|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
I would say no, because the fiery shuriken are not mundane objects but actually magical spells. Same applies to shooting an acid arrow through a wind wall. The spells only require ranged touch attacks, have no range increments (the kind which apply penalties to the attack roll), and does fire damage (as opposed to weapon damage). I'd say the shurikens pass right through.
It depends. Is the weapon a two-handed weapon with the caveat that sometimes it can used one-handed? Or is it a one-handed weapon that is restricted to two weapons without a certain feat?
I believe the bastard sword is a two-handed weapon that can be held in one hand, which means a large bastard sword cannot be used in one or two hands by a PC. I am pretty sure I've read something on this and recommend further investigation into what the the Devs/FAQ/Mr. T-Rex has said on this topic.
Large weapons do not have any further reach than medium version of the same weapon. So, to answer your question, no. Theoretically, anything large enough to effectively extend into another ring of five foot squares would be unusual by any creature small enough not to already have such natural reach increase.
The hesitancy comes from the ability to circumvent the natural drawback that is meant to balance out the benefit, namely an extend reach. I agree to a point; I would never let someone just use the longspear as a club for free but I would allow the Catch Off Guard feat to work in this case (making it a 1d6 improvised weapon). The reasoning is that I don't mind players avoiding drawbacks if they spend a feat to do so, be it catch off guard, imp. unarmed strike, exotic weapon prof, etc.
We were playing a friend's very first dungeon. So, of course, when we found our way into a tunnel behind the throne room, the cleric just cast Transmute Stone To Mud and there was the boss. So the bad guy is some kind of fighter/wizard hybrid. He casts fly and moves into the air so he can better rain down spells upon us. The dwarf fighter gets fly and charges him through the air.
He hits with the dwarven waraxe. Crit. Confirmed. Roll Damage (2d6+10, x3) was 5 6 6 5 6 6 = 34 + 30 = 64. Fort save against massive damage: rolled a 2.
We killed the boss on the first round of combat after exploring only a fifth of the whole dungeon. The friend never GM'ed again.
Remember kids, the boss is where you want him to be when you want him to be there. If the players break into an area early, the boss just happens to be elsewhere.
*pokes around in the rules**searches some forums*
*tries to remember origin of idea*
Hmm. I believe we used the bit of a druid's wildshape ability which says they cannot speak in animal form with the fact that an elemental lacks the physical mechanisms for normal (non-elemental) languages. Made sense at the time and my (now disbanded) party's druid seemed to think it was reasonable.
However, there's no reason I can find that specifically prevents it, so there you go.
Eldon, you're mistaken as to the details of wild shape. The druid does not become an elemental, he simply gains abilities similar to an elemental. They do not gain all the immunities and defenses defined in the monster type. They only gain what is specifically outlined in the Polymorph rules and the particular spell being emulated.
When determining what is gained, first read the rules on Polymorph as it describes the very specific rules of what you don't get and what you lose. Next you read Elemental Body 1 to see limited features are gained from the wildshape. Lastly, you would read Druid Wild Shape rules to learn any additional restrictions.
Sure, they have hours and hours of this. But they do not become the type into which they are shaping, so they do not gain the immunities or resistances unless the spell specifically states they do. A druid in fire elemental form can actually be burned to death; they only get Fire Resistance 20.
Another fun fact: elementals can't talk, so I hope the druid player isn't trying to communicate while in the form of an elemental.
Also, small elementals are pretty weak. I mean, they can scout really well, but that's kind of it.
Not functionally. Initiative checks set your position relative to the other people involved in the fight. After that, the order is set and only things like delaying or readying an action can functionally shift your location in the order. Basically, the reasoning is to ensure that each entity in the encounter gets a turn before anythings gets a second turn.
Archer Inquisitors are very powerful. They can throw down some pretty amazing self buffs for damage and have a whole handful of tricks allowing them to handle a melee throw down (either to escape or just beat the thing to death with a sword). It is a very strong build.
The synthesist summoner is a dangerously powerful build. Between the relative confusion of how the summoner/eidolon work together in a large set of scenarios and the simplicity of the build that allows even relatively new players to build a very powerful character. Unfortunately, relatively new players tend to end up playing with relatively new GMs who don't know enough about the rules to either manage the confusion or properly handle a synthesist's power which exacerbates the issues enormously.
