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

2,828 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS

1 to 50 of 2,828 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

_Ozy_ wrote:
draugr_hrafn wrote:
An unrelated note, I have ruled that a player can wield a spear or longspear one handed as a martial weapon. It takes away from the Phalanx Fighter archetype, but the way I see farmer Joe wouldn't have the martial training to be able to use it one handed, but soldier Johnny would have the training to be able to wield it with one hand and still have a shield. This ruling doesn't apply to polearms such as the glaive or other such arms. At least not without an exotic weapon proficiency.
Just FYI, normal spears are one handed weapons.

Regular spears and longspears are 2 handed. Shortspears are one handed.


Quote:
That said, not seeing that on page 15 of the CRB. Perhaps it was added in later editions of the CRB? Mine is one of the older editions, so it's always a possibility that my copy doesn't include the information because its old. Anyway, didn't mean to debate it, just curious if it really says that somewhere in the CRB.

I don't know if it appears there in the book, but on the PRD it does appear in the common terms section.

Quote:
Hit Points (hp): Hit points are an abstraction signifying how robust and healthy a creature is at the current moment. To determine a creature's hit points, roll the dice indicated by its Hit Dice. A creature gains maximum hit points if its first Hit Die roll is for a character class level. Creatures whose first Hit Die comes from an NPC class or from his race roll their first Hit Die normally. Wounds subtract hit points, while healing (both natural and magical) restores hit points. Some abilities and spells grant temporary hit points that disappear after a specific duration. When a creature's hit points drop below 0, it becomes unconscious. When a creature's hit points reach a negative total equal to its Constitution score, it dies.


From a rules standpoint only 2 things matter. The creatures natural reach, and if it is wielding a reach weapon or not.

A Small creature has a natural reach of 5 feet (same as a Medium creature). With a non-reach weapon, it can strike5 feet way. A reach weapon doubles that to 10 feet. Same as a Medium creature.

If a Medium creature could hit the opponent in a given situation, so can the Small creature.


Milo v3 wrote:
Jeraa wrote:
To be fair, Paizo didn't write the dragon entry. They just copied it directly from 3.5 D&D. Sorcerers didn't get Eschew Materials automatically back then, and neither did dragons.
It wasn't copied directly though... Every single dragon has been changed from 3.5e. The formatting of true dragons was completely changed, and very single dragon has abilities that it never got in previous generations (for example silver dragons getting Cold Aura, Fog Vision, Graceful Flight, Reflexive Scales and True Courage).

I was going to say I was only talking about the spells section, but that did get a minor wording change:

3.5 D&D wrote:

Spells

A dragon knows and casts arcane spells as a sorcerer of the level indicated in its variety description, gaining bonus spells for a high Charisma score. Some dragons can also cast spells from the cleric list or cleric domain lists as arcane spells.

Pathfinder wrote:
Spells: A dragon knows and casts arcane spells as a sorcerer of the level indicated in its specific description. Its caster level depends on its age, as shown for each type.

It still effectively says the same thing, however, just with different words. Casting as a sorcerer (with a few types adding in clerics spells as castable as well).


Quote:
They don't have Eschew Materials because like a lot of thing in the Core book it was made hastily to get it out the door quick and whoever wrote the dragon entry didn't coordinate with whoever wrote the Sorcerer entry and make sure Eschew Materials was a Bonus Feat rather than a feature of Spontaneous Casting.

To be fair, Paizo didn't write the dragon entry. They just copied it directly from 3.5 D&D. Sorcerers didn't get Eschew Materials automatically back then, and neither did dragons.

And as Ozy mentioned, even with Eschew Materials you still have reason to carry the pouch - not only is it a convient place to store any of the expensive components you are carring around, the pouch automatically comes with all the non-costly focuses you need (as the feat does not remove the need for those at all).

So feat or not, both dragons and sorcerers would most likely still have the component pouch.


Daniel Lipp wrote:

Ok I'm building a creature for a high level group and reading this has helped just a little but for my creature it has 12 and the invincible and savage mythic simple template,

at this hd these templates each provide resistance 15 to all energy types and dr 10/epic, so would these stack to be resist 30 all energy types and dr 20/epic

No. They don't combine in any way. The monster would simple have all energy resistances at 15 and DR 10/epic.

