Hello again, James. Hope you had a good Christmas, New Year, and birthday :) A couple of questions, if I may... 1) If a mortal becomes a (non-native) outsider, for example via the means to turn into a demon... what will happen to his soul? Unless I am mistaken, Outsiders don't have one, while the mortal does (or at least, did)... 2) Regarding redeemable outsiders:
Spoiler:
Arueshalae lost her [evil] subtype upon ceasing to be evil, and gains the [good] subtype upon completing her alignment shift. Is this a special effect for this very succubus, or is this a rule for beings with an alignment subtype in general? 3) While we're there...
Spoiler:
Since a romance between Arueshalae and a character is very possible... what kind of child could result from this kid of union? A Half-Celestial? A Half-Succubus, with modified traits? Something else altogether? 4) A minor thing i noted about Orcs and Alignment...
I said it and I'll say it again, I have zero problems with the Sorcerer lagging a level behind the Wizard in spells. What I do have a gripe with is the fact that, whenever the Sorcerer gets a new spell level, he will have one single spell to fill his new slots. One. Single. Spell. All the 6-level spontaneous progressions get two new spells known when them reach a new spell level. The Oracle gets three (one to choose, one from the Cure/Inflict series, and one from her mystery). The Sorcerer, however, gets one spell now; his Bloodline spell coming up a level after. Which not only leaves him with a single spell of his new level, but also leads to the effect that his Bloodline (which, according to fluff, is the very reason that he is wielding magic in the first place) comes in later. I'd do nothing to 'fix' the spell level lag. I would, however, grant Sorcerers their Bloodline spell of a certain spell level the very instant their spellcasting progression reaches said spell level, to reflect the importance of the Bloodline.
Jayson MF Kip wrote: 3/day limit probably isn't balancing enough. Ah, but there is no 3/day limit. Spoiler:
Quote: If a swashbuckler wearing the cloak of feinting performs the superior feint deed or uses this cape’s ability, the opponent is also dazed until the start of the swashbuckler’s next turn. Or uses the cape's ability. As opposed to, and uses the cape's ability. Now, let's see how long it takes for someone to pipe up 'No Problem. Wizards still are better at killing things, so there's no change required'...
bulbaquil wrote: Yeah. I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of GMs houserule (possibly unknowingly, in a de facto sort of way) that native outsiders count as humanoids rather than outsiders for things like disguise self, enlarge person, etc., unless you really would rather your undine disguise himself as a balor rather than an elf. Change the native outsiders in question to Humanoid (Planetouched)... and you rid yourself of a LOT of problems. Just sayin'...GM says: *rolls die* "The monster attacks you for... what was your AC again?"
Matthew Downie wrote:
Hmm... by that very same virtue, you'd argue that Dex damage does not affect your attacks when using Weapon Finesse... Doesn't appear very convincing to me.
LordOfThreshold wrote: Honestly, I think this whole debate comes from New School players unable to play through an Old School scenario. People who are whining about a Goddess not treating them the way they think they should be treated are just the entitled types of adventurers she would not rely on and would pass for better bringers of her will and might. ^This^ Seems that some players will start to whine the very second they are confronted with the existence of someone who is higher up on the food chain than their precious precious characters.
Orfamay Quest wrote: How do I rule it? If it's a melee attack, A hits and Z needs to roll. If it's a ranged attack, things like cover and concealment come into effect and I'd have to think harder. Ah, but part of the AC (your armor bonus, at least) is a simplification of the armor protecting you from damage - which it won't stop doing because you aren't trying to avoid the blow. As for ranged attacks... don't forget things like size and range. If not trying to evade a ranged attack would result in an auto-hit, archery contests vs. immobile targets would be quite... boring.
Indeed. Quote:
should be worded as Quote:
to have the static bonuses be affected by the multipliers Vital Strike and its cousins provide. As written, the static bonus for a large creature that employs Mythic Vital Strike just goes into overkill (Wildshaped Mythic Druid with Strong Jaw, anyone?)
