Aeric Blackberry wrote:
People really need to stop saying this. There is absolutely no rule anywhere in the books that disallows someone from further enchanting a specific item. Not a single one anywhere. (Nor was it a rule in 3.0 or 3.5 D&D either.)
The only thing that does stop it is that doing so makes a custom item, meaning its entirely up to the DM whether its allowed or not. It also can not be done in a Pathfinder Society game, as the Society does not allow custom making items of any type.
All negative energy does not heal undead or similar creatures. Only those effects that specify that the negative energy will heal them will do so. (Similarly, positive energy doesn't always heal living creatures - only when it specifically says it does.)
IF all negative energy always healed undead and similar creatures, there would be no reason to specifically call out that ability in Inflict spells.
Animate Dead requests onyx gem worth of 25gp per HD of animated subject however how can scrolls/oils/wands of such spell be used if the cost is different every time you use it? Can the material component be added upon the moment of casting instead of being added immediately after creation of scroll/oil/wand?
The cost must be paid when the scroll is scribed. That means the scriber must make the decision of how many HD of undead to create when the scroll is scribed, and include that much onyx.
Honestly, I would just drop the prerequisites entirely. Saves the trouble of having to word it carefully so it covers all possible classes that could benefit from it.
Yes, that does manes a 1st level fighter could take the feat if he wanted. It would just be totally useless, even if he later planned on multiclassing into wizard, as the feat requires to to choose spells you already know, not spells you might know at a later time. So even with no prerequisites, its really only going to be spellcasters who can use the feat that would take it.
And for the same reason you shouldn't limit the feats usefulness to only the existing casters, the feat should not require an arcane spellcaster. There may be none now, but there is always the possibility of a divine spellcaster who uses something similar to a spellbook. IF you want to open the feat up to all applicable users, then you need to keep the wording as broad as possible.
You automatically hit and score a critical hit. If the defender survives the damage, he must make a Fortitude save (DC 10 + damage dealt) or die. A rogue also gets her extra sneak attack damage against a helpless opponent when delivering a coup de grace.
If DR negates all of the damage, then the character took no damage. Therefore, the save should never be triggered, as it requires you to survive the damage - damage which you never took. The attack was negated.
Whenever damage reduction completely negates the damage from an attack, it also negates most special effects that accompany the attack, such as injury poison, a monk's stunning, and injury-based disease. Damage reduction does not negate touch attacks, energy damage dealt along with an attack, or energy drains. Nor does it affect poisons or diseases delivered by inhalation, ingestion, or contact.
Temporary hit points, however, are still hit points. The rogue still took damage, even if it was only to hit temporary his points.
It would require another paragraph in the Magic chapter, whereas you could just errata the feat using the language I did above (including all the of "learned" casters) and all would be fine.
You mean change the prerequisite to:
Prerequisite: 1st-level wizard, 1st-level magus, 1st-level witch, or 1st-level alchemist
Bad idea. That limits it to only those classes. Should another spellcasting class be created that involves similar mechanics, you would then have to re-errata the Spell Mastery feat to include that new class as well. If you are going to errata the feat to make it useable to all similar spellcasters, then do so. Don't limit it to the currently available ones (which is what happened in the first place, with Wizard being the only class able to take the feat).
Personally, I believe it is supposed to be a darkwood light shield.
Which is more likely to happen - one thing being wrong about it (the name), or three things being wrong about it (the cost, bucklers being made of metal and so can't normally be made of darkwood, and its description)?
But then again, I dislike how bucklers are treated anyway. They were held in the hand, not strapped to the arm, and very well could be used to attack with.
3.0/3.5 did allow you to stack the +10 DC to craft faster, if you used the rules from the Epic Level Handbook. (Despite being in that book, there is nothing that actually requires to to be epic level to use epic level skill usages. Its just that the DCs are usually high enough you needed to be epic level to beat them.)
It's a grey area, and I'd personally let it slide because otherwise, what good is a +30 Craft Skill? There is no DC 40 armor.