You only add two sources of damage reduction or energy resistance together if it specifically says to. In most cases, multiple resistances or damage reductions simply do not add together.


Quote:
Charge is a full attack action, "Even if you have extra attacks, such as from having a high enough base attack bonus or from using multiple weapons, you only get to make one attack during a charge." So I have to retract that comment (I was being humorous at the time) in a bow to the Charge text as it excludes high BAB (a very strong statement). In a side note

No it is not. Charge is a full round action, not a full attack action. Those are not the same thing. A full attack action is a specific kind of full round action.

Quote:
In general the only movement you can take during a full attack is a 5-foot step. You may take the step before, after, or between your attacks. So a standard attack may become a full attack but you must declare the action before your PC acts.

No you do not.

Quote:
After your first attack, you can decide to take a move action instead of making your remaining attacks, depending on how the first attack turns out and assuming you have not already taken a move action this round. If you've already taken a 5-foot step, you can't use your move action to move any distance, but you could still use a different kind of move action.

Assuming you haven't moved yet (or used any other move action), you don't have to decide to do a full attack until after you have already made a single attack.


Pizza Lord wrote:
Looking at the Combat section, it looks like Ascalaphus is right about Bullrushes not being valid for AoO's normally (must have been remembering 3.5.) It looks like you can substitute Disarm, Trip, or Sunder, as he says, but not a Bullrush or Grapple (I always remember being able to grab someone trying to move past, but again, that was back in 3.5)

Nope. You couldn't bull rush with an attack of opportunity in 3.5 D&D either. It required a standard action, or could be performed as part of a charge. Same as in Pathfinder.

You are right about the grapple part though. It was something you could attempt as part of any attack action. It wasn't a standard action like in Pathfinder.


You don't have to charge. In fact, charging doesn't allow an extra attack with haste at all. The extra attack from haste is only granted when you perform a full attack, which you can still perform even if you only normally have a single attack.

Quote:

If only your body is, then no, as your shadow projection is not in the AoE of the Haste, thus not hasted. <evil grin>

If your shadow projection which is a shadow is hasted, then yes, if you make a full attack then you get another attack at full BAB excluding some other similar effects. Generally touch attacks are standard actions so you may have to charge or make your standard a full attack.

Only if it specifically says it is standard action (like the ghosts corrupting touch ability). Otherwise, it follows the normal rules for an attack - standard action for 1 attack, full round action for (possibly) multiple attacks, and not an action at all for attacks of opportunity.


deuxhero wrote:
I saw that, but staves explicitly work differently from other items price-wise.

Staves are the only item that work the way you want. As far as I know. So those are the only pricing guidelines there are.

IF you don't want to use that pricing formula, you need to come up with something on your own (and this is the wrong subforum for that).

Edit: As James said, the multiple similar abilities stuff would apply. I had forgotten about that.


Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
In order to create a scroll of a spell you must either have it prepared, or be able to cast it spontaneously like a sorcerer. No one else can supply it.

You just have to have some access to the spell. It doesn't have to come from you.

Quote:
Note that all items have prerequisites in their descriptions. These prerequisites must be met for the item to be created. Most of the time, they take the form of spells that must be known by the item's creator (although access through another magic item or spellcaster is allowed). The DC to create a magic item increases by +5 for each prerequisite the caster does not meet. The only exception to this is the requisite item creation feat, which is mandatory. In addition, you cannot create potions, spell-trigger, or spell-completion magic items without meeting their spell prerequisites.

As long as you have access to the spell (either from yourself, another caster, or a magic item), you meet the spell prerequisites of a magic item.


Agodeshalf wrote:

Just to be clear the vampire entry states that it triggers only once per round.

Energy Drain (Su): A creature hit by a vampire's slam (or other natural weapon) gains two negative levels. This ability only triggers once per round, regardless of the number of attacks a vampire makes.

True. I did miss that when making my example. But the overall point does still stand - the creature can inflict negative levels multiple times as long as there isn't something specifically written against it.


Quote:

1) if you get hit multiple times in a round from something that level drains (say, a vampire) do you get 1 negative level each time?

1) No, that ability from a specific creature can only affect a PC once per round. Multiple vampires can each use it to apply multiple level drains. I forget why I think this way though.

