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

Globetrotter's page

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber. Pathfinder Society Member. 322 posts. No reviews. No lists. 1 wishlist.


RSS

1 to 50 of 322 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | next > last >>

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

If it says, "bonus on damage rolls", I would think that would only be weapon damage.

I could see someone arguing for precision damage, like sneak attack, or enchancement damage, like bane, but I would think this works more like vital strike than mythic vital strike... if you get my meaning.

Without the standard action problems...


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Anyone have any thoughts on this?

I know it's a corner case, but before I do something that might make a battle harder than it should be, I want to see if I am missing something.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Da'ath, thank you for your words, I think you understand me better than others.

I didn't intent this to become a deep rules discussion or an example of how people can be rude for no reason.

I understand the rules well enough to know that I do not like this spell the way it is written. I had a discussion with my players and we all agreed it was odd how the spell worked for such a low cost. We discussed alternatives, some of the same thoughts appeared in this thread.

I decided my course since it would be fast for me at the table, no rolls necessary, and as long as the rule is known well in advance, there are no upset players. I brought my decision to my players and they agreed it was a fair house rule.

My players are currently 11th level and 4th mythic tier. This rule doesn't effect the game much, but it makes me happier for it.

This is why I posted in the house rule section over the rules or advice section.

For those who think I am a bad DM because I like using environment and lighting in my game, well, please keep that to yourself. My players are happy and I enjoy running, which is the point.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

I was wondering if you are facing a burrowing creature and he lifts his body only partway out of the ground, does he have partial cover ?

I ask this because in the environmental section of the CRB, we have this rule for water combat:

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) from opponents on land. Land-bound opponents who have freedom of movement effects ignore this cover when making melee attacks against targets in the water. A completely submerged creature has total cover against opponents on land unless those opponents have freedom of movement effects. Magical effects are unaffected except for those that require attack rolls (which are treated like any other effects) and fire effects.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Snively wrote:

It'd be interesting if you made some underdarkies with Continual Darkness items to toss around as well... fight fire with fire, so to speak.

I get what you mean, this spell really shoots the bell curve of item creation. But do they have the spell in their spellbook? Can they find a Ruby? Will their god grant it for the day? Will the all mighty dollar be able to afford the item when it's for sale? Light should be available, but Perma-Light may be reserved for higher level adventures, say as a reward in a scroll at the end of an adventure arc, when you're through with a tread through the dark dungeon?

You need a Ruby for this spell, an Onyx for that spell... how rare are gemstones in your world?

I'm not really looking to micromanage or get in an arms race with the players. I just don't understand some items. I was thinking a lot about the ecology of certain creatures and the scare factor of darkness. Then I started thinking about economies and how if continual flame was so cheap, lights would be everywhere. I'm mean everywhere.

So trying to look at all of these things, plus thinking about a darkness discussion we recently had at the table I saw the silliness in this spell. At least from my perspective.

I told my players of the house rule and they are all for it, so I'm happy. It won't change much at the table, but it makes me feel better.

Thanks again for all the suggestions!


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Maybe I didn't make this clear enough, this is not for my current game but for future games. The players now have many ways to bypass it

However, I so think it's great that I'm a terrible GM now because I don't like a spell.

Thanks!


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

This rule makes sense game wise, and a lot easier to deal with in combat.

Can you imagine if I said apply 10 points of damage to yourself and all items your character is holding? That would grind the table to a halt.

Thanks!


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Lol... they would rather just kill the person.

This discussion is really a lot less about my players (they like the rules as is), but more about satisfying something that bothers me.

I think I am going to make it non-magical and end my thoughts.

I really thank you guys for contributing.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

To add (this is fun)...

an everburning torch says this and costs 110 gp

Everburning Torch This otherwise normal torch has a continual flame spell cast on it. This causes it to shed light like an ordinary torch, but it does not emit heat or deal fire damage if used as a weapon. Price 110 gp; Weight 1 lb.

