Maezer's page

If you're still trying to get this in PFS neither of the regenerating familiars are legal for play. They selected a finite list of familiars to make legal, and they aren't on it.

All the polymorph conjuration spells give you the natural attacks of the assumed form. It is list in the school description. I mean it would really suck t turn into a dragon or any other animal shape and find you had no attack options at all.

I think they are fine arrays. (And I personally am a pretty big fan of arrays, though I tend to say use the standard array (15,14,13,12,10,8).

Based on your scale, I'd kind of like to see a more gradual array maybe, 15,14,13,13,12,11 [21 points].

I'm interested to hear what you players pick when run.

This debate still comes up from time to time, so it is not really clear, and not official answer has ever been given. I am not here to start the debate again, just making a point that it's not clear.

It was in the 3.x FAQ. Not debated so much there after that. The rules haven't changed. Though its not in the pathfinder FAQ and pathfinder has reversed a number of 3.x FAQ rules while leaving the rule text the same. So there is certainly debate here.

I thought I read some where that you can use acrobatics for a free action to stand up from a prone position? I'm unable to find this rule, so maybe it doesn't exist?

You might be remembering Free Stand (a DC 35 tumble check to stand as a free action) from Complete Adventurer. But its not open content, thus not reprinted in Pathfinder.

Nobody with a good grasp of English is going to read the currently-worded CRB text of TWF and honestly claim he even had an inkling that it meant his low-level monk could 2hPA a temple sword twice a round.

If no one ever had an inkling, it never would have been a frequently asked question. It would not have regularly spawned some of the largest rules debate threads on my message boards.

TWF has always allowed the 2hd weapon. Greatsword + Armor Spikes has existed since 3.0.

Any combination of unarmed strikes or attacks with a special monk weapon generally includes using all of one and none of the other.

An FAQ isn't an errata. An errata changes the text in the rules. An FAQ just explains what the current text means if there was confusion. Thus no new text in the rule book for a frequently asked question.

Honestly before the post (note a message board/blog post, not a FAQ entry, or an errata) that you could not flurry with 1 and only one weapon (which temporary destroyed one of the more popular monk archetypes the zen archer) the general conception on the message boards was that you could flurry with one and only one weapon. And a large percentage of monk builds (and nearly all of the weapon using) posted all flurried with one weapon.

I really believed the two-weapon fighting line was added to prevent people from using flurry of blows and two-weapon fighting at the same time, which was a relatively common monk tactic in 3.x.

Untyped bonus from different sources should stack unless there has a been a ruling otherwise.

The fact that you put TWF of any class as your highest DPR, but especially the rogue, makes me realize that you have very little idea how much damage the classes in this game actually do.

You are making different assumptions. If you are guaranteed to hit, guaranteed to be making full attack actions, and guaranteed to have your opponent vulnerable to sneak attack, then sneak attack and two weapon fighting are good DPR mechanics. In most D&D games, the rogue isn't guaranteed to hit, and has to move far to or not get his sneak attack, thus in something with better defined goal posts than the original post, TWF/Sneak attack fall off considerably.

All that said, once you can negate misfire chance the double barrel firearm wins. Nothing else doubles your number of attacks. And you can combine it with whatever booster you want (smite evil/favored enemy/weapon training).

In neither example would T have cover from A. Your first example is pretty much identical to ogre ranged attack in example of cover in the core rules.

I don't see how there can be any question. The last sentence in the description in the Pathfinder chronicles Campaign Setting states: "Adding an armored kilt to heavy armor does not provide an armor bonus increase."

I don't remember any errata to it. And I don't think it was reprinted in Ultimate Equipment or Inner Sea World Guide. So I don't see why it would have changed.

Yes a raging barbarian can use Arcane Strike.

Concentration is a game term for maintaining a spell. So you can't maintain a silent image while raging.

Patience, is less well defined. My definition is anything that requires more than 1 round of action. ie you can't treat a disease with a heal check. Using sense motive to discern secret messages while raging probably wouldn't fly with me.

You no longer share squares as part of a grapple by default that's a 3.x holdover idea I imagine. So you would each stay in squares 8, and 5 initially.

After you maintain the grapple, and choose the move option, you can reposition the grappled target into any adjacent square (you pick), if you pick a hazardous square the target gets a free escape attempt at a +4 bonus.

