Lej's page

This thread got me interested so I did some calculations comparing Power Attack with Furious Focus and Exacting Strike.

I think some people are underestimating Power Attack with Furious Focus. Looks like a solid choice from level 10 and up. But it is easy to get the calculations wrong, so maybe I'm missing something.

Also, as resistances increase, Power Attack becomes even better.

The big downside is having to spend two feats.

Assumptions:
- Max strength boosts (+4 Level 1, +5 Level 10 , +6 Level 20)
- Fighter proficiency (Expert Level 1, Master Level 5, Legendary Level 13) - Fighter critical specialization (Level 5)
- Fighter (greater) weapon specialization
- Fundamental weapon runes on their respective levels
- Greatpick (1d10, Fatal 1d12)
- Power Attack (Level 1) and Furious Focus (Level 6)
- Exacting Strike (Level 1)
- MAP -5
- AC (Moderate for level, Table 2–5: Armor Class)

Damage comparison graphs:
No Resistance
Minimum Resistance, Table 2–8: Resistances and Weaknesses
Maximum Resistance, Table 2–8: Resistances and Weaknesses

I'm trying to understand how Righteous Might works as written, and if the special attack granted by it is a Strike or not.

Righteous Might has the Polymorph trait which means that (unless GM thinks otherwise):

• You are only affected by circumstance bonuses, status bonuses, and penalties
• You can not cast spells
• You can not speak
• You have hands and can use manipulate actions (since the spell explicitly calls this out)
• All your gear is absorbed into you

Then the MAP rules seems to make a difference between Strikes and special attacks:

The multiple attack penalty (detailed on page 446) applies to each attack after the first, whether those attacks are Strikes, special attacks like the Grapple action of the Athletics skill, or spell attack rolls.

The above, combined with the fact that the spell explicitly explicitly states that it gives you a special attack, makes me draw the conclusion that the special attack granted by Reighteous Might is not a Strike, but something called a special attack. I'm not sure this is the correct interpretation.

If the special attack is not a Strike:

• It still uses an attack roll since the spell states that it is an attack. Hence True Strike would work with it, but you can't cast it because of the Polymorph trait.
• It has the attack trait since the spell states that it is an attack. Bit unsure about this, the spell doesn't explicitly call it out, but the quoted MAP rules seem to imply that all special attacks have the attack trait. If it has the attack trait, it is affected by/affects the Multiple Attack Penalty.
• It can't be used with Power Attack since it is not a Strike.
• It can critically hit, since it has an attack roll, but it does not deal double damage since that only applies to Strikes.

Then, regardless of whether it is a Strike or not, there's the following. Let's consider only the melee version:

• The total attack modifier is (at least) +21. It is only affected by circumstance bonuses, status bonuses, and penalties. You do not add strength to it.
• The total damage is 3dX+8, where X depends on the diety's favored weapon. It is only affected by circumstance bonuses, status bonuses, and penalties. You do not add strength to it.
• The damage for a worshiper of Ragathiel would be 3d8+8. The fact that Bastard Swords have the trait Two-Hand 1d12 does not matter since it is not the normal damage dice.
• The caster can choose one of the four properties of the weapon as long as it matches his deity's alignment.
• However, if he chooses holy he can not activate the once per day reaction since the Polymorph trait states that "you can't activate any items".
• The special attack is not strength based. Similar spells, e.g. Animal Form, calls this out explicitly. Hence it is not affected by the enfeebled condition.
• Since it is not stated that the weapon is of the diety's favored weapon type, only that it borrow some specific aspects from it, the special attack does not have any Weapon Traits and/or Critical Specialization Effects. Bit unsure about this as well, reading again "A special attack with a righteous armament version of your favored weapon" could imply inheritance.

Is there anything wrong in my understanding of Righteous Might?
Most importantly, is the special attack a Strike or not?

My first impression was the same as yours. Then I read:

The item’s disassembled parts are worth half its Price in raw materials and can’t be reassembled unless you successfully reverse-engineer the formula or acquire the formula another way.

