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

Jeraa's page

2,559 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


1 to 50 of 2,559 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

ChaosTicket wrote:

One major detail that has kept me from multiclassing has been the question of whether multiclassing Base attack Bonus counts for getting additional attack as part of a full-attack action.

Spellcasting DC is more clear as part of your spell DC is your caster level. I do wonder if have multiple caster classes created different "caster level Pools" or just all classes with the ability to cast stack.

You add up your primary base attack bonus (The first number) then see if you get multiple attacks from that. A barbarian 3/fighter 3 would have a primary BAB of +6, and so would get a second attack at +1, the same as a Fighter 6 or Barbarian 6.

Spell DC has nothing to do with caster level. It is based on ability scores and spell level. Still, all caster levels are separate unless they specifically say they stack (And as far as I am aware, only prestige classes have that language).

Size categories are always capitalized. The "small ranged piercing weapon" in the description is not talking about the size category of the weapon.

vhok wrote:
apparently you didn't read my post or you have a very poor understanding of the rules. that FAQ very clearly states it is in reference to abilities that refesh Spell Slots it has nothing to do with the spell level of the spell after metmagic has been applied. by your logic every spell cast with metamagic has heighten magic applied to it and I get an increased DC and more damage dice because the spell is actually a higher level spell now and no longer its original level. you keep quoting the faq out of context. read it as a whole or don't use it.

Reread that FAQ. It also talks about concentration DCs in the question, which has nothing to do with refreshing spell slots. That FAQ applies to more than just refreshing slots. It has to do with what level a metamagiced spell counts at, which is what the OPs question is also about.

Type would refer to creature type like Humanoid, Outsider, Aberration, Undead, and so on. Most likely includes subtypes as well, like Outsider (Native).

Kind would be like human, elf, gnome, dog, zombie, etc.

There is a FAQ that gives an answer.


Metamagic: At what spell level does the spell count for concentration DCs, magus spell recall, or a pearl of power?

The spell counts as the level of the spell slot necessary to cast it.

For example, an empowered burning hands uses a 3rd-level spell slot, counts as a 3rd-level spell for making concentration checks, counts as a 3rd-level spell for a magus's spell recall or a pearl of power.

In general, use the (normal, lower) spell level or the (higher) spell slot level, whichever is more of a disadvantage for the caster. The advantages of the metamagic feat are spelled out in the Benefits section of the feat, and the increased spell slot level is a disadvantage.

Heighten Spell is really the only metamagic feat that makes using a higher-level spell slot an advantage instead of a disadvantage.

So adding the feat first (which raises the spell to 7th level) is more of a disadvantage and would be the correct way to do it.

It isn't multiple scrolls, it is still one scroll (just with multiple spells on it). A single magical item. If you rolled a 1, you couldn't attempt to use any of the spells on that scroll until the next day. Just like with a staff - if you rolled a 1 trying to use one power, it blocks you from attempting to use any of the other powers in that staff for the next day.

As for C, you wouldn't be prevented from trying to cast Passwall from another scroll, just the scroll you rolled a 1 on.

And as Saethori said, rolling a 1 only locks out that particular person from using that particular item. The rest of the party can still attempt it until they succeed or roll a 1 themselves.

Dragonchess Player wrote:
Jeraa wrote:
Dragonchess Player wrote:
Jeraa wrote:
You can learn any language by spending skill points.
With a few specific exceptions (i.e., Druidic).
No, even Druidic. It is even listed in the Linguistics skill (the druids-only part there only refers to the typical speakers).

That isn't a "typical speakers" comment, it's a restriction. More detail is given in the druid class features:

Core Rulebook wrote:
A druid also knows Druidic, a secret language known only to druids, which she learns upon becoming a 1st-level druid. Druidic is a free language for a druid; that is, she knows it in addition to her regular allotment of languages and it doesn't take up a language slot. Druids are forbidden to teach this language to nondruids.

Linguistics skill:


Learn a Language: Whenever you put a rank into this skill, you learn to speak and read a new language. Common languages (and their typical speakers) include the following.

