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

1,793 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


1 to 50 of 96 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
DragonMunchie wrote:
I have a question on behalf of a fledgling DM - Can you slap the half-fiend template on a demon, devil, or other type of fiend as a sort of advancement?This would probably be in addition to increasing the creatures hit dice.

Yes you can.

For that matter, you can add the Half-Dragon template to dragons to create a Half-Black Dragon White Dragon (a grey dragon? or a dalmatian dragon?), or use the Half-Celestial template to model the offspring of a Solar and Planatar angel couple.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mike Johnson 320 wrote:

I have a Headband +6 and Another Item giving me Int +4

Both have different skills attached to them.
Question is can I wear both Items and get the skills from both items.
I know I only get the +6 once to Int score. But the magic of the other item doesn't shut off. does it still give the skill bonus?

The bonus skill ranks you are getting are because of the boosted intelligence. Since the second item isn't boosting your intelligence any more, you should not get the skill ranks that item grants.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Quote:
It does make me sad that the DMG won't be out until November 2014. I wish they would just release the 3 core books all at the same time, not 1-3 months apart.

Hey, it could be worse. For 1st edition AD&D, the Monster Manual was released in 1977, the Players Handbook in 1978, and the Dungeon Masters Guide in 1979.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Enpeze wrote:
the layout of the basic pdf is ok, but not really phantastic. Even the simplest Pathfinder books have a more professional layout. What is really annoying that in my copy there was no index and no table of contents which page numbers.

This may change. The current Basic PDF is not the final version. They still have material from the Monster Manual and Dungeon Masters Guide to add to it. After that, they may include an index/table of contents.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

5e is still similar enough that conversion can be done relatively easily. No need for an "official" conversion.

Besides that, its generally not a good business model to actively support your competition in the market.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Darksol the Painbringer wrote:
Assuming you have Natural Spell, you could use this on yourself, but enjoy being squishy...

Won't work. Polymorph effects do not change your creature type, and Pup Shape only works on animals and magical beasts.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Paul Murray wrote:

Is hovering a move action? Does this mean that you cannot take a full-round attack while flying? It makes sense, I suppose, and explains why dragons land on the ground to fight adventurers. It creates a bit of a quandry for air elementals, though, who are always flying. But then again, they don't use wings. But neither to PCs using the fly spell.

What I'm asking is: can a PC using a fly spell just sit there hovering in midair and make full-round attacks as though they were standing on the ground?

Most (if not all) skills contain a section detailing what kind of action is required to use the skill. For Fly:

Quote:
Action: None. A Fly check doesn't require an action; it is made as part of another action or as a reaction to a situation.

So yes, you can hover and make a full attack.

Quote:
You can "turn more than 45° by spending 5' of movement", and "Turn 180° by spending 10 feet of movement". 180 is greater than 45 - why can't you just spend the 5'? Is there some errata to the effect that 5' will buy you more than 45° but only up to 90° or 135° or something?

There doesn't need to be errata. If you turn more than 45 degrees, you spend 5 feet of movement. If you turn 180 degrees, you spend 10' of movement.

Quote:
When you sacrifice 5' of movement to turn, do we assume that this 5' does not count towards the requirement to move at least half your movement to stray aloft? I suppose so, otherwise you could hover by just spinning in place.

Correct. You are sacrificing movement, not actually moving. Only actual movement counts.

Quote:
The fly spell states that it "requires no more concentration than walking". I read this as "it requires no more concentration to fly than a creature with a fly speed needs". That is, you still need to make fly checks when you are flying with a spell.

Correct. But note you only need to make Fly checks when performing a complex maneuver. Regular movement and gentle turns (less than 45 degrees) do not require checks.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Halfway-Hagan wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
Legend lore is a 4th level spell for a bard, so a bard could indeed make a wand of legend lore, and a wizard or sorcerer (or anyone else with legend lore on their spell list, regardless of where that spell appears) could use that wand.

What about a 1st level ranger who techincally doesnt have the spell class feature yet and thus has no spells? Could he use a wand (without a UMD check) with say Cure light wounds before 4rth level when he not only acquires the spell but the spell class feature?

First of all, this thread died about four years ago. Please check the date of the last post (or couple of posts) before posting.