People can't intentionally end there movement in an illegal square, so that's probably a no to intentionally squeezing.

Its functionally a 15' radius sphere effect. If everyone is one the same ground level, its 24 max targets. Though if everyone could fly in sphere formation its its up to 80 medium sized targets in a 15' radius.

I am kind of guessing what you guys would say, but can a monk/magus combine Flurry of Blows with Spell Combat. I am thinking two attacks with the same weapon from the flurry and a spell from the spell combat. Doable or not?

They are both different full round actions and thus, you can't do both at once.

Since the thread is resurected i have a question myself, does the resonant power thingy works only with normal ioun stones or for flawed and/or cracked version. (the question is not for PFS)

There is a 75% chance a normal ioun stone has resonat powers.

(In PFS its 100% for normals, 0% for others)

Where was orc bloodline banned? I still see it on the additional resources page as a valid item.

The basic answer is, 'Align Fang' was in 3.x and not open content. Thus its not in Pathfinder.

At what point does it's classification from one-handed, to two-handed, change?

Does it count as both, at the same time?

Is it something that must be "declared"?

In my game you would have to declare it as a free action. Just like you have to declare if you are swinging a longsword with one hand or two hand. You can change pretty much at your whim. You just change the way you wield it so you get the extra 10' of reach and can trip, but do reduced damage.

Its classification changes when you make your declaration. It would never be both one-handed and two-handed at the same time.

For purposes of hit points or anything else targeting the weapon I consider it to have the property of the scorpion whip irregardless of how its wielded however.

I wish I could remotely decipher what the intended with the scorpion whip.

1) A large version of what is normal a light weapon, would be a one handed weapon.

2) If you wield a one-handed weapon in two hands you get to add 1.5x your strength to damage, true.

Those I am pretty confident about. 3 and 4 this is what I go with.

3) My answer is yes. For my players if they wield a scorpion whip as a whip they get all of the whip properties (and none of the scorpion whip). So if wielded as a large whip it would be two-handed. If wielded as a Scorpion whip its one-handed.

4) First the Agile weapon property doesn't let you use your dexterity for your attack bonus it only affects the modifier to damage. But more to the point, when a large scorpion whip is wielded by a medium creature you cannot the agile property would cease to function because its not usable with weapon finesse. When wielded as a two handed whip to a medium creature the property would function.

If I gave my dragon pistol the distance enhancement, would that increase the range of the cone as well?

It probably should but it doesn't. The size of the cone is not related to the range increment of the dragon pistol.

Right, but as cited that's because the base 10 ft. reach was doubled. If your reach is a base 5 ft., and then gets doubled, and then doubled again, the multiplication rules mean it's only 15 ft. In other words, Medoum + enlarge person + reach weapon = very good, but not as good as Large + reach weapon.

Enlarge person does not double a persons reach. If it did, a small halfling enlarged would have a 10' natural reach he doesn't. And an enlarged tiny creature would still have a 0' reach, when it would should have a 5' reach (default for small upright creatures).

I don't know that I've ever seen an NPC running enlarge person and wielding a reach weapon in an adventure path or module. Its really a players tactic as writters have so many better options to put large creatures on the table.

Because those same rules limit the threat range of a weapon (bow) by using the threat range of an entirely different weapon (unarmed strike) to determine threat range. Ergo, if I can use bow attacks on AoO in squares threatened by Unarmed STrikes, then why not use Longspear attacks in the same manner?

If it works for one it works for the other. You can't say the rules apply to the bow but not the spear. You don't get to bend the rules to your liking just to deny attacks of opportunity beyond 5ft with a zen archer's longbow, not without breaking the game in another area, such as reach and attacks of op.

You could threaten a square because you wield a dagger. And on the AoO make a melee attack with a whip. Or you could make an unarmed strike without the improved unarmed strike feet. Or you could replace the melee attack with a trip attempt and not use any weapon attack.

What prevents you from using the longspear at 5' is the reach property which states you can't use it again adjacent foes. Or are you under the impression that you cannot normally make a bow attack at 5' range because it has some kind of dead zone like reach weapons do?

I'm asking where's the rule stating this isn't true for a bow with Reflexive Shot.

Where is the rule that you can only makes attacks of opportunity with weapons you threaten with?

You can ignore "The monk still threatens squares he could reach with unarmed strikes" bit. Its just there to clarify that you still threaten those squares.

