Quath's page

What about just using a straight Seeker Oracle (from PFS: Field Guide)? They get trapfinding and as a primary divine caster they will be capable of keeping up with your healing needs. It's pretty easy to build one stealthy as well.

Also, it allows for you to focus more. As a battle oracle you would be more combat oriented, as a life oracle you could still have channel energy, etc.

Thankfully doesn't Ultimate Campaign have revised crafting rules in it?

At my game last night we are exploring the darklands on behalf of a huge dwarven metropolis. We had trouble remembering the name of the Dwarf town and half the time we just call it Dwarfopolis. So the idea popped into my head to call it Dwarfstantinople. Any way, that led to the song by They Might Be Giants. I reworked the lyrics and felt I should post them on here in the hopes that someone more musically inclined than I am could put together a nice Youtube parody video.

Yeah, I saw that. However, it doesn't doesn't completely help, since you still can't craft rods or rings. Not to mention you have to have a billion and one craft skills to get an versatility out of the feat. I was hoping I had found a method of bypassing a crummy feat tax, but I guess it's back to the drawing board.

You don't need a Billion and one craft skills to get versatility. Just base it off of Profession (Thief) or Profession (Burglar). Then you can craft anything that can be stolen. It's funny and flavorful.

Rogue: "Hey fighter, check out this awesome sword"

Fighter: "This is really nice. Did you craft it yourself?"

Rogue: "Craft? Um... Yeah... Yeah, I crafted it myself. But on an unrelated note, I don't think you should ever try to sell that sword in this town."

There is nothing in the text of the ability that allows you to ignore prerequisites. For an example of text that allows you to ignore prerequisites look at the monk bonus feats.

Deadmoon has it spot on. This is the reason I play these games.

I want a book like this with every ounce of my being.

Also one last thing, what is incorporeal special quality? When I looked up incorporeal subtype it says, "In addition, creatures with the incorporeal subtype gain the incorporeal special quality." No idea what that is and can't seem to find it.

From the PRD:

Incorporeal: Creatures with the incorporeal condition do not have a physical body. Incorporeal creatures are immune to all nonmagical attack forms. Incorporeal creatures take half damage (50%) from magic weapons, spells, spell-like effects, and supernatural effects. Incorporeal creatures take full damage from other incorporeal creatures and effects, as well as all force effects.

It is found in the glossary

I have an archer right now that has used poisons his entire career and always tastes his poisons to be sure they're still potent. Since he acquired his ring of sustenance all he has eaten is his poison. One day he finally snapped, woke up and chugged a vial of his poison.

It turned out that after years and years of consuming the poison he had turned himself from a fighter into an alchemist. All of his extracts and mutagens are made from diluted poison. Let's just say that he's more than a little insane.

Quath wrote:

Since it's a specific item you cannot enchant it later in pathfinder society. It will always be mundane and you can never change that.

Incorrect.

Official FAQ wrote:

Non-magic specific armor and specific weapons may be upgraded normally.

LINK

Thank you Jiggy. I was unaware.

David knott 242 wrote:

Also, the mithral shirt has no enhancement bonus listed. If you want a +1 or better enhancement bonus to your chain shirt armor, that 2.5 pound difference is worth it.

I didn't really get this. Enchanting your armor does absolutely nothing to its weight.

Since it's a specific item you cannot enchant it later in pathfinder society. It will always be mundane and you can never change that.

Dot.

A ring of riding should be perfectly fine, price it the same as a ring of climbing and give it the same bonus. +5 to a skill is not unreasonable at all.

Quath wrote:

He is prefacing his posting of his house rules with a very long history of his gaming experience.

Context is important sometimes.

I didn't mean to offend. Someone asked for a summary and I gave one.

On topic however, I do agree with LazarX's suggestion to look into something like E6.

But, since it seems you are just sharing what works for you and asking for advice about significant rules problems that may come about due to your houserule set and not asking for a similar system in which your game world could run, I'd say that what you have created would have no great impact on the way the game functions other than the mechanics you have pointed out.