Second, yes. Wands are Spell Trigger items:

Quote:
Spell Trigger: Spell trigger activation is similar to spell completion, but it's even simpler. No gestures or spell finishing is needed, just a special knowledge of spellcasting that an appropriate character would know, and a single word that must be spoken. Spell trigger items can be used by anyone whose class can cast the corresponding spell. This is the case even for a character who can't actually cast spells, such as a 3rd-level paladin. The user must still determine what spell is stored in the item before she can activate it. Activating a spell trigger item is a standard action and does not provoke attacks of opportunity.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Vincent The Dark wrote:
It also says "Armor bonus x 5" which I don't understand.

Armor has a number of hit points equal to whatever its armor bonus is multiplied by 5. So, since full plate has an armor bonus of +9, it has (9x5=) 45 hit points. Leather armor has an armor bonus of +2, and so has (2x5=) 10 hit points.

Armor hardness varies by material. Padded armor would have Hardness 0, leather/hide armors have Hardness 2, and metal armors have Hardness 10 (15 for mithral, 20 for adamantine).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bob of Westgate wrote:
I guess the question is, with Pathfinder, why would you want to play 5E at all?

With 5e, why would you want to play Pathfinder at all?

Some of us believe 5e is easier to play, and we like that. Some of us like the lower numbers of 5e during play, letting monsters stay relevant longer, and letting us actually stand a chance when fighting monsters much more powerful than the characters.
Some people like the ability score cap, and don't like halflings capable of bench pressing tanks running around.
Some people don't like having to determine where each individual skill point goes.
Some people like the idea that magic items can be entirely optional.
Some people like the idea that feats are entirely optional.
Some people like the idea that there are no multitude of + or -2 modifiers thrown around everywhere, and like the idea of the Advantage/Disadvantage system.
Some people like the idea of wizards running around casting spells in full plate (assuming they are proficient with it) with no penalty.
Some like the idea of combat cantrips that stay relevant throughout your adventuring career, instead of being stuck with a pitiful 1d4 damage for 20 levels.

Asking someone why 5e when Pathfinder is available is like asking why someones favorite color is blue when red exists, or why someones favorite flavor of icecream is strawberry when chocolate exists. There is no right or wrong answer. The system you want to use is just personal preference. Some prefer Pathfinder, some prefer 5e.

Personally, I just don't like the 3.X/PF rules system. Modifiers to rolls get way too high. I don't like how magic items are pretty much required, or that the game assumes a combat grid is being used. I don't like how the numbers break down at middle and higher levels. I don't like how long it takes to make a character, especially a higher level one, having to spend all of those skill points and choose those feats.

While 5e does still have its problems, I just like it more than Pathfinder or 3.5 D&D. But the systems are close enough I can convert what I do like from Pathfinder to 5e easily enough.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Is it evil to kill a human and drink his blood? Then it is evil to kill a dragon and drink its blood.

Is it evil to skin a human and make armor/clothes from his skin? Then it is evil to do the same to a dragon.

Dragons are sentient beings too, just like elves, humans, dwarves, etc. Yet they are consistently an exception to what is acceptable for someone to do. Nobody blinks twice at someone walking around in dragonhide armor. But should that person be walking around in human-leather armor, everyone is suddenly offended.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
prototype00 wrote:

You are certainly denied dex, but I wonder if you are flat footed as you are aware of potentially hostile individuals in the area.

prototype00

You can be award of enemies in the area and still be flatfooted. For example, when you are in the first wound of combat and you haven't taken your turn yet, you are considered flatfooted.

Though nothing about being attacked by an invisible enemy makes you flatfooted. You just lose your Dexterity modifier to your AC. As far as I know, the only things that make you flatfooted are certain uses of the Acrobatics skill and not having acted yet in the first round of combat.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

Magic isn't everywhere because most players want a medieval world. You can try to justify it some way in-game, but it is really an out-of-game situation.

There really is no in-game reason for it. Most fantasy worlds are just stagnant.

The only real explanation I can see that would work in-game is that some over-deity (who views even the strongest of the normal gods as nothing more than little playthings) wants things to stay the way they are. How else can not only the material plane stay the same, but every other plane in existence?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

If something requires an attack roll, by default it is against the targets normal AC. You only roll against the targets touch AC when it specifically says to.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

The fighter is a better melee combatant than the wizard. He has his proficiency bonus (+2 with every weapon in basic, as there are no exotic weapons)and a higher Strength score than the wizard (16, +3 modifier). And I'm sure there will be feats that improve it further. So thats at least a +5 bonus on his attack roll.

