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

Jeraa's page

3,477 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS

1 to 50 of 3,477 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Wei Ji the Learner wrote:
Have carriers already started enacting plans because the site seems pretty *slow* today?

No, as it doesn't take effect for a while yet. While there is no specific timeline, we are still looking at weeks to months before it is officially done. Assuming the lawsuits and anything else like that doesn't push it back further. The vote just started the process - it did not complete it.

The site being slow at times has been going on for quite a while, at least from my experience. It has nothing to do with any of this.


the David wrote:
I'm sorry I had to necro this thread, but I couldn't find an answer to this question on the messageboards and it seemed silly to start a new thread. I checked the PRD for the rules and it seems this hasn't been hit with the errata stick yet. Now to be fair, this would raise the potential DPR of a Horned Devil by 15.

Starting a new thread isn't silly. Especially in this case where the original thread only has a single post and is over 7 years old.


River of Sticks wrote:
Interesting Question... Does a spell with Still Spell, or no somatic components, become incapable of being identified?

No. All spells have some sort of visual effect when cast. Read the FAQ that Fuzzy linked above.

Identifying a spell as it is cast says you need to see the spell, not the spell components. A spell can have absolutely no components and still be identifiable.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lady-J wrote:
Jeraa wrote:
Lady-J wrote:
So the fcc has decided to remove net neutrality in a 3-2 vote. So you guys in the united states need to contact your congressmen and let them know how bad of an idea that is. This will mean internet companies can throttle your internet speeds and force you to pay even more money to receive internet they can even then force websites and other online companies to pay exorbitant prices just to not have traffic to their sites slowed down for people using that particular internet service. The chairman of the fcc claims it will let the market decide which companies live and die if they do such things but that idea is fundamentally flawed in many areas around the USA only have access to one, maybe two internet providers in a given area. There still a chance to save net neutrality as there are a few more steps that need to be taken for them to remove it completely, but you will need to contact your congressmen and have them represent you and your needs and uphold your right to be able to have affordable un throttled internet.
And this is related to the Pathfinder RPG how? Wrong place. You want the Off Topic board.
because it has the potential to effect the entire paizo site as a whole as well as many of the resource sites used for pathfinder content plus the general discussion board is one of the most visited forums so its much more likely to be seen

Still the wrong place. And we (the US population) don't have as much control over what happens as many are led to believe. The country as a whole mostly supports net neutrality, and the FCC vote was still against it. The person who gets the most people voting for them in the presidential election is not guaranteed to actually win the election. The government mostly does what it wants. It may or may not happen to coincide with the wishes of the people.

But as the entire issue is a political one, I suspect the thread will be locked and/or removed. So it doesn't really matter.


Lady-J wrote:
So the fcc has decided to remove net neutrality in a 3-2 vote. So you guys in the united states need to contact your congressmen and let them know how bad of an idea that is. This will mean internet companies can throttle your internet speeds and force you to pay even more money to receive internet they can even then force websites and other online companies to pay exorbitant prices just to not have traffic to their sites slowed down for people using that particular internet service. The chairman of the fcc claims it will let the market decide which companies live and die if they do such things but that idea is fundamentally flawed in many areas around the USA only have access to one, maybe two internet providers in a given area. There still a chance to save net neutrality as there are a few more steps that need to be taken for them to remove it completely, but you will need to contact your congressmen and have them represent you and your needs and uphold your right to be able to have affordable un throttled internet.

And this is related to the Pathfinder RPG how? Wrong place. You want the Off Topic board.


taks wrote:
Darksol the Painbringer wrote:
Overwhelming Necromancy aura detected. *gains Stunned condition for 6 seconds
Only 6 seconds, from a 6 YEAR necromancy? Surely you jest.

Of course he is jesting. To detect as a necromancy aura you use detect magic, which does not stun. Now if he had instead used detect evil, he would of been stunned for 6 seconds.

Quote:
If you are of good alignment, and the strongest evil aura's power is overwhelming (see below), and the HD or level of the aura's source is at least twice your character level, you are for 1 round and the spell ends.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Quote:
Phantasmal Killer conjures the scariest creature. So your answer isn't valid. You'd have to name a monster/creature of some sort.

You don't have to name anything at all. It pulls from your subconscious mind. You don't even have to know you are afraid of it until it is right there in front of you. And the creature formed doesn't have to be one that actually exists. Maybe it does. Maybe bits of it are taken from other creatures. Doesn't matter.


