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

Quintain's page

Goblin Squad Member. Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber. 227 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS

1 to 50 of 227 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

A 5' step after attacking prevents anyone that was able to beat your enhanced stealth DC with their perception check from being able to counter-attack you effectively because the movement foils their ability to pinpoint your location.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Byakko wrote:

Except... even on a natural 20, a normal person won't be able to make the check to pinpoint an invisible person.

Only some superhuman/magically enhanced being can make the required check. And in that case, it kinda makes sense that they can do what us mere mortals can't.

But yeah, as I've said above, limit passive checks to significant discrete stimuli, or if none, once per round. Problem solved. (and probably RAI)

The character has a +36 perception. So on a natural 20, he can do it.

The problem with "limiting passive checks to discrete stimuli" isn't in the rules any more than my statement of requiring a move action to make a perception check while in combat.

It's two different solutions to the same problem. However, mine is at least mentioned in the rules and can't be abused by argumentative players.

Moreover, it's internally consistent, placing invisibility/stealth on par with traps.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

bbangerter,

I want you to counter the argument from this type of player:

I have a +36 Perception -- if you follow the attempts to describe the level of fine detail in this thread of what a Perception skill of this level can notice -- this individual has the ability to notice that an invisible person is breathing from at least 30' away, even while being mortally threatened.

How do you prevent 10,000+ reactive perception checks being made by said perceptive character until such time as he rolls a 20? All he needs to do is give a somewhat plausible description of some noise that the attacker is making.

Here's a hint: Given the way you are parsing RAW, you cannot. Because with every breath the invisible character makes, the perceptive character gets a check. Then, ultimately, a 20 is rolled, and the invisible archer is now pinpointed, location known.

Moreover, despite movement specifically being mentioned as a way to foil pin-pointing -- hell, he'll be able to hear the footsteps, he will ultimately always know the location as long as the DC is reachable by a skill check of 20, due to the multitude of passive checks that will be made, given what your parsing allows.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
bbangerter wrote:


You've ignored the point. How does magically enhanced perception work? Please find me the rules that describe that. If you cannot then you can't state that a human cannot have eco-location, or a sixth sense unknown in the real world, that would allow such a pin pointing.

Echo location in Pathfinder is called Blindsense:

DIRE BAT CR 2
XP 600
N Large animal
Init +2; Senses blindsense 40 ft.; Perception +12

Unless the magically enhanced perception includes the description of blindsense, then you cannot logically state they have echo-location.

Quintain wrote:


I can't quote rules when you are freely modifying the definitions of words that are stated in those rules. You are simply re-defining the meaning of these words to suit your viewpoint.

Once again, words have meaning and circumstances matter even in a game.

Which words am I changing the definition of? Point out my ignorance please :).

I already have, but you are being obtuse, so I'll repeat:

Noticing is reactive

Pinpointing is active -- applied holistically, this means "searching for stimulus" in order to locate the invisible archer (in this scenario).

This is where you are re-defining the words. Again, pin-pointing is a deliberate action. This is no different than searching for traps -- which is not a passive action (unless you have the rogue talent).

Are you really going to go with an invisible creature not requiring a move action to pinpoint (considering the level of difficulty beating someone's stealth score + the enhancement bonus afforded to invisibility) is inherently easier than noticing a trap?

This is essentially what you are saying.

bbangerter wrote:


You quoted the following rule:
Quote:


Intentionally searching for stimulus is a move action.

Now which part of that mentions combat? Which part of the combat rules refer back to this? I understand the definitions of all the above quoted words quite well, thank you very much.

I agree that intentionally searching for a stimulus is a move action. I don't agree that being in combat makes perception checks to pin point something require a move action. That is the rules reference I am asking you to produce. I'm asking you to provide the link that 'being in combat' requires any specific types of perception checks to be intentional ones.

On take 20, where do the rules define a "De jure Take 20 and De facto Take 20" difference? They do not. There is no de jure and de facto take 20. There is only "take 20" which is clearly defined as taking your time to accomplish the associated task. This argument you are putting forth is a straw man. (Aside from the fact you ignored that you can't take 20 in a combat situation).

You see, this is where you and Wraithstrike are being deliberately obtuse. It doesn't have to mention combat, I'm referring to combat because of the OPs scenario. I'm stating that it is required in this scenario due to the combination of being in mortal danger coupled with an invisible attacker.

