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

2,441 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS

1 to 50 of 2,441 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.

After checking the errata, the [Combat] tag was added to those feats in the third printing of the core rulebook.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The PRD lists all 3 weapon proficiency feats as combat feats.


Azten wrote:
Rules citation for one DR getting rid of the other?

There isn't one. You still have multiple types of damage reduction, but only the highest one applies on any given attack.

Quote:
If a creature has damage reduction from more than one source, the two forms of damage reduction do not stack. Instead, the creature gets the benefit of the best damage reduction in a given situation.


Each character receives that much. It is already nearly useless as is without having to spread a single small pool of healing among multiple targets.


Kahel Stormbender wrote:
Does this mean that kineticists qualify for crafting feats?

No. Kineticists don't have a caster level, so don't normally qualify for item creation feats.

A kineticist with the Master Craftsman feat could gain certain item creation feats, however.


PossibleCabbage wrote:
Derek Dalton wrote:
Another little wrinkle with a Tower Shield is you take a minus to hit hit.
Having proficiency in tower shields removes this penalty. It's sort of odd that the tower shield entry is written assuming you are not proficient in it, instead of stating the penalty to attack is merely the case if you use one without proficiency (as is generally the case).

No, it isn't written like that at all. The -2 to hit the tower shield gives applies to both proficient and non-proficient users. Non-proficient users have an additional penalty from the armor check penalty.

Quote:
When employing a tower shield in combat, you take a –2 penalty on attack rolls because of the shield's encumbrance.

You get a -2 penalty from the encumbrance of the shield, not the proficiency. The phalanx soldier fighter archtype has an ability that reduces both if you need more evidence. Also the tower shield specialist fighter archtype.

Quote:
Deft Shield (Ex): At 7th level, the armor check penalty from a shield and the attack roll penalty are reduced by –1 for a phalanx soldier using a tower shield. At 11th level, these penalties are reduced by –2. This ability replaces armor training 2 and 3.


Quote:
What about retraining through Ultimate Campaign?

Starting proficiencies can not be retrained. They are not feats, and they aren't a class feature with a choice. Retraining only applies to things you have a choice in gaining - starting proficiencies give no choice.


Quote:
Or didn't choose to include them (page count even) and left it as is due to backwards compatiblility as the rules are freely available. Omissions aren't always deliberate as has been brought to light numerous times since PFRPG. So unless you are telling us you know for a fact they were intentionally removed and have the quotes to back it up, I'm just going to go with that being your opinion.

Body slots were mentioned in 3 places in 3.5. The section I linked to previously, and the pricing chart (twice on the chart - once for the cost increase and again as a note at the bottom telling you to see the text). Seeing as how all of those locations are missing in Pathfinder, that means it was either a deliberate omission, or that by coincidence the only 3 locations talking about body slot affinities just happened to be left out. And seeing as how there is no FAQ or errata that adds them back in, the only logical choice seems to be that they were deliberately removed.


Kobold Cleaver wrote:
Plus, since it isn't a skill (anymore? I could swear it was in 3.5), there is almost no way to boost it.

3.0 D&D. It had already been removed as a skill in 3.5 D&D.


Skylancer4 wrote:
Wonderstell wrote:

** spoiler omitted **

** spoiler omitted **

As you can see, the Helm has an +50% increase in price since movement-type enchantments have an affinity with the Feet slot, whereas the Head slot does not.

This was a D&D (3.5, I think) rule which wasn't transferred to Pathfinder. But some items with their prices modified by this rule still remained, so +50% is backed by item examples.

It wasn't OGL so it couldn't be brought into PFRPG IIRC.

Nope. Body slot affinities are in the SRD. Paizo made a deliberate decision to remove them, but just didn't take the time to go through and correct the item prices that were affected.


Quote:
But IMO the chance to make cursed items when you're pushing your limits is a balancing factor. One which the "take 10" and "take 20" mechanics completely destroy. And without it you get ridiculousness things like someone making caster level 18 items at level 3 with zero chance to fail.

Since there is a penalty for failure (making a cursed item or wasted materials), you can't Take 20 when making a magic item (or mundane crafting) anyway.


Quote:
Got ya trumped: Gelatinous Cube, our old iconic monster, has an AC of 4.