Just having a higher craft modifier means it takes less time to craft an item, as you make more progress per check.
Also, the DC to craft some magic items can be DC 40 or more, depending on if you meet the prerequisites or not, and are using accelerated crafting. Base DC 5 + 20 (caster level) + 5 (accelerated crafting) = DC 30, +5 for every missing prerequisite. (Granted, most crafters would probably use Spellcraft instead of an appropriate Craft or Profession skill.)
I have been looking for the flight rules in PRD to help but can't find them. Can a creature with a fly speed run (i.e. x4 or x5 to move speed)? Even if that's posible, the PCs can out run the gaseous form, so they could just follow it to its coffin....so that seems kinda lame.
The Run action can be taken with any movement mode. And have the gaseous vampire flow through things like small holes and cracks - areas the PCs can not follow.
Another point this brought up, "Additional damage dealt to a vampire forced into gaseous form has no effect." It seems by that statement, the age old way to destroy vampire is out. I'm in sunlight, no problem, I'll just turn to gaseous form and now I am immune.
Being exposed to sunlight causes no damage. It just staggers them the first round, and immediately destroys them on the second. No actual hit point damage is done. As a vampire in gaseous from is only immune to damage, sunlight will still kill them (as sunlight doesn't do any actual damage - its just death).
Dropping a backpack or weapon or any other item, be it a Giant Rock or pebble, is a Free action (besides shield being a move action as stated, and armor which takes multiple rounds or minutes depending on type.)
Then I guess stripping naked is also a free action. Backpacks are worn, and clothes are worn. The same rules should apply to both, right?
Dropping something as a free action assumes it is already in your hand. All you have to do is let go. If you have to un-equip something (such as removing a backpack from your back), it should take longer.
A critical hit multiplies damage. Healing is not damage, and would never get multiplied anyway. You wouldn't be able to "critically heal" in 3.5 either.
3.5 SRD and Pathfinder PRD
Plus, 3.5 didn't require a touch attack to heal your allies anyway, so there was never an option to critically hit to begin with.
Also from both the 3.5 SRD and Pathfinder PRD, Combat chapter:
Touch Spells in Combat: Many spells have a range of touch. To use these spells, you cast the spell and then touch the subject. In the same round that you cast the spell, you may also touch (or attempt to touch) as a free action. You may take your move before casting the spell, after touching the target, or between casting the spell and touching the target. You can automatically touch one friend or use the spell on yourself, but to touch an opponent, you must succeed on an attack roll.
While the method is correct, your numbers aren't. A suit of mithral full plate of speed is already a +1 armor. You can't just add another +1 to that for 1,000gp. The cost to further enchant it to +2 varies, as Majuba pointed out above, depending on how the Speed part is priced (a flat 15,000gp, or a +3 enhancement).
Edit: Removed cost comparison, as Majuba already has it above.
And thats why further enchanting specific armor and weapons is hard - you have no idea just how their custom enchantments are priced.
The what now from the where now? I can't find that on the prd or in the book.
Ultimate Equipment. Its not with the normal magical weapons, its an intelligent weapon.
Without the free arrows, its a 40,500gp item. (Assuming the lightning bolt and true strike abilities are item powers, that the item can use as directed by the wielder. As it really needs to be, as a 3/day CL 17 lightning bolt ability costs over 55,000gp by itself.)
So a greatclub, which is really nothing more then a big stick, is a high-quality item? It has a craft DC of 15.A net, which can be made by any fisherman, is a high-quality item? It has a DC of 18.
A sap, which is generally nothing more then lead shot in a leather pouch, is a high-quality item? Its a DC 15 to craft.
There is nothing prohibiting it, so yes you can do it (Except in the Pathfinder Society - no custom magic items allowed). However, since the specific magic armors (and weapons) don't necessarily follow any pricing formulas, it can be hard to figure out out much it would cost to upgrade.
