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

Quatar's page

Goblin Squad Member. 1,622 posts (2,511 including aliases). No reviews. 1 list. No wishlists. 5 aliases.


1 to 50 of 1,622 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Let's say a necromancer has a couple of Skeletons and Zombies.
Now some mean adventurers come around and kill most of his undead buddies before leaving again, but leave the remains lying around.

Can he reanimate those again?

I think it was the False Priest archetype that I had seen.

Yes, doesn't help me in my current situation, unfortunately. Might have to come up with something myself then.

Thanks though for the help

I'm almost sure I saw something like that a while ago.

A cleric disguising himself as a different faith. Using (or pretending to use) a holy symbol of that faith, etc.

PCs got the unhealthy notion that whatever encounter the GM sets before them will somehow be level appropriate. So the question of "Can we really do this?" usually never occurs to them, instead it's "How can we best kill them all?"

But what if they stumble into something that is truly beyond them (for the time being at least)?

Just tell them straight "Guys, I don't think you'll survive this, find another way"?

I'm currently building a Summoner for a Wrath of the Rightious game, and I'm pondering if I should give my Eidolon (biped, sorta humanoid) a big twohanded weapon or focus on natural attacks instead.

I know at low level it's pretty amazing to have 3 or 4 attacks at full BAB when everyone else has 1 or maybe 2 attacks.

But how do natural attacks fare at higher levels? I rarely play there so I don't have too much experience with it.

- I suppose NA Eidolon is more dependent on getting full attacks as often as possible, while the Weapon Eidolon can do lots of damage with a single attack. How often (aproximately) would you say you get a full attack, over not (assume I won't get pounce).
- Does DR really mess that badly with you?
- Does the higher attack bonus (6 attacks at full BAB at 14 vs. 3 weapon attacks + a few natural weapons at -5 [possibly more as I won't get a AoMF and magic weapons]) make up for the lower damage per hit?
- Is the difference (one way or the other) actually really noticable in game, or is it mostly a theoretical debate, because both can easily kill level-appropriate enemies? If the enemy has 100 HPs and I do either 150 or 200 per round, it really doesn't matter.

I'm looking at the Eidolon page, and noticed something I just can't picture.

I'm allowed to trade out the default claws for hooves. Since bipeds are the only base form that comes with claws, that obviously means biped eidolons with hooves are ok.
Similarly, it says claws can be put on feet (only one pair, but you can do it). It doesn't give a limitation to "only quadrupeds" as other things do, and considering the hooves I'd say bipeds are viable targets for this evolution.

But... how? With a quadruped it's relatively easy to figure out how they use it, pretty much like any animal would. But a biped? It just says "you get 2 hoof attacks".

By RAW nothing seems to stop me from equiping my Eidolon with a huge two-handed weapon in it's hands, taking hooves and get 2 secondary attacks (doesn't matter, would be secondary anyway since I use a sword) and a bite as well, for 4 attacks right at level 1.

Are there any rules I'm missing about Natural Attacks on feet, or how am I to picture this?

Thank you guys.

The Skeletal Champion and the Juju Zombie seem both quite perfect for what I have in mind.
The Huecuva is a nice one too, but not the right one really. Though it might be nice for another encounter I plan.

I'm searching for a mini-boss kind of creature for my low level party (They're level 1, might be 2 or 3 by the time the encounter this though)
It's supposed to be an undead pirate captain "in command" of a whole bunch of lesser undead. By "in command" I don't necessarily mean it needs the supernatural "control undead" ability. It's just the one organizing the mindless ones.

- Undead
- Made from human
- Intelligent, aka able to work on it's own without constant orders
- Even better if it regains class levels and memories of it's living days
- Doesn't need a lot (or any) super special powers
- Should be created by a necromancer/ritual/etc. (though I can houserule this part if it's not)
- Able to serve as enemy to a party around level 2

I would say that's pretty much exactly what Adapted is for.

The problem is, if you deny the ranger the chance to IC act and stop the rogue, then YOU are OOC denying him that option.
If the ranger stops the rogue, it's all IC.

Just be careful how that develops. If everyone takes it in good fun, no problem, but some players can take this stuff personal.