Carnivorous blob, AC 2. Great wyrm red dragons have a touch AC of 0, while an aspidochelone has a touch AC of -1.


zainale wrote:
Skilled: Humans gain an additional skill rank at first level and one additional rank whenever they gain a level.

Classes grant a certain number of skill ranks per level. Wizards, for example, receive 2 + Intelligence modifier ranks per wizard level. A human would add +1 to that because of Skilled.


Guru-Meditation wrote:
Piccolo wrote:
I *am* the GM.
Ahh, k. Then tell your players: "Such an item is stupidly, brokenly too powerfull. It doesnt exist outside of Major Artifacts if even." Such anitem can only be created by the great Overgod named "Plotitem".

Considering he said that over a year ago, I don't think it really matters to him anymore. He has probably decided something by now.


Rudy2 wrote:

So, Lyrakien azata, say. She is tiny. Is there anything at all, rules wise, that prevents her from throwing splash weapons, presumably comically huge compared to herself, just as effectively as her master can (perhaps more so, given her high dexterity)?

I mean, there should be, given her size. But is there? I'm not aware of any sizing rules for splash weapons.

Size has no effect on range.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

You are complaining about carrying capacity (which does somewhat work as has been shown)? Your real problem should be with reach - a 3 foot halfling and a 6 foot human both have the exact same reach (5 feet). A human with a human-sized longspear and a halfling with a halfling sized longspear have the exact same reach (10 feet).

For that matter, a 2' tall creature (the bottom end of small) and an 8' tall creature (upper end of medium) have the same reach. They also take up the exact same amount of space on the battle grid (1 square).


Vutava wrote:
Ah, so native outsiders are raise-able now. Good to know. Thanks for the quick response.

Native outsiders could be resurrected in 3.5 D&D as well. Pathfinder didn't change that. The Pathfinder description of native outsiders (and the relevant section of the outsider type description) was copied exactly from the 3.5 SRD.


Quote:
Native Subtype: This subtype is applied only to outsiders. These creatures have mortal ancestors or a strong connection to the Material Plane and can be raised, reincarnated, or resurrected just as other living creatures can be. Creatures with this subtype are native to the Material Plane. Unlike true outsiders, native outsiders need to eat and sleep.

It is also mentioned in the description of the outsider type.

Quote:
Unlike most living creatures, an outsider does not have a dual nature—its soul and body form one unit. When an outsider is slain, no soul is set loose. Spells that restore souls to their bodies, such as raise dead, reincarnate, and resurrection, don't work on an outsider. It takes a different magical effect, such as limited wish, wish, miracle, or true resurrection to restore it to life. An outsider with the native subtype can be raised, reincarnated, or resurrected just as other living creatures can be.


zauriel56 wrote:
Nope, Ra has leadership as a subdomain, but Iomedae doesnt list anything close to rulership.

Are you looking at their portfolio/area of concern, or their domains? Because those aren't the same thing.

The variant channeling list doesn't care about domains. It is based on the deities area of concern/portfolio.


According to the listing at the Archive of Nethys, several deities have rulership in their portfolio. Iomedae, Dispater, Horus, Ra, and Olheon all have rulership listed.


Pathfinder ghosts seem to have absolutely nothing to do with the ethereal plane. The ethereal plane is never mentioned at all in the ghost's entry, and they have had the Manifestation ability from 3.5 D&D removed in Pathfinder. Pathfinder ghosts exist 100% on the material plane.

Quote:
Is there any bodiless undead which isn't at least partially in the ethereal plane?

Most if not all of them. Shadows, spectres, wraiths, and ghosts (all Bestiary 1) are bodiless and have no connection to the ethereal plane.


It is a builder's mallet, not a warhammer. Improvised weapon.


In 3.0 D&D, I believe the Animal Empathy and Use Magic Device skills could only be taken by certain classes. That restriction was dropped in 3.5 D&D.


Small earth elemental is correct at +6. +2 from base attack bonus, +3 from strength, +1 size modifier from being small.

The summoned eagle also has the correct stats. It isn't receiving a bonus on attack rolls from augment summoning (As it uses Dex and not Str), only on damage rolls (which would increase). IT has a +3 listed for both the normal attack roll and the augmented summon attack roll.


Yes, you can apply it to the same spell like ability each time you take it.