Dragonborn3 wrote:

Hit yourself with Ray of Enfeeblemnt(which has one sentence in it that says the target's strength score can't go below 1 for the duration of the spell) and then use Blood Money. No need to possess someone at all.

Of course, how you're going to get that spell from a Runelord(the created and only person possessing the spell in Golorion unless you've gone through a certain AP) is more difficult.

You would still have the Strength damage when the ray ends, even if it can't lower your score below 1 during. Not that that matters, as ability damage does not lower your score in any way in Pathfinder (it only gives penalties to things modified by that ability). Only ability drain does.

Quote:
Diseases, poisons, spells, and other abilities can all deal damage directly to your ability scores. This damage does not actually reduce an ability, but it does apply a penalty to the skills and statistics that are based on that ability.

And if you do find a way to be immune to the Strength damage, you can no longer benefit from blood money.

Quote:
Material components created by blood money transform back into blood at the end of the round if they have not been used as a material component. Spellcasters who do not have blood cannot cast blood money, and those who are immune to Strength damage (such as undead spellcasters) cannot use blood money to create valuable material components.


shaventalz wrote:
Jeraa wrote:
On top of that, a caster level check would be required if your caster level isn't equal to or higher than the scrolls. I suppose UMD can possibly be used for that too, under the Emulate a Class Feature use. It lets you emulate a class level, but caster level isn't not actually mentioned.

I don't think this part can be true. Non-casters, for example, don't have a CL of 0 - they have no caster level. Thus, they cannot attempt a caster level check. Which means the classic "rogue with UMD" wouldn't work.

This step must be part of the DC20 + caster level check made to activate the scroll. It makes sense, too, because "emulate a class feature" is DC20 + class level. The "use a scroll" check is essentially emulating a specific class feature (caster level).

The "Use a Scroll" use of UMD tells you exactly what it does.

Quote:
Use a Scroll: Normally, to cast a spell from a scroll, you must have the scroll's spell on your class spell list. Use Magic Device allows you to use a scroll as if you had a particular spell on your class spell list. The DC is equal to 20 + the caster level of the spell you are trying to cast from the scroll. In addition, casting a spell from a scroll requires a minimum score (10 + spell level) in the appropriate ability. If you don't have a sufficient score in that ability, you must emulate the ability score with a separate Use Magic Device check.

That is all it does. It only lets you count the spell as if it were on your spell list. It does nothing else. Ability score requirements and caster level requirements are entirely separate checks from that.

Now it would make sense that a caster level is emulated with the same check, but that is not what is written. The DC to emulate having the spell on your list for a wand is only DC 20. For a scroll it is DC 20 + caster level. But as written, the "Use a Scroll" function does not emulate a caster level.


WagnerSika wrote:
So you need to make two UMD checks to use scrolls? One to emulate high enough casting stat and another to emulate having it on your spell list.

Potentially yes.

If you don't have the spell on your list, you need to make a UMD check.
If you don't have a high enough ability score, you need to make a UMD check.
If you haven't already deciphered the scroll (and don't have the ranks in Spellcraft to do so or access to read magic), you need to make a UMD check.

On top of that, a caster level check would be required if your caster level isn't equal to or higher than the scrolls. I suppose UMD can possibly be used for that too, under the Emulate a Class Feature use. It lets you emulate a class level, but caster level isn't not actually mentioned.


Lady-J wrote:
Jeraa wrote:
Lady-J wrote:
its actually 1000g per spell level and it would be a 0 level spell so 1000 gold x0 is 0
For cost calculation purposes, 0-level spells are treated as 1/2 level spells. Otherwise their costs would always be free.
were's that rule cuz i don't see it, plus what would it matter anyway cantrips are pretty garbage anyway

Magic item creation. It should apply in every case, not just item creation. And by the wording, it can.

Quote:
0-Level Spells: When multiplying spell levels to determine value, 0-level spells should be treated as 1/2 level.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lady-J wrote:
its actually 1000g per spell level and it would be a 0 level spell so 1000 gold x0 is 0

For cost calculation purposes, 0-level spells are treated as 1/2 level spells. Otherwise their costs would always be free.

And Ultimate Campaign changed it to 100gp/level.


Fuzzy-Wuzzy wrote:
Pretty sure the option to take the average instead of rolling after 1st level is a PFS thing, not RAW.

