Greg Kilberger's page

Okay,I have a (hopefully) quick question.

I have no problems with a character casting fly and then getting hasted, allowing their fly speed to be affected by the haste spell.
But, what happens if the character is hasted and then casts fly. Does the haste affect this new mode of travel, or would the haste only affect the modes of movement the target had when haste was originally cast?

Opinions?

I'm throwing my vote in with the Witch.... safest way to avoid that evil eye!

Just a couple of thoughts to this thread:

polymorph changes your form... not your class.
Anything you gain from your class (i.e. barbarian rage) is not lost. You were a human barbarian..... you appear as a (lets go with) ogre barbarian.

Templates are not forms. You were a human lich sorceress.... you appear as a ogre lich sorceress.

On that same note, you cannot polymorph into a lich.... it is a template added to a form, not a form in and of itself.

In my weekly game, one player runs a MT (sorcerer/cleric) and although he felt he was often underpowered (compared to the rest of the party) when he reached 12th level, he no longer feels that way.
The main problem I saw with this character was the obvious lack of power at lower levels. The 8th level paladin had more healing at times than the 10th level MT. Of course, if it's power that the player wants, they won't take the MT. He is not a power class, he is a utilitarian. If you are a DM and one of your players is playing a MT, just make sure he has access to things like wands of curing and rods of metamagic. He'll do just fine. And if you are a player..... mention these to your GM.

A few questions arose in our weekly game.

Can you critical with a ranged touch spell (like ray of enfeeblement) that has been maximized and empowered, and if so.... does it double both effects?

can you take improved critical(ray) like you can weapon focus?

Our guesses were yes (it can crit) yes (it doubles both) and no (not listed as option in feat description) but opinions/ official lines are appreciated.

I just want to clarify something.....
I just GM'ed my first PFS adventures.... when I report them, do I include my character that is getting the credit for the first-runs, or do I just fill out a chronicle sheet for him?

Thanks all!

Go here.

Click "My Pathfinder Society."

Sign in.

Create an event in the system for your event.

Once you've created an event, a link will appear next to it on this page that says, "Download session sheets."

Thank you. I had not created any sessions when i set up the event. Now I have the sheets. Sweet.

As per the Guide for Organized Play, it states under reporting events that
"The coordinator can download convention tracking sheets from paizo.com/
pathfindersociety and then hand those out to each GM."

Anyone know where these magical sheets are actually located, so I can download them? It would make my life as a coordinator that much easier.

See above I saw the same thing, but if you look its not clear that the two sentances are linked.

They are linked.

Okay, let me explain another way.
The second sentence is there to allow shared spells that would normally not affect the eidolon based on his type (outsider). So, if Enlarge Person was a "target: you" spell, it could affect the eidolon even though it is an outsider. BUT since it is not a "target: you" spell, it is not eligible for shared spell status in the first place.

Although this is a neat idea, alas it is not legal. As it is stated in the share spells description-
Share Spells (Ex): The summoner may cast a spell with a target of “You” on his eidolon (as a spell with a range of touch) instead of on himself.
And Enlarge Person has a target of "one humanoid creature" so even though you are a humanoid, it is not "you"; so it is not shareable.

Minor errata for the Sea Serpent:

the attack for this creature is listed as:
"Melee bite +23 (4d8+12 plus grab), tail slap +18 (3d6+6 plus grab)"
but it is listed as having Improved Critical as one of it's feats.
Somewhere the (19-20,x2) needs to be inserted.

That is all.

the original quote at the top is a direct cut and paste from the PRD. It is the same in the print Bestiary.

Okay, good. I should just ignore the fluff text and continue to do it like I thought. Good. I assumed this already, but that dang "attack before and after" kept messing with me. I'm better now.

Can someone explain this to me?
Here is what it says in the Bestiary (and the PRD)

Flyby Attack

This creature can make an attack before and after it moves while flying.

Prerequisite: Fly speed.

Benefit: When flying, the creature can take a move action and another standard action at any point during the move. The creature cannot take a second move action during a round when it makes a flyby attack.

Normal: Without this feat, the creature takes a standard action either before or after its move.

The creature can ATTACK before and after a move? Wasn't this always a creature can MOVE before and after an attack? I just keep scratching my head when i read this entry. Please help, my scalp is getting sore.

also includes DR from spells, and armor, and SLAs etc. etc. ad naseum.

that's how we played it.