The wizard, on the other hand, only adds his proficiency bonus to a handful of weapons (+2), and most likely a 10 strength (+0 modifier). Its unlikely for the wizard to have any feats to improve this, so a total of +2. Should he use the same weapon as the fighter (not a dagger or quarterstaff), then this drops to +0.

Last I checked, a +5 is bigger than a +2. And it applies to every melee weapon in Basic, as opposed to only a dagger and/or quarterstaff.

The wizard needs to hit things with his spells. And as far as I can tell, touch attacks are gone. When attacking with a spell, the wizards attack bonus is +5. The same as a fighter attacking with a weapon. The wizard is as good at hitting things as the fighter. Just in different ways. The fighter is good at hitting with weapons. The wizard is good at hitting with spells.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Humans are Medium size. That gives them a minimum height of 4 feet, and a maximum of 8 feet. If you want humans smaller then that, they need to be Small size, and you need to design a new Small Human race.

Racial stats are not meant to cover all possible members of that race, but simply the average member. If you want a smaller version, make a racial trait or something.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Alexander Augunas wrote:

All Intelligence increases past 1st level don't add to the number of languages you know, not just a headband of vast intelligence.

The only way to get bonus languages out of a headband of vast intelligence is to set your headband's associated skill to Linguistics: then you get one bonus language per character level you possess from the skill ranks that the headband bestows upon you.

Now, I don't recall if the rules state whether those languages are fixed or whether you can choose new ones every time you put on the headband. Personally, I'd house rule it as the former, just for simplicity.

Well, if you follow the rulings in the FAQ, they do. As it is written in the book, you don't.

Quote:

Intelligence: If my Intelligence modifier increases, can I select another bonus language?

Yes. For example, if your Int is 13 and you reach level 4 and apply your ability score increase to Int, this increases your Int bonus from +1 to +2, which grants you another bonus language.
Technically, Int-enhancing items such as a headband of vast intelligence should grant a specific language (in the same way they do for skill ranks).


6 people marked this as a favorite.

By default (That is, the Core Rulebook), divine casters do not require a deity.

Certain campaign settings change that, like Golarion and Forgotten Realms. In those settings, a divine spellcaster must choose a patron deity.

And any attempt to bring real-world religion into the game should be avoided at all costs. That is just begging to start trouble.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Your sorcerer starts out at 7th level, but looses a level due to the Reincarnate (3.5 reincarnate, Pathfinder Reincarnate works differently), so is now a 6th level sorcerer. The bugbear hit dice and level adjustment are then added to that. So you would now have 6 levels of Sorcerer, 3 racial hit dice, and a +1 level adjustment, making you a 10th level character.

In Pathfinder, if your 7th level character was Reincarnated into a Bugbear, you would still be a 7th level sorcerer with the bugbear stuff added on top. You would also have 2 negative levels, and so take a -2 penalty on all ability checks, attack rolls, combat maneuver checks, Combat Maneuver Defense, saving throws, and skill checks, as well as loosing 10 hit points from your maximum amount. You are also treated as 2 levels lower for level-depending abilities (such as spellcasting). These penalties can be removed with a Restoration spell or similar.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

A Ring of Wizardry I doubles the number of 1st level spells you can prepare (base spells only, not counting bonus spells), and costs 20,000.

Since wizards ultimately only have 4 spell slots per spell level, you could figure that granting one extra 1st level spell slot costs 1/4 of 20,000 gp, or 5000 gp.

Following that, an extra 2nd level spell could cost 10,000 gp. An extra 3rd level spell would cost 17,500 gp and an extra 4th level spell would cost 25,000 gp.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
leo1925 wrote:
Not to mention that without access to magical healing you are going to end up doing two combats (3 at the very most) and then go rest for a week (at first levles) or for a few months (at higher levels).

No where near a few months. Remember that a character heals their level in hit points per day of rest. Complete bed rest doubles that.