For player characters, yes. For monsters, the game assumes average hit points.


blahpers wrote:

Limb severing doesn't really happen in Pathfinder unless the victim was either already dead or in a position to be outright killed anyway. There are a few exceptions for specific monsters, but even the old sword of sharpness was done away with in the transition from 3.x. (Did 3.x have that one? I remember 2e having it.)

There's always table rules, of course. Skull & Shackles, if I remember right, had some variant massive damage rules that could involve losing a foot or something. But by default, since such rules disproportionately affect PCs versus monsters (on account of the average monster lifespan being a few rounds), this sort of thing is rare.

The Called shot rules from Ultimate Combat allow it, but it is rare. You need to hit the called shot (on an arm, hand, or leg), deal 1/2 the targets hit points (with a minimum of 50 damage) in damage with that attack, and the target must failed the saving throw by 5 or more. Even then, the limb may only just be mangled instead of severed. The effects are the same.

And the sword of sharpness was dropped for 3.0, just leaving vorpal weapons for removing heads, which worked on a successful critical hit. Apparently cutting off limbs was considered too powerful, but instant-death critical hits wasn't. Combined with a high-critical range weapon, it was much easier to remove heads in 3.0 than it is in 3.5/PF (where it does so only on a successful natural 20 critical hit).


James Gibbons wrote:
I was under the assumption that when rolling hit dice you rounded up rolls of less than half to half or half+1 but i cant find where it is in the rules. Is this in the rules or is it a house rule?

House rule. Unless specifically stated, you always round down. Though I'm not sure when there would ever be a need to round a hit die roll, as each are rolled separately and there are no fractions of a hit point that way. Rounding would only need to be done if you skip rolling and instead just take the average.

Quote:
Rounding: Occasionally the rules ask you to round a result or value. Unless otherwise stated, always round down. For example, if you are asked to take half of 7, the result would be 3.


This can still be found on the WotC site. The relevant part:

Quote:

Q: I want to distribute computer software using the OGL. Is that possible?

A: Yes, it's certainly possible. The most significant thing that will impact your effort is that you have to give all the recipients the right to extract and use any Open Game Content you've included in your application, and you have to clearly identify what part of the software is Open Game Content.

One way is to design your application so that all the Open Game Content resides in files that are human-readable (that is, in a format that can be opened and understood by a reasonable person). Another is to have all the data used by the program viewable somehow while the program runs.

Distributing the source code not an acceptable method of compliance. First off, most programming languages are not easy to understand if the user hasnÍt studied the language. Second, the source code is a separate entity from the executable file. The user must have access to the actual Open Content used.

See the Software FAQ for more information.

You can make software (which I assume includes games), but there are some major hurdles to overcome to do so. I can't find the Software FAQ they mention.


Blindmage wrote:
Dual Tower Shields to block a corner, if you don't need to redeploy it, round 1, block one edge, round 2 the other.

Two things. First, no need to resurrect a thread that died years ago. Especially since #2, that doesn't work. The cover doesn't last, and you need to spend a standard action every single round you want the protection. So you can't gain cover from 2 separate shields by setting them yourself.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Driver 325 yards wrote:
Can you take a 10 when you are trying to combat train an animal?
Quote:
Taking 10: When your character is not in immediate danger or distracted, you may choose to take 10. Instead of rolling 1d20 for the skill check, calculate your result as if you had rolled a 10. For many routine tasks, taking 10 makes them automatically successful. Distractions or threats (such as combat) make it impossible for a character to take 10. In most cases, taking 10 is purely a safety measure—you know (or expect) that an average roll will succeed but fear that a poor roll might fail, so you elect to settle for the average roll (a 10). Taking 10 is especially useful in situations where a particularly high roll wouldn't help.

You aren't in immediate danger, nor are you distracted. So yes, you can Take 10.


Asmodeus' Advocate wrote:
From the text of Legend Lore:
Legend Lore wrote:
As a rule of thumb, characters who are 11th level and higher are “legendary,” as are the sorts of creatures they contend with, the major magic items they wield, and the places where they perform their key deeds.
Emphasis mine. So if you're a high enough level to cast the spell, you'll never be locked out of your house again. :D

...

Try as I might, I can't find a reason that wouldn't work. Clearly it isn't meant to work that way (and therefor is a perfect example to be used in That works... but it wasn't made for that), but it could be used for that I suppose. Though you have no control over what information you gain, so it may take a few castings.