For #1, it depends. If the ability that gives the negative level requires a standard action to do, then the monster can inflict only 1 (or more, not all energy drain attacks only deal 1 negative level) negative level per round. Multiple monsters could inflict multiple negative levels.

A vampire, however, can inflict negative levels on not only their slam attack, but all natural attacks. If the vampire had, for example, 2 claws and a bite attack, it could inflict 2 negative levels on each of those 3 attacks, potentially inflicting 6 negative levels on a target in a single turn.

Quote:

2) Monster is under water (lets say 10 feet under). PC in on shore, right above. PC Casts cone of cold. Does:

a) Monster get the benefit of evasion/bonuses to save?
b) Water freeze?

The rules on attacking into water:

Quote:
Attacks from Land: Characters swimming, floating, or treading water on the surface, or wading in water at least chest deep, have improved cover (+8 bonus to AC, +4 bonus on Reflex saves) from opponents on land. Land-bound opponents who have freedom of movement effects ignore this cover when making melee attacks against targets in the water. A completely submerged creature has total cover against opponents on land unless those opponents have freedom of movement effects. Magical effects are unaffected except for those that require attack rolls (which are treated like any other effects) and fire effects.

In the case of cone of cold, the water has no effect. If it was a non-magical effect, a magical effect that required an attack roll, or any fire attack, the creature under the water would gain improved cover (+8 AC, +4 reflex saves).

The spell says nothing about freezing the water, so the water doesn't freeze. Look at the freezing sphere spell, a spell that specifically says it freezes water. If all cold damage spells froze water, that wouldn't be required in the freezing sphere spell.

Unfortunately for #3, the rules don't seem to cover that. There are rules from attacking into the water, but not for attacking out of the water. I would assume that the same rules would apply, however.


donato wrote:
Jeraa wrote:
Quote:
Supernatural Abilities (Su): Supernatural abilities are magical but not spell-like. Supernatural abilities are not subject to spell resistance and do not function in areas where magic is suppressed or negated (such as an antimagic field). A supernatural ability's effect cannot be dispelled and is not subject to counterspells. See Table: Special Ability Types for a summary of the types of special abilities.
All supernatural abilities are magical.
There it is clear as day! Where did you find that? I was looking in the Magic section, but maybe not in the right spot.

In the PRD it is in the Glossary (also a similar entry in the common terms section of Getting Started). I assume it is the same for the book, but I don't have a copy at hand to check.


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

All supernatural abilities are magical.


Being undead, they have some proficiency:

Quote:

Proficient with its natural weapons, all simple weapons, and any weapons mentioned in its entry.

Proficient with whatever type of armor (light, medium, or heavy) it is described as wearing, as well as all lighter types. Undead not indicated as wearing armor are not proficient with armor. Undead are proficient with shields if they are proficient with any form of armor.

Unless an undead creature entry says otherwise, all undead have those proficiencies. It is a function of their creature type.

Quote:
I also was not sure by what does manufactured weapon attacks mean? Does that mean say a slain 1st level fighter who used a long sword before he died and is raised as a skeleton can use a long sword?

Longswords, axe, maces, andso on are manufactured weapons. Claw, bites, tail slaps, slams, and so on are not manufactured weapons, they are natural weapons.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Plausible Pseudonym wrote:
fretgod99 wrote:
I thought penalties didn't actually reduce the ability score. Or am I misremembering that rule/FAQ?
Spells that apply penalties to ability scores don't actually reduce them. Things that damage/drain or modify them do, however.

Not quite true. Only ability drain actually reduces your ability score. An ability penalty or ability damage doesn't reduce your score at all, it just gives penalties.

Quote:
Diseases, poisons, spells, and other abilities can all deal damage directly to your ability scores. This damage does not actually reduce an ability, but it does apply a penalty to the skills and statistics that are based on that ability.
Quote:
Some spells and abilities cause you to take an ability penalty for a limited amount of time. While in effect, these penalties function just like ability damage, but they cannot cause you to fall unconscious or die. In essence, penalties cannot decrease your ability score to less than 1.
Quote:
Ability Drain: Ability drain actually reduces the relevant ability score. Modify all skills and statistics related to that ability. This might cause you to lose skill points, hit points, and other bonuses. Ability drain can be healed through the use of spells such as restoration.