Under the smite evil ability, this statement is made: "Regardless of the
target, smite evil attacks automatically bypass any DR the creature might possess."
The question that arose in our game is- does this only count against the DR a creature normally possesses, or does it also include DR from things like stoneskin.

In short, no.

In a longer explanation, to use rideby attack, you would have to draw your straight line of movement to go past your target, but within reach of your weapon. In most cases, this simply means riding along the side of your target. Think jousting. They would ride past each other, not into each other. If you were to charge directly into the square of the enemy, you would have to attempt an overrun as well, which WOULD provoke an AOO.

And why was my last post containing a blue avatar? Is it because I used the S word?

I can't believe this thread has gone on for 5 pages.

I can't believe I just read the whole thing.

I can't believe all the smurfing smurfs that showed up.

I can't fathom what my avatar says about anything except maybe "grumph eek dukka"

Aura of Justice (Su): Allies must use this smite evil ability by the start of the paladin's next turn and the bonuses last for 1 minute.

So if the allies can't use the Smite evil by the start of the Paladin's next turn the effect ends?

YES

Or does the effect last 1 minute?

The effect of the smite YES

Or should the ability read something like 'Allies must use this smite evil ability by the start of the paladin's next turn and IF SO the bonuses last for 1 minute.'

That would make the ability more clear, and that is exactly how it works, so once again.... YES. ;-)

i was dming last week and one of the characters has 2 immovable rods, he used them to get 20 feet in the air and placed them a foot apart. next he got on top of them and and began to fire his light crossbow, i said hold on a minute, you have to make climb checks to pull yourself up and balance checks to see if you can fire the crossbow without falling off the rods, he disagreed and the debate was on, what would you fine people rule as to firing a lightcross bow atop 2 immovable rods?

I have had similar situations arise, and here is how I have handled it.

Who needs light armor?

In fact, who needs ranks in tumble? (Well, now in Pathfinder, it's ranks in Acrobatics).

Just wear your full plate, move through the enemy's space, and take your lumps from the AoO.

Except for most characters, acrobatic tumbling is impossible with that full plate on. See page 88 where it says "you cannot use acrobatics to move past foes if your speed is reduced due to carrying a medium or heavy load or wearing medium or heavy armor."

As far as the statement about moving through a occupied square:

Moving Through a Square, page 193 wrote:
Tumbling: A trained character can attempt to use Acrobatics to move through a square occupied by an opponent

So unless you have ranks in this skill, you cannot attempt this maneuver.

Those statements are not opinions or house rules. This next one is. In my game, a failed attempt at moving though a enemy's square will make the character stop short.

As I read it, there are only 2 item creation prerequisites that cannot be satisfied with the +5 DC to the creation check. These are the creation feat and any spells needed for spell-trigger or spell-completion items.

In other words, if you wanted to create a Belt of Physical Perfection, the prerequisites are: caster level 16, craft wondrous item feat, bear's endurance, bull's strength, cat's grace.
The standard DC is caster level (16) + 5 (as on page 548) or +10 (as on page 112) [this question is being addressed in another thread]
for this example, let us assume page 112 is right. The DC is then 26.
Now let's assume the caster is only level 12, and has none of the required spells. The belt is not a spell-trigger or spell completion, so that is 4 ignored prerequisites. 26 + 5 + 5 + 5 + 5 = DC 46. More likely he will end up making a cursed item, but he can still try.

On the flipside, items like wands and scrolls (spell-trigger and spell-completion) must have the creation feat and the required spell(s) prepared but can still ignore other prerequisites (like caster level) by adding +5 to the DC.

But the point is that a.) By ending his rage at the end of his turn he doesn't really suffer the AC penalty, and b.) He can use once-per-rage powers every round because each round is another rage.

If you rage, it lasts for the rest of the whole round. you cannot rage for only part of a round. Otherwise, no barbarian would ever incur the AC penalty.

I have had a question come up that I would love to hear an "official" answer for. One of my players is a Mystic Theurge (cleric/sorcerer). He had a question regarding the Spells per Day of the Theurge and how they effect the sorcerer side; specifically in regards to bloodlines.

I understand that the MT class would not grant any of the bloodline feats/powers, but does it allow the character to gain the bloodline bonus spells? His reasoning is that they are spells he would have gained as a sorcerer, and since the prestige class specifically states that only spells are gained from other casting classes, I think this seems to fit the bill.