Vidmaster7 wrote:
Well yeah move earth would be fine summon a earth elemental. But that defeats the purpose. Is this not the thread for casual things to do with dangerous spells? Did I misread that somewhere? If I can't overkill a trench whats the point?

Over killing a trench is one thing. But if you are trying to do that with a damage spell, it isn't going to work. Even with overlapping all the meteors in a single place, the best you are going to get is a shallow divot. Nothing close to a trench.


JiCi wrote:
Milo v3 wrote:
Jeraa wrote:
At this point, I believe pretty much everything in the 3.5 SRD (with the exception of epic and divine rules) has been converted by Paizo in one way or another.
There's still a few things like Ravids and Ethereal Marauders which haven't been ported over for some unknown reason.
Lack of general interest?

That, and that they have already been converted in 3rd party publications.

I should have been more clear and specified "everything popular" has been converted by Paizo. There are some minor monsters and variant rules that haven't made it over yet, but those are also no where near as popular as the stuff that has been converted.


Create Mr. Pitt wrote:
1 is such a silly circular rule. No one is coming to the board just to hear the GM is always right. I wish people would stop saying it when people have specific questions.

It is technically true, and specifically mentioned in the rules. It is a perfectly valid if unhelpful answer.

Quote:

Nothing in the spell description on pfsrd says duergar only: http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/i/ironskin/

I am usually pretty liberal about race-specific spells, but this doesn't even list it, such as spells like http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/p/paragon-surge which specifically list half-elf as a requirement.

There is a difference between a race developing a spell and it being specific to a race.

d20PFSRD is ultimately a poor place to use. They have been known to add their own interpretation, or leave out things. Things such as:

Quote:
When the duergar made deals with their dark god to turn the tide against their hated enemies, they were fundamentally changed, both physically and psychologically. After a period of adjustment to their new circumstances, their artisans developed innovations to better cope with their harsh environment, and their spellcasters mastered magical secrets gifted to them by the dark powers that granted them succor during the race's time of direst need.

Now, admittedly it never says the the spells are limited to duergar. But being granted to the race by a dark power (and not discovered and developed normally like other spells though later it does say that was likely) is grounds enough to limit the availability to non-duergar.


Xenocrat wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:


Mindflayer / Illithid: They already do. The Phrenic Scrouge is mindflayer like. Look at its Sap Will ability and compare it to the Mindflayer's Mind Blast. Also look at it's SLA's.
That’s Dreamscarred Press 3rd party.

Which is the only way those monster will ever enter Pathfinder. Paizo can't convert them directly, and the developers have stated they have no intention to do a version of those monsters with the serial numbers filed off.

At this point, I believe pretty much everything in the 3.5 SRD (with the exception of epic and divine rules) has been converted by Paizo in one way or another. I don't think Paizo converts old3rdparty content. So if you don't see it already, you likely never will. At least from an official Paizo product.


No. "Instead" means "ignore the previous method of gaining additional attacks, this is how natural weapons work". All the 2nd bolded sentence is saying is that if you have multiple natural weapons, like 2 sets of claws, you get 2 attacks (1 with each claw).

For manufactured weapons, you receive additional attacks from BAB.
For natural weapons, you instead receive additional attacks from additional natural weapons.

If you need actual evidence, look at any creature with natural attacks and a base attack bonus high enough to get multiple attacks. You will see such creatures never get additional attacks with their natural weapons from that BAB. Likewise, creatures with multiple natural weapons have multiple attacks despite not having a BAB high enough for that.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Slim Jim wrote:
Ambrus wrote:
I've been trying in vain to figure this out and would appreciate some insight. I have a character with a BAB of +7 and a natural Slam attack. The player is tired of making a single attack every round...
You should already be getting two attacks at BAB7, one a -5 iterative. It could be two slams, or two weapon attacks, or one of each (unless your creature type's physique somehow gums that up).

Can't be 2 slams. As a natural weapon, slams never get iterative attacks from a high BAB.

Quote:
Natural Attacks: Attacks made with natural weapons, such as claws and bites, are melee attacks that can be made against any creature within your reach (usually 5 feet). These attacks are made using your full attack bonus and deal an amount of damage that depends on their type (plus your Strength modifier, as normal). You do not receive additional natural attacks for a high base attack bonus. Instead, you receive additional attack rolls for multiple limb and body parts capable of making the attack (as noted by the race or ability that grants the attacks). If you possess only one natural attack (such as a bite—two claw attacks do not qualify), you add 1–1/2 times your Strength bonus on damage rolls made with that attack.