So the -2 Dexterity penalty won't reduce your score, and won't cause you to lose access to the Greater Grapple feat.


J4RH34D wrote:
So what was it supposed to be?

As I said, 1d4. It is a racial thing, there is nothing to add to it.


vanAdamme wrote:
Rise of the Runelords Anniversary Edition page 158. (Don't want to spoil anything)

Based on her race, it should only be 1d4 wisdom drain on the touch attack. Look at the monster entry in Bestiary 2 for her race.


Evilserran wrote:
ok, so i assume even though the added damage comes from constitution and not strength, same ruling would apply, thanks.

Yes, but only because the ability specifically says so.

Quote:
When making a melee attack with devastating infusion, the elemental annihilator doesn't provoke attacks of opportunity, and if she uses two hands, the attack's damage is equal to 1d8 + 1-1/2 times her Constitution modifier.

Normally, wielding a weapon in two hands only increases your Strength bonus, not any other ability score bonus that might be added. So an ability would have to specifically state you increase another ability modifier, in this case Constitution, for it to work.


Evilserran wrote:
so, i know i am resurrecting an old thrread here, but my current build requires this knowledge, it is decided here, that a light weapon CAN be wielded in 2 hands? Would this include the kinetist blade? I am making a weapon finnese based elemental annihilator and want to know if i can use my blade with two hands or not.

Light weapons can be wielded in 2 hands, but you get no additional benefit from it. It still deals damage as if only used one handed.

Quote:
Light: A light weapon is used in one hand. It is easier to use in one's off hand than a one-handed weapon is, and can be used while grappling (see Combat). Add the wielder's Strength modifier to damage rolls for melee attacks with a light weapon if it's used in the primary hand, or half the wielder's Strength bonus if it's used in the off hand. Using two hands to wield a light weapon gives no advantage on damage; the Strength bonus applies as though the weapon were held in the wielder's primary hand only.

Though the onle reference I can find for kinetic blade specifically says you don't add your strength modifier to the damage, o wielding it one or two handed wouldn't seem to matter.

Quote:

You form a weapon using your kinetic abilities. You create a nonreach, light or one-handed weapon in your hand formed of pure energy or elemental matter. (If you're a telekineticist, you instead transfer the power of your kinetic blast to any object held in one hand.) The kinetic blade's shape is purely cosmetic and doesn't affect the damage dice, critical threat range, or critical multiplier of the kinetic blade, nor does it grant the kinetic blade any weapon special features. The object held by a telekineticist for this form infusion doesn't prevent her from using gather power.

You can use this form infusion once as part of an attack action, a charge action, or a full-attack action in order to make melee attacks with your kinetic blade. Since it's part of another action (and isn't an action itself), using this wild talent doesn't provoke any additional attacks of opportunity. The kinetic blade deals your kinetic blast damage on each hit (applying any modifiers to your kinetic blast's damage as normal, but not your Strength modifier). The blade disappears at the end of your turn. The weapon deals the same damage type that your kinetic blast deals, and it interacts with Armor Class and spell resistance as normal for a blast of its type. Even if a telekineticist uses this power on a magic weapon or another unusual object, the attack doesn't use any of the magic weapon's bonuses or effects and simply deals the telekineticist's blast damage. The kinetic blade doesn't add the damage bonus from elemental overflow.

So yes you can wield it 2 handed, but you aren't applying any of your strength modifier in any case. Unless there is a separate ability somewhere that allows it.


The 3.5 D&D efreeti had a a caster level of 12, so did qualify for the feat. I assume the Pathfinder version having a caster level of 11is a typo, and it should be 12 as well.


_Ozy_ wrote:

Just curious, for purposes of verisimilitude. Why couldn't one do an oblique charge, physically speaking. Was there any explanation?

I mean, the idea that along the route of your charge, you must stop in the first square in which you can make an attack can make some sense. But being forced to take a particular route to a particular square doesn't make a lot of physical sense to me.

Who said the rules had to make sense? The rules also say a 2' tall Small creature with a dagger has the same reach as the 8' tall Medium creature with a greatsword. Also a colossal creature can stab someone with a reach weapon at a greater range than he can hit one with a thrown dagger.

