|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Alexandros Satorum wrote:
It seems caster level don't affect major curse (or bestow curse for that matter) at all.
It does. In this case, a higher caster level gives a greater chance to overcome spell resistance, longer range, and makes it harder to remove (such as with break enchantment or remove curse).
I don't see how it could be any clearer:
The terms "object" and "harmless" mean the same thing for spell resistance as they do for saving throws. A creature with spell resistance must voluntarily lower the resistance (a standard action) in order to be affected by such spells without forcing the caster to make a caster level check.
Spell resistance always applies when someone else targets you with an appropriate spell unless you take a standard action before hand to lower it.
Not quite correct. The item is limited to +10 total, but you can have more than +5 worth of special abilities. You can have a +1 weapon with a total of +9 in special abilities. As long as the actual enhancement bonus is +5 or less, and the total modified enhancement bonus is +10 or less.
Androids aren't creatures with the Construct type. They are creatures with the Humanoid type, but who also count as constructs for targeting purposes only. They don't gain any of the special things constructs get (like the bonus hit points), but you can target them with things like enlarge person.
Alchemist 23 wrote:
When making wondrous items, it is basically up to the GM what craft and profession skills can be used when it isn't obvious.
Personally, Craft (Alchemy) could be fluffed into making most magic items. You could say you brew up something that you soak the item components in, infusing them with the magic in the brew. You can probably think of a way to make any of the wondrous items, especially if you include ingredients in your brew that are thematic to the item (breath of an air elemental for a bottle of air, brain of a telepathic creature for a helm of telepathy, blood of particularly strong creatures for items dealing with strength, troll blood of similiar for items dealing with regeneration/fast healing, and so on).
Arms and armor do list specific craft skills, so while you could possible do the same with those, that would be a houserule.
I would say that the wearer is not casting the spell at all. It is a magic item power the same as any other - you activate the item, and the item casts the spell. It doesn't allow the wearer to cat the spell - how would you figure the effects? What if the wearer doesn't have a caster level? What if he has multiple caster levels? Is it a spell (and so requires components)? A spell-like ability (no components necessary)? Many questions are raised if you believe the item lets the wearer cast the spell himself.
The power is in the veil, you just command it to activate. As such, you are not casting a spell (or spell-like ability). As it requires activation, it can not be used while wildshaped. No special rules or complications - it functions the same as every other item that gives the effects of a spell.
Yes, it says "Casts". There are similar reference in other magic items as well (like the ring of telekinesis). You still need to activate those, and it isn't the wearer casting the spell.
Aaron Martin 718 wrote:
I couldn't find anything that says you can't but I wanted to know that if your mounted and have a shield, can you use shield bash. I was thinking about the mechanics of it. One of my players wants to TWF, shield bash then attack. The thought of someone on a horse hitting an enemy with a shield then following that with a sword stoke simply boggles me. Official ruling?
Don't overthink it. The character can do this just fine as far as the rules are concerned.
John Murdock wrote:
i would say since it does not say when you cast you choose, you must choose what type of energy when casting it (unlike a sorceror because spontaneous), same for detect an alignment and protection vs an alignment
And you would be wrong. I already posted the relevant part of the rules. And doubly wrong about detecting an alignment and protection vs an alignment, because that isn't a single spell but 4 (one for each alignment) for each.
They are wrong. Magic chapter, under Choosing a Spell:
If a spell has multiple versions, you choose which version to use when you cast it. You don't have to prepare (or learn, in the case of a bard or sorcerer) a specific version of the spell.
Wall of Force and Teleport are 5th level spells, so the first staff would need to be:
Wall of Force (10 charges) - 5 x 9 x 40 = 1800
Total = 8550
Using different, 4th level spells would use the numbers in the post however.
Kitty Catoblepas wrote:
You also require a 4th level spell slot to recharge your first staff, but only a 3rdlevel slot to recharge the lightning bolt-only staff. So in this case the multi-spell staff does have more utility, but also requires a more power spell slot to recharge.