If it had said "reverse-engineered" (referencing the specific attempt) instead of "reverse-engineer" (which sounds like it could allow you to retry until succesful) I wouldn't have hesitated.

You can acquire formulas by reverse-engineering items.

If you fail the crafting check, are you allowed to retry it or are you out of luck?

New to PF2E and just started reading up. Always interested in what strange builds are possible and the enablers of these. Hence, I'm looking for a list of features granting access to features of other ancestries/background/classes.

The granted features could be e.g. feats, spells, or proficiencies. The granted thing should probably be general, not specific. E.g. a feat choice, not a specific feat. Examples:

Ancestry Feats

• • Half-Elf, Feat 1, Elf Atavism. Gain an Elf Heritage (GM discretion).
  
• • Human, Feat 1, Adapted Cantrip. Gain cantrip from other tradition.
  
• • Human, Feat 1, General Training. Gain 1st-level general feat.
  
• • Human, Feat 1, Natural Ambition. Gain 1st-level class feat.
  
• • Human, Feat 1, Natural Skill. Gain two trained skills proficiencies.
  
• • Human, Feat 5, Adaptive Adept. Gain cantrip or 1st-level spell from other tradition.
  
• • Human, Feat 9, Multitalented. Gain multiclass dedication feat.
  

Ancestry Heritages

• • Elf, Ancient Elf. Gain multiclass dedication feat.
  
• • Human, Skilled Heritage. Become trained in one skill and expert at 5th level.
  
• • Human, Versatile Heritage. Gain general feat.
  

General Feats

• • Feat 3, Ancestral Paragon. Gain 1st-level ancestry feat.
  

Class Feats

• • Oracle, Feat 4, Divine Access. Add three deity granted cleric spells to your spell list.
  

Archetype Feats

• • Fighter, Feat 4, Basic Maneuver. Gain 1st- or 2nd-level fighter feat.
  

and also doesn't let you shoot past the fifth range increment for your weapon.

Not that it is directly related to the scope question, but normally it's ten range increments.

For most ranged weapons, the maximum range is 10 range increments, or 10× the number listed as the weapon’s range. For thrown weapons, the maximum range is 5 range increments. Some ranged weapons have different maximum ranges, but if so, their descriptions specify their maximum ranges.

Never considered that the range increment increase might not require the aim action. Rereading the scope rules I do think you might be onto something though.

In addition, a scope increases a weapon’s range increment for determining penalties to attack rolls due to range. For small arms, a scope increases the weapon’s normal range increment to 1-1/2 times its listed range for this purpose. For longarms and heavy weapons, the increase is 4 times the normal range increment.

I have a Disintegrator rifle, liquidator (range increment 30 ft.) with a Scope, Laser. I use a move action to aim using the scope. What is my range increment?

• 1. 120 ft. = 4*30 ft.
• 2. 150 ft. = 30 + 4*30 ft.

I read it as the second option since "the increase is 4 times the normal range increment". It does not say "increased to 4 times the normal range increment". However, I'm not certain.

If so, I'll take the following:

• climb 20 ft. (free)
  
• blindsense (scent) (1)
  
• bite attack (free)
  
• oversized maw* (1)
  
• swallow whole (1)
  

Is getting Oversized Maw and Swallow Whole under the assumption that GM will approve it, or am I missing something?

you can select any one player character racial trait of a race that grants such rules

the GM may allow you to select one of that creature’s special abilities or traits so long as the creature has a CR no higher than the spell’s maximum CR.

I have asked myself the same question about bonus spells.

http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qes1?Scarred-Witch-Doctor-Bonus-Spells#1

Constitution Dependent

A scarred witch doctor uses Constitution instead of Intelligence when determining the highest level of spells she can cast, her spell save DCs, number of spells known at 1st level, and any effects of her hexes normally determined by her Intelligence.

Intelligence should be used for bonus spells since it is not mentioned above. Is this intentional or an accidental omission?

You can protect 2200 sq ft at level 11 when a wizard is first able to pickup this spell. With 1 casting. For 22 hours. The spell is fine.