Snorter wrote: A proposal I made in the Beta testing, was that the bloodline spell of each spell level should be gained earlier. Therefore, the level 2 spell would be gained at caster level 4, when their other second-level spells were learned. Seconded, thirded and fourthed. I can live with the Sorcerer getting his spells a level late. However, the variety of spells when reaching a new level leaves much to be desired. Every single six-level progression class gets two new spells known when they reach a new spell level. The Oracle gets access to three new spells known (one from her spell progression, one from her mystery, plus a cure or Inflict spell). The Sorcerer is the only class that gets one. Granting these Bloodline spells a level early (or two levels early, in case of the first level spell), at the very moment the Sorcerer comes into the power level to actually cast them would both be thematically appropriate (these spells are a cornerstone of his arcane definition, after all) and remove the 'single spell to spam' effect the Sorcerer is suffering from at the time.
Detect Magic wrote: I thought bastard swords were pretty simple. What's the confusion? It's a two-handed weapon that you can wield in one hand if you have the feat. What am I missing? In a nutshell, Malachi claims that a bastard sword of any size, not just your own, is considered a martial weapon when wielded two-handed. Others (including myself) are of the opinion that the "One Handed = Exotic / Two Handed = Martial" equation is valid for Bastard Swords designed for your own size, and is subject to the same scaling rules as the usual handedness of weapons. Oh, and the Bastard Sword is not a 'two-handed weapon that you can wield in one hand with EWP'. For all design purposes regarding cost, hardness, and the like it is a one handed weapon.
Actually, it has come up before... and answered in the FAQ. FAQ wrote: As presented on page 549 of the Core Rulebook, there are no limitations other than (1) you have to have the item creation feat, and (2) you cannot create potions, spell-trigger, or spell-completion magic items without meeting their spell prerequisites. So racial requirements, specific spell requirements, math requirements (such as "caster level must be at least three times the enhancement bonus"), and so on, are all subject to the +5 DC rule.
ciretose wrote: That seems to be the other sides central argument. In fact, it is. I have been burned by at least one too many snowflake who sabotaged the party, the story or both claiming to 'just being playing my character' that I have come to the point of simply refusing to GM a group containing concepts that will not work together. Likewise, if I offer to GM a certain setting (let's just take the courtiers-in-Kyonin as an example), I will treat a player's idea of "Oh, I will be playing an Ugh-me-tough half-orc neanderthal barbarian, then" as just another way of saying "Not interested in your crap." Yes, I do have a plot in mind when I offer to GM something. Just tossing your characters out into a world-sized sandbox with the PCs as the only driving force is not what I offer; if you require that kind of play, please find yourself another GM. I can, and I will help players integrate the occasional oddball into the scenario, as long as things do not get odd enough to break my own suspension of disbelief. However, I require the player in question to play with me in these cases. Give me a reason why this character is on this setting. Give me a reason why this character would want to travel with the group, and why the group would want to have him. If you bring a snow elf winter witch (from a violently xenophobic tribe, to boot) into a desert campaign, simply stating "Well, she's diffetent" when asked about your reason to be there is not gonna cut it. I play this game because I want to have fun. As soon as you force me to do things that are un-fun for me, two things happen:
TL;DR: I offer a certain campaign, in a certain setting, within certain parameters.
Rynjin wrote:
Frankly, if I were in the the GM's shoes in that situation, I'd advise the players to change the GM, as well. Supply and demand. I offer a campaign, which may or may not place certain limits on what may be a viable concept.
Arikiel wrote: I don't know. The way I run it demons are pure evil and chaos given physical form. It's not just a person that's been lead astray and needs to be shown the error of his ways. Outsiders are the embodiment of concepts and not whole beings like mortals. That's what makes mortals so special. To even begin to change a demon's fundamental nature would require something of cosmic significance imo. They wouldn't so easy question their ways just because you shows weakness (mercy). Umm... Arikiel... you are aware that this very AP sports a redeemed demon in a prominent role, aren't you?
Icyshadow wrote: Wait, Treerazer can grant domains? Being a nascent demon lord, he can grant divine spells, along with domains and their associated powers. Speaking of nascent demon lords... Umm... Set, you forgot to include a nascent demon lady in your list.