So I know that you can craft a scroll with more than one spell on it. It's rarely done, but it's valid as far as I'm aware. My question is if say you make a scroll with the same spell let's say 5 times do you need to cast the spell 5 times each day of crafting the scroll, or just once?
The rules say:
Scribing a scroll requires 1 day per 1,000 gp of the base price. Although an individual scroll might contain more than one spell, each spell must be scribed as a separate effort, meaning that no more than 1 spell can be scribed in a day.
Effectively, you aren't scribing a single scroll with 5 spells. You are creating 5 scrolls that just happen to all be attached together. It is made the same as 5 individual scrolls.
So you completely finish scribing one spell, then you move on to the next.
A d20 roll that only adds the characters relevant ability modifier. Forcing open a stuck door is an example of an ability check (Specifically, a Strength check).
Create Mr. Pitt wrote:
Is this an artifact in an AP or other source or homemade, because for a homemade artifact it would be perfectly reasonable for the DC to based on a higher CL, such as 25.
The DC to save against a spell has nothing to do with caster level. It could have a caster level of 10 million, and the DC to resist wouldn't change.
That being said, if the spell was cast with the Heighten metamagic feat added (magic items that cast spells can have metamagic feats included at creation), the DC to resist would increase as normal. But even then, you are looking at a maximum DC of 23 (10 + heightened to 9th level spell + 4 from minimum ability score of 19).
Also, as an artifact, it doesn't need to follow the rules exactly. There is a a reason artifacts are beyond creation.
Icicle dagger says it creates a masterwork dagger which does normal dagger damage (with +1 cold damage added in). So like with a normal dagger, strength bonuses/penalties would apply.
You have to look at bonus types.
A cloak of resistance adds a resistance bonus.
Bonuses of the same type don't stack (with few exceptions). Bonuses of different types (or untyped bonuses) do stack.
Because it doesn't add your Strength modifier to damage at all. It does 1d6 damage/level. If your Strength modifier added or subtracted from that, it would specifically say so.
It isn't a thrown weapon. It is a spell that you just happen to throw.
It's weird that seeing invisible helps against blinking foes, but Blind-Fight does not. However, as written Blind-Fight has completely no benefit against a blinking creature, as Saethori said.
Blink quickly teleports you to the ethereal plane and back. See invisibility can see ethereal creatures. So with see invisibility. you can still continuously see the blinking creature. But the blinking creature is still not in the material plane part of the time, which is why there is still a (smaller than normal) miss chance.
Blind Fight doesn't help because part of the time the blinking target is literally on another plane, and there would be nothing for blind-fight to help against.
And you felt the need to resurrect a 7 year old dead thread why?
There is a difference between resurrecting a thread a few weeks dead and one several years dead. Especially considering that the rules do change so the one several years dead may no longer have any purpose as the rules changed.
I think its because i have access to level 1 ranger spells, which are arcane.
No, they aren't. Rangers cast divine spells, so are a divine caster.
Spells: Beginning at 4th level, a ranger gains the ability to cast a small number of divine spells, which are drawn from the ranger spell list presented in Spell Lists. A ranger must choose and prepare his spells in advance.
No. From the FAQ:
How do I know what the DC is for Witch hexes? Say im using Charm at level 8, hwhat would the DC be? Or for example I'm using Slumber at level 2 what is the Will DC?
You read the rulebook.
The Amazing Tools of Manufacture do absolutely nothing for magical crafting such as with any of the item creation feats.
I see nothing in the description of the tools that prohibits their working with magic item creation.
The wielder may use the tools to create items using the Craft skill much more surely and quickly.
Magic items are created through the appropriate Craft skill (or Spellcraft, which works for all items). Making magic armor uses wither the Craft (Armor) skill or Spellcraft. Magic weapons use Craft (Weapon) or Spellcraft. And so on. As far as the game mechanics are concerned, the tools do aid in magic item construction.