However, just because you aren't playing the MOST powerful build possible (and it isn't a summoner, they are just the easiest to understand and build), it doesn't mean the Archer Inquisitor isn't very powerful. There are threads on the board, one just the other week actually, that addresses means by which a GM can handle archers in the game. We can help things go back to being a challenge for everyone, rather than the cakewalk that Inquisitors can make out of certain common-to-new-GM encounters.
Early on it can be quite good. Wizard may not have any spells left but can grant a +2 to the fighter, which is a solid 33% increase in attack bonus. But in higher levels, +2 is only a ~15% increase, the aiding player has a lot of options to do in combat, and honestly if they aren't a frontline class then they need to get far away from the bad guy. Usually at this point, if getting away is impossible, full defense is more useful because you'll get splattered all over your party mate if the monster gets a hit in.
I'd just ignore the weirdness and let the rogue ignore it. He can always fail on a roll of 1. Sometimes rules and effects collide in ways that are not really intended or desired, but it is far easier to just roll with it than try to specifically account for it since changes at how things like this interact can have far reaching ripples.
Also, the rogue isn't necessarily breathing in the superheated air. A combat round is only 6 seconds and holding one's breath for, say, 30 seconds isn't exactly impossible (and while, yes, he is being rather energetic with his exertions during combat, he's also assumed to be in decent cardiovascular health given that he does this for a living).
Usually it is enough that the player said he is "searching the room". It is assumed that the PC is going around the room searching through boxes, examining walls, etc. It is supposed to take minutes to complete and can be considered to test for anything requiring a perception check. Rarely is perception meant to target a specific square.
Now, if there's a chest that has a specific hidden compartment inside it (a false bottom, perhaps), you may want to require a specific perception from whomever opens that chest.
I would argue that blink is a bad idea. A melee character's purpose is to hit things and the miss chance goes directly against that single goal. While blink has a lot of other benefits, not hitting a target is too great a penalty. Remember, if offense is not the melee character's best defense, that character shouldn't be in that fight.
Because half the group was Good aligned and did not agree with looting the mansion of a guy who may not be dead or evil. The disagreement between "maybe the Whispering Way lied and the Count isn't a bad guy" and "no one is looking so lets load up the wagon and get rich!" overflowed into real life and almost destroyed the gaming group itself.
I had to step in and force the issue that the PCs were not actually looters, even the Neutral characters, and to make them not loot the place. Was better than ending the adventure right there.
So if the druid gets hurt, he chases his tail until he catches it in order to deliver the touch spell? I've watched my cats do this and tail chasing looks pretty complicated and involved; certainly takes more than a few seconds. Perhaps the druid is also using it with an attempt to confuse and confound the enemy?
Seriously though, no he can't. Touch spells are still involve a touch attack (though the target may choose to be willing, it just means you automatically hit). Touch attacks must be delivered by something that can deliver attacks. The leopard's tail cannot be used to deliver attacks since it is not a natural weapon. Ergo, no touch spells on the tail.
The relevant text: "She still retains the Hit Dice, base attack bonus, saving throw bonuses, and skill ranks of the prestige class, but gains all other class features of her aligned class as well as those of the evangelist prestige class."
Pretty straight forward - you continue to add the 10 evangelist levels to the wizard levels for calculating everything mentioned above. Basically, you gain the hit dice, BAB, Saving Throws, and skill ranks of a level 6 wizard and the features of a level 16 wizard.
Yeah... as written, the consecrate effect is at will (so long as it is on a sturdy surface and not disturbed). Of course, that may be sloppy editing and the 'once per day' should be transitive across the bless and consecrate abilities. It would still require a standard action to activate. No additional costs are required to activate a magic item (unless otherwise noted).
The monster would still have to take a movement action, but it can simply stop moving whenever it wants. So it can react to being hit by stopping movement to face the new threat, it doesn't have to keep going to the intended end location, however once it has declared it is 'moving' (regardless of distance) the move action has been taken and it can no longer use full attack actions or five foot steps.
Lets say you are hiding behind a pillar and a monster fails to see you. As it walks past you, you get an AOO. When you take it, the monster becomes aware of you. After resolving the AOO, the monster may now choose to continue moving, change direction, or stop moving.
