

Here is the original 4th printing text:

CRB 4th printing p468 wrote:
Damaging Magic Weapons: An attacker cannot damage a magic weapon that has an enhancement bonus unless his weapon has at least as high an enhancement bonus as the weapon struck.


Weables, it was a rule in Pathfinder too, but they removed it.


chaoseffect, he is not mistaken, he is just remembering an out of date printing.

Barachiel Shina, that used to be a rule but it was removed a couple printings ago.


Lune wrote:

Gauss: You failed to answer the simplest question that I had. Let me restate it.

1. Can a Large sized creature attack at the 10' diagonal square?
2. Can a Medium creature with a reach weapon attack the 10' diagonal square?
3. If the Medium creature is riding a large creature and wielding a reach weapon can he attack the 10' diagonal square? If so, why?

BNW: Ah. I see. Yeah, I think I agree with you now then on the "adjacent is a property associated with a creature" bit. I can get behind that. Still not certain that answers all of the questions about reach when mounted though. Like the ones I posted above to Gauss.

1) Yes, a large creature with a reach of 10 can attack 2 diagonals away, this was covered in this FAQ.

2) Yes, a medium creature with a reach weapon can attack 2 diagonals away, this was covered in this FAQ.
3) Yes, a medium creature using a reach weapon riding a large creature can attack 2 diagonals away, this was covered in this FAQ.

A creature with 10' reach (or a 10' reach weapon) has the same reach mounted as not mounted, 10 feet. Only where you start to count changes due to the creature using the space of the mount instead of his own.

In any case, I am not sure how your questions regarding reach attacking 2 diagonals away relates to your question(s) regarding reach attacking one diagonal away.


CRB p127 wrote:
Improved familiars otherwise use the rules for regular familiars, with two exceptions: if the creature’s type is something other than animal, its type does not change; and improved familiars do not gain the ability to speak with other creatures of their kind (although many of them already have the ability to communicate).

So, type does not change and they do not gain the ability to speak with other creatures of their kind. All other rules are in effect.

Note: this creates an odd situation where the intelligence score can drop from the base creature's intelligence to the score in the familiar chart on CRB p83. Most GM's houserule this to be the better of the two.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I don't have to imagine it, I just have to look up the rules. The rules state that a rider on a mount occupies the entire mounts space.

Going with your large example, if a rider is on an huge creature, where is the rider? The rider is in all 27 (3x3x3) cubes, even the mount's feet!
Does that make any kind of realistic sense? Nope! But those are the rules.

Reach is not determined by space, you are conflating the two. You have a small creature occupying a medium, large, huge, or whatever, space. That does not change the small creature's reach (5' or 10' with a reach weapon).

Summary: the rules clearly state that the rider occupies the same space as the mount.
The rules do not state that the rider can choose where he is located on the mount or where he can attack from.
You are trying to add a level of detail to the game which the rules do not support. That level of detail may make sense, but it is not part of the existing rules.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Lune, lets change tack a moment, can an Ogre, using a Longspear, attack any square adjacent to him? Nope.

Same thing here, a Halfling using a Longspear while mounted on a Horse cannot attack any square adjacent to the Halfling/Horse.

The Halfling is considered to take up the same space as the Horse, which is also the same space as an Ogre.


No, because the mouse has to be able to threaten the opponent.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Positive and Negative energy are not "energy" attacks in the same way that the classic energy types (Acid, Cold, Electricity, Fire, and Sonic) are and do not usually do damage to objects for the same reason that they do not do damage to Constructs. There is usually an 'alive or undead' clause in there.

In 3.5 there was actually term definitions that supported this. Pathfinder did not bother to define many terms and that has created many problems.
For example, there are abilities that allow you to convert energy types and some people think that should include positive and negative "energy".

Regarding Kaiju, you'll notice it does not say "acid energy" or "cold energy" but it does say "negative energy".

"Negative Energy" is not one of the 5 types of energy, it is a name.

Edit: here are a couple of quotes from 3.5

3.5 PHB p308 wrote:
energy damage: Damage caused by one of five types of energy (not counting positive and negative energy): acid, cold, electricity, fire, and sonic.
3.5 PHB p310 wrote:
negative energy: A black, crackling energy that originates on the Negative Material Plane. In general, negative energy heals undead creatures and hurts the living.

The CRB does not have a basic word defintion section and as a result these questions repeatedly come up. Heck, people even argue over whether "character" and "creature" are interchangable (some people think they are not). Back in 3.5 the glossary stated they were and without these basic definitions there is a lot of confusion and debate that shouldn't happen.


Constructs are not alive. Most positive/negative energy effects state that they affect either living targets or undead, constructs are neither (barring the rare construct with a special statement to the contrary).

Put another way: without a constitution score you aren't alive. :)


You do not need to wait until the previous activation expires. You can activate it again and replace the previous activation.

Example:
I activate Wild Shape (first use) to turn into a Leopard for 5 hours (out of 6). At hour 5 I decide I want to become an Eagle.
I activate Wild Shape again (second use) to turn into an Eagle without going back to my normal form. I now have 6 hours of being an Eagle.
The remaining hour of Leopard (from the first Wild Shape) is lost because the second use of Wild Shape replaced it.

Note: I could have turned into a Leopard again, I used Eagle to avoid confusion.


Basically, yes.

CRB p212 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.

So what you are doing is using a new activation and replacing the old activation. You would lose whatever time was remaining on the old activation though.


There are no penalties for fighting in the same square because normally you and your ally cannot legally occupy the same square. Squeezing does not get around this rule.
There are exceptions (the very small sizes, mounts, spring attack, etc.).


So, here is the feat:

ACG p153 Pack Flanking wrote:

You and your companion creature are adept at fighting together against foes.

Prerequisites: Int 13, Combat Expertise, ability to acquire an animal companion.
Benefit: When you and your companion creature have this feat, your companion creature is adjacent to you or sharing your square, and you both threaten the same opponent, you are considered to be flanking that opponent, regardless of your actual positioning.
Normal: You must be positioned opposite an ally to flank an opponent.

So the key here is that it is allowing you to count as flanking if adjacent or sharing the same square. Not just if you are sharing the same square.

What does that mean? It means the typical use will be adjacent creatures fighting together, not creatures sharing the same square.

However, it allows for creatures who share the same square (such as Rider and Mount) to still benefit.


What part of the rules is causing a problem? It is enchanted exactly the same as any other magic weapon except you are dealing with batches of 50 (50 ammunition = 1 weapon).

1 to 50 of 7,280 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2015 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.