Why does a mundane item cost twice what the magic version costs? Especially since you use the magic spell to create the mundane item? My guess is if you were making an everburning torch, it should cost you 55 gp... or spend 50 gp and have a magical one that kicks the crap out of the more expensive version.

Does that make any sense at all?


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Yes, I do this as well. Fog clouds in darkness, it's pretty fun.

It's the idea of a spell having this much power (yes, it's pretty minor; it's a pet peeve).

For example, what would the cost be of creating this item using the magic rules? My guess would be:

Spell level x caster level x 2,000 gp

3 X 5 X 2,000 = 30,000 gp.

I would be pretty happy if this was the case, but it's not. For the price, you could say this should be halved since one of the rules is if the power lasts 24 hours, the cost is halved. ok, 15,000 gp.

Or if you used the light spell to base this, we are looking at this:

Spell level x caster level x 750 gp (based on 100 charges, which this formula is for 50 charges, so I will double the final total)

3 X 5 X 750 X 2 = 22,5000 gp.

This is a pretty good deal... and it bothers me. Since so many creatures have darkness as a power, or deeper darkess, a 50 gp spell that can be handed out defeats it for all of these creatures. Kind of makes the darkness spells nearly useless.

This is why I am thinking about making the flame mundane, but still allowing it to last forever. Like an eternal sunrod or something.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

As my party gets higher and higher level, this becomes a non-issue. They have access to daylight, which I think is a great counter.

This is a houserule I will use in my later games, so I want to hammer something out that is fast and easy.

Mr Pitt, it is still continual flame, lol, since it goes on forever.

Goth, currently, we have the two spells interact and the light returns to the prevailing condition. In some cases, its dark and others it is dim light. This is how the rules would have us do it. Since additional castings of darkness or light do not stack, these spells are pretty much done in the spell area. Players with darkvision rejoice and you have the darkvision spell to offset others. I am ok with this part as well since it is a resource expended to offset another resource expended.

Da'ath, that is a possibility, and an option one my players recommended. But how would that interact with continual flame items?


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

But why? Or is the answer "magic" and we move on?


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

If you cast acid cloud, the spell says, "Each round on your turn, starting when you cast the spell, the fog deals 2d6 points of acid damage to each creature and object within it.

I highlighted the part I am concerned with. Does this mean the character takes damage as well as all their gear, or just unattended objects?

I had the last encounter start to burn all of their clothes and whatnot, but that was mostly for fluff. Then I started thinking, what if my wizard player enters and his component pouch gets destroyed. That does not seem like a lot of fun.

It does make the spell dangerous, and seems to make sense that everything would take damage, but could really alter an encounter quickly.

The entire spell is listed below:

Spoiler:
Acid Fog
School conjuration (creation) [acid]; Level magus 6, sorcerer/wizard 6

CASTING
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S, M (powdered peas and an animal hoof)

EFFECT
Range medium (100 ft. + 10 ft./level)
Effect fog spreads in 20-ft. radius, 20 ft. high
Duration 1 round/level
Saving Throw none; Spell Resistance no

DESCRIPTION
Acid fog creates a billowing mass of misty vapors like the solid fog spell. In addition to slowing down creatures and obscuring sight, this spell's vapors are highly acidic. Each round on your turn, starting when you cast the spell, the fog deals 2d6 points of acid damage to each creature and object within it.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Yes, I really do not like this spell.

Why?

For a measly 50 gp worth of powered ruby, or something, cast by a divine caster (3rd level) it blocks the effects of every darkness spell in the game.

Yes, there is heighten deeper darkness, but that really never gets cast. I am running a wrath of the righteous game and a lot of creatures have deeper darkness at-will. I like to use these tactics to create more difficult encounters, but sadly by RAW (unless I am wrong, I am wrong often) all they have to do is pull out there little continual flame rock and bang, no more darkness spell. FOREVER.