I've considered action points or some kind of heroes luck mechanic. It's always a buzz kill when one of the heroes rolls a 1 (or worse yet two 1s) in a key heroic encounter. We had a game where the group wizard wasted half the fight because of two horrible rolls on casting defensively. He's 12 and I felt really crappy for him. I may have to steal some version of this.

I addressed this in kind of a unique way. Each Christmas, my players receive a "screen monkey card" that enables them to reroll saves, auto-confirm crits, or whatever. The card has a picture of the 5-assed monkey (from south park) on it. Each time the card is used, one (or more) ass is crossed off. It works really well, because they only have 5 each all year, and yet they don't always get used, because they want to save them til when they are "really needed".

Here are a few of ours:
cure spells any time a cure spell roll has all 1s, the caster can ask for a DM re-roll. The re-roll stands.

pushing spells if a caster runs out of a given spell level, he can attempt to push his body beyond the normal boundaries and try to cast another spell of that level. This does not come without cost. The rules are as follows:

-the caster must first make a magic channeling check (DC10+2xlevel of the spell attempted) vs. d20 + casting attribute modifier. Success means he casts the spell. example- wizard with Int 20 tries to cast a 4th level spell. Dc is 20(10+8)and his attempt would be d20+5.

-success or failure, the caster is drained 2x spell level attempted of Con. (in example above, our caster would be drained of 8 Con) This Con damage cannot be magically healed, but is recovered at 1 point per hour of bed rest.

-In addition, this causes the caster to become fatigued. A second attempt causes exhaustion.

As you can guess, pushing spells is dangerous, and can easily kill spellcasters, but if one mage's death saves the rest of the party by casting that last spell, think of the glory.

Simply put, in addition to the listed spells (in your example - 3 orisons and 1 1st level spell) you gain any bonus spells that you have level access to. At first level, you gain your level 1 bonus. When you reach level 3 cleric, you would have a bonus spell in 1st and 2nd level spells. The bonuses for the higher level spells are not gained until you have access to those spell levels.

I know this is already off my original topic, but it's a thought I had to state:

SUMMON ANT
casting
Level sorcerer/wizard/druid/ranger/cleric/bard 0
casting time: full round action
components: S,M
effect
range: close
duration: varies
description
This spell is cast when the caster drops a cupcake (the material component) and waits for the ant to show up. The caster has no control over the summoned creature once it arrives. This spell does have the possibility of summoning multiple creatures, at the DM's discretion. The duration of the spell depends on how long it takes the ant(s) to eat/remove the material component.

The 4th installment is finally up here.
So far nothing jumps out at me as "whoa why did they do that?" or "whoa how did they do that?", although one question did arise.
On the summon nature's ally list, there are ants (drone and soldier) but it doesn't say "giant". I certainly hope the ranger isn't wasting his time to summon an ordinary ant.

Can I play them as is, with PC's using PFRPG classes at the recommended levels? Should I start them at lower levels since there seems to be a power creep for PFRPG? And how much extra modification will it take to DM these modules? Any help would be appreciated.

Also, has anyone tried any of the Goodman Games DCC's with PFRPG?

Thanks

My current campaign is using the PFRP beta and we have ran several DCC modules. The only change I have done is given all NPC combatants an additional 10hp.... I have not messed with re-structuring feats or anything, and they still seem right in line to the level suggestions.

So Valeros may look like a badass thanks to great picture, but in (game) reality, if a 5th level Wizard makes a suggestion to go gather flowers (for 5 hours), our 14th level hero will most likely do so (for 5 hours, if the suggestion is stated properly).

And I don't see this as a problem. Everyone should have a weakness. Otherwise, DM's everywhere will have an even harder job making the players look like they have beat the odds.

For a PFRPG monk (or "monk"), ask me again in 3 months. I'll probably recommend a sorcerer/dragon disciple at that point. :-)

heck, I'll want to see that....

I know there have been several posts about what is currently legal for PF Society, but one thing does need to be considered. Several of the suggestions (including the one above by hogarth) need to be considered with only limited usefulness, simply because the current ruleset (3.5 plus campaign guide) is only good until august. So unless you are planning to play in 18 PF scenarios before august, the 6 level progression above will be outdated. Since the conversion to PFRP will allow for a reworking of your character, the "beta" ideas are still sound for future consideration.

If you really want to crack out this monk, first figure out how many levels you are going to achieve before conversion. If you are only getting in 4 adventures before august...... it really isn't going to matter all that much. Just take 2 monk levels, and worry the long range stuff later.