(at least, this is what the almighty T-Rexaur said back then)
Marthkus wrote: Summons aren't NPCs, and you can't summon NPCs. So what's the point of the argument again? Frankly, unless you're prepared to be told "I don't have authoritative info on that type of daemon / qlippoth / herald of Groetus you're trying to call via planar binding or planar ally", I'd recommend you bring the stats for any creatures you call as well. Same goes for your character polymorphing himself, an NPC, or another PC. You add a resource to the game, or change an existing one, you are the one who is forced to be able to state its abilities, from a legal source. Can't be that hard... or can it?
Chevalier83 wrote: Conclusion: Spell like abilities obviously grant a caster level of some kind. If it works for (general) item creation, it works for PrCs as well. Granting a caster Level says exactly ZERO about counting as the ability to cast spells of a certain spell level. Last time I checked, the PrC entry prerequisite was 'able to cast ($flavor) spells of Level X', rather than 'caster level Y'. I am aware that SLAs count as being of a certain spell level regarding concentration checks or penetrating various defenses... yet still, they are something different from actual spells of the associated level. Unless my memory fails me, it is repeatedly writen that 'SLAs are not spells'. If you come across a PrC, or Feat that requires 'able to cast Daylight', go ahead with your Aasimar. You are fulfilling that prerequisite. Likewise, your friendly neighborhood Succubus will easily qualify for any Feat of PrC that requires 'Caster Level X' (if X < 13). However, if the requirement is 'able to cast arcane (or divine) spells, your SLAs just won't do the trick.
karossii wrote: Possibly from the linked info; http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fm#v5748eaic9qow Quote:
I am aware of that one (I think I actually stated that very example). However, while being able to cast Dimension Door (whether as a spell, a SLA) obviously qualifies as being able to cast Dimension Door (duh!), the connection to 'thus is able to cast 4th level arcane spells' (or even 'cast arcane spells' at all) is the very link I am missing. The fact that a Dimension Door SLA counts as being arcane does not make it an arcane spell. The fact that I can create magical items that require Dimension Door, supplying my SLA in lieu of the spell does not make my SLA an actual arcane spell So; a Feat, a PRC, or whatever that needed the ability to cast Dimension Door would easily accessible by having the SLA.
Sorry to rain on your collective parade, but... Where exactly did you come to the conclusion that an SLA meets the prerequisite 'must be able to cast X - level arcane spells' for a prestige class? I see a 'yes' to item creation, I see a comment that most SLAs count as arcane (nota bene: not as arcane spells), and I seem to remember that having a particular SLA (e.g. Dimension Door) qualifies for the prerequisite 'Capable of casting Dimension Door. However; that's about it. So, I am unable to follow the leap of logic along the lines of 'SLAs are arcane, so they must be arcane spells, so they are a qualifying ticket into PrCs'. I'm sorry to say, but this whole attempt to loophole a shortcut into EK, MT or whatever PrC still appears illegal to me, on top of actually pinning the cheese-o-meter. Question: For all it's worth, why did no one of you plainly ask the question 'Can I meet a PrC's requirement of can cast arcane spells of Level X or higher' by possessing a SLA of appropriate level?'
Folkish Elm wrote:
DR only applies to weapon-type damage (i.e. damage which can be classified as piercing, bludgeoning or slashing). The damage dealt by Holy Water does not belong into these categories, and, as such, is unaffected by any DR the target might possess.Plus, it is not classified as being one of the resistable energies, so any Energy Resistance will be worthless, as well. (In fact, the only effect that reduces Holy Water damage I can name from the top of my head would be Corruption Resistance)
Kazaan wrote: Since it doesn't specify swapping a Bonus Fighter Feat or a Bonus Combat Feat, it seems logical that, in the absence of a specific restriction as exists in other classes (ie. Magus, Summoner) and by the precedent of multi-class meshing being permissible (ie. Orc bloodline benefiting non-sorc spells), it stands to reason that, so long as you earned the feat by a Bonus Feats class ability, you can trade it out. Well, let's see what happens if I apply your logic on something else in the Core Rulebook (something that was brought up by Ravingdork, IIRC) CRB wrote:
Note that nothing in the second paragraph indicates that I have to swap out my old spell for a spell from the Sorcerer list. Heck, even the initial paragraph only claims that I draw my spells primarily from the Sor/Wiz list, thus making it obviously clear, that by logic, I am fully within my rights to swap out an old spell for any kind of spell, doesn't it?