God forbid the wizard has to cast the spell twice to protect the whole compound. Not to mention if the GM will let you use it with permanency.

I looked at a keep from one of the adventure paths. It is roughly 55x30 squares times two stories + some extra towers and cellars. Let's say two stories. That is 3300 grid squares, 82500 square feet. Would require 38 casts at level 11, or 21 casts at level 20.

I'm not saying the spell is bad. Only reason I ask is because of the "This powerful spell is primarily used to defend a stronghold or fortress by creating a number of magical wards and effects." fluff. To me it seem to indicate that the intention is that it should be able to cover a keep with a few casts.

Area up to 200 sq. ft./level (S) ... This powerful spell is primarily used to defend a stronghold or fortress by creating a number of magical wards and effects. The ward protects 200 square feet per caster level. The warded area can be as much as 20 feet high, and shaped as you desire.

Guards and Wards

Is the area supposed to be only 200 square feet per CL?
Each grid square is 25 square feet. This means 8 grid squares per CL.
At CL 20, it's not even 13x13 grid squares. That's a puny stronghold.

On the other hand, 200x200 feet per CL seems a bit ridiculous.

LazarX wrote:

You could subject me to hours of Slim Whitman's yodeling and I wouldn't give it to you. You can not charge with a lance, and give subdual damage even if you quote RAW and verse to me.

Lol, it is kind of hard to believe someone who says "I know I came flying at him full tilt on a creature weighing half a ton and nailed him with a ten foot long piece of treated wood (or metal), but don't worry, I made sure it was non-lethal."

It's not gonna make much more sense even if I have to do it with an Earth Breaker :D

Nope. But you would still get double normal damage (not sneak attack) on a charge with another weapon...

I'm pretty sure the double damage only applies to lances?

So we are probably going to play an E6 game sooner or later and I was trying to see if it would be possible to make a Mounted Sap Master Rogue using a Lance for that extra damage.

Swashbuckler could give me proficiency with a martial weapon. Scout could enable flat-footed on charges.

The problem I'm facing is the fact that Sap Master requires a bludgeoning weapon. Is there any way to make a Lance deal bludgeoning damage? Or is there some other weapon that deals bludgeoning damage as well as extra damage when doing mounted charges?

A Divine Scion that chooses the Good domain for her Domain Specialization gets "Detect Evil Constant" as a spell-like ability. Do she need to spend a standard action every turn to use "Concentrating to Maintain a Spell" to keep Detect Evil on?

Try this thread. Although it doesn't have errata or such from the last two years, there wasn't much after that point.

Alternatively, you could pick up the River Nations book, which incorporates all the errata and expands on the rules.

Thanks, exactly what I was looking for

In the "Kingdom Building" sticky there are a lot of errors and fixes mentioned by James Jacobs. Does anyone happen to have done a compilation of these?

I personally hope the RAI is that you can't skip it. Since it is only one prerequisite, skipping it would only increase the DC by 5 regardless of what the prerequisite caster level is.

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.

Creating magic armor has a special prerequisite: The creator's caster level must be at least three times the enhancement bonus of the armor.

Can you skip the special caster level prerequisite (increasing the DC by 5) when creating magic armor?

If I have a shield carried on my back or by my side in easy reach, what/how many action(s) do I need to use to have it strapped to my arm (i.e. granting its shield bonus to my AC).

Weapon cords are 2-foot-long leather straps that attach your weapon to your wrist. If you drop your weapon or are disarmed, you can recover it as a swift action, and it never moves any further away from you than an adjacent square. However, you cannot switch to a different weapon without first untying the cord (a full-round action) or cutting it (a move action or an attack, hardness 0, 0 hp). Unlike a locked gauntlet, you can still use a hand with a weapon cord, though a dangling weapon may interfere with finer actions.

Can you provide the somatic components for a spell using a hand with an attached weapon cord? I would guess you can, that "may interfere with finer actions" seems awfully vague.

As you can see, the quickdraw shield would be a hinderance in that case since it requires a swift action where a regular shield requires a free action. There should be a benefit. I see that benefit as bypassing the 'get the shield out' part.

