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

James Risner's page

RPG Superstar 7 Season Marathon Voter, 8 Season Marathon Voter. Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Cards, Companion, Maps, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber. FullStarFullStarFullStarFullStar Venture-Agent, Kentucky—Lexington. 8,094 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 12 Pathfinder Society characters.

Owner of D20 Hobbies


RSS

1 to 50 of 8,094 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Option 1

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

You pick targets after the spell is cast, not during.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Both are Spell in a can, yes.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Worst part is I've talked to the owner, he seems to want to make the site a great resource but he doesn't fix any of the reported mistakes.

I've reported things like the Fox Shape having a Special: line added that doesn't exist and many archetypes listed on his charts as stacking that don't stack because they modify the same class feature but lack the "This replaces/alters" language (that isn't required.)

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

ryric wrote:
Rysky wrote:
D20PFSRD probably made it for completion's sake.
That seems a likely explanation, although as I've pointed out it would be rather useless.

Which is something I really wish they wouldn't do, I'm starting to have more than I can count on two hands of editorial revision by the site. It really gets frustrating to keep having to explain to players they need to look it up elsewhere before they use it.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Anzyr wrote:
Incorrect. Because the oracle would have to choose the hex again each day decide to pick the Lore Spirit, they would select different spells each time.
Quote:
Each time the shaman gains a level after taking this hex, she can choose to replace one of these spells with a new spell from the sorcerer/wizard spell list.

You missed the last sentence of Arcane Enlightenment.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Bill1138, each level you gain a way to swap out the Arcane Enlightenment spells. So eventually they will be higher level spells.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Mark Seifter wrote:
FAQrrangement; now we can have PComp and CS FAQs even if they aren't literally #1 in clicks like before (thus using our usual algorithm for choosing FAQs instead of the much stricter one), as long as PFS has already done the legwork for their Campaign Clarification document. Woohoo!

A FAQrrangement is an arrangement, and a cool one.

What's a PComp, CS FAQ and how does that relate to Campaign Clarifications?

I thinking I hearing that any FAQ that already has an answer in a Campaign Clarification is possible to be fast tracked with sufficient clickies on a proper FAQ thread?

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Not all CMB checks can use Unarmed Strikes as a weapon.

Grapple doesn't for example per developer comments.

Sunder and Trip do for sure, as does any weapon with the weapon special property that allows it.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Cover bonuses do not stack.

Your GM will adjudicate whether you have cover, improved cover, total cover or some value in between.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

I three-gree. ;-)

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Chess Pwn wrote:
Yes, I think the ability should be changed so that it does something useful, but that doesn't change what is clearly said by the text.

I will say that I hope if this gets FAQ it gets changed to not work for Oracles, as it would be broken.

So in short, I hope I'm wrong on a FAQ outcome.

I've been wrong about future FAQ very few times, because a lot of FAQ deviate from some "literal" word to use the root meaning. I believe the root meaning is that this adds spells to spells known that can then be cast.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Cha based. Could also be Con based in certain circumstances (from memory and I can't look it up as I'm on a cell.)

Ask your GM to fix for you.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

SlimGauge wrote:
graystone wrote:
As such, they are 100% contradictory so pick whichever one you like best.

They are not contradictory. The difference is in the wording of how one gets to wield a two-handed weapon in one hand. One wording changed ONLY the wielding, retaining all other two-handed characteristics such as 1.5xSTR, while the other changes ALL aspects to those of a one-handed weapon.

See other threads like this one or this one.

+1

Plus they have said they actively remove or change contradictory FAQ and this alleged contradiction (which I don't agree is one) has been pointed out often and never revised.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Love the porch example. Totally the discussion at hand.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

The Steel Refrain wrote:
Based on the progression of our discussion to date, I think we can likely agree that continuation of the discussion is unlikely to produce an overly satisfactory resolution for either of us.

On that we can agree. There isn't a snipit of a rules blurb that has yet to be found, the two sides have the same rules and FAQ to prove their position. The issue is that the interpretations differ.

Markov Spiked Chain wrote:
Arcane Enlightenment adds spells *to your class spell list*, not "to my list of spells known." Literally no part of the FAQ applies except "not on my spell list."

Actually:

Quote:
list of shaman spells she can prepare

I read that as the opposite, as a list of spells known (as you may only prepare spells known.)

At this point I don't think everyone can be brought on the same page without a new FAQ.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

No, the item is casting the spell. It's a "spell in a can" item.

The spell is cast with the CL of the item.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

I'll give you some friendly advice, from some who has GM multiple hundreds of PFS scenarios and decades of weekly non-PFS material.

Tell that player in a polite way the matter is settled, your job as GM is to adjudicate the rules, you have done so and here is the result, we shall not bring this subject up again.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

The Steel Refrain wrote:
actually different - "known spell" versus "spells known...

When someone replies with something like this, you know their mind is made up and they are unwilling to accept any logic, facts, or reason.