Druidic (druids only)

(Druids only), like all of the other examples, is an example of the typical speaker. Someone who has spent a rank to learn it isn't typical.

Druids are forbidden to teach it, but they still can. They lose class features when doing so, however. There is absolutely nothing that says anyone else is prohibited from taking the language.

If you were forbidden from taking the language with Lingusitics, then why bother listing it in the skill in the first place?

And as p-sto said above, PAthfinder Society play has a rule specifically saying you can't choose Druidic with Linguistics. Why make a rule if the core rulebook already prohibits it? Because the core rulebook doesn't prohibit it. It doesn't place a restriction on any language with the Linguistics skill.

Theconiel wrote:
Jeraa wrote:
Dragonchess Player wrote:
Jeraa wrote:
You can learn any language by spending skill points.
With a few specific exceptions (i.e., Druidic).

No, even Druidic. It is even listed in the Linguistics skill (the druids-only part there only refers to the typical speakers).

If druids can lose their class features by teaching druidic to non-druids, then by extension non-druids must be able to learn druidic. They would do so by a rank in Linguistics.

What druid would be foolish enough to teach Druidic to a non-Druid? Having the ability to learn the language does not imply the practical ability to learn the language. I might be able to learn a language spoken by Neanderthals, but I will probably never find a teacher.

Mechanically, finding a teacher isn't required. Just putting a rank in Linguistics is enough and implies you were able to do whatever was necessary to learn the language. Just like putting a rank into any other skill.

Yes, the GM could put roleplaying restrictions on learning a new language. That would make it harder to learn, but still not impossible. A druid may have fallen already, and no longer care about teaching Druidic to anyone who wants to learn. A ranger, after a long career of helping the local druids may have been taught Druidic as a reward. Or maybe like Ahmed ibn Fadlan in the movie 13th Warrior you were able to just pick up the language by sitting and listening to a group of druids talk. Maybe you touched (After being warned not to) the sacred stone in the center of the site most holy to the druids, and in addition to a splitting headache you have somehow been granted the knowledge of the Druidic language.

How you justify learning the language does not matter. You can come up with any number of ways. Mechanically, there is nothing stopping a non-druid from putting a rank into Linguistics and selecting Druidic as the learned language, and that was the point. The Linguistics skill does not put a restriction on what languages are possible to learn.

Dragonchess Player wrote:
Jeraa wrote:
You can learn any language by spending skill points.
With a few specific exceptions (i.e., Druidic).

No, even Druidic. It is even listed in the Linguistics skill (the druids-only part there only refers to the typical speakers).

If druids can lose their class features by teaching druidic to non-druids, then by extension non-druids must be able to learn druidic. They would do so by a rank in Linguistics.

Draxyx01 wrote:
Hey guys, I have a question. Characters with the standard language option can choose from 7 other languages of they have a high intelligence score. Does adding points to the linguistics skill allow you to learn a language outside those 7?

The starting languages are just a list of languages your race would probably have the most exposure to, and so would be the most likely languages you picked up as you grew up.

The languages you learn by spending skill points are totally separate. You can learn any language by spending skill points.

First: Furious says it requires rage. Is she taking the +5 DC for not casting it, despite having the much cooler rage feature?

Spell names are always italicized. In the PRD, "rage" is not italicized, so it is talking about the class feature and not the spell.

Edit: Apparently, it appears in the PRD both italicized and not italicized depending on which book you look at. As the Ultimate Equipment entry is more recent, it takes precedence. It is indeed talking about the rage spell and not the rage class feature.

Piccolo wrote:
I'm curious, what benefit does an orc (all of which have ferocity) gain when taking the Diehard feat?

With Ferocity, you always lose 1 hit point per round when in negative HP.

With Diehard, you may or may not lose hp when negative depending on your actions for that round. You can also choose whether or not you go unconscious at negative HP, unlike ferocity which requires you to stay conscious.

