Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ

Magicdealer's page

Pathfinder Society Member. 1,428 posts. 1 review. No lists. No wishlists. 4 Pathfinder Society characters.


1 to 50 of 1,428 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Well, pummeling style contains the following:

"If any of the attack rolls are critical threats, make one confirmation roll for the entire attack at your highest base attack bonus. If it succeeds, the entire attack is a confirmed critical hit."

So if you hit with three scythe attacks and three kukri attacks, and one of the kukri attacks threatened a critical hit, you'd make one roll to confirm it. If successful, all three scythe attacks, and all three kukri attacks are now critical hits.

I'd assume that from there, you'd just apply the appropriate critical modifier to each damage roll you made, and factor in whatever "on critical" abilities the weapons possessed.


Rushley... if you're complaining about power gamers, you're in the wrong forum, my friend.

On reading the relevant passages, I think that the intent of the ability is to allow the brawler to use whichever damage value is most beneficial. Also, given the line about not affecting any other aspect of the weapon, I believe the damage comparison and choice is limited to the base weapon damage, before magical effects.

A spiked shield isn't a magical enhancement, but rather a specific type of weapon. It's listed as such on the paizo srd. (

So I'd say you could either use the spiked shield damage, or the unarmed strike damage. After choosing your base, you would then apply bashing to increase the damage dice from there.


Ehh... I kind of have to disagree with you there, blackbloodtroll.

Even if you're making attacks without using limbs, two-weapon fighting requires a main hand designation and an off-hand designation. Even if they're not actual hands.

Copypasta from two weapon fighting section.
"If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon."

In order to get that extra attack, you must have a designated off-hand, regardless of what limb or non-limb ends up being used.

Even when you are two-weapon fighting with no hands, you're still two-weapon fighting with two hands :D


Well, the feat in question is being debated. It might be better to wait until there's a ruling rather than risk your character becoming non-fuctional.

That being said, I have a thought.

Two levels of Titan Mauler Barbarian.

Main hand scythe. Off-hand Kukri.

The idea here is to use the critical range with the Kukri to allow you to treat your scythe hits as critical hits, through the pummeling style feat. Keen or improved critical on the kukri would be a good choice.

Given this is for a lenient-ish dm, here's something you might be able to get away with.

Take a level dip to grab channel energy, and spend a feat on weapon focus, and then pick up crusader's flurry, which allows you to use your deity's favored weapon as a monk weapon.

Urgathoa has a scythe as her preferred weapon. Then you stack the rest of your levels into brawler.

So this would look something like titan mauler 2/cleric 1/brawler 17

And you'd be two-weapon fighting with a x4 crit weapon in one hand, and a 15-20 crit range weapon in the off hand.


Well, the wording implies that you select one hand to benefit from precise strike. Attacks with that hand only will get the benefit (so no two weapon fighting).

Furthermore, your non-attacking hand may hold a weapon or object, but cannot attack with it, or use a shield other than a buckler.


1. Well... I believe a dagger is a light weapon, not a one-handed weapon, so you couldn't select it as a valid weapon for Slashing Grace.

2. Precise strike requires melee, not ranged.

May I suggest you consider the flying blade archetype for your dagger hurling needs? It's not dex to damage, but it allows precise strike to work with daggers.


If your possibility about how something works requires rules that you cannot quote, then you are not dealing with raw.

You can certainly make an argument about it being rai, but don't misrepresent yourself about it.

Your argument about all writing being a matter of interpretation is a non-argument. These are the rules forums. raw and rai have clearly understood meanings here.

You're arguing rai, what was intended to happen by the rules. This is great, but accurate raw readings are also necessary to adjust and correct future printings of the book, so that what is written matches together clearly and understandably with what is intended.

Kazaan wrote:

It would most certainly be an error to suggest something that were impossible. Moreover, what I defined is not RAI. Implicit RAW is not necessarily the same as RAI. Intent is what it was meant to allow you to do.

Intent is pretty much the definition of a rai argument. If a strict reading of an ability means that it's impossible to use, that doesn't mean the reading is wrong. It probably means the devs need to go through and fix the ability so that it DOES work.

And arguments about how it's SUPPOSED to work are fine. But, by definition, they fall into rai.