From a descriptive point of view, the tools require the Master Craftsman feat to make (in addition to Craft Wondrous Item). The sole purpose of Master Craftsman (aside from a minor bonus on checks) is to make magic items using a specific Craft or Profession skill. Why would the Master Craftsman feat be a requirement if the tools could not assist in making magic items? So from a descriptive/fluff point of view, the tools should assist in making magic items.
I find it funny how I asked a simple yes or no question: has this specific question been officially answered? I said I didn't want opinions (which to me would include rules interpretations). And instead I got a bunch of people discussing how they interpret the rules and think it works. *Sigh*. Oh well, I kinda had a feeling this would happen, lol.
You never specified what question (there are at least 2 possibilities in this case that I can see). We just assumed. You need to be more specific.
And no. No official response is needed, so no official response has been given. The rules are very clear.
The spell itself?
Outsiders and elementals are not magical in themselves, but if they are summoned, the conjuration spell registers. Each round, you can turn to detect magic in a new area. The spell can penetrate barriers, but 1 foot of stone, 1 inch of common metal, a thin sheet of lead, or 3 feet of wood or dirt blocks it.
It sees through walls, provided the wall isn't too thick. Regardless of how other emanations works, the spell specifically says it can penetrate barriers. Specific vs general, specific wins.
That isn't what the PRD says. It says:
3rd Round: The strength and location of each aura. If the items or creatures bearing the auras are in line of sight, you can make Knowledge (arcana) skill checks to determine the school of magic involved in each. (Make one check per aura: DC 15 + spell level, or 15 + 1/2 caster level for a nonspell effect.) If the aura emanates from a magic item, you can attempt to identify its properties (see Spellcraft).
You automatically determine the location. You need line of sight to determine the school of magic involved.
And even then, you still have a 50% miss chance.
Detect magic doesn't require you to see the target - it does work through walls after all.
As for an official answer - read the rules on invisibility in the glossary of the core rulebook. It includes:
Invisibility does not thwart divination spells.
In other words, detection spells work just fine against invisible targets.
The FAQ is an official response from the Rules Team. The caster level of spell-like abilities do not qualify as caster levels to meet prerequisites. Spell-like abilities can be used to meet specific spell requirements, however. Just not caster level requirements.
Spell-like abilities do not qualify. From the FAQ:
why is inflict moderate wounds a 3rd level spell and inflict serious wounds a 4th level spell but inflict light wounds is a 1st level spell?
The same reason the paladin has cure light wounds as 1st level, cure moderate wounds as 3rd level, and [i]cure serious wounds[/] as a 4th level spell. Because that is how the designers wanted it.
As to why that is true, you would have to ask Wizards of the Coast. They are the ones that did it. Paizo merely copied it, then gave the antipaladin the inflict versions at the same level.
There are also items such as the orange prism ioun stone that increase your caster level for all spells, not just one spell. Still, whatever method you're using, you cannot create an item whose caster level is higher than your own caster level.
Again, that is wrong. And the FAQ states so (the question is specifically about a pearl of power, but the answer would still apply elsewhere):
For example, a 3rd-level wizard with Craft Wondrous Item can create a 1st-level pearl, with a minimum caster level of 1. He can set the caster level to whatever he wants (assuming he can meet the crafting DC), though the pearl's caster level has no effect on its powers (other than its ability to resist dispel magic). If he wants to make a 2nd-level pearl, the caster level has to be at least 3, as wizards can't cast 2nd-level spells until they reach character level 3. He can even try to make a 3rd-level pearl, though the minimum caster level is 5, and he adds +5 to the DC because he doesn't meet the "able to cast 3rd-level spells" requirement
Note that it is not "He can set the caster level to whatever he wants, up to a maximum of his caster level". You can set the caster level of an item as high as you want, regardless of your caster level.