Anyway, here's how I would do it:
Depending on how it was RPed, I might allow the Rogue a stealth or bluff check, and the Ranger a Perception/Sense Motive to see if the character even realises what the other is doing.
Have them roll initiative. Ranger can then try to grapple the rogue, or take him out with non-lethal or something. If the rogue manages the CdG, well he succeeded. If not, then not.
Remember CdG is a full-round action that provokes AoO, so he can't move to the prisoner and kill him in the same turn.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm sorry, I don't see that math work. At least not till you get ridiculous Charisma scores.

(Sorry, lots of math following)

You need to cast Dispel Magic against a spell of equal of higher caster level than you. Since you cast it yourself, it's your CL. Making the DC for the Dispel Magic 11+(your caster level). It's caster level of the spell, not the spell level!

Your roll for the dispell is 1d20+(your caster level)+(your charisma mod)

You always have to expend one Arcane Point to even try this.
If you fail the role, it's gone.
If you succeed on the dispel, but fail to exceed it by 5 or more, it's gone.
If you succeed on the dispel by 5 or more, then you get your point back. You just get it back, you don't get more.
Only if you succeed by 10 or more, do you actually make a profit in this.

Now lets look at the numbers. At level 11 we're looking at the following DCs:

To simply dispel: 22
To actually get your Arcane Point back: 27
To in fact get another Arcane Point on top of that: 32

Opposed to that we have your roll to dispel:
1d20 + 11 + Cha Mod

Say Cha Mod of 5 (bit on the low side for level 11):
Results in a roll of 1d20+16

Need a 6 to hit the DC 22, though that doesn't really help.
Needs a 11 to hit the DC 27 and get your points refunded (50% chance for that happening)
Needs a 16 to actually gain an extra point (25% chance)

So 50% of the time you have a loss of 1 Arcane point.
25% of the time you come out even.
25% of the time you make a profit of 1 point.

Ok, it clearly doesn't work with just Cha of 5.

Each increase in Cha reduces the total failure chance by 5%, and increases the chance for the +2 return by 5%.

The tipping point is a Cha mod of 8 (mathematically 7.5, but you can't have that):

35% for losing 1 point (anything below 8)
25% for just coming out even (8-12)
40% for gaining 1 point (13+)

You now have a tiny average profit of 0.05 points per attempt. That's still pretty bad and fairly unreliable.

At Cha Mod 10 we'd look at a profit of 0.25 points per attempt. That's better already, of course, but still nowhere even close to the 1.6 the OP claimed.
I suppose he meant "I get 1.6 back, but still have to pay the 1" making it a net profit of 0.6.

A Cha Mod 13 is required to get a net return of 0.65, but I'm not sure how realistic a Cha of 36 really is at level 11.

The CL doesn't even matter in this equation at all, since it's the same on both sides (DC and check), it hinges alone on the Cha Mod.

Ok, so we all know about the 15-minute adventuring day and why it's bad.

On the other hand I don't want to chase my party through a dungeon full of monsters and not give them a chance to rest. If they have to go through 20 fights they'll not use any of their resources and just save them for the end. That's stupid too.

So, how many is a good number?

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Also there's no such thing as a "skill crit"

If he'd be using a Bastart Sword as a Martial 2hd weapon, he could then decide to use it one-handed. He would take the -4 non-proficiency penalty on it however, unless he also has the EWP feat for it.

With a Greatsword however? No.
If he wants to use the big weapon with the nasty damage, he gotta accept that there are situations where it's not the ideal one. If he wants more flexibility, then he'll has to pay for it with reduced damage or something else.

Yes and the Lame curse doesn't make me faster at all! It makes me slower! Can you imagine that?!

And the clouded vision will always be clouded! Gaaah!

LazarX wrote:

Your only goalpost when you asked for this thread was on reading PDFs. It would have been helpful if you had bothered to mention that you had other requirements which kind of changed the whole dynamic.

As far as Roll20 goes, I'm not sure how any tablet will work for you. Obviously the Kindle is locked out of Google, but much of the others might not get you beyond getting up a Hangout interface.

True, my appologies. The main focus of this thread was to find out how Paizo PDFs display on an actual b/w Kindle, because I was curious about that. And I got this answered, thank you.

The whole Roll20 thing is a different thing, and I wouldn't even have mentioned it. I've been talking with a few people on the Roll20 board about that issue, and it seems it's not too great for it.