The rules say what the rules say. Sense, common or physical, doesn't seem to matter.


Amaguce wrote:
So basically being an evil cleric does not mean I can't heal. I just have to prepare the spell in advance, right? By doing so will that be considered a taboo against my deity and I need to atone from? Or I can use it without consequence?

You don't need to atone. Evil clerics can heal just fine. It is just that good clerics are better at it (they have more options).


Goddity wrote:
Mage armour. It even says 'mage' in the name, clearly marking who is supposed to use it.

He did specify non-magical in nature. So true, but not what was requested.


Níðhöggr wrote:
Generally, anyone can use any armour. Non-proficiency just adds the armor check penalty to your attack rolls and "all skill checks that involve moving", instead of just strength/dexterity-based skills.

And if the armor check penalty is -0, like it is for the haramaki and silken armor or a mithral buckler, there is no drawback when worn if non-proficient.


thatyellowbird wrote:
Johnny_Devo wrote:
Looks like that's just giving you final calculations for the related to-hit bonuses....
Jeraa wrote:
...both BAB and Attack Bonus on that sheet mean the same thing.

OH, that makes perfect sense! Thank you both so much for reading / replying. It really cleared it up for me, and I can pass that on to my players. (I'm sort of getting a trial by fire as a new GM here, but Pathfinder has been tons of fun. It's awesome that the community is so helpful too.)

Edit: The longsword Bizonder is using has a +5 melee attached - could that end up translating to a stray +1 or is that something else entirely (ie, counting the BAB as well as the Attack bonus which you've helpfully pointed out is the same thing)?

The +5 listed there is correct for normal longsword attacks. +1 from BAB/attack bonus, and +4 from the 18 Strength. The -1 from power attack is not included in those modifiers, as it is optional. There are no other modifiers added into that.


Johnny_Devo wrote:

Looks like that's just giving you final calculations for the related to-hit bonuses.

Basically, a melee attack's to-hit bonus is equal to your BaB + your STR modifier + misc bonuses. According to that, you have +1 from BaB, +4 from strength, and +0 total from misc modifiers (-1 from power attack and +1 I can't figure out from context) for a total of +5 to-hit

And a ranged attack's to-hit bonus is equal to your BaB + your DEX modifier + misc bonuses. So with that, you have a +1 from BaB, +1 from DEX, and +1 form misc bonuses. But, again, I can't figure out the context of that misc bonus.

His Dexterity is 14, so a +2 modifier not a +1. +2 Dex, +1 BAB gives you the +3 ranged attack modifier listed.

Power Attack is not included either. Look at the longsword attack on the right. It only deals 1d8+4 damage, and the +4 comes solely from his 18 Str.

The BAB, melee attack, and ranged attack numbers are all right. The only thing this is a problem is that miscellaneous +1 attack bonus listed under the +1 BAB. My guess is that it is simply an error. There is nothing listed that should be giving a miscellaneous +1 attack bonus.

Edit: And I think I know what it is. Hero Lab would normally just display BAB, and not Attack Bonus. But this is Beginner Box material. The Beginner Box doesn't use BAB, it just lists Attack Bonus. So both BAB and Attack Bonus on that sheet mean the same thing.


K-kun the Insane wrote:
I am putting the finishing touches on my PFS Nagaji Magus and want to double check that the height/weight chart in the back of my Advanced Race Guide is correct in that female Nagaji can be up to 7'2" and 300 lbs.?

Medium size covers from 4 foot to 8 feet, and from 60 to 500 pounds. At least according to 3.5 D&D. I'm not sure if that chart ever got reproduced in Pathfinder.


Lady-J wrote:
exept that falling damage isnt untyped its still physical damage which is blocked by dr

It is untyped. "Physical" isn't a damage type, just a broad category. Bludgeoning, piercing, slashing, fire, and so on are damage types. Falling damage wasn't given one of those types, so it is untyped damage.

And as I posted above, damage reduction say it reduces damage from attacks, weapons, and natural weapons. Not all physical damage*. A fall is not an attack, a weapon, or a natural weapon. So by the rules, falling damage does ignore damage reduction.

Should damage reduction apply to falling damage? Maybe, maybe not. But as far as the rules are concerned, damage reduction does not apply.