You AoO with the bow is not limited to 5'. If you threaten (ie can make a melee attack into) a square 20' away and someone provokes from you there you can make an AoO with the bow (or with whatever you threatened with).

The default assumption is you are a small or medium sized character with improved unarmed strike and thus threaten the squares within 5' of you even when not wielding a melee weapon.

I'm curious, what process do my fellow pathfinders go through when making a new character? Do you have any standards or criteria that you try to meet?

I think characters should generally be able to out preform the NPC pregens. If you can't do that I might try to avoid tables you are at.

So it pretty much screws any characters that chews to fight with two weapons if you use the fifth printing rules.

There was no change with regard to two weapon fighting. It still only grants 1 additional attack when taking full attack option. The change was just to a clarification that it worked with natural weapons rather than just held weapons.

Random Point, why does everyone assume the cost is based on the least expensive effect*1/2 and not the most or the first effect applied?

I think it was stated in such in one of the DMG sidebars of 3.x. And didn't make it into the SRD, thus it didn't get duplicated in pathfinder.

What armor to wear is a dex based character is a tricky subject. What you need to decide is how many times do you want to change the armor base over the coarse of your career. As its essentially given away every time you switch.

At level 20 you are probably looking at a 36 Dex (18+2 racial+5 level+6 enhancement+5 inherent).

The only items that will let you get that 13 dex mod bonus, are the bracers of armor, or the eastern Haramaki/Silken Ceremonial armors which have no cap on dexterity contribution. The bracers maximize your AC, but the others are options if you want to get some of the other armor bonus options. So those are you endgame armors. But they aren't the most cost efficient throughout your career.

At level 12, I'd assume he has a +4 dex belt (though a +6 is not beyond reason.) So his dex mod would be at +8. So the best maximum AC he could get at this point is from Celestial Armor.

Also note, nimble functions just fine with a mithril breastplate is considered light armor for all limitations other than proficiency.

The obvious answer is add magic items. At 12th level you should have about 108,00gp to spend. Also a shield/buckler though you seem to be two weapon fighting so maybe that's a no go.

1,000gp: Armor/Shield +1
2,000gp: Amulet of Natural Armor +1/Ring of Deflection +1
3,000gp: Armor/Shield +2
5,000gp: Dusty Rose Ioun Stone, Jingasa of the Fortunate Soldier, Armor/Shield to +3
6,000gp: Amulet of Natural armor +2/ring of deflection +2

All of the above would be a +12 to your ac for 44,000gp not an unreasonable amount of your total wealth.

What else???

Size bonuses. Enlarge person/righteous might, or any of the poly morph spell lines. Polymorph any object is a way to permanently make yourself very strong.

Mighty strength from Dwarves of Golarion is a +8 enhancement bonus, though technically that 3.5 material.

Are opponents able to Tumble away from me if they were beside me and I had the Stand Still feat? Or rather is there anything that could negate the effects of Stand Still and allow them to get away from my flurious wrath?

So long as they don't provoke stand still doesn't trigger. They could just withdraw or 5' step away from from you. But using acrobats to move without provoked gets them away as well.

Angel Wings grants unlimited flight, while the class-based flight is limited to minutes (per class level), but in combat that doesn't matter as most combats won't last a full minute anyway.

Those class abilities take a standard action to activate assuming you don't prebuff. A standard action is usually a significant portion of a players combat action allotment. And I would gladly trade those class features in for an overland flight/permanent variant if such was an option.

Honestly if Angel Wings didn't have that pesky racial requirement I am sure they would be extremely popular feats to take.

Can I be an aasimer elf with half elf traits and half aasimer traits? It says that aasimers do not necessarily need to be human, so is this possible?

It just changes you appearance. Instead of looking like an odd human, you look like an odd half-elf. Human aasimar don't get human racial traits, half-elf assimar don't get half elf racial traits.

Some spoilered info on this specific encounter from Vaults of Madness:

** spoiler omitted **

Respect the 10 foot square. You will find them very common in Pathfinder modules (mildly annoying yes, but common all the same). You don't need to make the encounter more lethal than the module wrote it, if you don't wish to.

Charlie Bell wrote:

Not broken, working as intended. If you can't stand the heat, take a level in commoner and give up adventuring!

