Search Posts
Weapons for the wrong sized creature are balanced wrong their hilts are sized wrong etc. Basically a longsword for a medium creature isn't shaped the same as a small bastard sword. Or more simply size of the wielder has no effect on the weapon proficiency needed for the weapon.
No where in the shield spell does it say it uses a hand.
What type of golem was it? Killing most golem with AF would take forever. First dropping 4 alchemist fire in one round would result in 4d6 dmg followed by.... 1d6 dmg. Adding more doesn't make them burn more. Create pit is only 1rnd per level and most coleman have alot of hp.
To the op. You may find things easier if you drop the idea and was ever about the middle ages. People fixated on find but ignore player armor 2h weapons etc. A anyhow you need to realize areas of golarion are presented in themes that easily capture players imaginations. For pirates this is the new world pirate. Rather than say 14th century Herman pirates in the Baltic. Its best to just ignore the parts you don't want. But expect most of your playets will think jack sparrow.
My issue with the "cannot draw wands and move" view is it seems to go against how information is normally presented in English. You present the general statement followed by the exception that works with the general statement. Then only evercrefer to the general rule because the specific exception tells you it works with the general rules . So we have the general draw/sheath rule. That tells you there is a draw weapon action and a sheat weapon action. We get an exception yelling us weapon like objects easily at hand can be obtained or put away with these actions. We then get a new paragraph with a rule that only applies to drawing a weapon. Its a new paragraph because it does not apply to sheathing a weapon and the game has already said draw weapon can be used with weaponlike objects. Implying you cannot draw a wand while moving is in my opinion reading it wrong . Its a shame someones character died over it.
The action is called draw or sheath a weapon. It then explains what the action of drawing a weapon is. It then explains this action. An be done withvweapon like objects. It then explains you can do so with +1 bab. The text has already told you the draw weapon action can be done with weaponlike objects they don't need to be mentioned again.
Pay an evil temple to cast the spell. Its cheaper than a scroll . Actually cheaper than raise dead too.
Guns dont do damage their ammunition does. Guns are also ranged weapons not one handed weapons.
However they cannot limit access to obsidian itself.
Most of these are MMO terms, some are from older Tabletops. I believe (and hope) that this post was made as a joke, as these terms have no place in this thread.Toon, mob, aggro, proc, kiting, THACO, buggernauts, solo'd, stunlocked, driveby, and badwrongfun.I'm not familiar with most of these terms, and they aren't commonly used in our region. Are these important ones if people will be playing elsewhere? Sadly I've seen Mob used. For those not aware it stands for mobile object its a Diku Mud term that transfered over to MMORPG. Its supposed to refer to any computer object (ie stuff you can interact with) that moves (mostly monsters but really any computer object that moves that isn't controlled by a player). The problem is the term seems to be shifting as younger players don't actually know what it means and think it just means monster.
Read the universal monster entry on rake. It will get two Cree claw attacks on the grappled target. Pounce provides an exception to the normal come ditiond cot rake.
If I have the enlarge person spell cast on me, and then grab and fire a large size arrow (not a medium arrow that is enlarged, a separate large arrow) will I do large size damage? Stop.. think clearly about what he wrote and what he said.. He is firing a large arrow from a large bow, when he fires the arrow the Arrow returns to its normal size.. which... is Large. Ergo it does large damage.
There really does not need to be any consistancy. Spells set their own rules and pf does not have a he real rule for this.
Right but if you don't know who Zorro is you cannot use divination to find him. Zorro would be an invalid target for divination spells as he doesn't exist. It makes finding him magically difficult unless you can name him.
The bit about spells or su aabilities would prevent sla from working. Don't think counterspelling works for the same reason.
The teleport works fine. The key thing as car as the rules ego is this. The target of the teleport is not the destination. The destination is an effect. If you want to stop people teleporting into an amf then use other spells like forbiddance.
He needs to be a ranger for the boots but yes.
PFS doesn't favour optimization as far as content goes. The vast majority of scenarios are designed that any player can survive and ha e fun. The fact that players are obsessed with optimization or feel its a must is a player paradigm.
A good rule of thumb I have found is if you need to make up rules to explain how something works it likely doesn't work that way. Example we can assume Instant enemy grants FE bonus works with any spells that use Fe And gives an AC the Fe benefit. Anything else require a lot of rules extrapolation not in the spell. Example I have Fe of 6 vs outsider (water)
It seems obvious to me none of these assumptions are correct as they all require slot of information not in the spell.
Most balance issues don't really exist outside of theorycraft. A few issues to a dress though. First the message boards seem to give the impression OF is harder than it is. This then confuses the issue as people push optimization as a me wasn't sure for survival. There's nothing wrong with optimization but you only need to be as optimized as the people you play with. Second it doesn't matter if one class is better than another unless two players are doing identical things in the same group.
It doesn't matter where the bloody skeleton was. It can't charge as a readied action. But yes it gets both a readied action and an Aoo depending on situation. As for the scrags charge it continues unless his original path is blocked. If the conditions for the charge cannot be met the charge ends.
walls and seems to be a mix of mwangi empowerment nascent nationalism fueled by a le mummy sungod child. Throw in fear legitimate grievances and mix it together. I would assume a anything non human is either paying tribute or subjigated. Assume ice its competition its self with hostility.
First this isn't a somatic issue. Its a polymorph issue. You also make somisunderstandings. 1) polymorph only cares about shape and aether that shape has either an explicit ability to cast spells or an implied pattern. If you are subject to a polymorph effect and it is humanoid or dragon shaped you are good. For creatures that can speak but do not have limbs polymorph does not convey the ability to make somatic gestures. The fact that naga may r may not have somatic spells isn't relevant. The problem with elementals is they are not defined well for manipulative digits. Though I think the consensus is they can wield weapons and cast spells.