Lord Corvus wrote:

Actually, I just found the answer and I feel pretty dumb. It's right there in the Animal Companion rules, the Link ability is what gives them the +4. Now, unless by some weird twisting of the rules only druids can take advantage of the special qualities animal companions get, and I don't think that's the case, anyone with an animal companion gets that +4. Oddly, the Handle Animal rules specify druids and rangers, when a Core Rulebook paladin can have a mount, which uses the animal companion progression chart and gets Link. That's why I was confused, my eyes glazed over Link but I noticed the line in the skill description.

I still don't know if a dip would give me access to all animals on the druid list, though.

The text remains unchanged from 3.5 D&D, where the paladin mount had a different progression from animal companions. 3.5 paladin mounts started with an Intelligence of 6, so Handle Animal wasn't needed as they weren't dumb animals (and indeed couldn't even be used anyway, as Handle Animal was limited to creatures of 1 or 2 Intelligence only).

The rules changed in Pathfinder, but not all of the text itself got changed.

Davor wrote:
Sure they can. Druids and other Animal Companion classes have been bumping Int up to 3 for years to get access to greater feat variety. Giving a Gorilla a greatsword is surprisingly effective.

Just because they have been doing it doesn't make it right.


Traits: An animal possesses the following traits (unless otherwise noted in a creature's entry).

Intelligence score of 1 or 2 (no creature with an Intelligence score of 3 or higher can be an animal).

Though there are passages that contradict that, so at best it is a GM discretion thing.

o0NAVI0o wrote:
I have a question along these lines and that question is coupling the second ability of the Arcane Archer I believe it's imbue arrow which state is it takes a standard action to imbibe the arrow with the spell of you metamagic the spell that is being imbued will that take a full round action then you may fire it on your next turn?

First, this has nothing to do with the original topic, so should of been it's own thread.

Second, you misread Imbue Arrow.

Imbue Arrow (Su): At 2nd level, an arcane archer gains the ability to place an area spell upon an arrow. When the arrow is fired, the spell's area is centered where the arrow lands, even if the spell could normally be centered only on the caster. This ability allows the archer to use the bow's range rather than the spell's range. A spell cast in this way uses its standard casting time and the arcane archer can fire the arrow as part of the casting. The arrow must be fired during the round that the casting is completed or the spell is wasted. If the arrow misses, the spell is wasted.

Not a standard action, the spells standard casting time. The standard casting time for a metamagiced spell for a bard/sorcerer is a full round action, so to use Imbue Arrow with a metamagiced spell would also require a full round action. During that full round action, you both cast the spell and get one attack with the imbued arrow.

SheepishEidolon wrote:

Phew. I checked 3.5's monster manual and it has this line on page 300:


Calculating Saving Throw DCs

The formula for save DCs is: 10 + 1/2 the creature's Hit Dice + relevant ability score modifier
So +9 HD results in +4 or +5 DC.

That is for abilities that don't duplicate spells. Even in 3.5, spell-like abilities had a different formula:


For creatures with spell-like abilities, a designated caster level defines how difficult it is to dispel their spell-like effects and to define any level-dependent variables (such as range and duration) the abilities might have. The creature’s caster level never affects which spell-like abilities the creature has; sometimes the given caster level is lower than the level a spellcasting character would need to cast the spell of the same name. If no caster level is specified, the caster level is equal to the creature’s Hit Dice. The saving throw (if any) against a spell-like ability is:

10 + the level of the spell the ability resembles or duplicates + the creature’s Cha modifier.

MageHunter wrote:
I see what you mean RavingDork, but doesn't the magic rules for casting time say something about this? I believe chapter nine says something like, "if it takes a full round action, the spell occurs right before the start of your next turn,"

That is a spell with a 1 round casting time. Different from a spell with a full round action casting time. With the 1 round casting time, you are casting the entire time until it comes into effect - you start casting on your turn, and continue casting through everyone elses turn until right before your next turn.

There is no delay - you are casting the entire time and the spell comes into effect immediately afterword.