Yolice32 wrote:

Does the game have a max + to competence bonus you can get to skills from creating your own magic item?

For example, if I crafted a wondrous item with a competence bonus to spellcraft, how high can I push it? I know in 3.5 is was +30, but that seems incredibly high in PF.

+30 actually wasn't the cap in 3.5 D&D. That was just the cut off where it stopped being a normal item and became an epic item, with a x10 cost multiplier.


Lady-J wrote:
whats an ogl

Open Gaming License. It is what allows third-party publishers and everyone else to freely make material for Pathfinder. In fact, it is what allows Pathfinder to exist in the first place - most of the core material is copied directly from 3.5 Dungeons and Dragons Open Content.

Without the OGL, there would be no Pathfinder.


Flamephoenix182 wrote:

My google fu is failing me I'm wondering if there was any announcement that pathfinder is moving away from the OGL model?

I noticed Ultimate Wilderness is not flagged as an OGL and that there doesn't seem to have been an open playtest like the other books? (I hadn't really been following new books for a while so if this is answered I apologize)

The title page of the book does say:

Quote:
Open Game Content: Except for material designated as Product Identity (see above), the game mechanics of this Paizo game product are Open Game Content, as defined in the Open Game License version 1.0a, Section 1(d). No portion of this work other than the material designated as Open Game Content may be reproduced in any form without written permission.

And the back cover still has the 3.5/OGL Compatible icon. So not sure what you are talking about it not being flagged as OGL.


dysartes wrote:
The Sideromancer wrote:
Every time I see "throw a handful of gravel," I think of Mythic Feather Fall.
Any particular reason?

Mythic Feather Fall target 2 creatures/objects per level. If you spend mythic power, it also causes each target of the spell to deal 1d6 damage/caster level (max 5d6 each) in a 10' burst when it lands, with each object granting a save to halve its damage. So you throw a handful of gravel (or anything else, really) and target it with the spell to do potentially massive amounts of damage.


vagabond_666 wrote:

At the bottom of the page there's a licenced languages section that says they've licenced it to the same company for both Russian and Ukranian.

I don't speak Russian so I don't know if this is even the core rule book, I just assume it is:

Russian Edition?

I don't speak Russian either, but judging from the cover and what I can see in the preview pictures, it is the core rulebook.


Elyalyn wrote:

For example, if creating a Circlet of Persuasion, but just making it out of leather, it would cost the same as making it out of the described materials ("This delicately engraved silver headband...").

How does this apply when making it out of a more expensive material like gold (but buying the circlet first, then enchanting it later)? Would the cost of the circlet be subtracted from the crafting cost of the Circlet of Persuasion, and I only pay the difference?

Another example is Boots of Speed. If I pay 150gp having boots made out of dragon hide, do the enchanted boots cost 150gp less to make?

Enchanted items (with the exception of armor, shields, and weapons) do not take the actual material into account in the price. A ring of protection costs the same if made from cheap copper as it does from solid platinum.

Quote:
Magic supplies for items are always half of the base price in gp. For many items, the market price equals the base price. Armor, shields, weapons, and items with value independent of their magically enhanced properties add their item cost to the market price. The item cost does not influence the base price (which determines the cost of magic supplies), but it does increase the final market price.

In my experience, that is usually ignored. But by the rules, the cost given is for the enchantment. The base item should add to that cost.


SheepishEidolon wrote:
arkham wrote:
Nope, otherwise you could take 10 levels of 10 Rogue archetypes and have 10d6 sneak attack at 10th level.
Given the high price for that (BAB 0, saves totally lopsided in favor of Reflex, no rogue talents, no evasion etc.), it probably wouldn't cause issues at a table. Well, the character would be incredibly good at Coup de Grace, but a regular level 10 rogue isn't too shabby when it comes to that, anyway.

Unless you are using the Fractional Bonuses rules (Pathfinder Unchained), then you still have a BAB of +7 (Same as a normal level 10 rogue), and your saves are +3/+7/+3, same as the normal rogue.


Derek Dalton wrote:

In the sentence of the race. A Draconic experiment to combine a Wyvern with a Kobold. I'm probably spelling the race wrong.