I get the idea that there should be some things out there that the PC's fear. I really do. What I don't get is designing an encounter as room #1 of a dungeon that (if run by the book by the GM) will kill a PC and make him/her dead for good- with no legitimate options for res.

Nothing is more infuriating than dying in an encounter in which the PC's: 1) Do nothing wrong in planning.
2) Do nothing wrong in execution.
3) Are not impacted by bad dice luck.
4) Are clearly not intended to be murder-balled (dying in boss fights=cool!)

I just think you are wrong. First having a lower initiative than all 3 of the enemy is bad rolls. I am willing to bet the majority of parties who went through this encounter without a PC death. It has far more to deal with the way the GM chose to run the encounter and the way the PCs approached it, than the way the module wrote it.

I read this as an encounter likely to cause damage, but unlikely to kill anyone at apl 10. It may force the party to rest to be better prepared.

Well, I read the Ioun Stone of +2 INT that can stack with 2 others for a total of +6 as costing 24,000. Its some sort of a Red or Ruby stone, so I don't know what's up with the pricing of these things.

Its priced with the assumption you are going to stack it to maximum +6 and with the 100% cost increase for being a slotless magic item. Thus it cost 72,000gp for a +6 stat (via 3*24,000gp ioun stones) ie 2x the cost of the 36,000 +6 stat headband or belt.

If outsiders are "living", then there should indeed be no need for this feat. If not, does this feat let you treat them as "living" or as "undead"? If I were a good cleric, could I choose to harm evil outsiders or would I only be able to heal them? If I can channel to harm evil outsiders, does that mean I can't heal good ones? If I'm a paladin, do I heal or harm chaotic outsiders?

Yes. When you use this feat, irregardless of what you normal happens when you channel energy, you pick a subtype of outsiders and if you want to heal or harm them. Then you deal Xd6 worth of healing or damage (whichever you picked) to that subset of outsiders who get to make a save to resist it.

I have a hard time see why you think being able to harm outsiders with a positive channeling cleric is so entirely worthless you would rather take prone shooter as a feat.

I generally don't like handing templates out to PCs. That said comparing it to the advanced simple template (which I consider to be the baseline +1 template) the ogrekin template gets:

+2 Str, -4 dex, -6 int, -4 Wis, -6 Cha, +1 Natural Armor. And a random benefit worth about a feat, and penalty worth about a feat.

I don't know, if templates are on the board I really think more people would take advanced than ogrekin. The Giant template (again a +1) is probably better than ogrekin as well if you just want a brute.

So I have a hard time saying ogrekin is an op template. Templates probably shouldn't fall into the hands of players but if they do, ogrekin isn't near the top of the list.

Incorporeal can be frustrating. Especially based on how GMs occasionally run them. Note if in an object they can only detect adjacent squares. And they can't move through an object larger than them. Also the unnatural aura might have told you something was up if you brought an animal within 30'. Detect evil might have been warranted as well depending on the environment.

Death ward makes you immune to energy drain. So if you got a death ward on the target before he died, then he should have survived unless the 1d8 damage killed him.

That said I don't think 52 HP (or 104 effecitve) is overmuch. And 2 levels per attack, means it took 5 standard actions to kill something. How many things do you target with 5 of your parties standard/full action survive?

Covert it all to diamond dust so its more useful and doesn't have a weight. Trade/Goods gems trade at full value so there really is no reason to carry coinage. Dust can be broken down to gold piece increments so its perfect for making change. Really the only reason to use coins is to advertise your support for whomever has there image stamped upon the disc.

While we're on the subject of petty and pedantic...
Since the Necklace of Adaptation surrounds the character with an air bubble, allowing them to breath in a vacuum or underwater, would that air bubble maintain an appropriate pressure to keep a character from being killed in a vacuum or deep under water?

I think the rules you seek are in Distant Worlds. Its not a book I bothered to pick up, but the description states: "...Easy new rules for adventuring on other planets, including discussions on gravity, temperature, time, vacuum, and traveling between worlds."

The official PFS response to the blog was:

http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2p823?Monk-Now-we-need-PFS-response#42
Post #4.

You can refund price difference in the Amulet. The ruling on brass knuckles (not using monk unarmed strike damage) was made/clarified shortly after the release of the advanced players guide. I don't think by PFS standard you get an official refund there. And at this point its been years so I wouldn't have high hopes. Though you can rebuild if you are still level 1 and refund at full price.