As far as I am aware, PFS doesn't allow any custom magic items. So unless it appears in a Pathfinder book somewhere, it doesn't exist.
Its on the table called "Estimating Magic Item Gold Piece Value" found here. Near the bottom of the table, under the heading "Special". The table is also found on page 550 of the core rulebook.
There are no body slot affinities in Pathfinder. You could have Goggles of Strength +2, and it would cost exactly the same as a Belt of Strength +2. Its just that by default, all physical stat-boosting items are belts.
The table with all of the formulas specifically says to increase the lower-priced cost by 50%. However, the example given in the book does the opposite.
Multiple different abilities Multiply lower item cost by 1.5
If the item is one that occupies a specific place on a character's body, the cost of adding any additional ability to that item increases by 50%. For example, if a character adds the power to confer invisibility to her ring of protection +2, the cost of adding this ability is the same as for creating a ring of invisibility multiplied by 1.5.
The same problem existed in 3.5 as well. The example given does not match the table.
As above, I have a few questions that have been an argument between my GM and me. He believes that this spell, as it says "(ending the effect as a dispel magic spell does)" with the keyword being DISPEL MAGIC, requires me to make a caster level check to end every spell effect. I, however, believe it isn't required - otherwise why in the high heavens would i use a level 9 spell to do the same thing that a dispel (or greater dispel for that effect) would achieve?
Because, Greater Dispel Magic can only affect a 20' radius area with an area dispel, while Disjunction affects a 40' area.
And, the area burst from a Greater Dispel Magic has no effect on magic items, just spells. The area burst from Mage's Disjunction not only affects spells, but magic items as well.
Area Dispel: When greater dispel magic is used in this way, the spell affects everything within a 20-foot-radius burst. Roll one dispel check and apply that check to each creature in the area, as if targeted by dispel magic. For each object within the area that is the target of one or more spells, apply the dispel check as with creatures. Magic items are not affected by an area dispel.
Also, as the area dispel option of a Greater Dispel Magic says it works like you had targeted a normal Dispel Magic on the creatures in the burst, then it can only dispel one spell on each those creatures. Mage's Disjunction specifically says it affects all magical spells in the area, so multiple spells could be dispelled from each creature inside the area.
Think of Mage's Disjunction as an Even Greater Dispel Magic spell.
Ethereal Gears wrote:
2. What's a good way to calculate ability score modifiers for a ghoul? Is there some system? I'm guessing not, since I know PF isn't really focused on players taking monsters as characters, but I'm just asking to make sure.
Subtract 10 from even scores, and 11 from odd scores. That will give you the ghouls ability modifiers. At least, that was how it was done for 3.5 D&D. Pathinder should be the same. (A ghoul would therefore have +2 Strength, +4 Dexterity, +2 Intelligence, +4 Wisdom, and +4 Charisma. It has no Constitution score.)
3. Would my paralysis and disease abilities have their DCs level with my class levels, or would they remain the same?
The DC for a monsters special abilities is 10 + 1/2 the monsters hit dice + a certain ability score modifier (for ghouls disease and paralysis, this is Charisma modifier). So as you gain levels (and so gain hit dice), the DCs should rise.
This might be a really dumb question, but does an Alchemist start the game with a laboratory? They only start with 105 GP (AVG), which doesn't cover the cost of a lab at all. I assume they begin play with one, but if not, I'll have to scrounge up some mulah fast!
No, they don't start with it. If they did, it would be specifically stated, as they do with the gunslingers gun or the wizards spellbook.
Besides that, an alchemists kit only costs 25gp, according to the Advanced Players Guide, and contains all materials needed for extracts, bombs, and mutagens (except for the expensive components). Thats all you really need.
Portable labs (from the same book) only cost 75gp, and provide a +1 bonus on Craft (Alchemy) checks. Even if you couldn't afford it at the beginning of the game, after the first adventure you should be able to.
Jason Adam wrote:
You would have fire resistance 5, unless the pyromancer class specifically says that it improves or stacks with existing fire resistance. If it just grants fire resistance 5, then it won't stack.