Mechanics aside, I must say I have to agree with the OP, flavor-wise. Last time I checked, a Sorcerer was able to wield magic due to some ancient or eldritch powers singing in his blood. Like the magic of Dragons.
Coming soon to a supplement near you: The Commoner Bloodline.
rangerjeff wrote: Also to note, before reading this thread, I had no idea that Tieflings couldn't be the target of X Person spells. It really is so far beyond logic that I never would have guessed, and must have glossed over reading those parts of the ARG or something. You won't find it spelled out in the ARG. The whole 'immune to Person spells' thing is simple and logical application of the rules of 'xxx Person works only on Humanoid type targets'. Actually, this is only the tip of the iceberg. Sprinkle holy water on an evil human sorcerer, he'll get wet. Sprinkle the same holy water on an evil Oread sorcerer, ooh, look at the effect of holy water having on evil outsiders. Tieflings (and Aasimar, Sylphs, etc.) are utterly unaffected by an Antilife Shell. Because 'Humor doesn't translate well', any Aasimar is less likely to be affected by a Hideous Laughter spell cast by a human. Your friendly Succubus Bard, on the other hand, is quite adept at finding the perfect punchline for her fellow outsider. A Tiefling cannot ever use a Hat of Disguise to appear human (as you cannot appear as another creature type). Disguising himself as a fire elemental, though, is no problem at all. While Shadows and normal Vampires still can easily kill your average Tiefling, they cannot change him into one of their own (the Shadow's spawn ability working only on humanoids, the vampire's only on creatures of their own type) Should I continue? Yes, some of these effects are counter-intuitive. Some are illogical. Yet, it is the developer's explicit intent that the planetouched races are Native Outsiders, period. So, I wouldn't count on that changing anytime soon. Frankly, my group has found the whole shebang to be more hassle than it's worth, and we have shifted the 0HD Native Outsider races to Humanoids with the (planetouched) subtype, and I recommend this house rule to whatever group I am playing with... but this is, and will remain, a house rule.
Frankly, I think instating the policy of 'No rules questions, folks' as a response to that ominous 'get your house in order' thread was... kind of an overreaction. There are many forumites (myself included) who liked to get an opinion on how the creative director was seeing the rules without intending to use the 'JJ said this, so your differing opinion must be ZOMGBADWRONG!!1!11' hammer. Might I kindly ask you to return to giving out your personal opinion about how you think some things should be resolved?
I just checked in for voting, and feel the urgent need for adding a possibility to declare 'None of these items should advance'. Out of the first 10 items I saw, precisely zero adhered to the template. I am not talking a wrongly placed semicolon, but all caps instead of bold text, the ubiquious 'wonderous item' and the like.
Is it just me? Am I too harsh, or elitist? Did I get off with a bad start?
I must admit, the so-called 'Most important rule: Did you warn him?' is the one I disagree with. Granted; in most cases, the Paladin (or rather, his player) should be be given the chance to see he is straying from the path; however, there are exceptions. A Paladin that takes offense on the (admittedly outrageous) prices a shopkeeper asks, leaves the shop and tries to set fire to the building the following night will fall without warning in my game. A Paladin who follows a code that states 'My word is my honor' who formally enters parley with an enemy emissary, only to strike him down (with a resounding 'SMITE EVIL') once negotiations have begun with no treachery on the enemy's part will fall. No, I will not accept excuses along the lines of 'Hey, he was evil, so I was doing a good thing.' A Paladin who gains an audience with the Crown Princess, and runs her through before she can finish the sentence of 'Welcome, hero of *urgh*' because, well, the player felt that 'this b#?ch was going to betray us anyway' will fall so hard he reaches terminal velocity before impacting on the floor. As for the 'no win situation': I agree that it is bad form for a GM to make a habit out of crafting a situation that only have 'You fall' solutions for a Paladin. Truth be told, I don't design my adventures that way. However, even if I don't design the adventure in such ways, some antagonist NPC's who have a personal gripe with the PCs will attempt to strike them where it hurts. Their reputations. Their loved ones. Their possessions. Their faith. And if a scheming devil, or an experienced succubus sees a possibility to maneuver the Pally into a situation where he seems to have the choice between falling and failing... trust me, it will do its very best.
|