Not necessarily. Using my interpretation you could combining one move action (move+free draw) and a swift action move your speed while drawing and donning the quickdraw shield. A regular shield would require two move action (with possible movement) to draw and don.

Personally I find these rules confusing and I'm probably just making things overly complicated. The rules use a lot of terms: don, remove, strapping on, unstrapping, put away, draw, readying, carrying, and worn.

If they wanted drawing shields to work the same way as drawing weapons, I wonder why they didn't just make it a general draw action.

Lej, I regret to inform you that your graph is incorrect. A quickdraw shield can go from 'on person' to 'donned' in one swift action (or free action with quickdraw) and back again. It does not have to go through an 'in hand' position.

Quickdraw shield should have the following sequence:
Carried on person -> Donned
Donned -> Carried on Person

- Gauss

We actually discussed this exact problem. The two possibilities being what you suggested and what is shown in the above graph. We found the wording "you may don or put away a quickdraw shield as a <type> action" a bit vague. In the end we argued that to be able to don or put away something you have to hold it in your hand. Has this been officially answered or is your way perhaps commonly agreed to be correct?

Thanks for the input. We discussed in-group the drawing, donning, and dropping of shields. We discussed how we thought it worked or should work, and what we ended up with was a graph. Hopefully this will prevent any problem for us when gaming. Not sure it is entirely correct though, feedback welcome.

Drawing, Donning, and Dropping Graph

Thanks for the answers. Pretty much what I expected, but I had to ask as it seemed pretty powerful.

Benefit: You can draw a weapon as a free action instead of as a move action.

Alchemical items, potions, scrolls, and wands cannot be drawn quickly using this feat.

Normal: Without this feat, you may draw a weapon as a move action, or (if your base attack bonus is +1 or higher) as a free action as part of movement.

Drawing a weapon so that you can use it in combat, or putting it away so that you have a free hand, requires a move action. This action also applies to weapon-like objects carried in easy reach, such as wands. If your weapon or weapon-like object is stored in a pack or otherwise out of easy reach, treat this action as retrieving a stored item.

Are shields in "easy reach" (such as carried by you side or on your back) considered to be "weapon-like objects" and hence drawable as a free action with the Quick Draw feat? Most shields are actually also weapons. Notice that Quick Draw does not disallow shield explicitly.

Benefit: Make one attack roll. If the attack hits, the target takes damage from both bolts. Critical hits, sneak attack damage, and other precision-based damage only apply to the first bolt.

Benefit: When you use the attack action, you can make one attack at your highest base attack bonus that deals additional damage. Roll the weapon’s damage dice for the attack twice and add the results together before adding bonuses from Strength, weapon abilities (such as flaming), precision-based damage, and other damage bonuses. These extra weapon damage dice are not multiplied on a critical hit, but are added to the total.

A medium Double Crossbow's base damage is 1d8 per bolt. Let's assume Vital Strike is used with a medium +1 Double Crossbow on a target with DR 5/-.

How much damage is dealt?

Sap master ninja with vanishing trick and a merciful revolver sounds like fun

Lej wrote:

So, assuming it works. Does it qualify me for feats such as Glorious Heat which has the prerequisite "Ability to cast divine spells"?

No. It adds one cantrip OR orison to your spells known, and a sorcerer only knows cantrips, which are not divine.

Which according to the description is "determined when the stone is created". At creation it was decided that it is an orison.

So, assuming it works. Does it qualify me for feats such as Glorious Heat which has the prerequisite "Ability to cast divine spells"?

A sorcerer obtains a Cracked Orange Prism (Ioun Stone) with the orison Spark.
When worn it adds the orison to his spells known.
Can he use his sorcerer spell slots to cast the orison?

OK, I'm contemplating making a blaster type sorcerer.

...
I'd say acid is a decent blaster element to choose as it tends to be the least resisted of the major energy types.

Are wordcasters allowed at PFS games? If so consider playing one.

In any case remember that casters require concentration checks if they are taking ongoing damage.