The spells known FAQ didn't fix any issues that used the word "known spell" or "spell known". But it fixed Known spell issues that didn't also add to your class spell list.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Ask your GM to adjudicate if a creature blocks, there are no rules.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

+1 you can lunge with whirlwind.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Quote:

Line of Effect: A line of effect is a straight, unblocked path that indicates what a spell can affect. A line of effect is canceled by a solid barrier. It's like line of sight for ranged weapons, except that it's not blocked by fog, darkness, and other factors that limit normal sight.

You must have a clear line of effect to any target that you cast a spell on or to any space in which you wish to create an effect. You must have a clear line of effect to the point of origin of any spell you cast.

A burst, cone, cylinder, or emanation spell affects only an area, creature, or object to which it has line of effect from its origin (a spherical burst's center point, a cone-shaped burst's starting point, a cylinder's circle, or an emanation's point of origin).

An otherwise solid barrier with a hole of at least 1 square foot through it does not block a spell's line of effect. Such an opening means that the 5-foot length of wall containing the hole is no longer considered a barrier for purposes of a spell's line of effect.

The full line of effect rules.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Markov Spiked Chain wrote:
crazy good "Pick some wizard spells" effect it has for shaman, you're trying to add a freebie "Also gain <Wisdom Mod> Spells Known.

Without addressing how good the effect is, I'll address it's legality.

Quote:
Bonded Spirit (Su) A spirit guide gains one hex of her choice from the list of hexes available from that spirit
Quote:

A shaman who chooses the lore spirit can select from the following hexes.

Arcane Enlightenment (Su): The shaman's native intelligence grants her the ability to tap into arcane lore. The shaman can add a number of spells from the sorcerer/wizard spell list equal to her Charisma modifier (minimum 1) to the list of shaman spells she can prepare.

So it is granted by a class feature.

Quote:

New Spells Known: If I gain the ability to add a spell that is not on my spell list to my list of spells known, without adding it to my spell list, can I cast it?

No. Adding a spell to your list of spells known does not add it to the spell list of that class unless they are added by a class feature of that same class.

So an Oracle class feature is adding spells. The FAQ clarifies that only class features default to spells known and class spell list.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

The clarification comes form 3.5 Glossary which was punted in Pathfinder.

Quote:
known spell: A spell that an arcane spellcaster has learned and can prepare. For wizards, knowing a spell means having it in their spellbooks. For sorcerers and bards, knowing a spell means having selected it when acquiring new spells as a benefit of level advancement.

You could consider it an unwritten rule.

In any event, there are many legal ways to do this.

Take a Magus with Greater Spell Access:
Spells given: 2 Wizard spells of each level

You add two non-Magus spells to your magus spellbook, then you retrain Greater Spell Access to something else.

Now you have 2 known spells in your magus spellbook, but you can't prepare them.

Another way is for a wizard to "make their own" a former magus spell book containing magus only spells. That wizard knows those magus spells. But can't cast them.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Your welcome!

So many choices!

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Well. It looks like this can only be solved with a FAQ. One that is something that pretty much no one ever will use as combining Spell Combat and Whirlwind is such a rare occurrence. But will be require anyway, as both sides are firmly resolved to their opinion and are using the same rules and FAQ to prove the conflicting interpretations.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Quote:
unless they are added by a class feature of that same class

Oracle class has a class feature that adds spells to the Oracle class, Arcane Enlightenment feature. So same class.

Also Spells Known is for Spontaneous Class (when you add a spells known you can cast that spell) and for Prepared (like Wizards your spells known is the spells in your spellbook.) So Spells Known is applicable to both, which is why the FAQ exists in the first place. You can add a spell to a wizard spellbook that is a magus only spell. It becomes a spells known for the wizard. He knows the magus only spell. He can't cast it, because it isn't a wizard spell. But he knows it.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Again, this isn't a combo.
This is an Oracle class feature granting access to spells known, which based on the Spells Known FAQ grants access to know and cast the spells. Because it's a class feature.

If this were and item or a feat designed for prepared casters, or a spell for prepared only or you chose spells that were prepared only, you wouldn't be able to cast them. But as long as you choose arcane enlightenment via Spirit Magic in Oracle and choose spells like fireball and not like meditation spells, then you are fine.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

6th UMonk gets to choose between:
Making non-Flurry claw attack only
Making non-flurry Unarmed attacks only
Making non-flurry Unarmed and secondary claw attacks
Making Flurry Unarmed attacks only
Making Flurry Unarmed attacks using one claw as the weapon (FCT) for some or all the Unarmed attacks

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Purple Dragon Knight wrote:
bbangerter wrote:

What is the purpose of this FAQ then? [...]

It used to be that speed weapons, haste, and other things that granted bonuses during a full-attack could not be used with spell combat. The FAQ reversed that ruling. The FAQ binds spell combat and full-attack being the same type of action for many purposes. haste

+1

I see that FAQ paving the way for Haste and similar effects like speed weapons that add to a full attack to work. It would be taking that FAQ out of context (which we are told not to do) to allow things that replace full attack actions to work (like Whirlwind).