Well, aside from the obvious changes to the (in)balance of the system (such as the cleric receiving less in the way of class features due to having the whole spell list at his disposal.) But, I'm pretty sure those changes were intentional.

He is prefacing his posting of his house rules with a very long history of his gaming experience.

Extend to a familiar in what way? I was always under the impression that familiars were loyal associates. However, I typically ask my GM to let me swap the familiar for Eschew Materials since I normally dont like keeping track of familiars or exposing them to danger. I do think an Ifrit Diviner with the racial/class/trait/feat stuff for initiative would be a good reason to get one of the +4 init pets. You could start with +18 initiative at level 1. But otherwise I avoid familiars anyway.

If it turns out that familiars are not willing participants, then my personal dislike syncs up well with the character's morals. :)

It's actually a +20 initiative. +5 Dex +1 Diviner +4 Wildfire Heart +4 Improved Initiative +4 Familiar +2 Reactionary Trait.

Oh this makes so happy. You have no idea. Now I can't find your donate button...

The idea was that my paladin worships Nethys but gains his powers through his devotion and force of will and not directly from Nethys. It sucks that I have to change though.

The previous edition of the PFS:GtOP didn't list paladins as needing to worship a deity since a PRPG paladin doesn't get his powers directly from a god (until the most recent PFS:GtOP.) So officially my paladin followed the teachings and practices of Nethys and never received his powers from him.

With this new set of restrictions does that mean my paladin can no longer worship Nethys? More specifically does the alignment to deity restriction only apply for evil deities as the text implies?

No, the correct term is indeed RAW. They work together, according to the exact wording of the text.

Snap Shot = While wielding a ranged weapon with which you have Weapon Focus, you threaten squares within 5 feet of you.

Combat Patrol = As a full-round action, you may set up a combat patrol, increasing your threatened area by 5 feet for every 5 points of your base attack bonus.

So, by the exact wording of the rulebooks, a level 20 Gunslinger with the Weapon Focus (Musket) feat, Snap Shot, and Combat Patrol would threaten 25 feet as long as he has a loaded musket in his hands. (5 feet for the Snap Shot and an additional 20 feet for the +20 BAB at level 20.)

That is not RAI that's exact RAW. And kind of ridiculous. I would think a Sniper (at least the Sniper Rogue Archetype) would have the ability to see far, wait for the opportunity, and then BOOM! Headshot!

That's kinda what a sniper is for.

I concur with this reading of the RAW. Also, Barry that sniper action you described is either the "ready" action or it's the "delay" non-action. Either way, it already exists.

Where is the descending attack order rule listed?

Here: Full Attack Action

With the weapon cord one you would only be wielding 1 weapon at a time but you would be TWF if you got the GM to say you can ignore the descending attack order. If you are going to go so far as to pull in 3.5 material, why not just ask for a house ruled repeating hand crossbow, then get a permanent abundant ammunition on the cartridge?

Edit: or use the Endless Ammunition Weapon Property from UE. But I'm unsure if that enchantment removes the reload time. It implies it, but doesn't state it.

Weapon Cord: Weapon cords are 2-foot-long leather straps that attach your weapon to your wrist. If you drop your weapon or are disarmed, you can recover it as a swift action, and it never moves any further away from you than an adjacent square. However, you cannot switch to a different weapon without first untying the cord (a full-round action) or cutting it (a move action or an attack, hardness 0, 0 hp). Unlike a locked gauntlet, you can still use a hand with a weapon cord, though a dangling weapon may interfere with finer actions.

They are in the APG. Quick draw only supports the drawing part of that quote, not the sheathing part. I really like the idea and concept of this build and think it would be awesome to see functioning. It just stinks that it requires house ruling (even if the house ruling seems reasonable).

You can take free actions during a full attack action, so it stands to reason that you can take a swift action the same way.