I am aware of this - I already have a copy of it. I have not read it however, as it is an expired Beta. I will wait for the full version, as the chance to comment on said rules is over, there is no point to analysing something that may be obsolete :)

Considering the organized play will be PFRP by august, and the builds listed go past 1st level, you might want to go ahead and consider the beta... since it's 3.5 that will be the obsolete one.

thanks hogarth, now my "should" can become a "sure" or something like that.

yes, they should be open content. The only non-open content should be "fluff" items. (descriptive text) All game info should be open content.

can anyone tell me what weapons are listed in the Pathfinder Chronicles Campaign Setting equipment list? I currently do not have access to one. (local game store is sold out of it at the time)

Lastknightleft answered 2-4 already, so let me address #1 a little

[1) Spontaneous casting clerics/druids: The main reason here is that with all the spell supplements in 3.5, it can become really intimidating for these classes to chose spells everyday. Spontaneous casting simplifies that problem.

Technically, Pathfinder has already addressed these. How you may ask? Well, one purpose of the Pathfinder rpg is to bring the power of the core classes back in line with the newer expansion classes that arose from supplements. For example ,the Favored Soul (from the Complete Divine) is your spontaneous cleric. You just use that class as written, and it fits in with the pathfinder classes. Same reason why you won't see a pathfinder warlock. It is already powered up.

I agree that CL is not as nice as it could/should be.
Here is my suggestion for fixing it.

Change the text description to:

This spell creates an electrical discharge that begins as a single
stroke commencing from your fingertips. Unlike lightning bolt, chain
lightning strikes one object or creature initially, then arcs to other
targets.

The bolt deals 1d6 points of electricity damage per caster level
(maximum 20d6) to the primary target. After it strikes, the bolt arcs
to a series of secondary targets equal to your caster level (maximum
20). This arcing bolt strikes from one target to the next, and deals
half as much damage as the primary one did (rounded down).

Each target can attempt a Reflex saving throw for half damage. You
choose secondary targets as you like, but the distance the bolt can
travel (after striking the primary target) is a cumulative 120 feet,
and no target can be struck more than once. You can choose to affect
fewer secondary targets than the maximum.

This way, the spell actually "chains" from one to the next.

It gets the same danger zone as the original lighting bolt.

I would even feel that the half damage for secondary targets could be changed to full damage, but personally, it's not the lower damage that nerfs this spell, it's the tight AoE that it currently has. With my version, this spell could rip through several ranks of low level fodder and still streak across the battlefield to put a little hurt on that pesky guy hiding in back barking orders.

Like it? Hate it? Wish I would stop calling? Let me know.

I just wanted to say I pretty much agree with everything DeathQuaker said above.

And, for the record, my favorite solution so far is the "save or dying" idea. take em out of the combat, not out of the campaign (at least not immediately)

Greg Kilberger wrote:

Jacob Blackmon wrote:

I hate to say this... but, "DUH!" The point of casting defensively is to avoid the attack of opportinity. Thus, If the caster fails the Spellcraft check to cast defensively, they take the AoO. As it is written, his feat is pointless.

Sorry, but I think you have your definition of casting defensively wrong. If you fail your skill check, you lose your spell. You never provoke when casting defensively (unless of course Spellbreaker has anything to do with it)

Page 72 of the PF RPG, under Spellcraft DCs:

Cast Defensively (avoiding an attack of opportunity): DC = 15 + Spell Level.

I think I am correct in my definition.

ok, that comes from a chart that simply tells you what "casting defensively" does.

I hate to say this... but, "DUH!" The point of casting defensively is to avoid the attack of opportinity. Thus, If the caster fails the Spellcraft check to cast defensively, they take the AoO. As it is written, his feat is pointless.

Sorry, but I think you have your definition of casting defensively wrong. If you fail your skill check, you lose your spell. You never provoke when casting defensively (unless of course Spellbreaker has anything to do with it)

I really think we need a list or a notation in the feat descriptions letting everyone clearly know which ranged feats can be used on things like spell rays.
Perhaps simply an added asterisk in the feat list and a footnote declaring "these feats can be applied to attacks with rays"

Otherwise, I have to keep explaining why "precise shot" can work with your ray of enfeeblement, but "rapid shot" cannot.

