So I got one yes and one no, anybody else have an opinion?
Search Posts
Here’s a question that I cannot seem to find an answer to. A cleric casts a prayer spell and allies and enemies gain the benefits of the spell that are within the burst. Subsequently, a wizard casts dispel magic on the cleric and uses the targeted dispel and succeeds in dispelling the cleric’s highest spell cast which happens to be the prayer spell. What happens? Does the spell just end and all affected no longer gain the benefit or bane of the spell? Or is just the cleric affected and all others continue to be affected by the spell until its normal duration? Thank you.
Ah, I get it! It can grab an opponent of appropriate size, but it cannot inflict squeeze damage to anything but a small or diminutive sized creature. I would assume the huge dragon would still be able to fling a medium-sized creature as described.
So, am I reading this right: Snatch (Monster) This creature can grab other creatures with ease. Prerequisite: Size Huge or larger. Benefits: The creature can start a grapple when it hits with a claw or bite attack, as though it had the grab ability. If it grapples a creature three or more sizes smaller, it squeezes each round for automatic bite or claw damage with a successful grapple check. A snatched opponent held in the creature's mouth is not allowed a Reflex save against the creature's breath weapon, if it has one. The creature can drop a creature it has snatched as a free action or use a standard action to fling it aside. A flung creature travels 1d6 × 10 feet, and takes 1d6 points of damage per 10 feet traveled. If the creature flings a snatched opponent while flying, the opponent takes this amount or falling damage, whichever is greater. Which means a Huge dragon can only snatch a small (or smaller opponent)? Is it Large (unable to snatch), Medium (unable to snatch), Small (able to snatch) or is it Huge (unable to snatch), Large (unable to snatch), Medium (able to snatch)?
What I thought, thanks.
I thought I saw somewhere that permanent levels are dispersed if a new level is gained. Can't find or is it wishful thinking? One character has no current access to a another restoration spell and that lingering pesky permanent level still plagues him. Now that he has gained a new level, without access to a restoration spell, does the negative level still remain after he gains the new level?
We so enjoy participating in Paizocon, and having just returned from the 2012 event, I must say it was one of best experiences we had to date. I have always been impressed by the genuine affection and respect the Paizo staff show one another, it is evident they enjoy a jovial nature to one another and their hard working efforts are clearly represented by their wonderful products. It was during this year’s preview banquet that an incident occurred that I witnessed which I believe should be shared that clearly depicts the character of one of these special people. As Lisa Stevens spoke, it was obvious she loved who she was speaking about, her voice breaking and she flailed her arms to fend off the waves of emotion that attempted to overcome her, she continued to speak about her friend Jeff Alvarez, and asked him to appear; however, Jeff Alvarez was nowhere to be found. Hints from the audience, indicated that Jeff was “helping a customer” and Lisa moved on to her next agenda item. Jeff returned sometime later and he and Lisa shared a wonderful moment. I happened to be seated at one of the tables and came to understand what kept Jeff away. One of the last diners that joined our table informed us that he had been unable to get any food, either the hotel had run out or he had missed the serve time. There he sat, empty plate and more than likely quite hungry. Jeff learned about the individual and disappeared from the banquet, it was during this time that Lisa Stevens was speaking about him, a few minutes later Jeff appeared with a tray and presented the dinner guest with a hamburger and fries meal he had obtained from the hotel restaurant. The look on that guest’s face was priceless; he was so surprised, so grateful and sincerely touched by the gesture that I knew at that point this gesture of kindness could not remain anonymous. All of the Paizo staff have always been welcoming, kind and friendly each year we have attended, but Jeff continues to be exemplary in greeting my son and I each year and we enjoy that time we share in catching up. Congratulations to you Jeff on your promotion and acknowledgments, I have no doubt they are well deserved and a result of your diligent work ethic. To those in your life that have instilled your caring nature, your kindness to others and willingness to serve, it is to them I say bless you for a job well done. Julian Rodriguez
Thank you. I too favored the belief that these were actions that were done without a verbal declaration, but the subject did come up and we had a similar discussion and outcome. Thank you for the brilliant examples!
I tend to favor the consensus that silence does not negate, but clever cleric spots intrusive inquisitor before they engage in combat. Clever cleric casts a few buff spells and finally silence on self and rushes to engage intrusive inquisitor, would intrusive inquisitor be able to pronounce judgment on clever cleric? And don't get me started on pious paladin and sullen samurai.
Here is an interesting question, would silence negate the abilities of a Cavalier’s and Samurai’s challenge, an Inquisitor’s judgment, or a Paladin’s smite evil? In their written descriptions, these do seem as if a verbal declaration is made. Thoughts? Cavalier and Samurai. Challenge (Ex): Once per day, a cavalier can challenge a foe to combat.
What I am thinking too.