You post only says wyverns. So you are misspelling. You mean wyvaran. And no, they aren't a bastard race. They don't gaining anything like the Elf Blood or Orc Blood traits. They don't count as kobolds for any purpose.

Wyvarans aren't half kobold and half wyvern any more than an owlbear is half owl and half bear. They are their own separate creatures.


Derek Dalton wrote:

I realize perhaps I phrased my question wrong. In Bastards of Golerian it stated both Half Elves and Half Orcs could take abilities, feats, and classes of it's parent race.

While Wyverns are created through magical experimentation not biology would they be considered a Bastard race if you will for this discussion.
A character idea is take Occultist Reliquin. At seventh take Dragon Disciple with the kobold Feat.

Half-elves and half-orcs can do that because they have special abilities that specifically state so.

Quote:

Elf Blood: Half-elves count as both elves and humans for any effect related to race.

Orc Blood: Half-orcs count as both humans and orcs for any effect related to race.

Without a similar ability, you are limited to taking options for your race only, not those of other races. Wyverns do not have such an ability.

And where are you getting that wyverns are an experiment by dragons and have anything to do with kobolds?


nighttree wrote:

1st Q: Does the Fleet feat improve any movement speed ?

example, would it increase climb speed as well ?
Quote:
Benefit: While you are wearing light or no armor, your base speed increases by 5 feet. You lose the benefits of this feat if you carry a medium or heavy load.

Doesn't specify land speed, so it applies to any movement mode you have.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

Sure cute fuzzy bunnies, majestic forests, and towering mountains are nature. But so are wolves tearing apart rabbits, forest fires, and volcanic eruptions.

Destruction is as natural as life. Nature is more than forests and bunnies.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Bwang wrote:

RAW, no. Other sources are not CORE, therefor not a part of the game.

In practice, most GMs filter spells by campaign. Ours has a number of Druid orders and all have their own lists (mostly the same, but...). A Druid cannot cast any spell that destroys nature...except for the Black Rose (various 'blight' spells and abilities). Taking any of the 'nature domains' also limits and grants spell choice. Elemental focused Druids are really good for such spells, but see a number of others 'slighted' (a la school specialization). It is all a part of her world and gives the texture we can really get into. YMMV.

RAW, yes. Whatever sourcebooks you choose to use, the druid automatically knows every druid spell in them. Unlike a wizard (and others) who only know certain specific spells and must choose to learn one of the spells.

Anything else is a houserule. Which is fine, but should not be presented as a rule in the Rules Questions forum.


"Living creature" is in no way a type. Construct, undead, humanoid, etc are types. You can be unliving and not immune to all necromancy effects. Undead are non-living, and do not have a blanket immunity to necromancy effects. They are immune to a lot of them because of other reason.

Inevitables are described as living constructs, and yet are still immune to necromancy effects.

Quote:
Constructed (Ex) Although inevitables are living outsiders, their bodies are constructed of physical components, and in many ways they function as constructs. For the purposes of effects targeting creatures by type (such as a ranger's favored enemy and bane weapons), inevitables count as both outsiders and constructs. They are immune to death effects, disease, mind-affecting effects, necromancy effects, paralysis, poison, sleep, stun, and any effect that requires a Fortitude save (unless the effect also works on objects, or is harmless). Inevitables are not subject to nonlethal damage, ability damage, ability drain, fatigue, exhaustion, or energy drain. They are not at risk of death from massive damage. They have bonus hit points as constructs of their size.

Being living or not ultimately has no bearing at all on whether or not you are immune to necromancy as a whole.


blahpers wrote:
@Jeraa: The prerequisites are the same as with any other custom magic item--ask the GM.

No. Every other magic item has its prerequisites specifically and clearly stated. That is not up the the GM (ignoring that the GM is always free to ignore the rules). The rules on all other forms of magic item are clear. The rules on intelligent items are not.

You are right in that the book does not outright disallow it. However, it also lacks any of the language that allows it. Unlike in 3.5 D&D, where is was explicitly allowed (well, as allowed as any other form of item creation).

I am not saying (and have never said) that the rules forbid it. I am saying the rules aren't clear on the process and requirements.

Edit: The core rules are vague at best. However, if you actually find the statblock of an intelligent item (there aren't many but Ultimate Equipment has some), you can see the requirements. There seems to be no special requirement to make an item intelligent (which there should be).


blahpers wrote:
Sure there is. The magic item creation rules.