*The Common Terms section of the book, the only place where you will find it saying damage reduction applies to physical sources, only gives at the very best a very general watered down version of a rule. Especially since that particular entry also tells you to see the Special Abilities section, which clarifies what is meant - a normal attack, weapon, or natural weapon.


AwesomelyEpic wrote:
Isonaroc wrote:
Lady-J wrote:
its only a little bit of magical assistance but with boots of the cat and dr20 you are immune to fall damage
Depending on who you ask, DR doesn't apply to falling damage.
I don't see any reason for why it shouldn't. Damage is damage, and unless it's energy damage, DR applies. If it's energy damage, resistance applies. Unless otherwise said, there shouldn't be reason to not apply DR to damage, and I don't see anything saying that DR doesn't apply.

It has to do with how damage reduction is defined.

Quote:
The numerical part of a creature's damage reduction (or DR) is the amount of damage the creature ignores from normal attacks. Usually, a certain type of weapon can overcome this reduction (see Overcoming DR). This information is separated from the damage reduction number by a slash. For example, DR 5/magic means that a creature takes 5 less points of damage from all weapons that are not magic. If a dash follows the slash, then the damage reduction is effective against any attack that does not ignore damage reduction.
Quote:
Damage Reduction (Ex or Su) A creature with this special quality ignores damage from most weapons and natural attacks. Wounds heal immediately, or the weapon bounces off harmlessly (in either case, the opponent knows the attack was ineffective). The creature takes normal damage from energy attacks (even nonmagical ones), spells, spell-like abilities, and supernatural abilities. A certain kind of weapon can sometimes damage the creature normally, as noted below.

Damage from falling is not an attack, nor is it a weapon or natural attack. Going by that, damage reduction would be useless against falling damage.


Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Save that Scribe Scroll along with Brew Potion, and Craft Wand, requires that the magic item CREATOR have direct access i.e. knowledge of the spell in question.

Not quite correct.

Quote:
Note that all items have prerequisites in their descriptions. These prerequisites must be met for the item to be created. Most of the time, they take the form of spells that must be known by the item's creator (although access through another magic item or spellcaster is allowed). The DC to create a magic item increases by +5 for each prerequisite the caster does not meet. The only exception to this is the requisite item creation feat, which is mandatory. In addition, you cannot create potions, spell-trigger, or spell-completion magic items without meeting their spell prerequisites.

The second bolded statement says those spell prerequisites can't be ignored. The first says that spell prerequisites can come an outside source.

A caster does not need to personally know the spell being scribed or brewed, but someone (or some item on hand) must.

You can argue that all the various subsections of the crafting rules say that the creator must have the spell, but that isn't entirely correct as shown by the first bolded sentence. And isn't correct at all for wondrous items, which also say the creator must know the spell (which isn't true at all - the spell prerequisite can be skipped entirely).


James Risner wrote:
8 hrs not 2 hrs as a craft session is 8 hrs for up to 1,000 gp.

Except for potions or scrolls that have a base price up to 250gp. Then it is 2 hours.


PossibleCabbage wrote:
vhok wrote:
Lead is metal
Detect Metal would certainly detect the presence of a lead box, but the spell lets you scry for specific metals, so if you were looking for platinum and there was something made of platinum inside of a lead box, would detect metal be able to find it?

Only specific divination spells are scrying spells. Detect metal is not one of them. Lead has no blocking effect.


Plausible Pseudonym wrote:
Agreed with Rysky, I don't think there's a generic "lead stops divination" rule, just specific call outs in specific spells.

There is, but it only applies to Divination [scrying] spells, not all divination spells.

Quote:

Scrying: A scrying spell creates an invisible magical sensor that sends you information. Unless noted otherwise, the sensor has the same powers of sensory acuity that you possess. This level of acuity includes any spells or effects that target you, but not spells or effects that emanate from you. The sensor, however, is treated as a separate, independent sensory organ of yours, and thus functions normally even if you have been blinded or deafened, or otherwise suffered sensory impairment.

A creature can notice the sensor by making a Perception check with a DC 20 + the spell level. The sensor can be dispelled as if it were an active spell.

Lead sheeting or magical protection blocks a scrying spell, and you sense that the spell is blocked.