So a Kindle Fire might be an option, I hadn't even considered it before, so thank you :)

Yes, I do. But when I'm considering the Kindle Fire, then I'm not comparing it to eBook Readers anymore (where the Kindle family wins), I'm comparing it to tablets like the Samsung Tab 3 or the iPad.
And those might be better to take notes or fiddle with Roll20 etc.

However the Kindle HD seems to be really cheap compared to them, so that's an option.

Hm, isn't the Kindle Fire just basically a "normal" tablet?

Yes, figured as much, but thanks for confirming it. I'll look into getting myself a "real" tablet then.

I'm pondering getting either a Kindle or a full Tablet PC at the moment, and one of the things I want to do is read some of the Paizo PDFs on them.

I know that most eBook Readers can read PDFs, but they're usually black/white too. So I'm sure a few people tried it out already, how do the Paizo PDFs look on a Kindle or one of the other readers like the Sony or Kobo?

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I just LOVED "We be Goblins" as an introductionary module. It let's them do completely silly stuff and at the same time learn the rules.

It's also a great way to break the ice with a new group.

Here's another one that might make a good first adventure:
Crypt of the Everflame - a small, fairly straightforward dungeon crawl with some RP elements, traps, and still room for some creative thinking

You can also target a square intersection directly, with a AC of 5, and everything around it takes splash damage.

Ah,but you barely have any skills as a fighter, so it will only affect one or two skills anyway :)

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Rules As Written. The other thing is RAI: Rules as Intended.
Basically RAW is "the letter of the law", RAI is "the spirit of the law".

Zura's always a good choice. Almost nothing can go wrong with a Zura worshipper in the party.

The only place in the rules where "off-hand" is mentioned is in the TWF section. Otherwise it doesn't matter if you wield a weapon right or left handed.

And the FAQ states that unless you get extra attacks, TWF does not apply.

There is no penalty. Even your strength is calculated normally.

Unless you use TWF to get an extra attack, there is no "off hand"

There's even a FAQ entry about it here

I'm not saying I want rules for sinking ships. Well ok, yes rules, but not rules that result in that. I know that most ship to ship combat eventually turns into a boarding fight, and then it's personal combat scale again.

But I want decent rules for the ship combat in front of it, and not rules where everyone thinks "Oh no, not again!"

haruhiko88 wrote:
I run Skull & Shackles and usually the only person that needs to make a sailing skill check is the captain,

That's more or less what I want to avoid.

That being said, I've heard that frog god games Razor Coast setting has some alternate rules that work better. I just haven't taken a look at them.

Hmm... that seems to be this here:

Has anyone tried that one yet?

Normally I just skip a lot of the chase scenes from Skull & Shackles as it gets boring fast, I have a player that min/maxed for profession sailor so I just say he's that good and they catch up to the other ship. The party enjoys it a bit more than 20 minutes of setup, dice rolling etc.

Thats pretty much what I did in Jade Regent with the caravan after the first two books. But considering that ship combat is far more important to a sea-campaign than caravan combat ever was, I don't really want to do that.

I'm planning to make a ship-campaign, inspired by Skull and Shackles.

So I'm looking for decent ship-combat rules.

Of course Skull & Shackles Player Guide has some in them, but I heard they're not as good, even though I haven't playtested them yet.
But I heard comparisons to the Jade Regent Caravan rules, where it's usually 1 roll of the GM vs 1 roll of the party, till one side has no HPs anymore. It was horribly boring and none of us had fun with it.
Is that true?

UC has Vehicle rules, but the way I understand it, S&S just uses them in a slightly modified form, so not sure they're really any better.

So is there anything out there that makes ship combat work. My criterias on that are:
a) It's fun for everyone (I know fun is relative...)
b) Everyone got something to do each round and has a chance to affect the outcome.
c) They're relatively easy. Sure some new rules have to be learned, obviously, but the more intuitive they are, the better.

No idea if such a thing exist...

Yes, they'd exchange the NPC class for the PC class.

ShadowcatX wrote:
I've never understood, players get one little thing that they can control in a game world, their characters and said character's creation, why do people want to take part of that away from them?