So consider the very lucky barbarian who rolled maximum on all 20 of his d12 hit dice. That is 240 hp. Lets say a Con mod of +5, for an additional 100 hitpoints, bringing the total up to 340. If brought all the way down to 0 HP, then that would take (340 divided by 20) 17 days to heal, with the barbarian still adventuring during that time. If he took complete bed rest, thats only (340 divided by 40) 9 days.

And remember, that is someone with the largest hit die size available, who rolled maximum on all dice. With more average numbers, the healing time drops to 12 days (with adventuring) and 6 days (complete rest).

OH, and then there is the Heal skill. A successful DC 15 check (for long-term care) lets the patient heal double the normal amount for they day (So 4x the characters level with complete bed rest.) You just can't provide this care to yourself, but the healer can provide it to up to 6 other people. That brings our mighty barbarian down to 9 days of healing with adventuring, or 4 days with complete bed rest. Again, the average 20th level barbarian would reduce those numbers to 6 days while adventuring, or 3 days of bed rest.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Acid Arrow doesn't create an actual arrow any more than Lightning Bolt creates a crossbow bolt, or Magic Missile creates a cruise missile or a Sidewinder.

The title is just descriptive.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Cranky Dog wrote:

Incidentally, Chaotic and Evil Outsider Bane are not valid bane enchantments.

It has to be a specific creature subtype (demon, demodand, qlippoth are all different CE outsider subtypes) to be a legitimate bane enchantment.

We have Holy and Axiomatic to deal with alignments.

Incorrect. Bane just requires to to chose a subtype.

Quote:
Evil Subtype: This subtype is usually applied to outsiders native to the evil-aligned outer planes. Evil outsiders are also called fiends. Most creatures that have this subtype also have evil alignments; however, if their alignments change, they still retain the subtype. Any effect that depends on alignment affects a creature with this subtype as if the creature has an evil alignment, no matter what its alignment actually is. The creature also suffers effects according to its actual alignment. A creature with the evil subtype overcomes damage reduction as if its natural weapons and any weapons it wields are evil-aligned (see Damage Reduction, page 299).

Evil, Good, Law, and Chaos are all subtypes.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

By RAW, the only penalty wielding a non-proficient weapon gives is you a -4 penalty on attack rolls. Everything else remains unchanged.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
DrDeth wrote:
I'd say a Perception roll before you get that Spellcraft roll would not be inappropriate.

Actually, it probably is inappropriate. The Spellcraft check already includes the Perception modifiers.

Quote:
Identifying a spell as it is being cast requires no action, but you must be able to clearly see the spell as it is being cast, and this incurs the same penalties as a Perception skill check due to distance, poor conditions, and other factors.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Common sense says that a normal lion can not wield a normal sword. You have to use common sense when reading the rules - its simply impossible to include every single little thing in the rules.

Though it should be possible to make certain weapons for animals. I know that in some rooster fights, a razor blade can be attached to its leg to inflict greater injuries on its opponent.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

You get your sneak attack damage on every attack that qualifies. So if you are using Greater Invisibility, or are flanking your target, you get to add sneak attack damage on every attack you make.

Rogue class, Sneak Attack description wrote:
The rogue's attack deals extra damage anytime her target would be denied a Dexterity bonus to AC (whether the target actually has a Dexterity bonus or not), or when the rogue flanks her target. This extra damage is 1d6 at 1st level, and increases by 1d6 every two rogue levels thereafter. Should the rogue score a critical hit with a sneak attack, this extra damage is not multiplied. Ranged attacks can count as sneak attacks only if the target is within 30 feet.

The description of sneak attack does not say you can only get the extra damage once per round, it specifically says you get it anytime you meet the requirements. If you meet the requirements on 2 attacks in a round, both get the extra damage.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Matthias_DM wrote:

"15 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Answered in the errata."

When and where was this answered in the errata??

"Answered in the Errata" or FAQ or whatever doesn't always mean that. It could of very well just been marked that way to clear it off their list of FAQ requests.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Granted, this is from 3.5, but its the full paragraph of the rules.

Quote:
If you miss the target (whether aiming at a creature or a grid intersection), roll 1d8. This determines the misdirection of the throw, with 1 being straight back at you and 2 through 8 counting clockwise around the grid intersection or target creature. Then, count a number of squares in the indicated direction equal to the range increment of the throw. So, if you miss on a throw out to two range increments and roll a 1 to determine the misdirection of the throw, the splash weapon lands on the intersection that is 2 squares away from the target in the direction toward you. See the accompanying diagram.