However (as I noted earlier) potions, scrolls, and wands have specific text that prohibits you from using a caster level higher than your own. Other magic items have no such limitation.
You can make magic items with a caster level higher than your own. Caster level requirements are one of the things that can be bypassed. The only reason you would need to do that is if the item had a higher caster level than your own. Assuming you had the feat and the gold, you can totally make a +5 sword (Caster level requirement 15th) at 5th level.
That being said:
Potions, scrolls, and wands can not be made with a caster level higher than yours.
What happens if a character has taken the accomplished sneak attacker feat but as he levels the character's sneak attack die exceed half his / her level?
Abraham Z. wrote:
Yep, you no longer meet the prerequisites, no effect until you do
No, you meet the prerequisite just fine. The only prerequisite for the feat is that you have the sneak attack class feature.
So you still qualify for the feat, it just wouldn't have any effect. This is an important distinction, as if you no longer qualify for a feat, you can't use any other feat that requires it as a prerequisite either. In this case I don't think that matters, but it is something to keep in mind.
doc roc wrote:
I cant think of any item that gives more than a +5 on a skill check... could be wrong!
Improved Ring of Climbing, +10 Climb. Also a jumping ring and a swimming ring that give a +10 bonus.
Improved Slick armor property gives +10 on escape artist checks. Also Improved Shadow for stealth. The greater version gives +15.
Various elixers give +10, though those are temporary.
Robe of Eyes, +10 perception.
There are several items that give more than a +5 bonus.
doesn't using the epic array increase cr by 1? so that's were that cr increase is coming from
Yes and no. An NPC with only NPC class levels uses the Basic NPC array (13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8) and has a CR equal to his level -2. An NPC with PC class levels uses the Heroic NPC array (15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8) and has a CR equal to his level -1.
So basically yes, but that is already accounted for in the formula. The only other thing that would impact it would then be gear, but the NPC has appropriate gear for a level 13 NPC with PC class levels.
Any NPC or monster with PC class levels gets to use that array, but by itself it adds nothing. It is accounted for in the increased CR adding a PC level adds.
Ryan Kappler wrote:
It says it is a CR13 enemy. I really do not see why, though. Sure, triple digit hit points and multiple attacks and many feats, but the damages are low, and he would need a way to be able to use the sneak attack damage.
His 13 class levels give him a CR of 12. NPCs from that section of the NPC Codex have PC level equipment, which gives a +1 CR boost, so CR 13.
Edit: I assumed the wrong NPC Codex. The reqular NPC Codex gives those NPCs the wealth boost. I don't see the Inner Sea NPC Codex saying the same thing, but it is probably true as well.
Isn't it Mnemonic Enhancer and nothing else, but only because that spell would do literally nothing for a sorcerer?
Blood Transcription, Mnemonic Enhancer, and Mage's Lucubration are the three I know of that wizards have but sorcerers don't. They all deal with wizard-specific things that sorcerers don't have to worry about.
The game has a definition for what a penalty is. It isn't just anything bad.
Penalty: Penalties are numerical values that are subtracted from a check or statistical score. Penalties do not have a type and most penalties stack with one another.
The number of hands a weapon requires may be a drawback or limitation, but as far as the rules are concerned it is not a penalty.
You aren't missing anything. While there are a few contructs that do have hardness (mainly animated objects and robots), the vast majority don't.
Why would Paizo make archetypes that say one thing but do another?
Why would Paizo make a feat that removes a non-existent penalty (the original Prone Shooter feat)? Why would they make NPCs with potions of personal spells (said spells can not be made into potions).
If you look at the actual book the Liberator archtype comes from, you will notice that isn't what it is called. It is actually the Numerian Liberator archetype (I assume you are getting your info from d20PFSRD, where they remove any reference to Golarion). Numeria has a lot of robots running around, and many of those robots have hardness. The archetype works perfectly well for where it was intended.
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.