I'm not trying to take that away from them. Once they reach 1st level they can build their character like normal. They can even build the level 0 ones themselves, they're just a bit more limited in that phase.

It's basically supposed to be for the first session or so.

Kolokotroni wrote:
You might want to check out the genius guide to Apprentice level characters. Basically does what you are thinking, with a 0th level character, but does it for all the core classes and the agp classes (as well as a few from the genius guides).

I'll look into that, thanks


I think I read this a while ago, and thought it was an interesting idea, but I have no idea how it plays out and if it's fun.

Basically it goes like this:
Player start at -1000 XP
They only have access to the NPC classes at the start. There's also a Sage class, which is pretty much an arcane Adept.
They'd only start with average HPs for their NPC class (rounded up, PFS style). So yes, a Commoner has 4 HPs + Con mod.

Once they reach 0 XP they trade the NPC class for their real class and get max HPs. After that it continues as normal.

I dunno. It sounds interesting, but has anyone ever tried something like that? It would make the first few encounters more dangerous as they lack important abilities and have less HPs, but possibly also more memorable.

I think it might make "random people thrust into a dangerous adventure" more real, instead of when everyone just starts with a PC class already.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Spoilering just in case players are reading this:


Ok, so I got a real problem with the end, namely Kassen's Ghost, Kassen's stuff and Kassen's Curse.

I get why people bury their dead with some of their possession. I get why those people would enchant the items so anyone stealing them would get cursed.

What I have problems with though is, why the heck would a good ghost actually care? He can't use the stuff. It's just lying there, rotting away, probably till some grave robbers come and steal it and either suffer the curse, or manage to break it. Either way after that the stuff is gone and used for god knows what.

Why would Kassen's Ghost be "Ok, thank you for killing Asar and returning the undead back to their rest, but TAKE YOUR FILTHY HANDS OFF MY THINGS!!!"

Why wouldn't he say "Ok, I don't need that stuff anymore, and I wish for you to have it and put it to good use protecting my town" instead?

I'm almost tempted to leave Kassen's Ghost out of the story entirely, have them piece together what happened from Asar's ramblings, the dead tomb raiders and Dimira's report, just so I can avoid that problem.

The problem with interpreting that rule this way is for example:

I can now have multiple +2 Headbands of Intelligence. They're 4k each, in the later game that's cheap.
Now I put it on and boom, instant maxed skill.
I switch it, boom, instant different maxed skill.

I put on a +Int item as a Wizard, and suddenly have an unused spellslot?
It's empty obviously, so I spend 15 minutes preparing some spell in it. Then I go and cast that spell.
Now I take the item off. The spellslot vanishes again. But meh, it was used anyway. Or does one of the unused ones vanish?
Now I put the headband back on. I get a new unused spellslot?

Sorcerer puts on a +Cha headband and gets an empty spellslot.
He casts a level 1 spell, and then takes the headband off.
Was the spell cast like this, that additional spellslot, or one of his other available level 1s?

I don't think when they said "it works for everything permanent bonuses do" the were thinking of spellslots and the like.
I don't know the original question but "Why does it only apply to some things?" most likely was asking about a thing that logically would be improved by a +Str item (and that everyone improved) but wasn't mentioned specifically, and not Spellslots. Whoever answered it was thinking of Strength items (you see all the examples given in the FAQ are Strength?)
So yes, sometimes the way you ask your FAQ question is sometimes causing different answers.

Edit: Found it:
+4 temporary increases to Strength: How does it work? FAQ or Errata in the Core book or NPC Codex?
That's the threat where the FAQ was eventually posted on (page 5)

It was asking if a temporary Str would get the 50% damage increase from two-handing the weapon.
Just quickly looking over the thread, it seems most every talk there was about Strenght or Con based stuff.

seebs wrote:
Unconscious does make you "willing". Not even remotely a grey area, that's an explicit rule. But note that "sleeping" is not "unconscious".

Ah yes, you're correct. But that same paragraph in the magic rules also explicitely states that stunned, paralized etc, does not make you automatically willing.

And since the OP was stunned, that's really all that matters.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Are you sure it all was supposed to happen in one round.

The GM might have thought "Ok, you're stunned, so you're helpless and I got a few turns to have fun with you".