Looking it up, it seems that the most mechanically efficient method is to buy two repeating crossbow magazines with a continuous Abundant Ammunition spell cast on them. According to the magic item creation table, they'd only cost 4k gp each. (1st lvl spell x 1st lvl caster x [2000x2 {doubled because the duration of Ab Ammo is 1min/lvl}])

TURN:

1) Drop offhand weapon (Free Action)
2) Full Attack Action w/main and reload lever w/offhand (Free Action)
3) Drop main weapon (Free Action)
4) Draw offhand weapon using Quick Draw (Free Action)
5) Continue Full Attack Action w/offhand and reload lever w/main (Free Action)
6) Draw main weapon using Quick Draw (Free Action)
7) Benefit for rest of round from Two Weapon Defense and Two Weapon Warrior abilities

As far as I can see, this methodology allows you to do this on an infinite loop if you have the magic clips with the Abundant Ammo continuous spell effect.

Am I missing any mechanics other than the Attacks of Opportunity all that would draw (that I could eliminate with other feat investments) and the "reasonable limits on free actions, as decided by the GM" ?

Assuming this is all legal, this idea may have just gone from Paladin's Divine Hunter to Warrior's Two Weapon Warrior to one BEASTLY Arcane Archer....now, what other 10 levels to take....1 Sorcerer/9 Rogue (with sniper abilities)/10 Arcane Archer?

Quick draw doesn't let you change the action of retrieving a weapon on a weapon cord or picking up a dropped weapon, so that attack pattern you detailed doesn't work that way. Sheathing a weapon or picking one up is a move action either way. There might be a feat or something that lets you pick up or sheathe weapons faster, but without that, you are restricted to having only 1 weapon in hand at a time.

Edit: also, that attack pattern is ignoring the restriction that you must make your attacks from highest to lowest. So if your attack pattern is +20/+15/+10 (MH) and +20/+15 (OH) then you must attack +20/+20/+15/+15/+10. You can choose to make those attacks MH/OH/MH/OH/MH, OH/MH/MH/OH/MH, MH/OH/OH/MH/MH, or OH/MH/OH/MH/MH, but you cannot make a pattern like OH/OH/MH/MH/MH or MH/MH/MH/OH/OH by RAW.

My previous post was under the assumption that you were talking about a game where you could negotiate with the GM, not PFS.

I'm not sure of what sort of actions you can take during a full attack action, but assuming you can take swift actions during a full attack action (and I don't see anything that says you can't, but am willing to be shown otherwise), You could have it set up so that both crossbows are on weapon cords.

You start the turn with your off hand dangling and you main hand equipped, you begin the full attack and make all the attacks with the main hand, you then drop the main hand as a free action, use your swift to grab the off hand, then finish your full attack. Next turn you start with the off hand, and end on the main hand.

The full attack action says you may begin your attack pattern with either weapon, but because you must make all attacks in descending order, I'm pretty sure this doesn't work by RAW. But it is as close as I can get to figuring this out. And I feel that this isn't going to be game breaking, it would just require a little more bookkeeping on your part due to the irregular attack pattern and being aware of which weapon is equipped at any given time. This is especially important if you are making AOO's with these weapons.

Falling damage caps at 20d6 anyway... so going more than 400 feet doesn't matter.

Where in the RAW that HD = CR for PC's?

Need to be able to show my DM.
I know that HD equals class levels for standard race PC's BUT the celestial and fiendish templates uses CR not HD.
I am not trying to be difficult just looking for RAW to back up my point.

A creature that possesses class levels, but does not have any racial Hit Dice, is factored in as a creature with a CR equal to its class levels –1.

Here is the link.

Sorry that it's not favorable to you. :(

You left out the Headband/Belt of primary attribute.

My question is, when does DD check to see if the place you are teleporting is a valid location?

1) If it checks before the spell is cast then you are able to teleport anywhere that is not your current location.