Then what are the prerequisites to make an item intelligence? What are the requirements for the special abilities? We know the prerequisites of all other magic items, but not intelligent ones. What feat is required? The normal item creation feat or Craft Construct? The rules say treat them as constructs, but just what does that apply to.

It isn't that the rules forbid the crafting of intelligent items. It is just that the rules are incomplete and give no guidelines like they do for all other items.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Atalius wrote:
Could someone explain to me what benefit a feat like Spell Specialization would have on the spell Chains of Light? I don't believe I understand how caster level works. I have an idea which is a level 5 wizard who had +1 caster level via Varisiam Tattoo could cast a fireball that is 6D6. Also the duration of certain spells could be longer due to caster level. Are there other things as well? Thanks all.

The range of most spells, chains of light included, are based on caster level. A higher caster level also makes spells harder to dispel. It also means it is easier to get through the targets spell resistance. A higher caster level would also make your concentration checks (if any are needed) easier.


blahpers wrote:
Meirril wrote:
Generally speaking Intelligent Magic Items are something players aren't suppose to be able to create.
This is one of those "oft stated but seldom cited" principles. Does anything in any of the core books state this?

In 3.5 D&D it was specifically allowed. Pathfinder did leave out the relevant section however. The section from 3.5:

3.5 D&D wrote:
To create an intelligent item, a character must have a caster level of 15th or higher. Time and creation cost are based on the normal item creation rules, with the market price values on Table: Item Intelligence, Wisdom, Charisma, and Capabilities treated as additions to time, gp cost, and XP cost. The item’s alignment is the same as its creator’s. Determine other features randomly, following the guidelines in the relevant section.

As is, there is actually nothing in Pathfinder telling you how a character can actually create an intelligent item.


You share your space with your mount. So you very well can share spaces with a creature with neither of them being helpless. There are exceptions to pretty much every rule.

Tiny and smaller creature are one such exception. They can enter into other creatures spaces and stay there. That is the only possible way for those creatures to attack in melee - something the rules allow them to do.

For what it is worth, from the 3.5 D&D FAQ:

Quote:

The rule against two creatures sharing the same space doesn’t apply in any situation where one creature is carryingthe other, whether that’s a horse carrying a knight or an elf wizard carrying her raven familiar. As clarified by the answer to the “Which square is a rider in when on horseback?” question, a familiar carried by its master is treated as sharing the master’s space. However, the familiar is in no danger of being accidentally struck by a melee or ranged attack made against the master. If the familiar is visible to an attacker, the attacker could choose to target it with an attack as if it is a carried object (see the sunder rules, PH 158); the familiar should use either its own Dexterity modifier or its master’s, whichever is better.

Of course, as long as the familiar is Tiny or smaller, a wizard doesn’t have to carry her familiar at all. Tiny and smaller creatures can enter or share the space occupied by a Small or larger creature (they must do so to attack, after all). This is a specific exception to the normal restriction against two creatures sharing the same space.

Not that that should automatically hold true for Pathfinder, but it shows the intention of how the rule is supposed to work from the people who wrote the rule, not just copied it (as Paizo did). Pathfinder just copied the rule, so in theory should work the same.


Odo Hillborne wrote:

Ah, the racial bonus is only 'called' Halfling Luck.

The Lucky Horseshoe is from Occult Adventures.

Quote:

LUCKY HORSESHOE

Price 6,800 gp; Slot none; CL 9th; Weight 2 lbs.; Aura moderate evocation
Although it appears to be a simple horseshoe, a lucky horseshoe focuses and channels the mystical energies of good fortune. As long as a lucky horseshoe's owner carries it on her person, she gains a +1 luck bonus on saving throws. Once per day, she can invoke the lucky horseshoe's power to gain a +4 luck bonus on a single saving throw. She must declare that she is using this ability before the roll is made.
CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS

Cost 3,400 gp
Craft Wondrous Item, divine favor

In that case, the horseshoe is a +4 luck bonus, and the halfling ability is a +2 racial bonus. They stack.

To determine if a bonus stacks, always look after the number for the bonus types. Different types always stack. Same types don't stack (except for a few exceptions). If it doesn't have a type listed, it stacks with everything, including other untyped bonuses.

Penalties, on the other hand, always stack.


Sir_Andrew wrote:
so a friend and i were discussing if a samurai made a good range character. i check all the sites and found out that a samurai, despite having at least to abilities that include longbows, can't make range challenge attacks? is this right?