OK, here are my opinions on the new feats list:

The following seem to be quite balanced as written:
acrobatic steps
advance
critical focus
disruptive
fleet
greater bullrush
greater disarm
greater grapple
greater overrun
greater shield focus
greater shield mastery
greater sunder
greater trip
improved fortitude/will/reflexes
lunge
nimble moves
shall not pass
shield focus
shield mastery
step up
strike back

now let's look at the rest, in no particular order:

Greater feint: needs to be re-worded. "Whenever you use feint to cause an opponent to lose his Dexterity bonus, he loses that bonus until the beginning of your next turn, in addition to losing his Dexterity bonus against your next attack, if that attack does not come before your next turn." so an opponent loses his DEX when and why? what? <blink blink>

penetrating strike (and greater): I like the getting around DR, but not the getting around DR/-. No matter your feats, that elemental is still made of elemental type stuff. Although I think the ignore 5/ignore 10, although a nice even number, might be too high. I would like to see this feat help with DR, not ignore it completely. How about negate up to 3 DR (6 with greaterPS) and leave the dr/- alone.

I'm not sure how i feel about any of the critical feats. Need to test these more, but seem overpowered at first (and second read)

Lastly, master craftsman:
I understand the desire to have people craft things without the use of spells, but then how are they going to be magic? If people want a vehicle to creating magic items without it being wizards.... then have a special "magic imbued craftsman" npc class. I do not want or need smart fighters making magic items without access to magic.

Personally, I would like to see all magic items (with the exception of scrolls) have to be crafted from the ground up by the person who is doing the enchanting. Since there is no xp cost to making magic items in PF, having to take the time to create the MW item first is a good balancer.

I agree that the grapple needs a little tweaking.
I enjoyed the OPers ideas, especially the “aid” and multiple grapplers entries.

However, I think there should be two positions in a grapple; grappler and grapplee. Or if you prefer, grappling and being grappled .
This could be rectified by simply adding the below part to the original (or any revised) grapple entry.

If you are the person being grappled, you can perform one of the following actions.
Escape: Make a standard CMB roll against the target’s CMB (with the +5 circumstance bonus if your opponent has earned it) If you succeed, you are free of the grapple. You can also choose to use an Escape Artist check against your opponent’s CMB.
Reverse: Make a standard CMB roll against the target’s CMB (with the +5 circumstance bonus if your opponent has earned it). If you succeed, you become the grappler, and can now choose to attempt to move, damage or pin your opponent next round.

I agree with several posters that there needs to be some stipulation about the “move” action when dealing with larger creatures, or those that don’t use their whole body to grapple. Personally, I like the idea of “move” and “pin” only works on creatures of up to one size category larger.
For some reason, the game mechanics are eluding me for this next part, but I’m pretty sure you couldn’t pin or move an opponent that is grappling you via its tentacle. So that would have to be mentioned as well.

I see a few ideas here I wish to address.

First off, I think the PF incarnation of the cleric is wonderful. The domain powers are a nice change without being overpowered. One player in our home game has 2 clerics that he switches between, which allows me to see 2 styles, and so far I have not seen any major downfalls in the class. If anything, they are more useful.

Secondly, as for people "not wanting to play the cleric", there are simple solutions. Don't play one. As has been mentioned, there are many items that can give the vital healing that characters need. Potions, wands, and the like. And of course, the party can always hire a healer. Get yourself a pacifist cleric of a god of healing. He certainly won't get his nose dirty in combat, but he will be ready to heal you when you need it. (not to mention this is a great way to siphon off a little gp if the group gets a little wealthy)

Last thought: Not all clerics need be the "healbot" that seems to be expected of them. In our last campaign we had a cleric of the god of war who was far more into the Glory of his God, then in healing the others who seemed to only give lip service to his patron deity when they were hurt. Personally, I am more concerned with seeing that the character classes stay balanced.... not "enticing". Those who want to play the cleric will, those who don't want to shouldn't.

quote>>"However, if in this game, the morning star does indeed have a length of chain on it, I would suggest #1 making it a martial weapon and #2 whats the difference between a flail and a morningstar?"

This is simple.
A mace is a blunt ball on a handle. Sometimes it has flanges (knobs) protruding from it.
A morningstar is a mace that has spikes instead of flanges.
A flail has a length of chain with one (or more) balls on the end.
All of these (historically) have come in varying handle lengths, often split into the footman and horseman categories.

If you see reference to a "morningstar" having a length of chain, it has been mislabeled. That is a flail.