The difference between you and I is that when I read the rules, I see what is written and attempt to apply them holistically. To make the balanced and playable. You and the other RAW Message board warriors (aka Wraithstrike) are rules-parsing lawyers attempting to score points on a message board.

So, Ok, I'll admit that there is no specific reference to combat in the perception/stealth rules that mandates a move action to make a perception check.

Here's a virtual cookie.

Congratulations.

Quote:

On take 20, where do the rules define a "De jure Take 20 and De facto Take 20" difference? They do not. There is no de jure and de facto take 20. There is only "take 20" which is clearly defined as taking your time to accomplish the associated task. This argument you are putting forth is a straw man. (Aside from the fact you ignored that you can't take 20 in a combat situation).

You see this is where you are again being deliberately obtuse.

Are you truly misunderstanding the difference between De Facto and DeJure? Really?

Remove the reference to Take 20 out of it. I want to know if you really have a grasp of what I am saying (or whether I'm simply wasting my time).

Give me the definition of de facto as opposed to De jure, please. On anything.

Quote:


Admittedly, if I am running a game I am not giving anyone a check for a bowstring anyway. Almost everything you do makes some noise so if I give a perception(not just hearing based) check for every condition that realistically makes noise it will be too much. The player will never stop rolling dice.

HALLELUJAH!~!!! This is what I'm talking about. The requirement of the move action prevents this "de facto" Take 20 from taking place. Without having to make up your own house rules.

Quote:


Quintain: I see you also ignored the last post I made about frequency of perception checks. I do agree that if you give a perception check on every little possible stimulus, eventually they're going to roll a 20. This is why I advise only giving a passive check on significant discrete events, or once per round otherwise. I also think it's FAQ worthy.

I didn't ignore your post, it got lost in the TLDR.

A simpler solution is to make it a move action. It's already there, in the rules. The Rule-Gods simply need to make it more explicit because of all the rule-warriors on this message board.

Quote:


If you're playing that you need to take a move action to make Perception checks in combat than you would always need to sacrifice said move action, which is clearly not what the rules intend.

You read RAI differently than I do. I see this as a logical application of the entire ruleset, holistically.

For those of you who want to continue to "call me out on specific rules", forget it. That is not my purpose, my purpose is applying these rules, which are admittedly less than perfectly written for the budding internet lawyer/warriors in a way that works and is less prone for abuse and moronic argument.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Quote:


The only way to make a non-Invisible object "effectively invisible" is if it's small enough to be hidden in otherwise Invisible garb. I think Full Plate would fail to qualify as "a small visible item" that can be tucked in a pocket.

No, but it is pretty much automatically covered by a cloak. Which is standard adventuring garb.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Quote:


ake 20 is always an active perception. Take 20 is taking time and patience to look for something. Take 20 is the investigative officer who goes over a murder scene with a magnifying glass. Take 20 also cannot be done in combat.

You misunderstood. I was speaking of the difference between De jure Take 20 and De facto Take 20.

I'll try to clarify.

If you are re-actively making perception checks as something that doesn't even consume a free action (for what that is worth), then you look at the Try again rules which state that as long as the stimulus exists you get to try again. And you know every player will always argue that *some* stimulus always exists because they have the knowledge that an invisible person is present, then you might as well De facto give them Take 20, as they will allow themselves enough perception checks given an always present stimulus coupled with *reactive* perception rules to pretty much role the perception check until they get a 20.

That is the logical conclusion of allowing reactive perception checks based on whatever micro-analysis the player can come up with (such as listening for a bow being drawn back, or the attacker *breathing* -- which someone who has a +50 perception bonus can detect with their bat-like echo-location).

The only way to prevent this conclusion from occuring is to ensure that the character has to devote effort -- aka move actions -- to their perception checks.

Incidentally, this is the reason why being struck in combat allows for automatic pinpointing of the attacker -- a De facto Take 20 whose circumstances prevents modifiers from applying.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Quote:


Once again do you or do you not get a free perception check to detect sound made by an invisible person?

If you say no, then I was not misrepresenting you earlier.

If you say yes then no move action is needed.

If you somehow feel like bowstring noise and other noise call for different rules then explain.

edit:Also linguistics, not perception is the skill used to read lips when you can't hear someone.

You get a free perception check to notice the sound, yes. In other words, the answer is: You hear someone speaking. No more, no less. Just like you get a free perception check to notice that you are in combat, if you really think you need to make a roll to understand something so obvious.