Readied actions allow you to delay part of your turn until a certain condition is triggered. This condition expires at the start of your next turn in the initiative order, when you get another full round action. So you have already moved 10 feet this round and are just readying your standard action at this point.
Combat rounds are defined as a complete pass through the initiative order, but it is a personal value, not a global one. Each character gets one action in a round of combat, true, but 'full round actions' start on the character's turn and end just before the character's next turn, not at the top of the initiative order.
Half my group wanted to loot, half my group threatened to walk out of the adventure. They didn't loot the castle. In thanks for being rescued, the Count gave them a prize equal to the value of the goods they could have looted.
The solution is easy to implement and the players won't even know they could have looted the place. Unless you give them price tags next to every item or they are the kind of 'adventurer' that robs a place blind.
As for the value? Pop open a calculator and add things up during a quick read-through.
Try this thread which is really just a collection of links to other threads regarding the "Does Catch Off-Guard count as improvised weapon proficiency?" question.
The general idea is that no, technically there is no way to become proficient in an improvised weapon HOWEVER it is also perfectly reasonable for a GM to choose to interpret Catch Off-Guard as making one proficient in improvised weapon. Just remember that this is not a formal definition.
In a home game, I'd totally let you run this concept. In a PFS game, you are asking for some trouble if the table's GM disagrees with your interpretation.
Well, you're still 'wearing' armor, it is just magically hidden and has no effect upon you... but the intent is that a monk isn't able to move smoothly if wearing armor, but since wild shape gets rid of armor penalties then it isn't going to affect the monk... but the real reason is for balance... So it is up to your GM.
The monk penalty doesn't come from having armor or shield AC bonuses but from specifically wearing armor. A wild shaped creature is NOT wearing armor; they do not suffer penalties from any armor they were wearing in normal form and don't even need to be proficient in the armor type when they have wildshaped. Strictly speaking, you retain the Monk bonus (unless I'm unaware of any FAQs on the matter, of course).
However, I would not allow it because it is clearly against the intent of the rule, which is that the monk AC bonus is to be used in place of, not in support of, real armor.
He doesn't have to hold his holy symbol, he simply has to have it prominently displayed (on a chain around his neck, on a tabard, worked into the hilts of the two swords, or even engraved on the swords).
If he is holding two scimitars, he can attack twice as a full round action; this means he cannot take a move action (move more than a single 5 foot step), pull out an item from a bag, pick something up, or cast any spells. If he does move, then he can only attack once.
Two more points: Playing as the GM and a PC is somewhat hard (as is GMing for your fiance since you don't want a lucky crit from the goblin king to leave you sleeping on the couch, heh). You know the DCs, the ACs, the attack bonuses while the other player doesn't. You control the monsters positions and what they do while also having a vested interest in not having your character die.
It may help to play things a bit more open in terms of monster numbers in the early levels. It makes things a bit more fair and lets you get a feel for the power of a monster given its level when you know the numbers.
Alternatively, you can run the game as the GM and have your fiance basically run the PCs. You can still do the combat stuff for your guy, but the one player decides (with your suggestions, if you want) where to go and what to do. It isn't especially easy and takes some work, but you can look for suggestions on playing a solo / single PC / one on one game (different terms for the same thing) to get ideas on how to best do it.
Some are just one PC, others have a 'GM PC' to help (like you are doing now), and others involve a PC plus several NPC followers that can be tapped to help out on adventures (say five or so and the player can take two or three along as needed). Single PC games can involve a lot more stealth or subterfuge, they can have much deeper and involved stories (since you don't have to worry about claims of favoritism, you can actually have a single PC be the "chosen one" and give them a lot of attention).
PS - Using pre-gen characters is a great idea when starting, not unorthodox at all.
1) The beginner's box is a subset of the game. You won't really have to learn different rules from what you know, just more rules than you know. It is relatively easy to start plugging in some of the advanced systems, opening up the various choices (feats, spells, races, classes), and otherwise slowly expanding from the BB base.
2) Turns only have meaning in combat as a way to allow a fair chance for everyone involved to act. Outside of combat, it is personal preference. If there is no more combat or traps, you can stop using the map and turns. If there are undiscovered traps, or monsters waiting to ambush, I may use the map, but I may just keep asking the players what they are doing every minute or so of game time. Once someone hits the trap or triggers the ambush, I'll have the players put their minis down about where they would have been.