MeanMutton wrote:

The problem is that there's a forum post floating around by Paizo's creative director which says that Paladins are powered by their inherent goodness and righteousness but there are plenty of published Paizo sources which suggest a Paladin is powered by a god (the core rulebook description of a Paladin, Gods of the Inner Seas and their details of the codes for paladins of various gods, PFS's Guide To Organized Play which states that in Golarion all Paladins worship gods and all divine magic comes from a god or godlike being).

All said and done - this is a GM's call and fit squarely in the realm of world-building.

The core rulebook paladin isn't a Golarion paladin. The core rulebook is setting neutral. Specific setting can (and do) change the basic assumptions laid out in the corebook. The same was true in 3.5 D&D - the core rulebook paladin didn't require a deity, while all divine spellcasters (including druids and rangers) required a patron deity in the Forgotten Realms setting. A rulebook published for a specific setting (like Gods of the Inner Sea) has absolutely no bearing on paladins from any other setting or, in this case, generic paladins from the core rulebook.

Wheldrake wrote:
Seems to me that the "forces of law and good" are ultimately powered by the positive energy plane, which does seem to have some absolute existence and value independent of the various gods who represent it.

That doesn't really work, seeing as how positive energy is what powers all life. That includes demons and devils (who are healed by positive energy the same as a human or elf).

I will admit there is a trend to associate positive energy with good, but that isn't really the case. Positive (And negative) energy is neutral.

opakedragon wrote:

Hey Folks!

Lets say you have a staff with a 1st level spell, a 2nd level spell, and a 4th level spell (all minimum caster level and none of which require expensive components). The price of said staff would be 13,200 gp (400 gp * 4 spell level * 7 caster level + 300 gp * 2 spell level * 3 caster level + 200 gp * 1 spell level * 1 caster level) and cost 6,600 gp (13,200 gp/2) to craft.

Your numbers are wrong. A staff (or any other magic item) only has 1 caster level. Each spell going into a staff doesn't get to have a different caster level. Also, staffs have a minimum caster level of 8 - you can't have a staff with a caster level below that.

So your example staff would be:

4th level spell: 400 x 4 x 8 = 12,800
2nd level spell: 300 x 2 x 8 = 4,800
1st level spell: 200 x 1 x 8 = 1,600
Total of 19,200 gp.

Adding a 6th level spell to it (Which raises the minimum caster level for all spells to 11th):

6th level spell: 400 x 6 x 11 = 26,400
4th level spell: 300 x 4 x 11 = 13,200
2nd level spell: 200 x 2 x 11 = 4,400
1st level spell: 200 x 1 x 11 = 2,200
Total of 46,200gp

PS. How much would a cantrip/orison cost to be crafted into a staff? Would it be crafted as a one half level spell with a 1st level caster?

Cantrips are priced as if they had a spell level of 0.5. Actual cost to add a cantrip would vary based on the staffs caster level, as well as how many other spells are in the staff.

PPS. Is a staff cast cantrip/orison treated as a prepared cantrip (at will) per charge used? or is it a single casting? how many charges does it use?

It would use charges the same as any other spell. Minimum of 1 charge per use, like all other spells in a staff.


This can get really nasty if there is a pack of them, since normally standing up from the prone provokes AoO (at +4 due to you being prone when you provoke).

What I'm not totally sure about is if -during that AoO- bite, if successful, does the wolf get its free action trip as well. Since it gets the trip as free action on a successful bite, it would seem to indicate it does have a good chance of just continuing to keep you mauled on the ground and you might be better off attacking back from the prone until help arrives than getting into that "gnawing circle of death".

Doesn't matter if it gets the free trip or not. As an AoO occurs before the action that triggered it, the target is still prone and tripping them again would do nothing. After the AoO, the target would then finish his action and stand up (as nothing prevents him from doing so).

You can't keep someone down this way.

eternalglory wrote:
Then shouldn't it be called an Acrobatics check?