The monk's slow fall ability can eventually negate any amount of falling damage, provided you are within arms reach of a wall.

The rogue talent Expert Leaper doubles the distance you can ignore with a successful Acrobatics check to 20 feet.


Snowlilly wrote:
The attuned metal fork is a focus(F), not a material component(M), It is not included in a spell component pouch. Eschew Component does not remove the need to carry tuning forks.

The first half of that is flat out wrong. Non-costly focuses are included in the spell component pouch.

Quote:
Spell Component Pouch: A spellcaster with a spell component pouch is assumed to have all the material components and focuses needed for spellcasting, except for those components that have a specific cost, divine focuses, and focuses that wouldn't fit in a pouch.

As for the second half, neither I nor anyone else ever said anything about Eschew Materials getting rid of the need for the forks, so I have no idea why you bothered to bring it up.


The chain attacks aren't weapons or natural weapons. They come from the kyton's Dancing Chains ability. That allows 4 attacks as a standard action. Increasing the kytons number of attacks won't change this at all.

If the kyton instead attacked normally, it would only get 2 attacks as a full attack (from its +8/+3 BAB) instead of 4 as a standard action. You can work out additional attacks from a higher BAB or other abilities from there.


Plausible Pseudonym wrote:
There are zero published methods to cut a silver cord, and it (apparently) lets you enter any plane at any point you want. Plane Shift requires you to carry an appropriate focus for every destination plane.

With no listed cost, all those attuned metal forks are included in a spell component pouch.


There are two possible meanings for the word humanoid.

The first is the actual definition. Having human characteristics or form, resembling human beings. Human beings don't have wings, so any creature with wings would be non-humanoid. Your armor costs more.

The second possible meaning is the Humanoid type. If you have the Dragon type, you are not Humanoid. Your armor costs more.

The table dates back to 3.X D&D where, as far as I know, there never were any Larger or larger creatures of the Humanoid type (giants were their own type, not a subtype). That would make half that column unnecessary. This seems to be one of the instances where "humanoid" is referring to the actual definition of human-like form, and not creature type. Whether or not the same holds true for Pathfinder can be debated.

Either way it goes, half-dragons are non-humanoid and must pay more for armor.


Bob Boodookins wrote:

A half dragon changes its type from say Humanoid to Dragon, so therefore a half dragon attempting to wear armor is no longer a humanoid and has to pay the 2x cost right?

Cause it is now a non-humanoid cost to the armor?

Correct. It is kind of hard to fit wings into suit of armor made for a human.


Quote:
Entwined Serpent just says "At will, the wielder can use the staff to cast magic missile". Is there a footnote somewhere that says all magic items require a command word? Where would I find that?

If the item doesn't say anything about activation, it defaults to a command-word activation.

Quote:
Command Word: If no activation method is suggested either in the magic item description or by the nature of the item, assume that a command word is needed to activate it. Command word activation means that a character speaks the word and the item activates. No other special knowledge is needed.

Nothing about the staff says or suggests any other activation type, so it is a command word activation.

Note that "at will" is not a method of activation. It just means it can be used an unlimited number of times per day.


Alderic wrote:

I always wondered what happened with +2 Bracers (with some extra abilities on them) worn with a magical armor that gave a +2 bonus as well, along with other abilities.

Since the AC bonus is the same, which one is going to work ?

By RAW, both still function normally. Except the armor bonuses don't stack. Only if one source grants a higher armor bonus does the other shut off entirely.


ElGinOfMalar wrote:

Full disclosure, my buddy is smoking crack. Here is his argument that he feels you are not addressing.

Bob doesnt know Joe is his foe, and does not know he is in his AOE. Can you respond to this.

Also a third scenario. Joe and Bob are invisible again. Bob is mad and decides to blow off steam by firing a fireball off in a seemingly empty field. Unbeknownst to Bob, Joe is in said field and is hit. Results?

Quote:
The spell ends if the subject attacks any creature.

Any creature, not just foes. The next two lines:

Quote:
For purposes of this spell, an attack includes any spell targeting a foe or whose area or effect includes a foe. Exactly who is a foe depends on the invisible character's perceptions.

Those lines don't change anything about attacking a creature. They state that certain things that aren't attacks still count as attacks for the purpose of ending invisibility, like dispel magic. Note that it says attacks include, but never says attacks are limited to, those conditions.