Yes, I could cast dispel magic... but they know that and carry multiple. I tried thinking about having the two effects counter and another casting of deeper darkness would then work normally, but they pull out another one. Arg... this shouldn't be an arms race.

What I am trying to figure out is how to make this spell functional, but not something that can take out stronger spells. My houserule that I want to use is treat continual flame as a mundane spell that lasts until dispelled. Then even darkness would cancel out the light effects like it would a torch. I feel this to be more balancing.

Can anyone either validate this probably terrible houserule or offer suggestion one what they do?

Thanks


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

It's an odd ability to be sure, lol.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Really?


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

What does this do?

Blood Sanctuary (Su): At 3rd level, due to the power of his blood, a bloodrager can stand confidently amid the effects of spells cast by himself or his allies. He gains a +2 bonus on saving throws against spells that he or an ally casts.

Why do you need a saving throw vs you cast yourself? Why saving throw bonuses against allies?


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Solves that.

Thank you!


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
HangarFlying wrote:
EDIT: there are a number of examples that allow free actions outside of a turn. In short, yes, a summoner can use his Fused Link ability outside of his turn.

What are the other exceptions? Speaking is one, but only limited to a few sentences.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
HangarFlying wrote:
This would be an exception to the general rule. The only way this ability can work is if the summoner is allowed to do this outside of his turn.

That is kind of my point. I do not like this archetype at all... not the class much either, too prone to abuse.

But rules are rules.

If the ability doesn't work, we need to modify it or have a FAQ. Either this is a specific that overrides the general, or it is not and I see tears well up from my player.

Or I houserule it as an immediate action.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Lol, I like quick and to the point answers.

So, help me with this then,

The summoner gets hit with an attack and his eidolons hit points get brought down to -2. Doesn't the eidolon immediately dissappear?

How does this ability work?


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Can someone help me out here.

The Fused Link (Su) ability says:

Spoiler:
Starting at 1st level, the synthesist forms a close bond with his eidolon. Whenever the temporary hit points from his eidolon would be reduced to 0, the summoner can, as a free action, sacrifice any number of his own hit points. Each hit point sacrificed this way prevents 1 point of damage done to the eidolon (thus preventing the loss of the summoner’s temporary hit points), preventing the eidolon from being killed and sent back to its home plane.

This ability replaces life link.

Free actions says:

Spoiler:
Free actions don't take any time at all, though there may be limits to the number of free actions you can perform in a turn. Free actions rarely incur attacks of opportunity. Some common free actions are described below.

Cease Concentration on Spell

You can stop concentrating on a spell as a free action.

Drop an Item

Dropping an item in your space or into an adjacent square is a free action.

Drop Prone

Dropping to a prone position in your space is a free action.

Speak

In general, speaking is a free action that you can perform even when it isn't your turn. Speaking more than a few sentences is generally beyond the limit of a free action.

Does this mean the summoner can only move hit points from herself to her eidolon during her turn?

Shouldn't this be a "no action" or an immediate action?


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

It's going to be hard to just forget about perception checks. My players wonder about these things too, at least I am sure they will; they are clever, lol.

I would have to bring in the Q9 demons to Q2, it would make not sense otherwise.

I did over look Q14, the training area, but I am not sure that is enough to block out a real battle. There are 4 templars, weak against anything i this section btw, training together or against wood dummies. I am guessing that is making some noise, but nothing like the sound of a real battle fighting against fiendish minotaurs.

Alarms will be set off.

Did you guys just run this as a room to room encounter? What is behind this door... ah, most death. Wow, we got through that one, lets see what is behind the next door? Ouch, more death. Good thing these rooms are sound tight, that battle would have been dangerous if they worked together.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

My party is about to run through the Ivory Sanctum this weekend and I am a little puzzled about how it is set up.

First, after reading it through a few times, it seems there are three forces at play:

1: Jerribeth (Q5)
2: Grillixbee (Q10)
3: Xanthir Vang(Q19)

Jerribeth wants Xanthir dead so she can take a promotion.