Some bonuses only apply to specific uses of a skill. For example, the jump spell only applies to Acrobatics checks made to jump. So a jump modifier would be your normal Acrobatic skill, plus any bonuses that apply specifically to jumping.

Morag the Gatherer wrote:

This could have come up in the last game I ran. The party was faced with several monsters, some of whom were real; others were illusions.

In the 1st round those of the party who could see the monsters failed their will saves. What would have happened if an illusionary monster hit a PC for damage.


Nothing. An illusion only causes damage if it specifically says it does.

Lloyd6770 wrote:
Based on the space/reach link, there are two large options (Long and Tall). Based on the description of Enlarge Person, the 10 feet of natural reach make me think that I'd be considered tall. Is this correct?


Because of my assumption there, on the space/reach sheet, I would use the "Large (Tall)" grid for my attack layout, but I'd only use the green grid, as my Great Axe doens't have reach. Is this also correct?


If I were using a weapon with reach, like a Glaive, then I'd use the green and red grid for attacking enemies?

Partly correct. With a reach weapon, you can't attack a creature inside your normal reach (within 10 feet of you, in this case). With a reach weapon, you would be able to attack a creature in any of the red squares, but not a creature in the green squares.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Das Bier wrote:
That's...interesting. Two casters could contribute to recharging a staff so it could regain power faster? Interesting idea. Honestly never considered it.

No, that is specifically called out as not possible.

Staves hold a maximum of 10 charges. Each spell cast from a staff consumes one or more charges. When a staff runs out of charges, it cannot be used until it is recharged. Each morning, when a spellcaster prepares spells or regains spell slots, he can also imbue one staff with a portion of his power so long as one or more of the spells cast by the staff is on his spell list and he is capable of casting at least one of the spells. Imbuing a staff with this power restores one charge to the staff, but the caster must forgo one prepared spell or spell slot of a level equal to the highest-level spell cast by the staff. For example, a 9th-level wizard with a staff of fire could imbue the staff with one charge per day by using up one of his 4th-level spells. A staff cannot gain more than one charge per day and a caster cannot imbue more than one staff per day.

I think what Gevaudan meant was that multiple party members have the possibility of recharging the staff, it doesn't have to be the same guy every day. One day it could be the cleric, the next day the party wizard does it, and so on.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Orfamay Quest wrote:
So magic items are, at $100 per gold piece, extremely expensive; the price of a simple +1 long sword comes in at close to two million dollars, and the price of the +2 or +3 sword that an 8th level fighter would need is closer to ten or twenty million. I can't think of anything I could buy in the real world for twenty million dollars and expect to carry with me into a dangerous wilderness survival experience, but this provides a cash sink for the game that makes it practical for adventurers to earn huge rewards without making the game unplayable.

Off by more than a little. A +1 longsword costs 2,315 gp. At 1gp = $100, that is only $231,500, not 2 million. Likewise, even a +3 sword (18,315gp) would only be $1,831,500, not 10 to 20 million. A +10 equilivent weapon would be $20,000,000.

Secane wrote:

Can the Ilsurian Archer archetype use wand and scrolls?

The archetype doesn't seem to mention the lost of the ability to use spell trigger and spell completion magic items. (See Skirmisher archetype example below.)

It doesn't have to specifically mention their loss. Spell completion items require you to be a spellcaster to use. Spell trigger items require you to have the spell on your spell list. Completely removing your spellcasting abilities (as Ilsurian Archer says it does) would also remove the ability to use spell completion and spell trigger items.

Note that a CL 0 character like Paladin, Ranger or Bloodrager levels 1-3 can still use wands.

Because the spell trigger rules specifically say so, and they still have a class spell list even if they haven't gained spellcasting yet. Ilsurian Archer removes all ranger spellcasting abilities, which would include the ranger spell list.

As you are breaking the rules of magical weapons anyway, price it how you see fit.

Improvised weapons aren't designed to be weapons. Masterwork weapons are finely crafted normal weapons. The two would be mutually exclusive.