Prefect self makes you an outsider. An immortal outsider. I think that's worth passing on enlarge person.
No it doesn't. It only makes you count as an Outsider for two very specific things - spells, and magical effects. For all other purposes, you are still whatever you were before gaining that ability. And as aging is neither a spell or magical effect, you still age normally (with the exception of what the Timeless Body ability does.)
And there is nothing in the Outsider type that states, or even implies, outsiders are immortal. Certain kinds of Outsiders may indeed be immortal, but its not a function of all Outsiders. If it was, it would of been included in the creature type. Not that it matters, as 20th level monks never become actual Outsiders.
MurphysParadox - That is the passage I could not find (nor could anyone else) in the books. What we found is exactly what Jubal Breakbottle has posted. I was not having an issue with the difficult terrain part, but the straight line part. I'm still not seeing that in the book (I have 4th printing, if it makes a difference...)
Core rulebook, page 188.
Hendelbolaf - perhaps I played 4th edition too long, and am misremembering; or perhaps I always unwittingly played with house rules - I recall 3.0/3.5 having the charge restrictions, but I do not recall ever having to RUN in a straight line only. Yes, Charging was, but not running.
Running in Pathfinder works exactly the same as it did in 3.5 - there was no change.
Even if all 3 spells were required, every caster (and any non-caster with the Master Craftsman feat) can still make the rope. Not meeting a prerequisite just adds +5 the the DC to make the item.
Discovery (Su): At 2nd level, and then again every 2 levels thereafter (up to 18th level), an alchemist makes an incredible alchemical discovery. Unless otherwise noted, an alchemist cannot select an individual discovery more than once. Some discoveries can only be made if the alchemist has met certain prerequisites first, such as uncovering other discoveries. Discoveries that modify bombs that are marked with an asterisk (*) do not stack. Only one such discovery can be applied to an individual bomb. The DC of any saving throw called for by a discovery is equal to 10 + 1/2 the alchemist's level + the alchemist's Intelligence modifier.
Cerberus Seven wrote:
Well, it's not Paizo published but it does follow a precise formula based on powers of 2 that appeals to my math-sense. Screw it, I'll go with this. Thanks for the link!
Even though it isn't from Paizo, is is from the rules set that Paizo copied from to create Pathfinder. A bit more evidence, that is from Pathfinder:
Tiny, Diminutive, and Fine Creatures: Very small creatures take up less than 1 square of space. This means that more than one such creature can fit into a single square. A Tiny creature typically occupies a space only 2-1/2 feet across, so four can fit into a single square. 25 Diminutive creatures or 100 Fine creatures can fit into a single square. Creatures that take up less than 1 square of space typically have a natural reach of 0 feet, meaning they can't reach into adjacent squares. They must enter an opponent's square to attack in melee. This provokes an attack of opportunity from the opponent. You can attack into your own square if you need to, so you can attack such creatures normally. Since they have no natural reach, they do not threaten the squares around them. You can move past them without provoking attacks of opportunity. They also can't flank an enemy.
Do the math, and a fine creatures space is 6 inches wide and 6 inches long (besides that, the table in Pathfinder even says so). Why would a fly or a grain of sand have a space that large? Thats like a human having a space of around 50 feet or more (instead of 5 feet). Now if a fine-sized creature was up to 6 inches, that makes much more sense (so a 5-6 inch creature has a 6 inch space, like a 5-6 foot tall human has a 5' foot space).
Cerberus Seven wrote:
You're probably thinking of the tiny size, since critters like cats or some breeds of dogs (and most familiars iirc) are usually listed as tiny size. You can hit something like this with a sword since it's generally up to a foot or so long. Swarms of these sized critters have 300 individual members per 5 foot square and actually take (half) weapon damage.
No, I am thinking of Fine size creatures. The table wasn't (entirely) reprinted for PAthfinder, but here it is for 3.5.