Grillixbee wants Jerribeth dead since he/she believes Xanthir is the more powerful out of the two, but he/she is truly only loyal to Areelu

Xanthir is just a powerful force.

The way the players are supposed to come in is through Q1 and fight 6 basilisks, a cake walk and then a few fiendish minotaurs in area Q2 through an illusionary wall the PC already know about. This is all straight forward.

The problem that I have is with the general "dungeon crawl" feeling of this. This is what I am trying to figure out, if the PC start to fight the minotaurs in area Q2, through the gate or not (everyone has access to teleportation or dimension door at this level), how is it that the ENTIRE complex is not aware of what is going on?

I was looking at the perception skill and it says hearing a combat is a DC -10. Modifiers are +1 for every 10 feet, +5 for a closed door and +10 for every foot of wall. Jerribeth has a perception check of +26. That means her reactive perception is +36. That means in her room in area Q5, the DC for her to hear a battle in Q2 is about a DC 5: about 50 feet away (DC +5), through a 1 foot wall (DC +10) in combat (DC -10). She is 100% going to know.

Xanthir sitting in his room counting his worms has about a DC 22 using similar calculations (70 feet, one closed door and 2 one foot walls). His perception is +23, so he will hear this too. It's not a big complex after all.

What is to stop the entire complex from coming down on the PC's? They are the heroes of Kenebres that killed Stauton, saved the heretic succubus, rescued Drezen and pretty much have caused problems for the forces of evil. Are they really going to just sit in their rooms and wait for the PC's to open each and every door?

Take the demons in Q9, I have no idea why they are not engaging against the PC's during the Q2 battle.. I mean they are only 80 feet away and they have line of sight. They are either going to attack or not, but the telepathy 100 feet thing is pretty much going to also alert the entire complex that the heroes have arrived.

I have trouble with this, and am working on a different solution and am very curious to what you have to say. I think when the PC's begin their simple battle with the minotaurs, Jerribeth is going to pop her cute little face around the corner and say hi to the PC's. She will give her little speech in private about how she really want Xanthir dead and hope the PC's don't just kill her outright.

If they run into Grillixbee, he/she can try to sway the PC's to not listen to Jerribeth and send them back to kill her, but either way Xanthir is going to know what is going on and scrying the entire time to prepare.

There is no way Grillixbee is going to let the PC's get a hold of documents just laying out on the table... this doesn't make any sense at all. The documents will be in Xanthir's room for save keeping well before the PC's reach the room.

All the wondering creatures are either going to hold back and do a full assault with whomever they are more allied with, or they are going to head for the hills.

I see this going down as two or three battles, with the other rooms either fleeing the scene or simple mop up that doesn't even deserve exposition.

The final battle will be with Xanthir, with maybe some of the demons assisting. I think having the Q9 demons and maybe some of the blackfire adepts helping.

Battle one or two will either be with Jerribeth with the remaining minotaurs helping, or with Grillixbee and the blackfire adepts.

Xanthir is smart and pretty wise as well. I am sure he knows Jerribeth is plotting against him and will wait to strike at the right time during the battle to finish off the PC's. Why would he wait for the PC's to recharge fully? Plus, he gets rid of the plotting Jerribeth at the same time.

So, another problem then pops up, there is no way the PC's can survive this assault.

I could have the PC's fight either Jerribeth or Grillixbee, which gives Xanthir time to get prepared, and send summons out to cause problems, but again, it gets too hard for the PC's.

I read the thread about how this AP was too easy and the mythic levels allowed them to tear though all the encounters, but this does not happen at my table. We have lost a number of characters and they complain the AP is a little too hard. We had another character death just last week against the annis hag. That was getting close to a TPK.

This post might be a little scattered, so I apologize. I hope my point is clear and I look forward to getting feedback and suggestions.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Rylar wrote:

I'm not using XP nor trails. I am just telling them when they level up or gain a tier.