Another question please, regarding the Arcane Pool (Su) ability. So at 16th level the magas gains a +4 enchantment bonus. Is he able to spend one arcane pool point to make his already +2 Bastard Sword into a +4 Speed Bastard Sword, or does that cost him four arcane pool points ? Thanks.
Allow me to interject another postulation, if in the above example with the magus wielding the +2 Bastard Sword with the corrosive consumption spell cast and he confirms a critical hit with that spell. That one single attack with the corrosive consumption would deal damage of: +2 Bastard Sword (2d10+18+30 acid) correct? Corrosive consumption inflicts 1 hp of acid damage per caster level to a max of 15, so 30.
Thanks Dal Selpher and all! Have a really nasty high level magus villain in the game future and I am unfamiliar with the class and wanted some clarification before I stumbled into the inevitable combat.
And at this level the magus could forgo the speed ability and instead use 2 arcane points to make all those into melee touch attacks with Accurate Strike, correct?
So would it be more accurate to say it is: +18/+18/+13/+8 melee (1 HND): +2 Speed Bastard Sword (1d10+9/17-20/x2) and one free melee attack at: 18 melee (1 HND): +2 Speed Bastard Sword (1d10+9/17-20/x2) But regardless the spell is discharged on whichever is the first actual successful melee attack.
New question, progressing magus to 16th level and magus spends 2 arcane pool points to make his +2 Bastard Sword into a +2 Speed Bastard Sword, magus uses his spellstrike ability to cast corrosive consumption (from Ultimate Magic) would his full round attack be: +18/+18/+18/+13/+8 melee (1 HND): +2 Bastard Sword (1d10+9/17-20/x2) and corrosive consumption spell effect on one successful attack. Magus' unadjusted base attack is: +20/+15/+10 melee (1 HND): +2 Bastard Sword (1d10+9/17-20/x2)
Ah, just reread it and saw it perfectly in the spell combat description. Thank you!
Both those attacks if successful inflict normal melee damage, and the magus does get to cast another prepared spell as part of the off-hand action?
Looking at a 3rd level magus, whose base attack with associated feats is: +4 melee (1 HND): Bastard Sword (1d10+1/19-20/x2) Is this a correct example of a full round action for the class? As a full round action: Using spellstrike ability, casts corrosive touch on the weapon and resolves the attacks as follows: +1/+1 melee (1 HND): Bastard Sword (1d10+1/19-20/x2) and if any of those attacks succeed in striking the target, the target is affected once by the corrosive touch spell. Is the magus also allowed to cast a prepared magic missile at the target with his off-hand attack? Or is the spellstrike ability considered to part of the off-hand attack? Adjustments: -2 penalty for spell combat, and -1 intelligence modifier and gains a +1 circumstance bonus to combat cast defensively.
Looking at a 16th level magus, whose base attack with associated feats are: +25/+20/+15 melee (1 HND): +2 Bastard Sword (1d10+10/17-20/x2) Round 1: As swift action, spends 2 arcane points to make +2 Bastard Sword into +2 Speed Bastard Sword. Round 2: Using spellstrike, he casts corrosive consumption (Ultimate Magic). Does he get the following attacks: +25/+25/+20/+15 melee (1 HND): +2 Speed Bastard Sword (1d10+10/17-20/x2) and if any of those attacks succeed the target is affected once by the corrosive consumption spell. Alternatively, If the magus instead forgoes the speed ability in round 1 and uses the swift action to spend 2 arcane points to gain Accurate Strikes and combines the attack with his combat expertise feat (-/+4) and greater spell combat (INT modifier +5), would the attack then be: +14/+9/+4 melee TOUCH attack (1 HND): +2 Bastard Sword (1d10+10/17-20/x2) and if any of those attacks succeed the target is affected once by the corrosive consumption spell. Adjustments: -2 penalty for spell combat, -4 combat expertise, and -5 intelligence modifier and gains a +12 bonus to cast defensively.
And a regular manyshot with those same conditions would be: Regular manyshot arrow: 2d8 +6 strength bonus +6 bane enhancement +8 sacred bonus +2 luck bonus +2d6 fire +4d6 bane 2d8+22+2d6 fire+4d6 bane
Oops, forgot the flaming damage. So is this the consensus? Critical arrow: 3d8+9 strength bonus+9 bane+12 sacred bonus+3 luck bonus+1d6 fire+2d6 bane
Total damage: 4d8+12 strength bonus+12 bane+16 sacred bonus+4 luck bonus+2d6 fire+4d6 bane 4d8+44+2d6 fire+4d6 bane, plus target shaken for one round.