I don't think any feudal systems used anything so complex. A lordhad lesser lords under him and they brought their men to his service. The base feudal structure in some ways is counter intuitive to large modern army Co dots. One thing to keep in mind is much of feudal warfare consisted of the population of a modern high-school going to war with another school. One lord could have 1500 men in his service and 3 lesser lords with 600 each. The thing is the lesser lords might have zero loyalty to eacother and each would betray their Leicester it he prove weak. None of the men have any loyalty beyond their. Own feudal obligations. In short they are somewhat counter productive to modern warfare. None of the modern concepts are intuitive to how humans fought wars much of history. Sure there are exceptions but first you need your setting. Then let setting g dictate army style.
When a class feature is traded out the class litterly does not have it. You don't possess any class feature until it is given to you.
Vital strike isn't to replace a full attack and shouldn't be compared to it. Its an option for when you have to move.
The key thing is flurry of blows is as if using the two weapon fighting feat. Flurry is a full attack action. Twf normally modifies a faa. But as mentioned earlier your allready using Ted when you flurry and it doesn't stack with itself.
standard polymorphic rules cannot be subject to a polymorphic effect and another spell that changes size. Even if the polymorphic changes you into a creature the same size as your normal size. Basically polymorphic effects don't work with enlarge or reduce person. Edit reread your question yes it works as brownfur transmuted just says transmutation not poklymorph. If it didn't it wooksnt work with beastsgape either as those are also size bobuses.
Monks have no special twf rules outside of flurry. If your not using flurry you follow the same restrictions S's everyone else.
A small 2h weapon cannot become a black blade. Effort to wield and weapon category are seperate
Yes... to be clear a roc isn't a valid ac for s ranger outside of pfs. There os no reason to expect pfs to change this. Or to simplify things you need something go say you can select the roc as an ac.
Ac are presumed to know how to use any ability they posses. If a feat or trait has been legally applied to an ac the dm has no grounds to restrict its use.
I can't figure out why two falcata. You can twf with falcata buckler...baby take more penalties?
If it is in reference to channel it has its own clause. It hurts the living or heals undead not both.
Applying old rules for firing into melee or fumble never works. The primary reason is the number of attacks. Between the two systems. In 2ed at the highest levels as an archer I get 4? AttCks with hyper special ializtion. In Pf I can spend 3 feats and I get 6 arrows mid level 7 for haste. The big thing is it is a burden placed on one type of character in the game which basically ruins the play. Ask yourself this..why play an archer when a wizard never has to make these checks? No one asks a wizard to roll a d20 every 2d6 of fireball to see if he hits a team mate. But essentially an archer has to do this... and more as he gets better. Its a bad house rule.
When you read class abilities they are written as the only class. They are never raised by multiclassing unless explicitly stated.
My guess is the answer is no. For one swift actions are only done on your turn. Secondly interrupts interrupt there is nothing to interrupt during initiative .
You made one mistake. It wouldn't stack with the bonus from mw weapon. When you add magic enhance ement bonuse to a me weapon it is always lost.
The issue isn't one of a cleric not healing in combat. Its a number of clashing parDigm. Your expectations pf him for being a cleric. His for what he wants being different and esther anyone can recognise what the best choice is.
It looks like the ooze gets the wis drain from the corrupt (su) ability. There seems to be onconsistancy in its damage (1d3 vs 1d6)
Concentration check while grappled is 15+double the spell level + the grapplers cmb.
You'll get a better answer on the 14 as the acg willv e out then. Currently though dd does not advance bloodrager.
The text for the weapon supports the sickle trip chain reach and grapple view.
It is just one. You would add all the penalties on top of the roll.
The part people ignore is you can already reload a repeating crossbow as a free action pulling the Leaver. Loading the case is a different action.
Well you can come to two con lusions either is valid.ban eidolon cannot wear armour of any kind. Either a) the spell fails or b)bit works andvhe recieves no benefit. The key part is instant armour is explicitly armour. Any conclusion that results in an eidolon receiving benefit from armour is not the correct one. Just to be clear. If instant armor gives a full plate it applies all normal penalties to the wearer arcane spell failure acp movement.vital is armour which eidolon explicitly cannot wear. In all honesty reading it mate armour raw has similar issues because it is also expressly armour (we are then told none of the normal penaltiescapply) however the accepted play paradigm is no one treats mate armour as armour.
By raw I dontvthink you can. We have no deific obedience powers for demon lords.cut is easy to extrapolate from the demonic obedience powers but would only work for one of the prc. In the case of empyrean lords I think deific obedience works for one of the prc. Appologies cannot remember all 3 prc names evangelist one other and a melee one. The "one other" is the easiest to apply the prc.
No benefit the spell says it acts in all ways like armor. You would also get all the penalties.
A few points on this post in particular. First, a lot of GMs, myself included, would not allow a tanglefoot bag in a spring-loaded wrist sheathe. I draw the line at the items enumerated in the item listing and a rolled up scroll (of the ones that have been asked of me so far). Second, you don't have to declare a "main hand" and an "off hand" until you start making the attacks and if you're only using a single one-handed weapon (and no shield), you can make your "main hand" attacks with either hand. You could even make one with your right hand, swap the item to your left hand, and make the next one with your left hand. The only time "main hand" and "off hand" comes into play is when two-weapon fighting and assigning the .5x Str bonus to the attacks from one of your weapons. If you are implying you can twf with a single weapon swapping hands nothing in the rules suggests this.
It can hold a divine focus fine can retrieve one too. |
Shopping Cart
|