Compare with Weapon Focus, which must be applied to different weapons each time:

Quote:
Special: You can gain this feat multiple times. Its effects do not stack. Each time you take the feat, it applies to a new type of weapon.


Quote:
Spell resistance is the extraordinary ability to avoid being affected by spells.
Quote:
Only spells and spell-like abilities are subject to spell resistance. Extraordinary and supernatural abilities (including enhancement bonuses on magic weapons) are not.

It is called spell resistance, not magic resistance. It only applies to spells and those things that act like spells (spell-like abilities). Cockatrice grit is neither.


fearcypher wrote:
JDLPF wrote:

A character throws a bag of Cockatrice Grit at an Adult Red Dragon.

Does Spell Resistance apply?

Considering both possible spells used in its creation allow spell resistance and that is a transmutation item I would rule that yes it would allow spell resistance.

The spells used as a prerequisite have absolutely no bearing on an items effects (unless the item actually duplicates the spell).

As cockatrice grit does not duplicate a spell, spell resistance does not apply.


Cyg wrote:
Jeff Merola wrote:
Uh, Summon Monster doesn't require concentration.
Where is this stated? I searched a long time trying to find it.

Spells that require you to concentrate to maintain them have a duration of Concentration. The summon monster spells have a duration of 1 round/level, not concentration.


Nox Aeterna wrote:
Claxon wrote:

Permanency is a 5th level spell. But it's sorcerer/wizard only, though I think a cleric with the right domain can grab it. Which means minimum caster level 9. Shadowkras' values are off.

The other complication is that magic fang is ranger druid only.

Which means a wand or scroll and UMD will be required.

Wouldnt it be easier to just have 2 casters instead of one?

I thought one could just buff and then someone could make said buff permanent.

A strict reading of the spell indicates that both the base spell and the permanency must be cast by the same person.

Quote:
This spell makes the duration of certain other spells permanent. You first cast the desired spell and then follow it with the permanency spell.


Gisher wrote:

Despite the name, Polymorph Any Object doesn't work on magical objects.

PRD wrote:
A nonmagical object cannot be made into a magic item with this spell. Magic items aren't affected by this spell.

Dispel Magic makes magic items temporarily nonmagical for the duration. Then you cast Polymorph any Object.


There is at least one instance of a strength check to lift an object - lifting a portcullis.

Quote:
Portcullises: These special doors consist of iron or thick, ironbound wooden shafts that descend from recesses in the ceilings above archways. Sometimes a portcullis has crossbars that create a grid, sometimes not. Typically raised by means of a winch or a capstan, a portcullis can be dropped quickly, and the shafts end in spikes to discourage anyone from standing underneath (or from attempting to dive under it as it drops). Once it is dropped, a portcullis locks, unless it is so large that no normal person could lift it anyway. In any event, lifting a typical portcullis requires a DC 25 Strength check.


Biztak wrote:

so does a medium character takes any penalty for using a small heavy flail as a one handed weapon?

i'd use a normal flail but the heavy flail has a better crit range than the flail for some reason

Using an inappropriately sized weapon gives a -2 penalty on attack rolls for each size different. A medium-sized wielder using a weapon meant for a small-sized creature would take a -2 penalty on attack rolls.


Tradition. Dimension Door seems to always have had a restriction on what you could do afterwords, at least as far back as 1st edition AD&D (where there was a recovery period of 7 segments after you used it).


Mage Evolving wrote:

The spell says Duration concentration + 1 round/level.

Does this mean that I need to maintain concentration in order to maintain the spell?
Or is it that My concentration Which is 16 is added to my level which is 10 so that the spell lasts 26 rounds?

If I am maintaining my concentration can I cast other spells?

You must maintain concentration. Casting any spell while concentrating on another spell will end the spell you are concentration on.

Quote:

Concentration: The spell lasts as long as you concentrate on it. Concentrating to maintain a spell is a standard action that does not provoke attacks of opportunity. Anything that could break your concentration when casting a spell can also break your concentration while you're maintaining one, causing the spell to end. See concentration.

You can't cast a spell while concentrating on another one. Some spells last for a short time after you cease concentrating.


TheWhiteWingFamily wrote:

enlarge person affects humaniods and A.Animal gives a normal the humaniod body style

Enlarge Person cares about humanoid type, not humanoid form. When a spell (or any other effect) says it targets humanoids, it always means humanoid type.