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

It got changed because people were interpreting it as add more STR bonus that designed.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Solid answers by all. +1

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm also on the Not a FAQ bandwagon. Until this week, this isn't a question that came up often or was not quickly answered and done.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Unarmed Strikes are manufactured weapons and not natural weapons. How a spell like Magic Weapon classifies Unarmed Strikes does not change what they are.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Chess Pwn wrote:
yes and neither

+1

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

+1

Also since it's a class feature, they would be able to cast it via the Spells Known FAQ.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Do we need two threads discussing the same thing?

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Oncoming_Storm wrote:
I fear that not only does this not work, but that somehow the clarification you're seeking will make monks weaker and druids even stronger.

+1

I'd be just about anything the FAQ would go against IUS being a Primary Natural Weapon. I wouldn't even be surprised if Dragon Style gets another round of errata.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Snowlilly wrote:
Please provide RAW backing your position.

Please see all posts by Snowlilly RAW as RAW backing the position opposite to Snowlilly.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

200 gp seems a small price to pay for increased action economy similar to how a "true strike" item would be too cheap to pay for an activated item granting +20 to attack.

But sure, using the table, you can get to 2000 gp for continuous. I just don't think you do following the guidelines.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Plausible Pseudonym wrote:
The FAQ didn't cover every circumstance it broke through its general rule.

That FAQ reinforced how spells in a can items should have always worked from 1e to 3.5/PF. It was different than many players used the items.

In original 1st edition rules:

DMG p129 wrote:
Rings' spell-like abilities function as 12th level of magic use unless the power requires a higher level of magic use. The latter function at the mini- mum level of magic use necessary to cast the equivalent spell.
DMG p130 wrote:
The wearer of an invisibility ring is able to become in- visible at will, instantly, This non-visible state is exactly the same as the magic-user invisibility spell (q.v.) ...
PHB p70 wrote:

Invisibility

Duration: Special
The spell remains in effect until it is magically broken or dispelled, or the magic-user or the other recipient cancels it or until he, she or it attacks any creature.

This always comes up in every question about this subject. The rules for how magic item "spell in a can" items work has not materially changed. In 1e, rings had a CL of 12 and a duration of what ever that CL makes.

What did change is the Invisibility spell changed from indefinite duration to being duration based.

Most people conflate "ring of invisibility worked for ever because one activation of the spell worked forever" to "ring activations work forever."

Tarantula wrote:
Or, follow the item creation rules, to make a constant hat of disguise for 2,000gp instead of the command word for 1,800 that already exists.

Which would violate the item creation guidelines because we already have a Hat of Disguise and Greater Hat of Disguise.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Snowlilly wrote:
RAW has been provided. If you have RAW that runs counter to that, please provide it.

RAW has not been provided.

If you continue this way, this thread will be 1000 posts by next week.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

sunblaze31 wrote:
BTW. it has been stated several times that wildblooded are allowed as bloodline. But as always confirm with your DM.

Actually it never been stated as much. There may also be a FAQ stating the opposite.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

8. Conclusion based on incorrect rules interpretation.

8. Correct Conclusion:
Monks Unarmed are not Primary Natural Attacks confirmed (allegedly) by a PDT member in a post.

I should point out, that was a huge post. It took effort. The problem is that everyone understands how you come to your conclusion, but we don't agree with the conclusion.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

It's not limited at all.
It just doesn't count as a primary attack.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

1 person marked this as a favorite.

There is no Sylvan bloodline. It's a feature of the wildblooded archetype, so at Anita can't choose it as a bloodline.

Unless the thing granting you an animal companion says you can choose any companion available to a Druid, you need to pick from the list.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

CraziFuzzy wrote:
causes confusion, frustration and bickering among people who are just trying to have a good time around a table together

While in almost 400 games I've been player or GM, I've seen this happen at a table only a couple times.

Generally, this is far more of a problem online and mostly related to some that cling to some sort of "only one way to read the rules".

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Stewart818 wrote:
You guys are quoting the Weapon Proficiency part of the Kensai. But the Canny Defense ability doesn't say it has to be the same as the weapon you are proficient with, just a specific "chosen weapon".

Because the author didn't think someone would cheese out inserting an unwritten rule of "you can choose any weapon, not the signature weapon you picked with your weapon proficiency."

I, as a GM, wouldn't allow that unwritten rule.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

So seems everyone except swoosh agree you can't be in a style before combat, even if it's the last style you had from last combat.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

swoosh wrote:
If combat style master wasn't designed specifically around weaving together multiple styles I'd agree with you. Given that it is I don't see it as particularly relevant.

Cool thing is RAW is an interpreted thing. You don't have to agree it's relevant for it to be relevant.

1 to 50 of 8,094 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2016 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.