3) Well... you get 1 hit point per level from a "full night's sleep". In pathfinder, that is described as a solid 8 hours of rest. Usually, however, this is really 8 hours within a 24 hour period. You cannot sleep for 8 hours, adventure for 2, sleep for 8, adventure for 15 minutes, then sleep for 8 again. However, if you take a day or two off from adventuring and just take it easy for 24 hours, it is perfectly reasonable to gain 3 times the 8 hour rest number.
This 8 hours thing is also needed by spell casters (wizards, clerics, at least) to memorize a spell list and to recharge any used spell slots. It can only be done once per 24 hours.
4) Remember that this isn't a video game. It is a living story within a living world. It is generally smart, as the GM, to always let the players have some way to run away if things get bad (it sure beats having everyone die, at least in the early levels). However, the players may have gotten out but the Goblins are still going to go about their lives. They may fortify, bring in more guards, or set ambushes to attack the PCs when they return.
Try to think as a goblin from their point of view; what did the PCs say and do? What do the goblins want? What would they do to PCs who attacked them vs ones who tried to be nice and left when the king got angry. Maybe the king demands money or for the PCs to go kill some kind of monster for him after they were so rude last time!
5) Always round down (so yes, half of 1 is 0).
6) As with question four, it is always a more interesting story to keep PCs alive than to kill them. Later on, when everyone is far more skilled with the game, killing PCs is different (some games are bloodbaths with each player running through a half dozen characters while others never feature PC death either because the GM avoids it or the players are just very good).
In this situation, I'd have monsters knock the players unconscious (-1 or worse hit points) and then go after the other guy. Then the two PCs would wake up in a jail and have to get out through roleplaying and/or combat... or outside the cave with a crude note saying "and don't come back!". These outcomes are a far more interesting story, and the point of the game is to have interesting stories.
7) Heal is a skill. Skills are an area that is simplified from the full game, so assume in this case that if you have the skill (ranks were put into it, which may be automatic with the pregen characters) then you can use any action it allows. Heal is mostly for out of combat use (except for the check to stabilize someone), to provide care and thus allow more hit points to be gained back with rest.
As for monster care, I don't have the Beginner's Box and can't be certain of the specific wording. As for healing monsters, well, it may come up. If you decide to not kill the Goblin King after beating him, maybe you'll need to use some first aid (showing mercy may be a good thing, though realistically, a goblin would likely turn on you the moment it can).
8) Again, I don't have the book, but in general if there is no specifics on something in the adventure book (which happens), then it is up to the GM (one of their jobs, in fact) to fill in the missing details. You try to make it seem reasonable and have it fit within the game. Would a bunch of goblins let you take their treasure, even if you did help them? Not likely, but maybe you can get them to pay you extra with some use of Diplomacy? Or maybe you can have one PC distract the goblins while the other sneaks over to grab some gems or an item. Though be sure to know what you'd do if the plan fails!
9) Again, whatever seems reasonable. They probably wouldn't be allowed to walk right up to the King; most likely, the guards would stop the PCs and lead them over to the king.
Generally, you want to let the PCs place their models on the board in a reasonable location when a scene with combat starts. By reasonable, it can be a bit tricky. If you say "place your models on the map" or "can I have a perception check?", the players know there's about to be a fight and may try to be a bit... unrealistic about placement. "oh, uh, well my ranger just happened to have climbed this tree over here right before the bandits attacked... because, uh, he likes climbing trees?" is a bit suspicious. However, if the ranger was on the side of the road looking at some plants because earlier he said he was keeping an eye out for certain herbs, then that's totally fine.
10) You generally don't tell anyone anything. However, any PCs with a bit of attention will figure out the AC by simply taking note of what does and doesn't work. If a 16 misses but a 17 hits... the AC is 17, so it really isn't a big secret. However, I won't start off the fight by saying that either. You would not tell them about the bad guy's attack bonuses or hit points though.