Whatever you decide on the trick will be mounting it as 99% of commercial video projectors are designed to be displayed on a wall or vertical screen rather than horizontally on a table top.

The best solution is probably mounting it under a glass top table and projecting upwards. But taking a lightweight projector and mounting it on the ceiling can work as well (but my wife would never tolerate the cords).

Gallant Inspiration would seem to fit the bill. You could use while crafting to create masterpieces (or at least slavage would be failures). It also will probably be useful throughout you adventuring career as its an immediate action and can be used in combat.

Good Hope or Heroism is also a potent spell option giving you a bonus to skill checks which seems appropriate.

Minor Creation (summoner 3) or Stone Shape might work too. Its a versatile spell that could take advantage of your crafting skills.

It makes diehard a much more interesting feat for eidolons than it generally is though.

I would redefine from a hostile source, as hit by an attack that does lethal damage (ie something that requires an attack roll). I just don't want to see perpetual damage (caltrops, vicious weapons, bleeding etc) trigger it round after round.

If you want to set a round/day cap, max rage gained per day = barbarian level (min 3). This lets it grow far beyond the extra rage feat without being superior in every possible way.

Another solution might be a prerequisite of barbarian 5 or 7. I don't want barbarian 1/other class 19 to have unlimited rage for a feat. It also may be more appropriate to make this a rage power rather than a feat.

Some people take the rule the encumbrance rule that medium/heavy encumbrance by weight count as medium/heavy armor for the purpose of abilities or skills that are restricted by armor (p. 169 core rules). This is also where you see the reduction in movement speed for encumbrance (flying has the same reduction as ground movement).

And the barding rules (armor for animals) that state creatures cannot fly in medium/heavy barding. (p.162 core rules)

To mean animals (or possibly anything) cannot fly with a medium/heavy encumbrance.

You get a fair amount of debate on the issue whenever it comes up.
....

And no you can't summon a creature with extra equipment. Else you would have people summoning things with +5 full plate etc. You get what's in the stat block nothing else. Honestly, you shouldn't be getting a saddle with the riding dog either, that's flavor text not listed equipment, but I'd probably let that one slide.

what happend with "Fighter Training (Ex)" of Magus's special ability?

Sash of the War Champion stack with "Fighter Training" and gain the benefits?

Sash of the War Champion only effects Armor Training and bravery. Fighter training only effects qualifying for feats. There is no overlap that I am aware of.

It has often been said that an easy scale for RPG->RL understanding of the Intelligence score is to multiply by ten and call it IQ. This makes sense, because an IQ of 100 is average, as is an Int 10. This makes the Forrest Gump comparison apt, because in the movie, his IQ was 75; that would be the equivalent of a 7-8 Int, which is what we're talking about.

By generic D&D rules, the common person generates stats by 3d6. Creating range of values from 3-18. What you are saying is about 16% (or 35/216) are at or below 7 intelligence (ie Forest Gump). That seems like quite a large percentage of the world population.

Even by old heroic PC standards (4d6 drop lowest) 7 int or less would represent more than 5% of the world's hero population (74/1296).

I find it more realistic to think of Forest Gump as a 3 int. At the level of .4% (1/216) of the population. And its probably still too great a percentage of the populace as that.

The IQ rational for D&D intelligence has never held much water. Instead I think people associate the lowest allowable value with the what they perceive is the lowest playable level of intelligence. So they put 7 (in pathfinder) or 8 (in 3.x) right there with Mr. Gump.

(That said I think allowing players to point buy a 7 was a mistake, as was the value assigned it).

Optimiser? When I started they were called Min/Maxers and looked down on significantly.

This all breaks down to the definition optimizing. If you are at all better than the worst possible combination of choices for whatever action You have optimized your character to some extent. You are making better use of your resources than someone else thus you are more optimal.

And on the other extreme this game is open ended so open ended, its virtually impossible that any character is fully optimized to the point no one can do any given task better than him in whatever circumstance.

So everyone character fall between the absolute best and worse possible. Ideally you probably want to play with people who you think put about as much thought into their characters as you do. But that's probably a fairly narrow band and its probably not going to include everyone who plays PFS in your local area (which is essentially guaranteed because you are reading these boards and that means you spend a lot more effort than the majority of players) much less globally.