1) There's nothing that would stop both abilities from working together. Nothing in the phrase, "gain wisdom to AC" prevents it from stacking with a different source that also adds wisdom, or charisma, or dexterity to ac. They clearly stack. Bonuses from different sources stack. In this case, one source is ex, and one is su. Different sources. By raw, they stack. Just like a +1 from luck and a +1 from dodge.

2) These guys don't stack.

3) debate ongoing. Raw would seem to imply the damage is delivered by a punch, but makes no mention as to the attacks that can contribute to the total damage that is delivered.


Well, I wouldn't argue that headbutting would be fine. It's not a punch. I WOULD argue though, that pummeling style has to be DELIVERED via a punch. At least, as it's worded.

If there are other attack types other than unarmed strike that specifically reference a punch as the method of delivering your attack, then by all means, use those in place of an unarmed strike.

That seems appropriate to the way it's worded, at least. As far as the intent? Maybe it was meant to be limited to unarmed strikes, or close weapons, or weapons you could flurry with. Until we get feedback though, there are too many different ways the actual intent could go to make a solid argument of one over the other. Not that that will stop anyone from trying :D


I'd absolutely disagree about the intent of Pummeling Style to only apply to unarmed strikes.

It seems to me it was intended to work with any weapon you could flurry with (monk or brawler), and ended up using some unfortunate word choice.


You only get one swift action a turn, and can't trade for more, so no. Pick one :D


I have to say, I like the flavor of martial monk that the brawler is. And I would love to see flurry of blows errata'd to use the same mechanics as the brawler's flurry.

Given the wording used on pummeling style, I have a couple thoughts about the strangeness here.

The benefits section specifically says "one devastating punch."

So I think the cumulative damage is delivered via that subset of unarmed strike.

Here's where it gets weird.

You make a number of rolls equal to the number of attacks you can make with a full attack, or a flurry of blows. Ok. This wording implies that if you were wielding two shortswords with three attacks each, you'd roll six attacks to hit, and total up the "normal" damage. (I'll come back to this.)

Ok. Here it's basically working like clustered shots.

If ANY of the attack rolls are critical threats, you roll once to confirm at your highest bab. If it succeeds, the entire attack is a confirmed critical hit. Ok.

So, let's say I'm a titan mauler barb wielding a scythe in one hand, and wielding a kukri in my off-hand. The kukri crits, and now I get my x4 scythe crit damage. This is delicious, but very strong. But ok, let's roll with it.

Now, all that damage is delivered via a punch. It's specifically a punch in the benefits section. So, do we HAVE to have a free hand to make this attack? If we're fighting with a temple sword, do we need to drop it to deliver the attack? Or, if we don't HAVE a free hand to punch with, does the ability fail?

Clearly, the ability is delivered through a punch. So, do you apply the +5 from your +5 scythe to overcome damage reduction? Or does your damage suddenly suffer from dr/magic because you don't wear an AOMF?

Now, let's revisit the above comment. "Normal" damage. Does normal damage include precision damage like sneak attack? How about damage bonuses from things like hammer the gap, that deal additional damage on multiple hits? How about something like elemental fist damage? I'd like to think that normal means all the damage you'd deal if you were making the same attack routine without using pummeling fist.

I think Ravingdork's right. There's something worth discussing here.


1) the arcanist isn't limited to spells that are only in the core rulebook. The arcanist cast spells from the sorcerer/wizard spell list. That list is presented in chapter ten of the CRB, and modified by other officially released content.

The sentence says the list is presented in chapter 10, not restricted to chapter 10. Which is true. The list IS presented there, and expanded in other books.

2) The arcanist can't leave spell slots open. "An arcanist must choose and prepare her spells ahead of time by getting 8 hours of sleep and spending 1 hour studying her spellbook. While studying, the arcanist decides what spells to prepare and refreshes her available spell slots for the day."

There's nothing in the chapter about preparing spells like a wizard, so for now, it appears that they can't hold out slots for later use.


Soo... the plume of panache. I keep staring at it, feeling like I'm missing the obvious reference to what it actually does. It reads like it should be referencing a specific deed, but I don't... *shakes head*

Maybe I should get some sleep.


First, holy thread necro batman!

Second, let's take the pit trap and compare it to a fireball trap.

Rick James the bard has managed to slide his feet sideways, and grabs the edge of the newly revealed pit. He sighs with relief and continues on.

A few steps down the hall, he is assaulted with a violent burst of flame that appears instantaneously and immediately vanishes. Despite having literally no time to react, he manages to avoid much of the flame. Somehow.