Since it is already a two-handed weapon, altering the effort required to wield it by two steps increases it beyond a two-handed weapon and therefore it cannot be used.

I'm not forgetting it. If you look at my previous posts you'll find another thread discussing exactly that matter. I thought the discussion in that thread as well as others was one of the reasons they added the more specific "Inappropriately Sized Firearms" section.

You cannot make optimum use of a firearm that is not properly sized for you. A cumulative –2 penalty applies on attack rolls for each size category of difference between your size and the size of the firearm. If you are not proficient with the firearm, a –4 nonproficiency penalty also applies. The size of a firearm never affects how many hands you need to use to shoot it, the exception being siege firearms and Large or larger creatures. In most cases, a Large or larger creature can use a siege firearm as a two-handed firearm, but the creature takes a –4 penalty for using it this way because of its awkwardness.

It says you can use siege firearms as two-handed firearms. Not that you can use siege firearm of your size as a two-handed firearm.

But the reason I posed these question is of course that I am unsure how it should be interpreted. Assuming you are correct I guess we could simply change the gargantuan "Bombard, heavy" to a large "Cannon" and try to answer the same questions.

Reading about firearms I came upon the section addressing inappropriately sized firearms.

You cannot make optimum use of a firearm that is not properly sized for you. A cumulative –2 penalty applies on attack rolls for each size category of difference between your size and the size of the firearm.

In most cases, a Large or larger creature can use a siege firearm as a two-handed firearm, but the creature takes a –4 penalty for using it this way because of its awkwardness.

So let's assume my Large creature is proficient with firearms (which means he is also proficient with siege firearms).

He is wielding a Gargantuan "Bombard, heavy", an Indirect-Fire Engine.

Since the rules state that he "can use a siege firearm as a two-handed firearm" what about the following:

1) He takes a -4 penalty to attack because there is two categories between the wielder's and the firearms size.

2) He takes another -4 penalty because of using the siege engine as a firearm.

3) The "Bombard, heavy" can be reloaded as a full-round action since it is used as a two-handed firearm and the rules state that two-handed firearms can be reloaded as a full-round action.

4) Does the Rapid Reload feat reduces the reload time?

5) Does the "Bombard, heavy" when wielded like this use an attack roll instead of the indirect firing since two-handed firearms use attack rolls?

6) If so, what are the range increments?

Reading about the Gunslinger on d20pfsrd.com

It is a move action to load a one-handed or two-handed advanced firearm to its full capacity.

Alchemical cartridges make loading a firearm easier, reducing the time to load a firearm by one step (a full-round action becomes a standard action, a standard action becomes a move action, and a move action becomes a free action), but they tend to be unstable.

Metal Cartridges used in Advanced Firearms seems to be listed in the Alchemical Cartridges table which would seem to imply that they are Alchemical Cartridges and hence that they invoke Rule 2.

I've found nothing that states that Rule 2 does work with Advanced Firearms.

This would imply that the Metal Cartridges reduces (Rule 2) the Advanced Firearms move action (Rule 1) to a free action as default. Am I missing something?

A selected lengthy corrosive bolt with Intensified Spell metamagic feat is a 2nd-level spell that takes up a 3rd level slot. It has no save and no spell resistance, merely a ranged touch attack to hit.

Can you stack that several times on the same target?

The targets of a wordspell with this effect word are nauseated; they receive another save at the end of their turn to end this effect.

Torture Effect Word

Do the targets
a) Receive one extra save at the end of their next turn
or
b) Receive an extra save at the end of each of their turns as long as the effect persists?

Lej wrote:

Core wrote:

A spell's power often depends on its caster level, which for most spellcasting characters is equal to her class level in the class she's using to cast the spell.

Maybe I'm reading this wrong. I read it as casters having a CL that was also used for the spells he casts (unless he chooses to lower it).

Just read that sentence again.