It specifically says 2 range increments results in a 2 square distance when you miss. It doesn't say anything about the 2 squares being because the weapons range increment is 10 feet (2 squares), but because it was thrown 2 increments.

Now the full text wasn't made Open Content, so couldn't of been used in Pathfinder, but thats the original intention. The number of squares you count is equal to the number of range increments that you threw the weapon, not the same distance as the weapons range increment.

Of course, Pathfinder could of changed that like they did other things.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Reecy wrote:

Also even By rules of taking 10 and 20... They are considering you had failures before you finally Succeed... So anything that has a consequence for failure would not be allowed to take 10 or 20...

Incorrect. Taking 10 does not assume you fail many times before you succeed. Only Taking 20 does that. Furthermore, a consequence for failure only prevents Take 20 - Take 10 has no such limitation.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Aeric Blackberry wrote:

Lightning bow is a special ittem (a named one). You cannot ad further abilities to a special object. They have a fixed set of abilities that cannot be changed and they have a fixed price. Either you like as they are or you don't.

Perhaps for that reason they have lesser prices....

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.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Quote:
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.

Quote:
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.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

There are no limits on the number of potions you can have effecting you at any one time (or spell effects, for that matter). Just a limit of drinking 1 per round (as its a standard action, and you only get one of those per round).


1 person marked this as a favorite.

You don't call him on it. Thats not your responsibility. Tell your Game Master. Its his game, its his job and responsibility, let him deal with it.

Just tell the GM what you have seen. Let him make decide what to do.

(If you are the GM, just tell the player to stop. Preferably away from the entire group so as not to make a big deal out of it.)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

When a monster says it "casts spells as a Xth level" whatever, it means exactly that. They cast spells as that level of caster. They get no other benefits from that class at all, just the spellcasting. That means monsters that cast as sorcerers don't have a Bloodline and monsters that cast as clerics don't get Channel Energy. They only get that classes spellcasting ability.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

And you don't have to wear the belt for 24 hours to get the additional hit points. You gain those immediately upon wearing the belt.

Quote:
Constitution: Temporary increases to your Constitution score give you a bonus on your Fortitude saving throws. In addition, multiply your total Hit Dice by this bonus and add that amount to your current and total hit points. When the bonus ends, remove this total from your current and total hit points.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Quote:
Touch Spells and Holding the Charge: In most cases, if you don't discharge a touch spell on the round you cast it, you can hold the charge (postpone the discharge of the spell) indefinitely. You can make touch attacks round after round until the spell is discharged. If you cast another spell, the touch spell dissipates.

You can only hold the charge on a single spell. Trying to cast another spell while you are holding the charge automatically ends the first spell.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

How far is a "long distance?"

The Whispering Wind spell has a range of 1 mile/level, but only allows up to 25 words.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

The first step to pricing a custom magic item is to always compare with existing items first.

A constant Mage Armor effect (+4 AC) is the same as Bracers of Armor +4, and must therefore cost the same. So 16,000gp.

The Shield effect is equivalent to +2 bracers, so 8,000gp at least. Thats not including the protection from Magic Missiles part.

And don't forget the additional cost modifier for multiple powers in an item. The most expensive ability cost remains unchanged, but each additional ability has its cost increased by 50%. So the Shield effect actually costs at least 12,000gp. The Mage Armor and Shield effect combined cost 28,000gp, not the 4000gp like the formulas would suggest.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

Everything that is not a PC should be under control of the DM. That includes animal companions.

Animal companions actually require Handle Animal checks to get them to do what you want. Thats why druids get a +4 bonus on Handle Animal checks when dealing with their companion.

Quote:
Link (Ex): A druid can handle her animal companion as a free action, or push it as a move action, even if she doesn't have any ranks in the Handle Animal skill. The druid gains a +4 circumstance bonus on all wild empathy checks and Handle Animal checks made regarding an animal companion.

If an animal companion was under control of the druid, and so does whatever the druid wants, then there would be no need for that. If the check is required, then there is at least a chance of failure, and the companion not obeying the character and doing what it wants (what the DM wants it to do).


5 people marked this as a favorite.

Charisma has no real effect on beauty.