So is this the consensus? Critical arrow: 3d8+9 strength bonus+9 bane+12 sacred bonus+3 luck bonus+2d6 bane
Total damage: 4d8+12 strength bonus+12 bane+16 sacred bonus+4 luck bonus+4d6 bane 4d8+44+4d6 bane, plus target shaken for one round
Here’s a ponderous question, Nameless the Inquisitor confirms a critical hit using his +1 Flaming Composite Longbow: +3 STR bonus with a manyshot and has the following benefits ongoing, judgment destruction (+4 sacred bonus to damage), prayer (+1 luck bonus to damage), weapon of awe (+2 sacred bonus to damage), and finally has bane effect on (bane: +2d6 to damage). Using his normal base damage of (1d8+4+1d6 fire/x3), what is the correct damage calculation? +1 Flaming Composite Longbow: +3 STR bonus (1d8+4+1d6 fire/x3)
Thank you all, very informative.
Re Edit: Only the smart ones. And that "or the paladin rests" is subjective as no definitive time period is given - so it could be as little as allowing the paladin to catch his breath after a particularly strenuous or grueling encounter...
Thank you. Seems somewhat odd, allow me to speculate. Say at the beginning of a harrowing campaign the paladin is tracking down a werewolf and has a mid-afternoon encounter with the lycanthrope in which the paladin declares smite on it and the werewolf flees. The paladin and allies set chase, encounter other monsters and the paladin manages to use his remaining smite evils for that day. Several hours have elapsed and the group tracks and traps the werewolf in its lair, is that mid-afternoon declared smite evil still in effect? It belies logic that it should still be somehow "on".
OK, thanks. Seems we already have differing opinions as well.
If a paladin declares smite evil on an evil target and target leaves the combat for some reason and the paladin declares another smite evil on a new target, are both smite evils in continuous effect? One of my players interprets the smite evil reading as seeing the paladin as having multiple smites ongoing to different targets. I in turn read it is limited to just one target within sight. But he did pose this interesting question and I would welcome any clarification. Example: Paladin and his group encounter a vampire and a mummy along with a host of skeletons. The paladin declares smite evil on the vampire and delivers a vicious blow. Fearing its destruction, the vampire assumes gaseous form and momentarily flees to allow its fast healing to patch it up. Seeking to aid his compatriots, the paladin engages the mummy and declares his smite power against it. While still combating the mummy and the skeletons, the vampire returns to the battle. Do both smite evils continue to remain in effect? Or did the first smite evil end because the vampire was no longer in sight? Or say, if the paladin had destroyed the mummy prior to the vampire returning would the first smite continue to remain because the target was not dead, nor had the paladin rested? Smite Evil (Su): Once per day, a paladin can call out to the powers of good to aid her in her struggle against evil. As a swift action, the paladin chooses one target within sight to smite. If this target is evil, the paladin adds her Charisma bonus (if any) to her attack rolls and adds her paladin level to all damage rolls made against the target of her smite. If the target of smite evil is an outsider with the evil subtype, an evil-aligned dragon, or an undead creature, the bonus to damage on the first successful attack increases to 2 points of damage per level the paladin possesses. Regardless of the target, smite evil attacks automatically bypass any DR the creature might possess. In addition, while smite evil is in effect, the paladin gains a deflection bonus equal to her Charisma modifier (if any) to her AC against attacks made by the target of the smite. If the paladin targets a creature that is not evil, the smite is wasted with no effect. The smite evil effect remains until the target of the smite is dead or the next time the paladin rests and regains her uses of this ability. Thank you.
Perhaps this has been previously addressed, but I was unable to find an official clarification and believe I have downloaded the most recent errata corrected book, but still need to determine what is considered official and correct. Need clarification on which DC is the correct one, on page 112 of the Pathfinder Core Rule Book it states that the Spellcraft check is DC 10 plus the caster level. On page 548 of the Pathfinder Core Rule Book it states the Spellcraft is DC 5 plus the caster level. Which is the correct DC?
Cosmo, thanks! Good seeing you - dashing moustache! J.
Obtained my copy at Paizocon, upon returning I discovered that it is damaged in a couple of places. The pages 147 and 148 are folded in on themselves and cannot be read without ripping them. This also occurs in pages 157 and 158. Let me know how you wish to proceed. Thank you.
Please forward me a copy as well. Thank you. yohox2@sbcglobal.net
Wow. And let us not forget, since Fortitude is CON-based, those DC's are going to be very hard to make when any poison-based CON damaging monster is encountered. If in the example provided, the paladin's CON is reduced by say average 6, his base +8 Fortitude is now +5 and needs a 14 or better to avoid the poison. If he is hit anytime thereafter, an increased DC of 21 - seems almost unattainable - needing two consecutive 16 rolls! Truly Nasty.