"A spell's power often depends on its caster level"

Okay, so a Spell has a Caster level. Then it goes on to state:

"which for most spellcasting character's is equal to her class level in the class she's using to cast the spell"

So the Spell's Caster Level is equal to HER Class Level? How did the Spell gain a gender - apparently they're all female? And Spells now have a class? And wait ... HER just referenced the SPELL, and then later in the same sentence it says "she's using to cast the spell." Is HER the spell, and SHE the caster? The sentence is rife with pronoun errors.

The sentence should make just as must sense like this:

"A spell’s power often depends on its spellcaster level, which is equal to her class level in the class she’s using to cast the spell."

Clearly it makes no sense when written that way.

I read it as "her" referencing the "spellcasting character" and "the class she's using" referencing the class of the "spellcasting character" used to cast the spell.

If divided into parts something like:
A spell has a caster level.
The character has levels in a class that allows it to cast spells.
The caster level of a spell cast by this character is (for most characters) equal to the character's level in the class used to cast the spell.

The sentence is pretty much directly copied from 3.5 except they use "her" instead of "your" and "she's" instead of "you're".

Admittedly English is not my primary language and of course I might be wrong. I agree that the sentence could be written much more clearly. I'd never thought about spells having caster levels at all (only characters) before reading the paragraph in the words of power rules which lead me to read the above line in the Core Rulebook.

Lej wrote:

I'm a bit confused. What I was trying to ask was if:

maximum number of dice = minimumOf(Caster's CL, Caster's Level)

The text says that "# of dice <= wordspell’s caster level" and "# of dice <= wordcaster level".

Wordspell's don't have Caster Levels. Characters have a Caster Level. Scrolls have a caster level. Magic items have a caster level. The phrase "wordspell's caster level" is non-sensical, and needs to be errata'd. That's like asking the question "what is Fireball's caster level?" It doesn't have one.

Why doesn't a wordspell have a CL when cast? Is this something special for wordspells? I thought normal spells did have a CL?

A spell's power often depends on its caster level, which for most spellcasting characters is equal to her class level in the class she's using to cast the spell.

Maybe I'm reading this wrong. I read it as casters having a CL that was also used for the spells he casts (unless he chooses to lower it).

Lej wrote:

Some of these combinations list many dice of damage. I have a question about the following paragraph:

UM wrote:

Multiple Effect Words and Damage: If more than one effect word causes the wordspell to deal damage, the total number of dice of damage the wordspell can deal can be no greater than the wordspell’s caster level. The caster can decide which dice belong to which effect word, in any combination, so long as the total number does not exceed his wordcaster level and the number of dice allocated to a specific effect word does not exceed its maximum.

I guess the bold parts means that I need to increase both my caster level and level to increase the maximum number of allowed dice? This probably makes a lot of feat/traits/etc that increases one of those pretty useless for wordcasters.

Also it mentions "total number of dice of damage". Does this mean that RAW spells doing damage each round does damage the first round and then the coming rounds potentially could have used up all their dice? RAI I assume its the dice cap per target for each time you are damaged by the spell.

Wordspells don't determine caster level, casters do, so the first bolded part is erroneous unless you are referring to a scroll or some such. The second part doesn't prevent CL boosts, since CL boosts boost YOUR caster level.

The rule was put into place to prevent people from having a burst acid wave/fire blast/ice blast/lightning blast word spell that does 40d6 damage.

I'm a bit confused. What I was trying to ask was if:

maximum number of dice = minimumOf(Caster's CL, Caster's Level)

The text says that "# of dice <= wordspell’s caster level" and "# of dice <= wordcaster level".

Some of these combinations list many dice of damage. I have a question about the following paragraph:

Multiple Effect Words and Damage: If more than one effect word causes the wordspell to deal damage, the total number of dice of damage the wordspell can deal can be no greater than the wordspell’s caster level. The caster can decide which dice belong to which effect word, in any combination, so long as the total number does not exceed his wordcaster level and the number of dice allocated to a specific effect word does not exceed its maximum.

I guess the bold parts means that I need to increase both my caster level and level to increase the maximum number of allowed dice? This probably makes a lot of feat/traits/etc that increases one of those pretty useless for wordcasters.

