|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
I'm not sure your question.
A magus can use Spell Combat as a full round action.
Jeff Hazuka wrote:
Ok, then that makes me on the hunt for 3 ratfolk as I have one other deal for 1 ratfolk.
In case it seems I'm kidding. I'm not.
If anyone has a ratfolk, I'll trade anything I have for it. So that I may trade for Glutton for Punishments.
Guarded Stance as a Furious Guardian: Will the Furious Guardian levels count towards Guarded Stance?
Hybrids can multiclass with their parent, that was a beta restriction.
They either stack or not:
Ask your GM
repeatedly stated that FAQs are only supposed to deal with their stated subject matter, and that extrapolating beyond that isn't the intent
all of this is complicated by the fact that some humans think one thing is obvious. When confronted with non-obvious to them (but obvious to others) a lot of times we will qualify things.
So when some FAQ were taken to mean things they didn't mean, the general answer is "don't apply any FAQ outside the scope what what they reference."
Then the opposite thing happens, where they make a general FAQ intended to have scope well beyond and others use the "don't take it as a general" thing.
That FAQ happened after conversations about ring of spell storing being used to store metamagic'd spells as the lower level. It was repetitively said that wouldn't work. A few years of that and a thread that blew up then a couple months later we got the FAQ with a specific question that only covered a couple things but had an "in general" comment. I take the events to be related, but I don't have a dev saying they were related.
Wayang Spellhunter wrote:
When you use this spell with a metamagic feat, it uses up a spell slot one level lower than it normally would.
Magical Lineage wrote:
When you apply metamagic feats to this spell
Both trigger once, when you apply 1 or more metamagic feats.
This has all been hashed out in the years since these traits were printed.
Kazumetsa Raijin wrote:
Not requited because of the part you quoted. No additional means no natural attacks, no additional attacks.
I get that you'd want to avoid taking my word, but a designer point this out already and yet is being ignored.
Do we really have to wait until they answer a question in a new FAQ already answered?
that FAQ specifically calls out concentration dc and spell recalls.
That came about in threads related to "which ring of spell storing do I use for a magic missile with metamagic?" where the answer has always been "which ever spell level is worse for you".
The FAQ makes that clear with a general rule. So if the higher level slot is worse for you, use that.
At no point did the level of the spell change, because worse for you is using the lower level slot for DC.
It's a general "worse for you" way of thinking.
PFS situation, a GM would be very much crossing the line if they ignored explicit rules text based on a relative comparison to an FAQ that doesn't apply.
PFS GMs are required to enforce the rulers and not change adventure combats or tactics. Enforcing the rules by the GM's interpretation not your interpretation.
The FAQ gave an in general rule:
So if you use a metamagic 0-3 rod on a spell using a 4th level slot, you are ignoring the disadvantage.
I have a feeling you will disagree with my logic, in which case welcome to table variance.
vhok, I think we are saying the same thing.
If you are saying that a multiple metamagic'd fireball that uses a 4th level slot requires the 4-6 Metamagic rod then we are.
If you are saying using a 4th level slot (required minimum) for a fireball and using a 0-3 rod, then we disagree. Because of the FAQ you quoted.
Wise Old Man wrote:
Your last two sentences seem to be saying something wrong.
A Persistent (+2) Dazing (+3) Fireball (3) with Magical Lineage/Wayang Spellhunter (-2) = 2+3+3-2 = 6.
Being 6, it is using a normal Metamagic Rod.
it says nothing about having to be adjacent to the creature yourself so would you get flanking if you attack at range? because if so that would make a ranged rogue a bit more viable.
If you have a rouge with a long melee reach attack like a whip, sure.
If you think ranged, then no. You gain no flanking bonus or the benefit of being considered flanking when making a ranged attack.
Flanking is by definition a melee thing, so you can't ever flank ranged with anything that doesn't say "you are ranged flanking".
magical lineage and metamagic master you end up with using a slot 2 levels less than it normally would
If you are saying a Fireball can ever take up a slot less than 3rd, then no.
metamagic rods. Most people in there agreed that a rod works on the slot, not the spell's effective level (3rd for fireball).
Actually it takes the worse for you. So if you have a Metamagic adjusted slot of 6th on a 3rd level Fireball, you pick 3 or 6 whichever is worse for you.
Whenever a creature targeted by a persistent spell or within its area succeeds on its saving throw against the spell, it must make another saving throw against the effect.
Quoting this would have helped.
You only roll the second time if it succeeds the first check. Then you roll a second time and if it fails it fails. So it forces the target to succeed twice to pass the check.