Not all humanoid type creatures have a humanoid form, and not all humanoid form creatures have the humanoid creature type.

Merfolk have the humanoid type despite not having a humanoid body (they do have 2 arms and a head, but have no legs). Ifrits have a humanoid body form, but not the humanoid creature type. They have to have a special exception in their Efreeti Magic alternate racial ability to allow them to be affected by Enlarge Person.


Nezzarine Shadowmantle wrote:
I have found that keeping with a natural 1 results in failure continues to keep the aspect of rolling a die, even at high levels of game play, a necessary and risky venture. Granted the rogue with a stratospheric dexterity, maxed out ranks in stealth, and 4 different stacking stealth-enhancing magical items and spell effects should be able to sneak past everyone. However, that 5% chance of failure promotes good roleplay and hones quick decision making. I am very happy with most of Pathfinder's rulings, but I prefer nat 1's as failures. Sometimes, despite excellent character builds, great gear, and the best strategy, the dice decide to tell a tale all their own. I don't ever want to see that change.

Nice and all, but no reason to resurrect a thread from 6 years ago.


Had this been 4e D&D, you would have a point. 4e D&D did away with the "every other diagonal square counts as 2 squares" thing. It also had square fireballs.


Naud M. Portant wrote:
Ok, for a 5 foot square space on a your usual grid the area contained in each is 5 square feet. That means that the length of the sides of this square have to be √5 feet long (2.2360679775... feet).

Edges are 5 feet long. A single square contains 25 square feet. Each diagonal is approximately 7.07 feet. With every other square counting as 2 for the purposes of movement, you actually travel slower moving diagonally than you do moving in a straight line.

4 squares of diagonal movement therefor counts as 6 squares of movement. Diagonals are 7.07 feet, and you traveled 4 of them = 28.28 feet. Traveling the same 6 squares of movement in a straight line would be 30 feet in the same span of time.

Running, a human gets 24 squares of movement in a straight line, which is 16 squares diagonally. There, you cover 113.12 feet compared to the 120 feet you would of covered had you run straight instead of diagonally.


Gauss wrote:
Jeraa, there is only ONE check. Not a check each day. It doesn't matter how many days are required to craft the item.

Right, my bad. Absolutely stupid rule (like most of PAthfinders rules), but my bad.


Gauss wrote:
Skylancer4, why would crafting while adventuring risk failure if it requires multiple days?

You make less progress than normal if you craft while adventuring. That means more checks are required to finish the item. Failing any check by 4 or less ruins the item and the time and money spent are wasted. Failing any check by 5 or more results in a cursed item.

So the more checks there are, the more likely you fail to make the item. Unless your modifier is high enough you can't possibly fail.


Delenot wrote:
I was under the assumption that spells with expensive components could not be cast because the summoned creature didn't have the needed component. If the player supplied the component, it off their own resources, the spell could be cast.

Nope. The spell says summoned creatures simply can not use those abilities. It has nothing to do with components. Notice that it also applies to spell-like abilities that duplicate spells with expensive material components. Spell-like abilities don't use material components to begin with, and the summoned monster still can't use them.


Eretas wrote:
And what about the effects of a healing spell???

The magic comes and goes in an instant. There isn't anything to end when the monster leaves - the spell already ended the moment it was cast.


Casting spells won't change your alignment by itself. Though what you do with those spells might.


Quote:
A kineticist gains a simple blast from her primary element at 1st level—some elements offer more than one option. When a kineticist gains a new element via the expanded element class feature, she gains a simple blast from that element as well. Each simple blast is either a physical blast or an energy blast. Physical blasts are ranged attacks that deal an amount of damage equal to 1d6+1 + the kineticist's Constitution modifier, increasing by 1d6+1 for every 2 kineticist levels beyond 1st. Spell resistance doesn't apply against physical blasts. Energy blasts are ranged touch attacks that deal an amount of damage equal to 1d6 + 1/2 the kineticist's Constitution modifier, increasing by 1d6 for every 2 kineticist levels beyond 1st.


Air elementals in their normal form are as solid as any other creature.


Matthew Downie wrote:
jhilahd wrote:
I allowed it, and for his vulnerability I chose for him to be vulnerable to positive energy. Which comprises most of the healing spells.
So, he takes +50% from healing spells?