If you attack any creature, friend or foe, invisibility ends.


Quote:
would bracers of armor that just have special abilities like forification stack with mage armor though?

Bracers of armor can't just have special abilities. They must also have at least a +1 armor bonus first, the same as regular magic armor.

Quote:
Bracers of armor must have at least a +1 armor bonus to grant an armor special ability.

If any other source of armor provides an armor bonus greater than the bracers, all of the bracers magic shuts off, special abilities included.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Why are all elves proficient in bows and swords?
Why do all dwarves, even those raised by non-dwarves, receive special training against giants?
Why does the arcane archer prestige class only work with bows, and not crossbows?

Because that is just the way some things are.

As for learning Druidic, that is already possible in the rules. Absolutely nothing puts a limit on what languages can be learned by putting ranks into Linguistics. It is even listed in the skill. The notation in parenthesis is only the common speakers of that language (in this case, druids only). That is not a limitation, just the common speakers.

Quote:
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.

Non-druids that know druidic are possible, just aren't typical.


Too late to edit my previous post, so:

Edit: I did just notice that rangers don't have will, but do have fortitude and reflex. That does make them an exception to the general guideline in one way (they don't have will despite being a magical-type class), but still fit the guideline in the other way (they are a combo class, and so have 2 good saves).

Every rule or guideline can have exceptions.


Quote:
You must make choices about whom a spell is to affect or where an effect is to originate, depending on a spell's type. The next entry in a spell description defines the spell's target (or targets), its effect, or its area, as appropriate.

Wall of fire is not an Area spell, it is an Effect spell. You'll note that the description of Effect spells include some spells with an area as well (like fog clouds). Not all spells that affect an area are Area spells, just like not everything that causes instant death is a Death effect.

As for aiming Effect spells:

Quote:
You must designate the location where these things are to appear, either by seeing it or defining it. Range determines how far away an effect can appear, but if the effect is mobile, after it appears it can move regardless of the spell's range.

And what is required to designate the location? Line of effect.

Quote:
You must have a clear line of effect to any target that you cast a spell on or to any space in which you wish to create an effect. You must have a clear line of effect to the point of origin of any spell you cast.

In order to designate a specific location as the location of a wall of fire you must have line of effect to each location.


Nothing says you only need line of effect to a single location. Unless that location is designated as the origin of the spell, like for all area spells.

Quote:

Line of Effect: A line of effect is a straight, unblocked path that indicates what a spell can affect. A line of effect is canceled by a solid barrier. It's like line of sight for ranged weapons, except that it's not blocked by fog, darkness, and other factors that limit normal sight.

You must have a clear line of effect to any target that you cast a spell on or to any space in which you wish to create an effect. You must have a clear line of effect to the point of origin of any spell you cast.

Note that there are three separate things there (though 1 and 3 effectively say the same thing).

1) Line of effect to the target you cast the spell on.
2) Line of effect to any space you wish to create an effect.
3) Line of effect to the point of origin of the spell.

Wall of fire doesn't have a point of origin, so #1 and #3 are disregarded. That leaves #2 - line of effect to any space the spell occupies.

To create a wall of fire or similar effect, you must have a line of effect to the chosen area. If you don't have line of effect to that space, you can't create the wall there.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
John Lynch 106 wrote:
What's the justification with paladin's and rangers getting 2 good saves and fighter's only getting 1? Has this design choice ever been explained?

In general, warrior types are good at either fortitude or reflex saves. Mystical/magical types are good at will saves. A combination character that combines traits of both warrior and mystical/caster would therefore be good at will saves, and either fortitude or reflex saves.

Just looking at the core rulebook classes, this holds true. Barbarians, fighters, and rogues are pure warrior types. They have 1 good save (fortitude or reflex).

Bards (magical warrior-poets), clerics (warrior priests, heavier on the priest), druids (shapeshifting warrior nature priests), monks (mystical warriors), paladins (warrior priests, heavier on the warrior part), and rangers (magical nature warriors) are all combo classes. They all have good Will and either fortitude or reflex saves.

Sorcerers and wizards are pure magical classes. They only have good will saves.

1 to 50 of 2,828 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2016 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.