It may not be a bad idea to come up with phrases like "he is unhurt", "he is a bit bloody but still coming at you", "he is definitely limping but is determined to fight on", and "he is swaying and has some difficulty focusing on you as he swings his sword" to give the PCs a feel for how damaged the monster is. I am also a fan of the "He's hanging by a thread" or "a few threads" or "six threads" when a monster has just a hit point or two (or six, heh) left.
I also tend to hint heavily at, say, a wizard who is planning on spending a big spell on something that is a sling stone away from death because no one likes wasting a burning hands when the goblin has 2 hit points left
11) Officially, PCs don't know what any magical item is until it has been identified. This can be fudged a bit, especially if they already have a few potions of CLW and can say "hmm, looks the same, tastes the same, smells the same" in comparison. Now, you can still use something that isn't identified. A +1 magic sword still gives +1 to attack and damage even if you have no idea that it is a magic sword.
You can hint at it though: if the PC attacking a goblin gets, say, a total 15 to-hit and the monster has a 16 AC, you can even say something like "Your sword strikes true but the goblin turns to block the blow with his thick armor. To you, but more importantly the goblin's surprise, the blade punctures the heavy leather and draws blood!". This indicates that it hit a bit better than simple skill (the PC's normal attack bonus) would suggest, hinting at it being a magical weapon. However, in my games, I don't generally bother with hiding what a magic item is or does; PCs like magic items so much and identification is pretty straight forward that I'd rather just give it to them straight.
Lastly, you need to always keep in mind that the game as written is for a group of four players. If you only have two, you will probably want to make combat less busy; reduce the number of bad guys by 25-50% (especially boss fights). You can also stagger combats to make it less of a bum rush. For example, the Goblin King may let his guards attack the PCs first and won't get involved himself until the guards are mostly dead.
The written adventures are frameworks with suggestions built into them. They are never expected to be run 100% by the book because every party is different. Some groups will absolutely destroy anything considered by the rules as "level appropriate", so the GM makes stuff much harder. Other groups may not have any arcane spell casters, so the GM has to change the arcane puzzle into something the PCs can actually solve. It is alright if the PCs fail, but they should fail while trying, rather than fail because they can't even try.
As for getting a thrown knife or a used bolt. The official rule (from the full game) is that you can always retrieve the thrown weapon, but ammo is different. If it hits the target, it is considered destroyed. If it misses, there's a 50% chance that it is still usable. Of course, this assumes the PCs can loot the room; it may be that the PCs win the fight but run out immediately to chase a running goblin (which is usually more important than recovering a few arrows).
However, it is also going to make the game much faster if you assume thrown weapons are automatically retrieved after the fight (unless they have to run away) and ammo is always destroyed. As with many things, you are trading a bit of realism away to make things move a bit more smoothly.
Welcome to Pathfinder! It is a different kind of game than most are useful, it takes some getting used to and practice to even be a player, let alone a GM. However, it is also a whole lot of fun; where else can you create a world of your own bound only by imagination? Where you choose the direction of the adventure and tell the stories you want to tell!?
Feel free to post any questions, comments, concerns, funny stories, or anything really on the boards and the community will be here to help!
Sure, I get your theory, but the rules don't support it. You could probably argue that you could use it to, say, climb and thus make the check with int mod instead of strength mod. However, it doesn't let you attack any differently because the rules don't give any reason to provide the capability to swing a sword harder or throw a weapon with more force.
However, your GM may agree with your theory; it isn't especially game-breaking since it is a limited use ability and by the time you can use it a notable number of times a day you will not be doing much melee attacking.
Cost of a magic weapon or armor or shield: Sum all the enchantment bonuses (+1 through +5) with the bonus equivalent values of the various qualities. This number is the weapon's total enchantment value.
Take the total enchantment value to the cost table and there you go!
If you're upgrading a weapon, you pay the difference between the value of it currently subtracted from the cost of a weapon with the new enchantment value.
So, for the purpose of costs, a +3 rapier and a +1 ghost touch agile weapon is the same amount of gold.
It is worth noting that archery is the key to high damage in Pathfinder. It is also worth noting that as the GM, it is your job to ensure combat is challenging for the group, and while the adventure paths are a great framework/starting point, they will definitely require some modification as you progress.