In 3.5, mind flayers had high charisma, and they had squids for heads.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

Spamming random threads would be a Chaotic behavior, yes? Sounds like something Asmodeus wouldn't like. Reporting the threads is a lawful behavior. Asmodeus should like that.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Something is only an enchantment effect if it specifically says it is an enchantment effect (or belongs to the Enchantment magic school). The mummies Despair ability is not an enchantment effect.

It is, however, a fear effect, as it specifically says its a fear effect. The bards Inspire Courage can be used against it then.

Quote:
Despair (Su) All creatures within a 30-foot radius that see a mummy must make a DC 16 Will save or be paralyzed by fear for 1d4 rounds. Whether or not the save is successful, that creature cannot be affected again by the same mummy’s despair ability for 24 hours. This is a paralysis and a mind-affecting fear affect. The save DC is Charisma-based.

Crushing Despair is an enchantment effect, as it belongs to the Enchantment school of magic. A mummies Despair effect is not an enchantment effect, as it does not belong to the enchantment school of magic, and because it doesn't specifically say it is an enchantment effect.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Quote:
Don't forget about the Ninja Gaiden game where you fight a tank with your sword!

Just a tank? Pfft. I've seen a katana cut through 30ft+ wide warships in a single strike.

Anime can't be wrong, can it? Its a Japanese weapon in a Japanese show. Surely they know what the katana is truly capable of.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Dehydrating Touch (Sp): Starting at 1st level, you can make a melee touch attack as a standard action that inflicts 1d6 points of nonlethal damage + 1 for every two sorcerer levels you possess and sickens the target for 1 round. Oozes, plants, and creatures with the aquatic or water subtypes suffer lethal damage instead. You can use this ability a number of times per day equal to 3 + your Charisma modifier.

Its not an instant kill. "Lethal damage" doesn't mean the creature automatically dies. Most weapons do lethal damage, like swords, axes, maces, etc. Normal damage is lethal damage.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Only weapons, shields, and armor must be masterwork. None of the other item creation feats require masterwork items.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Its value is dependent on your DM. Is your DM someone who like to have the party get captured a lot? Is the party wizards spellbook stolen/lost? If the DM never separates the party wizard from his spellbook, then the feat is practically worthless.

However, if the DM has no problem with having the PCs get captures, or having thieves steal the wizards spellbook, or cause the book to be lost (like the party is shipwrecked), then Spell Mastery can be worthwhile, as the wizard can still prepare (some) of his spells.

In my group, the feat was worthless. The party wizards were never separated from their spellbook.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

If you don't like how the spell component pouch works, just be glad this isn't Dungeons & Dragons. The Book of Vile Darkness contained spells that required evil artifacts, severed hands of good aligned clerics, and bones from still living children. As none of those had a cost associated with them, they were all assumed to be contained in infinite amounts in the standard spell component pouch.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ventnor wrote:

Okay, so I was looking through the Advanced Race Guide, when I realized just how dumb-sounding catfolk and ratfolk sound. I mean, sure, they look like cats and rats, but they're really the only races who seem singled out by that designation in their name.

After all, gnolls aren't called hyenafolk. There aren't ravenfolk, there are tengus. It's vanaris, not monkeyfolk. And gods help you if you call a minotaur a bullfolk.

So, why don't we have cooler names for catfolk and ratfolk, if every other animal-themed race gets a better name?

You forgot the lizardfolk (Bestiary 1).

And halflings, who are half the height of the "normal" races.
Giant eagles, who are intelligent, and probably don't see themselves as giant, but as normal.
The entire line of giant races. They probably wouldn't call themselves giants - they are normal size. Its everyone else who is abnormally tiny.

Look at the race names as what those races are commonly referred to as. The races probably have their own names for themselves. Like in Faerun, most people call them halflings. But to the halflings, who don't see themselves as half of anything, they are the Hin.

"Catfolk", "Ratfolk", and "Lizardfolk" are probably just the generic, Common name for them. Each race probably has its own name, but that is something that should be setting specific.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ciaran Barnes wrote:
Isn't this a relic from Chainmail, or possibly earlier?

It is from Chainmail, as a balancing mechanic. Numbers of cheap Undead units could easily kill the more expensive Elf units, so Elves were made immune to ghoul paralysis to compensate.

When Chainmail was made into D&D, it carried over.

1 to 50 of 96 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 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.