Saves don't just represent reactions. They also represent a healthy chunk of luck. Against an instant effect, you've got no time to move. But you still get a reflex save without any penalties.


By default, specific magic items can't be modified. No changing materials, enhancing bonuses, and the such.

That being said, ask your dm.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think that the assumption has been made that initiative begins at 300ft away, where the telepathy and unspeakable presence kicks in.

If that assumption changes, then execution becomes much trickier.

Let's assume, for example, that initiative begins a thousand feet out. After the time stop ends, the Nalfeshnee will not be close enough to trigger the runes.

And here's something else interesting that I noticed. Cthulhu has triple treasure and the craft wondrous item feat. I don't see any reason why the majority of that loot wouldn't be items he'd forged at cost for himself. Why have the feat if he doesn't use it? It's in the stat block, so it must be intended. Anyone want to deck Cthulhu out with appropriate amount of silly gear?


6 people marked this as a favorite.

Chuck Norris is a terrible person, and I am saddened to see him referenced here :(


Well, the abilities you gain aren't coming from those spells at all. They just provide you the list. The abilities are coming from your mutagen. The only thing I can think of that would prevent them from stacking would be the order of application.

I think an argument can be made that after drinking the mutagen, the abilities are part of the physical form. Spells that change your physical form *and thus cause you to lose abilities based on that form* could cause you to lose access to them.

But enlarge wouldn't fall under that anyhow.


I'm late to the party, but I'll toss my hat in as well. I'm a fairly experienced pathfinder player. On wednesdays, I dm a pathfinder game for some friends of mine, and I'm looking to get some play time in myself.

I'd be interested in a skype/maptools/roll20/ect... game. I'm available any time monday, tuesday, thursday, friday, or sunday. I'd prefer something on monday, tuesday, or thursday though.

Any of those modules would be great to play in. I don't believe I've been through any of them myself, so no spoilers for me! :D


Note that being a willing target doesn't mean that the wizard cannot roll a will save to resist the spell. Being a willing target allows you to target the wizard. He may still choose to resist the spell, and roll a will save against it.


Theoretically. However, keep in mind that any custom magic item (even traps) has to be ok'd by the dm. And that's the kind of stuff (auto infinite healing) that just begs to be slapped down with prejudice.


I assume you mean the lightning bolt spell?

On page 424 of the core rulebook, table 3-15: cost modifiers for magic device traps

Automatic reset trap:
Each spell used 500gp*caster level*spell level
So 500*5*3 = 7500g. That looks good so far, assuming you're casting the spells for it yourself.

However, you need to determine the kind of trigger you're going to use. That may end up modifying the final price. For example, a visual trigger requires the casting of one of three spells, and that will increase the cost.

The perception dc looks right, depending on the trigger type again, as does the disable device dc.

Reset would be automatic reset. You can have it reset once a round, or increase the delay if you wish.

The save dc for the trap is set to (10+spell level)*1.5 so for this trap the dc is 19 for half.

If you're using alarm for the trigger, as seems implied, then everything is perfect.
The creation dc seems fine as well.

It's a magical device trap, so you're using wondrous items (spellcraft), and not craft traps.

creation time looks good, again depending on your trigger method.


1. Can supernatural abilities harm incorporeal creatures? Yes.
2. Do all supernatural abilities automatically harm incorporeal creatures? No. (There are plenty of Su effects that provide buffs, and not attacks.)


I see a witch with the misfortune hex, who uses it on herself and her allies. Cackle too, to keep the bad times rolling. Maybe some alchemy ranks and alchemical weapons.


Gargantuan animated object? :D

Consider how the ship will deal with flying monsters, and offensively placed dispel magics/antimagic auras.

Also, have emergency repair kits of some kind or other on hand, to repair damage.


The father, unable to sire a child, and hearing that his once-love had borne a child after she left him, assumes that the child is his.

He has the woman brought to him, as he is perhaps dying or just sorrowful and lonely, and begs her to tell him the truth of the child.

He learns that the child was male, declares it to be his, and bestows the right of his title so that his family name, at least, may carry on after his end.


I don't know. While you get synergy from Cleric2/empyreal sorc1/MT10, you're still advancing a reduced progression caster class.

If you split stats, you can go Wizard2/cleric1/MT10. I think that nets you something like 9th lvl spells and 7th lvl spells respectively.