Cerberus Seven wrote:
RAW it would work but it sounds like it goes against the feel of how creatures of that size operate. Something that's fine size is like an individual fly or speck of sand. Saying it could attack something 5 feet away with this feat is kinda 'WTF'. You'd want to ask your GM about it, but I'd personally allow it only for tiny creatures. *Maaaaaaybe* diminutive.
Fine size is generally much larger then that. Anything up and including 6 inches in height/length is Fine size. Still, even with that its a stretch to imagine.
Selecting a feat may have to be done immediately... but does leveling up have the same rule? You could risk staying 2nd level until you hit a town.
Whenever you reach the required number of experience points, you level up. You don't make a choice in the matter - it just happens.
As soon as you earn the experience, you level up. So if your DM awards experience in the middle of a dungeon, and you have enough XP to level, you immediately level. If your DM holds off on giving your your XP until you reach a town (or other suitable resting spot), then you don't level up until then.
Michael Riter wrote:
All right, really what I wanted to know is this. Does a magic item have to be created as a magic item (for example, a +1 enchantment) or do you need a masterwork item to enchant? If it's the first of the two, can you add enchantments as time goes on, or do you have to buy new items? (For example, If I have m enchanted +1 sword, can I add a +1 ability, and later on add another +1 and then another +1 ability, or perhaps buy a +2 enchantment then two +1 abilities?)
For magic armor, shields, and weapons, you must have a masterwork item to enchant. For all other magical items, masterwork is not needed.
And you can add enchantments as the game goes on.
You figure the Arcane Spell Failure for each individual item first, then add those results up.
So a chain shirt has ASF of 20%. Making it from Mithral reduces this to 10%. Activating the Arcane Armor Training feat (which requires a swift action) reduces this further to 0%. So the final ASF of the mithral chain shirt is 10%, or 0% with the feat activated.
A buckler has an ASF of 5%. Making it from mithral reduces this to 0%.
Now that we know the ASF of each component, we add them up. The 10% from the mithral shirt, plus the 0% from the mithral buckler equals a total Arcane Spell Failure chance of 10%. (When the Arcane Armor Training feat is activated, this drops down to a total ASF chance of 0%.)
Survival isn't a trained skill. Anyone can attempt it even with 0 ranks. By Taking 10, anyone (as long as they don't have a Wisdom penalty)can get along in the wild and provide enough food and water for themselves every day.
And as Track is no longer a feat in Pathfinder, everyone can track with Survival as well.
The sling may cost and weigh nothing, but the ammo does. 1 silver piece for 10 bullets, which weigh 5 pounds total.
And Strength penalties do apply with slings.
Sling: A sling is little more than a leather cup attached to a pair of strings. Your Strength modifier applies to damage rolls when you use a sling, just as it does for thrown weapons. You can fire, but not load, a sling with one hand. Loading a sling is a move action that requires two hands and provokes attacks of opportunity.
So with just a 7 strength, thats only 1d4-2 damage. 1d4-3 if he runs out of bullets and must start using regular stones.
A save dc is generally 10 + 1/2 the creatures hit dice + some ability modifier. A Con-based save means the save DC is calculated with the creatures constitution modifier.
Mounts actually do work differently then animal companions and familiars.
Only difficult terrain and darkness remove the possibility of a 5' step.
Something like a Slow spell, which reduces your speed to half, doesn't remove the possibility of a 5' step. You can still take a 5' step, as it is only difficult terrain and darkness that matter.
Jose Suarez 916 wrote:
If everyone does it with their pets for streamline combat then why can't I do it for my contruct creation ?
Everyone doing it with their pets is a houserule. You would need to ask your GM if you can do the same.
By the rules, though, everything has its own initiative score. Including animal companions and familiars.
You must have the actual adamantine sword before you can enchant it. So the correct answer is A.
However, nothing says you have to be the one to make the adamantine sword. You could just buy one. Or use the Fabricate spell on a lump of adamantine.