You can't have a vicious weapon without it first being a +1 weapon. That would make the vicious property worth 6000gp at the least (the difference between a +1 weapon at 2000gp and a +1 vicious weapon at 8000gp), assuming you could actually price it that way.

My recommendation wold be to simply treated it as a +1 vicious dagger in all aspects (so not an improvised weapon). Or make it a necessary component to make a vicious weapon (reducing the component cost to make one).

Tangent101 wrote:

@Das Bier: I looked through those rules and don't see anything stating that, for instance, a +2 Flaming Burst Bane weapon wouldn't overcome all types of damage reduction (outside of that from blunt/slashing/piercing weapons).

Nor is there a FAQ stating that either.

Where did you find this information on only DR/Epic being equivalents.

It does very well state that.

Weapons with an enhancement bonus of +3 or greater can ignore some types of damage reduction, regardless of their actual material or alignment. The following table shows what type of enhancement bonus is needed to overcome some common types of damage reduction.

You have to have an enhancement bonus that high. A +2 weapon flaming weapon only has a +2 enhancement bonus. IT is just priced the same as a a weapon with a +3 enhancement bonus, it doesn't actually have a +3 enhancement bonus.

The rules on DR/Epic are found in Mythic Adventures.

DR/Epic: A type of damage reduction, DR/epic can be overcome only by a weapon with an enhancement bonus of +6 or greater. Weapons with special abilities also count as epic for the purposes of overcoming damage reduction if the total bonus value of all of their abilities (including the enhancement bonus) is +6 or greater.

Evasion has a limitation that it only works with light or no armor.
Mithral says for the purposes of limitations that mithral armor counts as one category lighter.

I don't see the problem here. Medium armor made out of mithral counts as light armor for limitations, and would therefore work with evasion which is limited to light or no armor.

Also, this has already been answered in the FAQ.


Mithral armor: What exactly does it mean when it says mithral armor is counted as one category lighter for “other limitations?”

This means that mithral armor allows its wearer to use it when her own class features or special abilities demand her to wear lighter armor; in other words, the character wearing the armor is less limited. For example, a bard can cast spells in mithral breastplate without arcane spell failure, a barbarian can use her fast movement in mithral fullplate, a ranger can use his combat style in mithral fullplate, brawlers, swashbucklers, and gunslingers can keep their nimble bonus in mithral breastplate, rogues keep evasion in mithral breastplate, a brawler can flurry in mithral breastplate, characters without Endurance can sleep in mithral breastplate without becoming fatigued, and so on. It does not change the armor’s actual category, which means that you can still store a creature one size category larger in a hosteling mithral fullplate, and you can’t enhance a mithral breastplate with special abilities that require it to be light armor, like brawling (though you could enhance it with special abilities that require it to be medium armor), and so on.

Qayinisorouse wrote:

So i might be REALLY stupid here, but looking here:

in "Table: Eidolon Base Statistics" it on 13th level (for example) it says the Eidolon's BAB is +10, however if you scroll just a little bit down there's a text saying:

BAB: This is the eidolon's base attack bonus. An eidolon's base attack bonus is equal to its Hit Dice. Eidolons do not gain additional attacks using their natural weapons for a high base attack bonus.

if i'm not mistaken, my "Hit Die" at 13th level is 13,not 10, right?

So which text is the correct one?

You have 13 hit dice at 13th level. Your eidolon doesn't. As a 13th level summoner, your eidolon only has 10 hit dice, and so a base attack bonus of +10. The eidolons base attack bonus is based on its hit dice, not yours.

Kennypngn wrote:
Pathfinder and 3.5 are not Lord of the rings. Hence hobbits vs halflings. Outside of that, both pathfinder and 3.5 did their best to let people know that elves _seem_ to be immortal, due to the fact that they live through several generations of humans, and sometimes 2 generations of dwarves.

Let us speak of other old things. Like this thread from 2011. I'm sure 5 years dead is a little beyond a threads lifespan.

Nygard wrote:


I have been wondering how the crit threat range increase works for creating new weapons, but can't find an answer on the forums or google.