Hmmm. After some additional reading and perusal of other gamers here, the consensus is as such: We are wondering if the damage is not calculated as such: On round 1, the paladin is stung by the wyvern. This round and for the next six rounds he must succeed on a Fortitude Save DC 17. If he fails, then he must succeed on rounds 2, 3 or 3, 4 or 4, 5 or 5, 6 to prevent the poison for harming him. If he fails all these Fortitude saves then he suffers 1d4 CON damage. Now if he is stung again in any round before the 6th, the Fortitude save increases to 19 and the effect endures for an additional three rounds. Failing to make two consecutive Fortitude saves for the entire confrontation would result in a TOTAL OF 2d4 CON loss at which point the poison coursing through his body is rendered inert. Or does the paladin take a 1d4 CON loss for each failed Fortitude save? At which point the paladin is in deep trouble as he could very well lose points to his Fortitude saves for the CON loss. Since a wyvern’s primary attack is its stinger, one wonders how easily any character could fall to such a beast. Say the wyvern uses it stinger each round for the 12 round battle and hits half of the time, would the poison be in effect for the next 21 rounds? And does the +2 increase stack? Is the paladin expected to make two consecutive Fortitude saves in the 23 to 27 range? Poison (Ex) Sting—injury; save DC 17; frequency 1/round for 6 rounds; effect 1d4 Constitution damage; cure 2 consecutive saves. We agree on this point: For this poison to end, you must save 2 consecutive times. If you do, the poison effect ends - there's no more saves to make. Please chime in. Thank you. J.
Let me see if I understand the Pathfinder version of poison effects. A 5th level paladin is in the scrap of his life with a wyvern. Their battle endures for 12 rounds before the wyvern is dispatched, on the first and sixth round of the battle the paladin is stung. The paladin needs to succeed on 2 consecutive Fortitude saves to “cure” the effect and no longer suffer from additional poison damage. On round one of the battle, the paladin needs to make a DC 17 Fortitude, but fails – upon that failure – the paladin immediately suffers the effect and loses 1d4 CON points, correct? Additionally, the paladin needs to continue to save each round for the next 5 rounds and if he succeeds in making two consecutive Fortitude saves he no longer suffers any additional poison damage, but the initial damage remains. On round sixth of the battle, he is successfully stung again and now needs to make three additional Fortitude saves with a DC of 19 in order to prevent further CON damage. Say he succeeds on round 7 and 8 he suffers no additional CON damage - only the initial CON damage from the round one sting and Fortitude failure, yes? If the paladin fails all his Fortitude saves for the entire nine rounds he has suffered a total of 2d4 CON points and can recuperate them either daily or by magical means, correct? He does not suffer 1d4 CON for each Fortitude failure, only 1d4 CON for each frequency in this case 6 rounds, nine for the double sting, yes? Assuming he has a beginning +8 Fortitude, but is reduced by 4 to his CON due to wyvern poison he makes his next Fortitude save a +6. As he has a +10 Heal check, he would be able to treat the poison to himself to gain a +4 on his next Fortitude save each round he succeeds on the heal check in order to gain a +4 competence bonus. And once he succeeds on two consecutive Fortitude saves, he no longer fears further wyvern poison injury, yes? Treat Poison: To treat poison means to tend to a single character who has been poisoned and who is going to take more damage from the poison (or suffer some other effect). Every time the poisoned character makes a saving throw against the poison, you make a Heal check. If your Heal check exceeds the DC of the poison, the character receives a +4 competence bonus on his saving throw against the poison. Thanks all!
Same set-up, character deals additional 2d6 points of sneak damage, confirms critical with same: 2d8+8+3d6(1d6 fire and 2d6 sneak attack) Correct?
From PFRPG; page 179 Multiplying Damage:
Note:
Exception:
Which damage would a character with a +3 strength bonus that is using a flaming longsword and confirms a critical hit inflict: +1 Flaming Longsword (1d8+4+1d6 fire/19-20/x2) A. 2d8+8+2d6 fire
Thank you.
Attended Paizocon and truly had a wonderful time. Was great meeting all the talented Paizo staff, Erik (spelled it correctly), Joshua, Jeff, Cosmo, Chris and especially enjoyed my chat with gregarious Lisa Stevens. My son and I, gamed, painted minis, and sat in on conferences with Wolfgang Baur, Sean K, Reynolds and also a real special thanks to James Jacobs for signing the fiendish T-Rex! The Previews Banquet was a wonderful event, a lot of fun – the trivia contest a hoot, our table “Hot Cross Buns” contributed a memorable answer: not the RED Revolution, but aptly suggested as “Dance, Dance”. We’ll get them next year guys! I was able to peruse Hugo Solis’ amazing portfolio, what a talented artist. Thanks for sharing! And thanks for showcasing the Combat Tiers, truly a pleasure doing business with Paizo. We had a great four days, and we will make plans to make Paizocon an annual event we will not miss. Thanks to everyone that really put in the effort to make a memorable, fun and well organized event. J.
|