Also it mentions "total number of dice of damage". Does this mean that RAW spells doing damage each round does damage the first round and then the coming rounds potentially could have used up all their dice? RAI I assume its the dice cap per target for each time you are damaged by the spell.

Lej wrote:

Greylurker wrote:

Barrier + a Fire Effect seems the right way except that all the fire words have instantaneous durations, leaving me with a Wall of flames that winks out of existence moments after I cast it.

RAW I'm not so sure it winks out. Good example would be Wall of Iron. I has a instant duration and create a permanent wall of iron. If the wordspell with the barrier target word + fire effect word works the same way it would create a permanent wall of fire.

Wall of Iron is a special case. Just apply common sense to the spells (no, I'm not accusing anyone of anything). A permanent fireball makes no sense, and an instant wall of iron that goes away right away after you cast it also makes no sense.

In most cases, if an instant spell appears to have a permanent effect this is because the spell changed the world somehow and you are left with the non-magical aftereffects of the spell. A wall of iron is not magical and you cannot dispel it because there is no spell keeping it in existence. This is also why you can't dispel feeblemind, because the spell did its damage in an instant. However, spells with duration (including permanent) can be dispelled because the magic is keeping the spell's effect in existence!

Does an everlasting wall of fire sound like a nonmagical effect? I would say no, and that you can't do it with a spell with a duration of instant.

Anyway, if you combine the barrier word with an instant effect word, you will get a barrier that lasts for less then a second. This is because all the effect words you're thinking of adding to the barrier don't create anything permanent aside from the damage they do. You might as well just use the burst target word.

RAI I agree with you. Instant word + barrier should not create permanent non magical changes. I just think that RAW there is not enough information to tell which way it works.

Barrier + a Fire Effect seems the right way except that all the fire words have instantaneous durations, leaving me with a Wall of flames that winks out of existence moments after I cast it.

RAW I'm not so sure it winks out. Good example would be Wall of Iron. I has a instant duration and create a permanent wall of iron. If the wordspell with the barrier target word + fire effect word works the same way it would create a permanent wall of fire.

We had this question appear in our group. Examples seem to indicate it replaces.

Examples:

Storm Giant
Zombie Storm Giant

Wolf
Zombie Wolf

+4. When you use the template you're not actually advancing the monster by hit dice, which is what the table is used for.

In the Pathfinder PRD, you can see that the size increase table is listed under the "Adding Racial Hit Dice" header. So, it should only be used when going through that process of increasing size.

By that logic I should neither use the "Table: Size Bonuses and Penalties" to modify AC/Attack, CMB/CMD, Fly Skill and Stealth Skill when using the template as that table is also listed under the "Adding Racial Hit Dice"?

If so that raises another question. Should I increase the damage dice for natural attacks one size category?

Link: Giant Template

Using Rebuild Rules on a medium creature (making it large).
How much strength does the creature gain?
+4, +8 or +4+8=+12?

The rules seems to have been clarified a bit since the playtest but maybe not for the better. The rules state

If a wordspell has more than one effect word, the shortest of all the effect words’ durations is used for all of the effect words.

A wizard casts the level 5 wordspell

The target obviously takes CL*1d6 fire damage (Boosted for damage).

Question 1: Since Burning Flash has the shortest duration, instant, I assume this causes Altered Form to also have the duration instant. Does this mean the effects from Altered Form are basically made permanent and non-dispellable?

Question 2: Burning Flash states

If the wordspell with this effect word has only a single target, it requires a ranged touch attack to hit and does not allow a saving throw.

It states that the wordspell allows no save, not that the effect word allows no save. Does this mean that there is no save at all for the spell? Normally you would use the save of the highest level effect word requiring a save.

Channel Resistance (Ex) is a Special Quality that is listed under Defensive Abilities. This means being listed in Special Defense does not equal not being a Special Quality.

I'm pretty sure the Special Attack and Special Defense locations in the monster entries are just there to quickly find what you are looking for and not actual type of abilities. The Special Qualities location is there to handle abilities that don't fit into other locations.

Some typos. Special Defense should be Defensive Abilities. I don't think there's anything called Special Defense?