I had the same issue in my Carrion Crown game. Inquisitor archer that would absolutely destroy things. So I played dirty. Potions of invisibility, casters with greater invisibility and wind wall and darkness and obscuring mists, ambushes, etc. I killed him twice and both times were by having something very large corner him and trade bow shots with AOOs. I also stymied his actions with various spells and by adding casters that were not normally in the creature layout for a fight. And minions. Lots of minions that would soak up one to two arrows but still be strong enough to threaten the lower AC casters.
Now, Carrion Crown is nice because you spend the the later books fighting through ranks of a cult, so it is entirely expected that the bad guys will learn the party's combat patterns and tactics, then move to block it (potions of Freedom of Movement became a lot more popular amongst the cultists after the monk grappled and murdered one of the bigwigs in the cult, heh).
So don't feel bad about employing counteractions when the players get crazy. I wouldn't target him from the get go of a fight, but even random one-off combats (in which foreknowledge of a super archer is unlikely) can have a sudden focus on the archer in the back because he killed three people in his first full round. That's usually enough to get some attention from any controllers or ranged types on the bad guy's side.
Lastly, make the combats more dynamic. Add columns, trees, bushes, and underbrush. Have enemies come at the party from multiple angles and stagger the arrival (great way to jump up a fight's size safely; if it is going poorly for the good guys, you can always pretend the final wave was actually on the other side of the castle).
I'd often take three or four combats and just roll them together so there was always a bit more stuff to worry about that players to handle. Sure, the inquisitor is killing the Grillion I wanted to use to grapple the wizard to death, but that means he can't be sniping the four blade spiders coming in to dismember the bard in the other room.
By "combat manoeuvre" do you mean trip, grapple, disarm, sunder, reposition, dirty trick, steal, and drag? Because those are all standard actions, so you can move however you want before you perform them. Of course, some of them require you to be moving, namely bull rush and overrun.
If that's your meaning, then yes you can five foot step or tumble past someone before you trip them.
I suspect, however, you may mean something else?
I'd argue that you would take the penalty because you have to have an extra attack available to give it up for parry. Otherwise you get to use parry and attack at full strength without any penalties or issues. I would also apply it to ripost because that AOO is strictly due to the use of parry, though I am shaky on this part.
I'd say you can use tongues to understand mi-go's clicking/lightshow language but not speak the native language since it isn't speaking but creating visualizations (which the Oracle cannot do unless the PC has strapped a few mind-controlled chameleons to their forehead). The second quote is for when a mi-go must speak to a non-mi-go in a non-mi-go language.
It does not mean that.
The fighter has all the necessary armor proficiencies when qualifying for other feats. What the fighter does NOT have is a feat that granted him the armor proficiency. The issue addressed by the FAQ is that a fighter can exchange feats for other feats (assuming both the old and new feat qualify as fighter bonus feats).
The question asks if a fighter who does not want the heavy armor proficiency can trade the presumed Heavy Armor Proficiency feat for something else. The FAQ specifies that the fighter does not actually have the feat, though he does have the proficiency.
You will continue holding the charge.
Spellstrike says the Magus "can deliver the spell through any weapon he is wielding as part of a melee attack". So it is entirely at the choice of the Magus and requires the Magus to make a melee attack, so I'm not sure you could discharge the touch spell through a trip attempt even if you wanted to do it.
For one, it is an unbiased answer to the question. While in a perfect world one could assume the GM and the Players could all just have a good time and work together, there's a lot of emotional investment in the roles played. An 'official' ruling is one that can't have claims of favoritism, self interest, or vindictiveness.
Even when the people involved are all friends who can get along, it is nice to have something that maintains the desired power curves and intent of the development group. Officials can consider more than the small specific scenario that generated the question. They may know of combinations that the GM or player doesn't know of and thus they can move to counter it. They also maintain a general equivalent level of power and similar intent. This is, of course, up for debate... but that leads me to the final point.
Any rule, even ones that are officially ruled, are free to be house ruled or modified by the GM. An 'official ruling' is a good way to have a starting point from which house ruling can expand.
Of course, in PFS, the situation is different because the GMs can't arbitrarily modify the rule system and consistency between games is paramount; official rulings drive that consistency. Also there are GMs like myself who enjoy staying as close to official rulings as possible and will revert house rules if a FAQ comes out that specifically rules differently. But that's just because I'm pedantic.