And yet...

There IS something to be said for lore oracle/sorc. Noble scion moves your cha to init, sidestep slaps it onto your reflex and ac, and using a tiefling variant you can grab the fiendish sorcery/imp. fiendish sorc stuff.

It seems to me that there are a lot of interesting and potentially powerful ways to slap this together. What is really drawing my attention at the moment, however, are the remaining 7 levels. Yes, you could stick them back into one of the basic classes. But surely there's a better use for them in one of the myriad prestige classes. Sorc2/oracle1/MT10/bloodmage7 perhaps?

I do not know.


The way it's worded, it doesn't matter which offhand the weapon or shield is in. As long as it's in one of the offhands, the dervish dance won't work.


I too think your player has it right.

That being said, talk to him and let him know what your concerns are. Ask that he restrain himself from getting too carried away so that everyone there can have fun, not just him.


Oh, that's an interesting point. The older the elemental is, the more intelligent it is. They can be as smart as -or smarter than- humans.

What's going on behind the scenes with these intelligent elementals?

With the core thing, keep in mind that you're looking at a lot of golems, and a lot of industry from their labors. Consider for a moment the variety of cars that exists in our world. There's no reason a similar degree of variety couldn't exist in your world.

It's certainly within the realm of imagination that some golems are tasked as repairmen, or construction equipment, and just spend all day building replacement bodies for various common golems.

I'd take some time and look at the different golems you want to use in your world. Consider what the "basic model" would be. Everything above that is an upgraded model, and everything below it is an amateur build.

I'd probably stick with maybe two or three general use models, which cuts down on the need for a bunch of different power cores floating around. Specialized models are out there, but power cores and replacement bodies are much more difficult to find.

Alternatively, you could go with a top-down model. Each power core is rated for a specific body type. E.g., Mithril. However, the mithril power core can also power any golem of lesser cr. You can't use it to power a higher cr one though.


Well, I'd translate a percentage of the cost of the golem into the core. You'll need to decide how much cheaper you want to make it to replace/rebuild your golems.

So, assuming the core itself is intact, maybe repairing the golem only costs 50% or 25% of the cost to build a new one.

Keep in mind though that the cores will become targets for some folks. What happens if the core is broken open? Will it release an elemental?

And how do folks feel about enslaving sentient creatures to power their devices? Do they even know? Or are elementals not intelligent or possibly even alive?


So then, divine favor being a spell makes all of your attacks count as magical? Bulls strength too? And enlarge? That's a magical buff as well.

Smite evil doesn't make your attack a supernatural attack. It is an ability that grants you a number of specifically listed bonuses. It'd be nice if smite evil allowed you to hit incorporeal creatures. But, sadly, that's not one of the listed bonuses.


Unless you're ignoring the skill requirements for MT, you'll need at least three non-MT levels first.


As per the earlier quote, "many traits" does not mean all traits. While the two traits do provide a bonus for the character, it is not a typed bonus, which means that it stacks. Had the traits listed that the effect should be considered a "trait bonus", then you'd have an argument.


The faq says "one or more targets", which would include firing all your scorching rays at different targets. So, pick just one for your sneak attack damage.


My understanding is that the issue with allowing players to craft intelligent items is one of action economy.

An intelligent item can take its own actions, activate its own abilities and such. Basically, you can design a buffing machine that stacks all sorts of round/level defenses on you.

From page 532 of the CRB, "these items think and feel the same way characters do and should be treated as NPCs."

Personally, I limit crafting to existing items in the book. That effective cuts out intelligent item costs. But if you do allow your players to craft intelligent items, remember that the crafting cost table in 550 is an "estimation" table. Don't forget that you should look at the abilities of the item and compare it to other, existing items to determine its actual cost.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

One of my players made a similar character. After a few levels, he regretted the dip and delayed casting so much that he retired the character.

Oracles already have slower spell progression than clerics. Slowing it down even more just HURTS.


Mystic theurge. Tiefling cleric3/wizard1

Arcane trickster. Tiefling wizard 1/rogue3/


Well, for one, the feat I mentioned (Spellsong) requires bardic performance. For two, as far as the rules go still/silent together don't conceal spellcasting. So I provided an example feat that could provide the functionality the OP wanted.


Since you're looking for house rules stuff --

There is a bardic feat to conceal spellcasting called Spellsong. It allows you to conceal your spellcasting by masking it in a performance. Observers must make a perception or sense motive check, opposed by your perform check, to realize that you are also casting a spell. And it uses 1 round of your bardic performance.