2) If it checks after you cast then you would blink to where you wanted to be and if that location is incorrect then you are suddenly put back where you cast the spell from.

3) If it checks while the spell is cast, then you are in more than one location at a time when casting a teleportation spell.

I believe #1 is the correct answer. Otherwise I could summon a sword inside my enemies small intestines; in this example following #2 the sword would appear, shred their intestines (assuming medium or small size creature) and then go back where it was and following #3 the sword would stay where it is currently at and appear inside the small intestines of my opponent before deciding that it can't be inside my opponent.

So, again, when does a spell check if the target is a legal target?

Would be useful if the Monsters by type and Monsters by Terrain at least also included the CR of the monsters in their links so that when people go "I need to fill a dungeon full of undead for an APL 4 group" they can go the Undead Monsters page and pick straight from the appropriate level monsters and ignore all the ones that are far too high/low.

They already have a link to this amazing Google Doc somewhere on their website. I've downloaded it and use it all the time myself. It allows you to sort monsters by anything you want basically.

You can filter this database at the PFsrd basically however you want.

I haven't seen it mentioned but this is a 3.x thread from GitPG that has all of these nicely formatted. It includes most pathfinder stuff so if nothing else you can steal the appropriate things from it.

I hope this is helpful even though it hasn't been updated since April.

I disagree Karkon, The rules say that "A creature or object brought into being or transported to your location by a conjuration spell cannot appear inside another creature or object, nor can it appear floating in an empty space. It must arrive in an open location on a surface capable of supporting it."

Since as the caster of the spell I am not being brought into existence or transported to my location (since I am always at my own location and cannot be transported to it) those restrictions do not apply to me when I cast DD.

It may be a different type of attack action, but full attack still has the proper wording to be AN attack action. It is not THE attack action. Vital strike calls for THE attack action. Sunder calls for AN attack action. It's the same idea that a square is a rectangle, but a rectangle is not always a square.

Yes, symbols will do exactly as I described.

What about the fact that one of the full round action options is listed as a "full-attack action? Is that not the required wording for sunder? I can live with not sundering on an aoo, but it is within the rules to sunder with a full-attack action.

I just posted this in the thread that this question came up in but for completeness I'll re-post it here.

I believe that the ruling from Jason Bulmahn doesn't apply to sunder on the basis that Vital Strike says, "when you use the attack action..." and Sunder says, "as part of an attack action." The difference being that Vital strike references the attack action (the standard action) and sunder references any type of attack action (such as full attack, AoO's, and the standard attack action.)

Vital strike says that "when you take the attack action..." and sunder says "as part of an attack action." The difference being that Vital strike references the attack action (the standard action) and sunder references any type of attack action (such as full attack, AoO's, and the standard attack action.)

I'll move to the other thread so this will be the last I post on the topic in this thread unless it is more relevant to rage cycling.

LBJ took the IRT down to 4th Street USA?

MIC is Magic Item Compendium, and what's ACF?

Alternate Class Feature

Weird Words is also not restricted to targeting creatures, meaning it can easily hit most objects (weapons? armor?) and as a SU ability it ignores DR and hardness.

You can sunder with any melee attack. The PRD rules for combat maneuvers even mention making them as part of an AOO. Here is the relevant text:

When performing a combat maneuver, you must use an action appropriate to the maneuver you are attempting to perform. While many combat maneuvers can be performed as part of an attack action, full-attack action, or attack of opportunity (in place of a melee attack), others require a specific action.

Sunder falls into the category of can be performed as part of a full-attack action since full-attack is still an attack action. You could even sunder an opponents weapon when he provokes from you by standing up.

Could you please provide links to the discussion and rules you are citing?

I disagree with r-Kelleg on the second question.

A special property (such as flaming or keen) added to an item is not an enhancement bonus. It doesn't help you bypass DR and it doesn't add to the hardness and hit points of a weapon. I've copied and pasted the relevant rules from the PRD's magical weapons section.

considering that regardless of character level, sunder - using an attack action (standard action) - is normally 1/round...