Well problem with that is, that Stunned condition does not mean helpless. Nor does helpless mean "willing" or "fails all saving throws".

So that's the first problem.

Second issue is that Teleport requires you to be willing. Stunned does not make you willing. Technically even unconscious wouldn't make you willing I believe, though that's possibly a bit of a gray area.
But it says quite clearly it only works on "touched objects or other touched willing creatures". Willing is the keyword there. Nowhere does it mention any special rules for unwilling creatures, so the spell simply fails.

Then of course there's the fact that Nightmare doesn't work that way.
It's a 10 minute cast time for one.
Contingency does not work to shorten the casttime, as it must be a personal spell.
It has a Will save (which you get even when stunned).
It has SR.
It lasts for 24 hours and not forever.

The -10 however could work, the kiss and resulting exchange of bodily fluids could count as "body part".

But seeing how much else was wrong with the entire encounter, that last part doesn't make things right.

I would mention that list of everything that was wrong with it to the GM and straight out ask, what the hell was going on there.

Eben TheQuiet wrote:

Yah, if you're only considering taking TWF at this point (and no other TWF feats), then I'd agree with Wraithstrike's suggestion. Start with your 15 in Dex, pick up TWF, go straight Barbarian.

I only suggested Ranger so you could get the other juicy TWF feats without needing high dex.

Well, I do want to eventually get a few of the other TWF feats.

iTWF at some point (not necessarily right at 6, but around 8 maybe).
Double Slice to narrow the gap in damage a little, though now I get told it's not worth it. Maybe that's true, it's not a huge bonus, but it's a bonus.
TW-Defense seems like a wasted feat, Dodge is superiour.
Rend seems nice though, but also fairly late, and I don't wanna plan for that far ahead yet.

Right now my plan if I go Barbarian is either:
or something like

The race is the Kuru, +2 Dex, +2 Con, -2 Int (already included above). So that 18 Str would be freaking expensive. (And yes, I know it's not an ideal case for Barbarians, but they're not horrible either)
Hm... 17,15,14,8,18,12 would also work (trading 2 con for 1 Str from #2)

That way I start with 15 Dex and can easily get TWF.
I either raise Dex twice and get 17 Dex by 8 and take iTWF at 9 (or dip a level of fighter at that point), and qualify for Rend or I increase Strength and get a +2 Dex belt for those feats by that point.
Of course that latter option has disadvantages, can be dispelled, lost etc. And the money I need to invest in Dex I can't invest in Str, so it probably comes out more or less the same in the end.
Though a +2 Dex/Str belt is cheaper than a +4 Str belt...

Ah well, I'm already far overthinking it

Ah, yes special crit confirmation feats aren't important for me, but I suppose you're right.

However, how do I compare a single 2hd attack vs two TWF attacks?

Simply use the formula for each hand separately and then add the results together?

Ah, that's exactly what I was looking for.
Thank you very much!

Ok, so comparing pure damage is easy. Take 1d12+6 to 2d8+8, it's 12.5 vs 17 average damage and the 2d8+8 wins.

But what if the 1d12+6 is a single attack at an attack bonus of +10, while the 2d8+8 is actually two separate attacks (TWF) at +7 with 1d8+4 each ?

I'm fairly sure the 1d12+6 wins in that case.

What if the 1d12 is a 20/x3 crit weapon and the 1d8 is a 19-20/x2 weapon?

I'm also sure you people here have already developed a formula to calculate all these things fairly easily and compare them to each other.

So my question: Can someone of you tell me that formula (and maybe explain it too)? Would be great.

Eben TheQuiet wrote:
Ciaran Barnes wrote:
Play a barbaric ranger?
Yep, actually only dipping a single level of Barbarian and taking Extra Rage, then staying full ranger seems the best way to go.

Yes, that's definitely an option I'm considering. Either:

- dipping 2 levels of Ranger (but that only gives me TWF, may not be worth it),
- taking 6 levels of Ranger and then full Barbarian again (might take 2 levels ranger for TWF first, then 2 Barbarian for the first rage power then 4 more Ranger for Imp TWF at level 8)
- or mostly Ranger and only a level or two into Barbarian as you said.

Natural weapons are a nice option too and maybe good mechanically, but I don't think it fits the flavor I got in mind.