The feat also allows you to use bardic performance to maintain a bard spell with a duration of concentration.

This feat creates two checks for the spell. The first is a perception or sense motive opposed by the caster's perform check. The second is the standard spellcraft roll to identify the spell.

Given that, I might suggest creating a feat for spellcasters who wish to conceal their spellcasting.
Something like this?

Cloaked Casting:

Prerequisites: Still Spell, Silent Spell

A spellcaster with this feat may attempt to conceal the casting of a spell. Select a spell with a casting time no greater than one standard action. You may make a stealth check to conceal the casting of this spell from others. You receive a +2 bonus to the check if the spell is modified by still spell or silent spell, or a +4 bonus if modified by both.
Normal: Spellcasters cannot disguise spellcasting.

If you don't want to make it a feat, then by all means just make it opposed skill checks. However, keep in mind how this may potentially disrupt your campaign, as the party spellcasters hit everyone they encounter with charm person :D


It's silly? Silly?

Remind me to infer that your group's gaming style is silly.

Working a character into the story isn't a problem. Working a replacement character into the party every other week is. As is dealing with an extra 140k gold every other session.

Since I knew this was going to be an issue with certain of my players, this was the solution we discussed and agreed on. None of my players have a problem with it or, if they do, have voiced it to me.

It's been working as intended for this campaign for about seven months now.

From a story standpoint, it's like asking Ashton to stand with Belhamir. From a COMBAT standpoint, any combat can be balanced around your players and their abilities.

This is the solution that my group chose, being themselves aware of their own gaming tendencies. It's an option that Xallin can choose to explore or not.

Certainly, it's Xallin's choice.


If you can't come up with something for a level disparate character to do to participate, that's a gm failure. Goodness knows, all lower level enemies cease to exist from the world once they're a few cr's below the APL.



Listen, all you STR rogues out there are building your rogues JUST FINE!

There's nothing wrong with a str based rogue. It has plenty of benefits.

Heck, you can even pick up medium and heavy armor proficiency if you really want.

As long as you're having fun with your character, don't let anyone tell you otherwise.


For my current game, if your character dies and is not rezzed then your new character starts at level two with appropriate WBL.

The party is level 13 now. While it doesn't take long for a level two to catch up if he keeps his head out of trouble, it does serve to keep wealth in check while creating an additional penalty for serial characters. Introducing a new pc every other session starts to screw up story flow.


Well, from the invisibility spell, "If a check is required, a stationary invisible creature has a +40 bonus to its stealth checks. This bonus is reduced to +20 if the creature is moving."

I'm not sure what the issue is, mechanically. It's pretty clear that it provides a bonus to stealth. If you're looking for a rationalization, that's different.

The best one I can come up with is, when you don't have to worry about being seen, you can put a lot more attention into moving quietly.

If you're talking about the extra +20 from perception to the dc, mechanically they would stack.

As far as the whole perception thing, I'm going to note that it is possible for something to be effectively invisible without use of the invisibility spell. In that case, the invisible creature who didn't cast invisibility would net only a +20 bonus instead of the whole number.

For example, the pixie is invisible, but not as per the spell. So is the shadow demon, and the spores of the basidirond. Short list, true, but still present.


As an aside, you should check with your dm about leadership and what you can an cannot take as a cohort. Many dm's interpret it differently, some outright ban it, and some will only give you cohorts that they've put together for you.

For a cloaker, it's a cr 5 creature, however it has a few abilities that are unsuitably powerful for an average party. Specifically, the moan ability is fairly strong. Given that, I would probably set a cloaker without class levels at cr 8. Maybe nine, given the composition of the party, but probably 8.


Jah, dm's are scarce as is, and asking for a solo campaign isn't going to make finding one any easier.


Considering this is pretty much the only place we have to communicate inbetween games, a couple thoughts here. If you give me a day to work, I can throw together several scrolls. I'm thinking a few more magic missile, and maybe four magic weapons.

Which brings me to my next topic:

Do we want to set up a party fund for stuff that the party will be using? I've gone through about 70 gold worth of scrolls so far, which is fine since that's what they're there for. But do we want to set up a party fund specifically for stuff like that?


yeah, I need a guest pass

1 to 50 of 1,428 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email 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.