What I have been wondering, and is also the question, is if the cost is 3+7dp or just increases the total price to 7dp for the full effect.

Thanks for all the answers in advance.

You add both together, so 3 + 7.

For an example, look at the war flute they have stated out. It has taken Weapon Feature twice (the price for Weapon Feature also increases when taken multiple times). It is listed as costing 4 design points for the two features total, and Weapon Feature says the first time you select it costs 1 design point, and the second time costs 3 design points. 1 + 3 = 4, showing that you add of each individual cost if you take a weapon quality multiple times.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Avoron wrote:
Oh, and let's not forget about the tarrasque's frightful presence. Between that and combat maneuvers, the tarrasque could incapacitate the golem however it pleases without dealing a single point of damage.

Constructs are immune to mind-affecting effects, so the frightful presence would do nothing.

Fentomy wrote:
When you cast a Quickened Gate spell, do you still have to use your standard action that round to concentrate to keep it open?

When you cast any other spell with a duration of Concentration, do you have to spend a standard action that first turn to maintain it? No. (In fact, it is generally impossible, as you have already spent your standard action to cast the spell, you don't have a 2nd standard action to maintain it.)

The same applies in this case. You don't need to spend the standard action to maintain the spell until your next turn. A concentration-duration spells casting time is enough to let the spell last one single round. After that, you need to spend standard action to keep it going.

TomasMurdoc wrote:
I am playing a druid currently and I have a Roc for my animal companion. I am level 6 and don't find myself feeling like a lesser character in anyway. My animal companion is the tankiest one in the group often having an AC of 28 and that is only with Barkskin and no other defensive buffs. My druid uses produce flame and flameblade to devastating effect. Touch AC attacks all day long. When I wildshape I out damage everyone but our barbarian but that is all he can do. While I do like most of a druid's spells, I do concede that compared to a cleric or a wizard their spells tend to be not as good.

Are you sure you aren't actually a necromancer instead of a druid? Seeing as how the majority of this thread is from 2009 (with 2 posts in 2013) that is some mighty powerful necromantic magics being thrown around.


I'm confused though about the fact that some Staves have Arcane and Divine spells.

According to Spell trigger if you don't have the spell on your spell list you couldn't use it.

As has been pointed out, Use Magic Device exists. Also not all casters are single-classed.

1 person marked this as a favorite. includes the errata. It is not the same as the official SRD.

As far as I know, the errata wasn't declared Open Content, so Paizo couldn't use it even if they wanted to.

Yogmoth wrote:
Hi, i was wondering if undead creature such as skeletons, zombies or even necrocrafts could be considered as objects, even magical ones ?

No. Undead are creatures, not objects. (The same applies to golems and other constructs as well.)

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Weapons and armor can be crafted using materials that possess innate special properties. If you make a suit of armor or weapon out of more than one special material, you get the benefit of only the most prevalent material. However, you can build a double weapon with each head made of a different special material.

You can use as many materials as you like, but you only get the effects of one of them.

This is covered in the FAQ.


Items as Spells: Does using a potion, scroll, staff, or wand count as "casting a spell" for purposes of feats and special abilities like Augment Summoning, Spell Focus, an evoker's ability to do extra damage with evocation spells, bloodline abilities, and so on?

No. Unless they specifically state otherwise, feats and abilities that modify spells you cast only affect actual spellcasting, not using magic items that emulate spellcasting or work like spellcasting.

Imbicatus wrote:
No. DR/Epic is only bypassed by an actual +6 enhancement bonus, and doesn't exist in PF rules, only 3.5.

Incorrect. Also, DR/Epic does appear in Pathfinder (even pre-Mythic Adventures). It is included in the very first Bestiary (solar angel).