You can many any type of attack. You just don't gain the damage bonus unless it is a melee attack. It may still beneficial to use a challenge while doing ranged attacks because of the added benefit depending on the samurai's order. For example, the damage reduction from Order of the Warrior would apply against ranged attacks as well as it does against melee attacks.

Quote:
Challenge: Whenever an order of the warrior samurai declares a challenge, he receives damage reduction 1/— against attacks made by the target of his challenge. This DR increases by +1 for every four levels the samurai possesses.

But to get the full use of a challenge does require the samurai to be using melee weapons.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Josie Nemo wrote:
Xenocrat wrote:
The inside cover of Blood of Shadows spelled out the five light conditions (bright, normal, dim, dark, supernaturally dark) if you can get a copy.
Exactly, but the people I was talking to elsewhere were under the misapprehension that "supernaturally dark" was exactly the same as "magical darkness"

Elsewhere in the rules "supernatural" does mean "magical", so the confusion is understandable. With darkness, it works differently.

Quote:
Supernatural Abilities (Su): Supernatural abilities are magical but not spell-like. Supernatural abilities are not subject to spell resistance and do not function in areas where magic is suppressed or negated (such as an antimagic field). A supernatural ability's effect cannot be dispelled and is not subject to counterspells. See Table: Special Ability Types for a summary of the types of special abilities.


graystone wrote:
If you want to cast those kind of spells, take a level of Sorcerer with Impossible Bloodline: "Bloodline Arcana: Constructs are susceptible to your enchantment (compulsion) spells as if they were not mindaffecting. Constructs are treated as living creatures for the purposes of determining which spells affect them."

That won't help with necromancy effects at all. A construct isn't immune because they aren't living creature - they are immune because it specifically says they are. That does nothing to remove the immunity to necromancy effects.

That does help with things like charm monster. As is, constructs are immune to that for 2 reasons. Fist, it is mind affecting. Second, it only targets living creatures. If you just get rid of the mind-affecting part, a construct would still be immune because it it only targets living creatures.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Bonuses of the same type don't stack. I assume the lucky horseshoe gives a luck bonus (I can't find it to make sure). The halflings ability is not a luck bonus, but a racial bonus.

As they are different types, they do in fact stack.


Lannister2112 wrote:
Moving this discussion... as soon as I figure out how.

On the right side of a post, upper right corner. The "Flag" button. For the reason, choose wrong forum. That will notify the moderators, who can move the thread.

But it has already been moved. It is now in the Advice section.


Lannister2112 wrote:

So in our campaign, my paladin (1) / magus (7) has made it his mission in life to destroy a set of evil enchanted armors - something he feels uniquely qualified for. Now he's a LONG way from being able to sunder plate mail... so I came up with this, and the GM and I are trying to figure out if it is OP or not.

It has high potential damage (and can be doubled on a crit since it is a touch spell), but I think its not so far off from an equivalent level fighter. Maybe make it 1d4? Maybe have the hardness always apply?

Let me know your thoughts.

Wizard’s Sunder (working title)
School transmutation; Level sorcerer/wizard/magus 3
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S, M (a twig)
Range Touch
Target One Medium or smaller object
Duration instantaneous
Saving Throw Fortitude Spell Resistance yes
You can attempt to break or at least damage any one large or smaller object within range. The damage is 1d6 / caster level, max 10d6. If the saving throw is made, the hardness of the material applies. If the saving throw is not made, the spell bypasses hardness. The saving throw can be made by either the item, or the master of that item, whichever bonus is higher.

Target line says Medium object, but text says large.

Saving throw line should be Fortitude (partial)
The line about who makes the save is redundant - that is how all objects determine their saving throws.
Spells generally don't require a touch and a saving throw. Generally, it is one or the other (but there are exceptions)

As for the effects, the 2nd level spell shatter will completely destroy a single object up to 10 pounds/level. It does only work on non-magic items, but a simple dispel magic will make the targeted magic item non-magical for a few rounds. Seems odd that the higher level spell is less effective at destroying things than the lower level one.

1 to 50 of 3,477 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002-2017 Paizo Inc.® | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours, Monday through Friday, 10:00 AM to 5:00 PM Pacific time.

Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, Starfinder, the Starfinder logo, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc. The Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Legends, Pathfinder Online, Starfinder Adventure Path, 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.