Sunder

You can attempt to sunder an item held or worn by your opponent as part of an attack action in place of a melee attack. If you do not have the Improved Sunder feat, or a similar ability, attempting to sunder an item provokes an attack of opportunity from the target of your maneuver.

If your attack is successful, you deal damage to the item normally. Damage that exceeds the object's Hardness is subtracted from its hit points. If an object has equal to or less than half its total hit points remaining, it gains the broken condition (see Conditions). If the damage you deal would reduce the object to less than 0 hit points, you can choose to destroy it. If you do not choose to destroy it, the object is left with only 1 hit point and the broken condition.

Just to be clear, Sunder is done in place of a normal melee attack, so if I was a level 16 fighter I could take 4 sunder attacks on my turn if I performed a full attack action with a melee weapon.

even this is wrong, in 3.x a rouge got 1 sneak per round per target, even if they had 30 attacks on one target.

now if you have 30 attacks you get 30 sneak attacks also, assuming you're flanking or feinting.

That is incorrect. Could you please point out in this ability where it states that the SA damage can only be applied once per round per target? I've even provided a link to the 3.5 rogue in the srd.

I'm against the barbarian on the grounds that your number of rounds of rage/day will be really small with only three levels of barbarian and no con score.

I say inquisitor with the Spell Killer inquisition. It fits the flavor and actually pays off fairly well with your reach and immunity to magic. The idea being that as you are trying to search for other sentient constructs and claim godhood, you also seek to punish the arcane casters that enslave your race. Just make sure you pick up a headband of wisdom.

It's a great build until the GM decides to up the difficulty curve to challenge this one player and ends up killing the rest of the group. My two cents, do not do this build unless everyone else in the group is going to be doing roughly the same level of Power.

That's one of those reasons I would never go full tilt on this build. I come complete with my own disclaimers :P

Also, isn't that just a really terrible way for a GM to handle a situation like this?

Rogue 6/Horizon Walker 10/Whatever 4

Level 1 take endurance, Every rogue talent should be terrain mastery, every feat from level 3+ should be extra rogue talent(terrain mastery). Your first two Terrain Dominance's should be aquatic and urban (all humanoids).

That's only if you want to decimate nearly every relevant skill and have massive damage output from level 9+. Before level 9 it will be pretty rough with the exception of the favored terrain skills being ridiculous.

This build works anytime you know the exact environment that your campaign will be taking place in. It is a really cheesy build and I would never actually play it 100% as written. Though if you did take it as written you would definitely negate most of the rogue's hitting problems.

If you go 10 rogue/10 walker, at level 20 against creatures that are from your highest favored terrain bonus you have +44 to hit/damage, +44 Bluff, Knowledge, Perception, Sense Motive, and Survival. While within your highest favored terrain you get +44 on Initiative, Knowledge (geography), Perception, Stealth, and Survival. Boots of Friendly Terrain will increase these bonuses by another +2 as well. These are also untyped bonuses, so that's nice.

Here is a fun link to a built Oterisk did close to a year ago. It's the Greatest Sailor in the World. Basically you have an obscene profession sailing, perception, initiative, and stealth while you're on the water.

I really like the Aasimar paladin archetype, Tranquil Guardian. It reminds me a lot of the 3.5 Apostle of Peace, which was my favorite prestige class ever.

Since the golem is falling intentionally it has a 65% chance to make the dc 15 acrobatics check to reduce the fall damage by 2d6 (since he ignores the non-lethal damage as well). So the golem has a 65% chance to not take damage and even if he fails that, the average falling damage for that jump is 14. The golem's DR is 15. On average the golem will not take damage from that fall, and when it does, the damage will be minimal.

Interesting not about repulsion that I didn't think about until just now: if you put the center of the repulsion effect above the arena floor, then it will take a will save to stand up from prone since that would put you closer to the center. Kind of brutal.