Healing isn't damage. It isn't affected by vulnerability.

Quote:
Vulnerabilties (Ex or Su) A creature with vulnerabilities takes half again as much damage (+50%) from a specific energy type, regardless of whether a saving throw is allowed or if the save is a success or failure. Creatures with a vulnerability that is not an energy type instead take a –4 penalty on saves against spells and effects that cause or use the listed vulnerability (such as spells with the light descriptor). Some creatures might suffer additional effects, as noted in their descriptions.

And unless he is undead, the cure spells won't deal damage, so the vulnerability won't kick in. There aren't many abilities that deal positive energy damage to living creatures.


You don't figure and apply damage in steps - it happens all at once. An 18 strength character wielding a longsword doesn't deal 1d8 damage, then +4 damage (From strength). He deals 1d8+4 damage.

Likewise, when wielding a silver longsword, he doesn't do 1d8 damage, then +4 damage (Strength), then -1 damage (silver). Nor does he do 1d8-1 damage, then +4 (from strength). He does 1d8+4-1, or 1d8+3.

All of the static modifiers combine into a single formula. Then you solve the formula.

Quote:

If the minimum is applied last, then there are instances in Pathfinder where it will raise the amount of damage you're doing:

Roll of 1 (-1 from alchemical silver, minimum 1) with strength mod of -2 = 1 nonlethal damage.
Roll of 1 -1 from alchemical silver with a strength mod of -2 (minimum 1 last) = 1 lethal damage.

The first one is wrong as you are applying the minimum twice, both to the amount rolled and to the final result. The actual answer would be 1 (-1, min 1) -2 = -1 damage. Which isn't possible, as by the rules damage reduces your hit points, not improves them.

The second one is wrong because it would be nonlethal damage. 1-1-2 = -2, which become a minimum 1 nonlethal damage.

Applying the minimum damage rule at any point other than at the very end results in times where you would end up doing negative damage, which just isn't possible. Applying the minimum rule at the very end means you will always do some amount of positive damage (even if it is just 1 point of nonlethal damage).


The relevant rule:

Quote:
Minimum Damage: If penalties reduce the damage result to less than 1, a hit still deals 1 point of nonlethal damage.

It just says "penalties". It doesn't matter what kind of penalties - if any penalty at all reduces the damage below 1, the attack still deals 1 nonlethal damage.

Also note the bolded word - result. Not roll. It applies to the entire amount of damage you do, not just the dice rolled.


Nefreet wrote:

Wouldn't a "charisma-based check" be an "ability check"?

I see the phrases "<stat>-based" and "ability" as being interchangeable.

By that defination, everything would be an ability check. Attacking with a melee weapon is strength-based, using the Stalth skill is Dexterity-based, and so on.

A "charisma-based check" is not always an ability check.

Quote:
I see the phrases "<stat>-based" and "ability" as being interchangeable.

They aren't. As Cevah posted, the section on ability scores says ability checks just add the ability modifier. The take 10/20 rules call out ability checks as being different from concentration checks and caster level checks (both of which have an ability score added).

And from the Strength domain:

Quote:
Might of the Gods (Su): At 8th level, you can add your cleric level as an enhancement bonus to your Strength score for a number of rounds per day equal to your cleric level. This bonus only applies on Strength checks and Strength-based skill checks. These rounds do not need to be consecutive.

If "Strength-based" and "Strength check" meant the same thing, there would be no reason to specifically call out both.

Everything in the rules shows that an ability check is a check where you only add the relevant ability modifier and nothing else (with the exception of anything modifier that specifically says it applies to ability checks).


Quote:
If you shield bash with a heavy shield do you use two weapon fighting rules?

If you also attack with a weapon, yes. Assuming you are actually using two-weapon fighting. If you don't use the extra attack, it doesn't count as two-weapon fighting. As long as you don't make more attacks than your base attack bonus allows, it isn't two-weapon fighting.

Quote:
For example, what I'm going for is having both shield focus, which adds +1 to shield AC, and two weapon defense, which would add yet another +1 shield bonus.

Two Weapon Defense grants a shield bonus, which wouldn't stack with the shield bonus from a shield.

1 to 50 of 2,441 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2015 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.