When looking at the trials and how they were described in the mythic handbook vs this path, I was a little off put. But, the path is trying to cover 30 level ups in 6 books, so I feel we can let this slide.

Yes, this


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Seannoss, you've captured my original reason for this thread perfectly. I feel the trials in the books do not always live up to the trials we should be giving to the players. Killing a worm that walks is hard, but not sure if it's a trial. Even closing a dimensional rift is impressive, but a mythic trial?

It seems they are trials only because this adventure is mythic and we need to have X amount of trials to continue. Having so many trials for trivial tasks makes less of the trials that do matter. Killing a demon lord is a mythic trial, killing a house if fiendish barbarians is apparently a trial too, but seems to be of similar stature.

Dragonchess, I'm not trying to say Paizo doesn't know their own material, although maybe I did say that. It was not my true meaning. They are trying to work within the confines of they system they made, which makes very impressive task - killing a demon lord- and trivial tasks - killing a fiendish barbarian - on par, which it's not.

It would be easier to just throw out the trial system as written and ad hoc the game as we mostly do with experience. One trial is one tier. All we have to do is choose which tiers to focus on, and I think the adventure already does that well.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Sorry to necro this thread... but I am wondering what the answer is now that we have this FAQ:

Quote:

Temporary Ability Score Increases vs. Permanent Ability Score Increases: Why do temporary bonuses only apply to some things?

Temporary ability bonuses should apply to anything relating to that ability score, just as permanent ability score bonuses do. The section in the glossary was very tight on space and it was not possible to list every single ability score-related game effect that an ability score bones would affect.

The purpose of the temporary ability score ruling is to make it so you don't have to rebuild your character every time you get a bull's strength or similar spell; it just summarizes the most common game effects relative to that ability score.

For example, most of the time when you get bull's strength, you're using it for combat, so the glossary mentions Strength-based skill checks, melee attack rolls, Strength-based weapon damage rolls, CMB, and CMD. It doesn't call out melee attack rolls that use Dex instead of Str (such as when using Weapon Finesse) or situations where your applied Str bonus should be halved or multiplied (such as whith off-hand or two-handed weapons). You're usually not using the spell for a 1 min./level increase in your carrying capacity, so that isn't mentioned there, but the bonus should still apply to that, as well as to Strength checks to break down doors.

Think of it in the same way that a simple template has "quick rules" and "rebuild rules;" they're supposed to create monsters which are roughly equivalent in terms of stats, but the quick rules are a short cut that misses some details compared to using the rebuild rules. Likewise, the temporary ability score rule is intended as a short cut to speed up gameplay, not as the most precise way of applying the bonus.

A temporary ability score bonus should affect all of the same stats and rolls that a permanent ability score bonus does.

If I am understanding, now fighters wearing heavy armor can be squashed by the weight of their own gear in battle if they take enough penalties to STR? OR does this change nothing since the FAQ is only talking about bonuses and not penalties?

Although... aren't penalties just negative bonuses?


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

So, do you pick the spell on selecting of the feat or each time you perform your obedience?


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Since outsiders do not sleep...would slumber still effect them?

I know they are not immune... Maybe a poor mans house rule.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

I hear yah... I am just letting people know what they told me.

Since Hero Lab speaks directly with Paizo, I would think they have a reasoning for coding it the way they do.

RAW vs RAI I suppose. Would be nice to know if this was what Paizo intended.

This is an incredibly powerful way to create a character, and potentially give a GM a struggle. Caution would tell us to at least consider it.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

I'm not sure if this matters, but I've been emailing the developers of hero lab and they are under the belief that the rogue favored terrain bonus does not increase the rangers favored terrains by the +2. The +2 only applies to the terrains previously selected with rogue talents.

This would surely balance things. Since hero lab is a second party publisher, maybe they have received info that is not written for coding clarification. This is the email I received from them regarding this:

Quote:
The upgrade only applies to favored terrains gained through the selection of that rogue talent, and not any which you might get by virtue of ranger levels (which have a different advancement scheme).