DR/Epic: A type of damage reduction, DR/epic can be overcome only by a weapon with an enhancement bonus of +6 or greater. Weapons with special abilities also count as epic for the purposes of overcoming damage reduction if the total bonus value of all of their abilities (including the enhancement bonus) is +6 or greater.
Am I correct in thinking that enchantments other than the +x such as flaming only help bypass DR in the case of DR/EPIC, so a +1 weapon with +5 worth of stuff beats DR/EPIC but not DR/Adamantine?


QuidEst wrote:
Notably, psychic casters don't need one, as they ignore inexpensive material components.

They do, however, still require focus components. Those are also included in the spell component pouch.

Sorcerers also need one for the same reason. Of course, you could always make sure to choose spells that don't have a focus requirement. (Eschew Materials does not remove the need for inexpensive focuses, just inexpensive material components).

TDChangeling wrote:

When a class gets one of these skills as a Class Skill, do they get all three boxes, or one?

So, Bard's with preform. Are all three Performs a class skill, or just one?
Thanks everyone!

What do you mean when you say boxes?

If the class just says Perform, it means all Perform skills are class skills. Same with Craft, Profession, and Knowledge. If it lists a specific skill, like Perform (Sing), then only that specific skill is considered a class skill while all other skills of that type are not considered class skills.

Rock Lord wrote:

Raise thread!

Advanced Player's Guide wrote:
Unless otherwise noted, activating the power of a revelation is a standard action.
Lunar Oracle: Moonbeam Revelation wrote:
Moonbeam (Su): You can fire a ray of moonlight as a ranged touch attack at any creature within 30 feet.
Would the "as a ranged touch attack" be the "otherwise note" for action economy in this case?

No, because "ranged touch attack" means absolutely nothing when it comes to action economy. It just tells you that it is a ranged attack (so uses your Dexterity modifier) that targets touch AC.

One single arrow.

Applying poison to a weapon or single piece of ammunition is a standard action. Whenever a character applies or readies a poison for use there is a 5% chance that he exposes himself to the poison and must save against the poison as normal. This does not consume the dose of poison. Whenever a character attacks with a poisoned weapon, if the attack roll results in a natural 1, he exposes himself to the poison. This poison is consumed when the weapon strikes a creature or is touched by the wielder. Characters with the poison use class feature do not risk accidentally poisoning themselves.

There is nothing in the rules that says multiple arrows can be poisoned with a single dose, so they follow the same rules as all other weapons - one dose is enough for one weapon/arrow.

Check: A check is a d20 roll which may or may not be modified by another value. The most common types are attack rolls, ability checks, skill checks, and saving throws.

If you roll a d20 and add your Charisma modifier, it is a Charisma-based check.

Delenot wrote:
pauljathome wrote:
I'd suggest using archivesofnethys instead. Very good search engine and better organized tgan the SRD or PRD sited
Is all the info on that site Pathfinder produced? (Not necessarily organized play legal)

It does appear to be all from Paizo, yes. Not all of it was actually written for the Pathfinder RPG, however. Some of it is material for 3.5 D&D (like Elves of Golarian - written for the setting, but back when it still used 3.5 D&D rules).

AlaskaRPGer wrote: to sum it up, you can do the following:

1) Take a move action, swift action, and a standard action
2) Take two move actions and a swift action (The standard was downgraded to move)
3) Take a swift action, a full action, and a 5 foot step.

Barring any spells or items, nothing can be downgraded to a swift action.

By the way your English is fine! No worries.

You can also do a 5 foot step in numbers 1 and 2 as well. You can't use a move action to move in the same round you take a 5 foot step, but you can still use a move action to do something else in that same round.

Just a Mort wrote:
Another thread stated you don't lose shield properties(like fortification) when you're using your bow. So I'm trying to see if you lose the enhancement bonus or not.

A +1 buckler does not give a +1 shield bonus and a +1 enhancement bonus to your armor class. It gives a +2 shield bonus. The enhancement bonus is not applied to your AC, it is applied to the shield bonus (or armor bonus, if armor), and that is applied to your armor class. IF you lose the shield bonus, there is nothing for the enhancement bonus to be applied to.

1 to 50 of 2,559 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2016 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email 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.