Disadvantage of going Ranger, I won't be getting Double Slice, but then again the Favored Enemy should make up for it.

The kuru barbarian pirate I'm planning to make, who's probably going to use this weapon, wouldn't be mistaken for a Red Mantis.
And if, it would probably be an improvement ;) Of course the Red Mantis might not like it.

It's just a weapon that I think is cool and looks fearsome, enough reason to use it.

Of course the feat requirements for TWF + EWP is quite bad... :(


I'm considering a TWF Barbarian type character. (Barbarian as the concept not necessarily the class).

I know that it's probably worse than a THW barbarian, but I'm ok with that, I don't think the difference is too huge.

Now obviously I want high Strength for damage and high Con for not getting killed, which means I don't really have too many points left for Dex.

Now, are there ways to get TWF without the insane Dex requirements?

- I know Rangers can pick it as a fighting style.
- I know I can start with 13 Dex and eventually get a +6 Dex belt and have enough for Greater TWF. Of course that means I won't have as much +Str or +Con which may be bad too.

Are there any other ways. Obscure classes/archetypes/feats/races? Paizo only though, nothing 3rd party.

Ok, so I'm looking at the Sawtooth Sabre right now and how it works.

First part seems clear, if I have the EWP for it, it counts as a light weapon for TWF, so I only take a -2 to attacks.

So far so clear.

Now, for all other purposes it counts as a one handed weapon. Does that mean, I do still add my full Strength bonus to the damage, or my normal Power Attack bonus?

Or is the only advantage of using it that you can use a 1d8 in both hands, instead of a 1d6 and still get Weapon Focus etc in a single feat?

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Wizards want to be more than "taxi" or "taxi builders". And they certainly don't like other people telling them what to do.
That's why they usually build towers in the middle of nowhere, so the can study their creepy books on magic without being disturbed.

Could they make money with this? Sure. But a 10th level wizard can make money with other ways far easier. If he even still needs money and isn't just content with what he has (or the things he wants to acquire might require something other than money to get).

In other words: Merchants might be up for this. Wizards probably aren't.

So my players (Wu, go somewhere else!) are about to reach the end of Jade Regent now, but the Rebellion Points are a bit weird.

I checked how much RP can they get at the max and I got to 28. Five of that is for actually killing the Jade Regent, so it's 23 before the end-fight.

Now I look at the Teamwork Scores, especially those of the JR and Anamurumon. The events under Sow Discord can reduce their Teamwork scores by 25 and 20 respectively, so if the PCs have done everything, they'll have a Teamwork Score of 25 or 30 at the lowest before the fight.
23, the max they can get as Rebellion points, wouldn't have a chance to reduce that below 0.

Since the whole thing seems to be made as a Yes/No trigger - either the score is 0 or below and the alliance is broken, or it's 1 or higher and it's all peachy - that math seems extremely weird to me.

Alright, I'll most likely try to take the actual score into account when determining how the NPCs react, but I still find it weird that it's impossible for two of the NPCs to even break their alliance, and almost impossible for the Raven Prince (he's down to 22 if everything is done - miss one step to get Rebellion Points and you can't break him loose either).

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Just be careful with unusual, cool ideas. They might be unusual and cool, but in some cases simply destroy the entire character concept. A TWF with feats and ability scores geared towards TWF suddenly having a hand that can shoot a ray but can't handle a dagger anymore might seem cool, it probably doesn't make her entirely happy though

If your character is one to go with the flow, and accepts such stuff, then cool. However it might be an idea to make the option of a simple regenerate available in addition to the cool idea. Maybe at a somewhat higher cost than the other, but that way your player won't feel like you're herding her character into a direction she doesn't want to go.

Let's say I have a Nalfashnee Demon for example.

It has "Aura unholy aura (DC 23)"

Unholy Aura:

Especially this effect is nasty:
4. If a good creature succeeds on a melee attack against a warded creature, the offending attacker takes 1d6 points of Strength damage (Fortitude negates).

Now... can the caster of the group dispel that Aura? Or at least supress it? It's based on a spell but not exactly a spell, so I'm not sure.

Except for ranged attacks/spells, is there a good way to deal with that creature?

Oh, ok, that way of reading the table makes sense, I get it now.


1 to 50 of 1,622 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2015 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.