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Yes, the giant subtype is removed (although they still retain their size)

Giant Subtype: A giant is a humanoid creature of great strength, usually of at least Large size. Giants have a number of racial Hit Dice and never substitute such Hit Dice for class levels like some humanoids. Giants have low-light vision, and treat Intimidate and Perception as class skills.

Undead are no longer humanoid, which is what the giant subtype requires.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Korthis wrote:

"This resistance equals double her current DR/— from her barbarian damage reduction class feature; this DR increases by 2 for each dragon totem rage power she possesses, including this one"

-
I would say that "this DR" is referring to the previous statement, absolutely, more specifically it's referring to the last thing mentioned in the previous statement.
Or to rearrange it for clarity's sake:
This DR, from her barbarian damage reduction class feature

Interesting point.

So, take a 10th level barbarian with this rage power
His DR is 2/-.

If he takes this power, his DR is now 4/- with an energy resistance of 8 for one energy type?

That doesn't seem over powered. The other interpretation (wrong or otherwise), would be:

DR 2/- and energy resist of 6 to one type - this is kind of lame.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Yes, this is now across two threads, lol.

The only point that I can see that goes with what Hendelbolaf and others are saying is that it does reference DR as a +2 and not resistance increase. Energy resistance is not measured in DR, so there is that.

So either they wanted your DR to go up or they wanted your resistance to go up.

I am on the side that they meant resistance, since that is what this rage power is focused on, but as Ryric says, by RAW, I can see both interpretations.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Umbranus wrote:
Nefreet wrote:
Plus, there's already a Rage Power that increases your DR by +1. It's highly unlikely Dragon Totem Resilience gives you +2, and another +2 for each of the other Dragon-related powers.
It is a totem power so taking this prevents you from getting pounce.

But feats are not designed with the basis of opportunity cost.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Wait.. this entire thread spawned from Paizo either not clarifying something or not creating an errata, so it's possible Paizo just has not clarified anything.

I did some forum searches and there seems to be a divide on what the real answer is.

I am just saying it only references gaining additional DR for energy. the semicolon does necessary change the focus, although it is a clause closely tied to the original, which is only referencing the energy resistance.

It would be great if this is a bonus to DR, but just like anything, it does not say the barbarian's DR is increased by +2, it says "this DR", which leads us to make our best guess. When I read it, "this" refers to the previous subject, which is the energy resistance and not the barbarians damage reduction.

I wonder if Paizo just put the wrong word, writing "this Dr" instead of "this resistance".

It's a debate either way.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Not to argue, but why?

It only talks about energy resistance in this ability.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Isn't the +4 extra DR from Dragon Resilience only for the energy resistance? From the power below, it doesn't say anything about increasing his personal DR.

Benefit: While raging, the barbarian gains resistance to the energy type that is associated with her dragon totem—acid (black, copper, green), cold (silver, white), electricity (blue, bronze), or fire (brass, gold, red). This resistance equals double her current DR/— from her barbarian damage reduction class feature; this DR increases by 2 for each dragon totem rage power she possesses, including this one.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Serpent wrote:

The +4, +4, +2, +2, +0, -2 is based on the arrays they use. Most monsters use 11, 11, 11, 10, 10, 10 + racial adjustments while NPCs whith class levels use 15 (11+4), 14 (10+4), 13 (11+2), 12 (10+2), 10 (10+0) and 8 (10-2), so it's almost the same array after the adjustments.

Why NPCs with NPC class levels don't get adjustments when they take character class levels is probably for simplicity's sake.

Hmm.. I'll be damned. That's good to know.

Thanks.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

I always thought this part seemed extreme:

Step 2: Add Class Levels
Once you have determined the creature's role, it's time to add class levels. The first step of this process is to modify the creature's ability scores. Creatures with class levels receive +4, +4, +2, +2, +0, and –2 adjustments to their ability scores, assigned in a manner that enhances their class abilities. Creatures with NPC class levels do not receive adjustments to their ability scores.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

I don't think the spell DC changes at all. An area dispel would probably take it out the invisibility pretty quick.

The vanishing move ability has your caster level as double your tier, so at 3rd tier the caster level is only 6.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

My mythic players have about 9 points to burn. Most fights do not last longer than 10 rounds, unless you are only doing 1-2 per session or you are going really long sessions.

On average, our battles last around 6 rounds. 1 point is nothing to spend to get a huge boost to hit by negating power attack.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

ok... I am glad someone pointed out the AoO... I did miss that.

To be honest, what Chaos is saying I agree with (were you yelling at me, lol?, I didn't even notice until you apologized for yelling).

It would make a lot more sense to have power attack spend a mythic point for one round and mythic furious focus for 10 rounds.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

I am not saying that. Furious focus is a great feat.

I am comparing the two mythic feats.

Once feat should not completely eclipse another to the point that you should retrain the original.

A lot of builds have power attack and furious focus. If you ascend to mythic power and take mythic power attack, you might as well retrain furious focus for something else.

And there is no reason... not one that I can think of, that you would want to take mythic furious focus.

Yes, some things are more mechanically better, but do we really need more feats that cancel out others?

I am hoping someone can show me a benefit in mythic furious focus. If not, this is just another feat trap. Why do that?


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

There are more..

I just made a post regarding the differences between mythic power attack and mythic furious focus. These two feats are pointless since mythic power attack does what mythic furious focus does but much better.

Too many cooks in the kitchen with this book :)


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

1) Yes... I think they used immediate since that would cover your swift action on your following round and then you can use it on saving throws and whatnot. Saving words...

4)I thought the same thing. Maybe they needed X number of tier one abilities for balance against the others? Kind of silly all in all.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Yes... great suggestion!


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Ok, so with more clarification:

Chemlak is right... This is an insanely powerful tool.

See invisibility does not work.
Glitterdust will work
Perception checks, tremor sense, blind sense, etc will not work
Fairy Fire will work... if you can somehow find the people (5ft burst)

Yeah.. pretty much screwed.

Invisibly purge and area dispels work, but looks like purge is the only sure fire way to stop it.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Hold on... I am an idiot.

So, with Vanishing move... if you spend your mythic point, you are greater invisible and can move all over the bloody place without issue. Duration: double your tier.

That's one powerful ability. So my players are honest :) That makes me happy.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Can someone explain this one to me? Why in the world would you ever take mythic furious focus when mythic power attack is far and away better?

With mythic furious focus, you can spend a point to negate power attacks penalties for all attacks for one round. Pretty decent.

With power attack, not only does your bonus damage get doubled on a crit before the multiplier, but you get the furious focus power for an entire minute instead of one round.

Really? Am I reading this wrong?

I am prepared for the developers to chime in and say, "well, it's mythic", but come on. This is just poor design or planning.

Furious Focus (Mythic)

Your attacks create a rhythmic barrage that doesn't sacrifice precision for force.

Prerequisite(s): Furious Focus.

Benefit: When you are using Furious Focus, you don't take Power Attack's penalty on attack rolls that are made as attacks of opportunity. As a free action, you can expend one use of mythic power to negate Power Attack's penalty on all melee attacks you make for 1 round while using this feat.

Power Attack (Mythic)

Your attacks are truly devastating.

Prerequisite(s): Power Attack.

Benefit: When you use Power Attack, you gain a +3 bonus on melee damage rolls instead of +2. When your base attack bonus reaches +4 and every 4 points thereafter, the amount of bonus damage increases by +3 instead of +2.

In addition, the bonus damage from this feat is doubled on a critical hit, before it's multiplied by the weapon's critical multiplier.

You can expend one use of mythic power when you activate Power Attack to ignore the penalties on melee attack rolls and combat maneuver checks for 1 minute.

1 to 50 of 322 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 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.