Do you pinpoint based off that person speaking with your free perception check? No, you do not. In order to pinpoint, you are required to actively search, as pinpointing is an activity.

It really cannot be explained any simpler. I have repeated this time and again, and if you cannot understand this plain english, well, then there is really no reason why this discussion need continue.

Quote:


Does the creature stuck have to take a move action to gain this knowledge? No. (Foiling that knowledge by afterwards taking a 5' step isn't really a part of this discussion, it doesn't change the fact that at the time the attack was made the defender did know where the attacker was).

Being struck with a weapon isn't even in the same class as hearing a bowstring or a person yelling. It is actively taking a hit in combat. It's the same false analogy as saying a human has eco-location on the level of a bat.

I can't quote rules when you are freely modifying the definitions of words that are stated in those rules. You are simply re-defining the meaning of these words to suit your viewpoint.

Once again, words have meaning and circumstances matter even in a game.

When you notice something, it is a re-action. When you pinpoint something, it is an action you take. One is reactive (notice a bowstring being drawn back, hearing someone yell that you have no idea where they are). Pinpointing requires a move action because it a action, not a re-action. It requires effort.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

You could check Staples to see if they can repair the binding.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Quote:


If you want to say an invisible creature wearing visible Full Plate isn't effectively invisible, that seems like a reason way to handle the situation as a GM. I would likely do the same.

But an invisible creature wearing full plate isn't even in the same ball park as being able to react to an arrow that becomes visible after it has already been fired.

I wouldn't even do that. The rules for a picked up object remaining visible are for those that are essentially held in the hand. Armor is worn in his scenario. It would become invisible.

\\ Picking nits, I am :P


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Kirth,

Your problem is that you think that the knowledge that an invisible creature is present allows for effective defense -- it doesn't.

Effective defense vs invisibility means that the defenders are able to use their dexterity modifier to their armor class. They can't. The rules for invisibility specifically state this: all the attacks (regardless of all other issues being discussed here) are considered sneak attacks by RAW.

Yes, the defender can try to take actions with the knowledge that an invisible creature is present. That is immaterial. He still cannot effectively defend against any attacks from the invisible creature so the defender is subject to sneak attacks while defending, and has a 50% miss chance when trying to counter-attack.

In order to counter attack, he has to try one of two things: pin-point the attacker's 5' square (using a move action to make a perception check to beat the attacker's stealth score), or guess.

If he guesses and guesses wrong, he automatically misses in his attacks. If he guesses and guesses right, he still has a 50% miss chance on his attacks.

Noticing is not the same as pinpointing. Noticing something is "...a hunch that “something's there” but can't see it or target it accurately with an attack."

Pin-pointing allows for the sure knowledge that someone is out there and moreover in which 5' square they reside ensuring that you know that your attacks aren't wholly going to waste.

Otherwise, you are left with guessing.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Quote:


Scent is a specific rule that changes how Smell works. Saying you're going to play with Hearing working like Smell is fine, but it would be a house rule.

Saying that sound allows for precise perception checks like vision for humanoid characters is just as much a house rule.

I can guarantee that for humans, hearing is in no way shape or form as precise as vision.

Edit: There is a definitional difference between noticing and pinpointing.

Noticing is a reactive action. Hearing is a reactive action.

Pinpointing is pro-active action. Listening is a pro-active action.

You absolutely have to keep them separate in order to apply stealth/perception/invisibility properly.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Quote:


But let's go back to your example of two archers, and my pointing out that a bat would be able to pinpoint the source location of the sound. Do you believe a bat could do this? (Yes or no). And if a bat could do it, could a super human, with the aid of magic, not do the same thing? If no, why not?

A bat locates creatures through echolocation, does your character that has the +50 percpeption have echolocation? Meaning does he actively transmit ultra-sonic sounds in order to perceive his surroundings?

No?

Then your bat analogy is flawed. Having a +50 to your perception doesn't give you the ability to echo-locate. You'd have to have a specific spell cast in order to gain that extra-ordinary ability.

Pinpointing is an active attempt to locate someone, a reactive check is just that, reactive. It is in the definition of the words themselves.

There are no in-game examples of how perception vs opposing an invisible opponent are supposed to be played (which is the whole reason for this thread, incidentally).

Here is the quote:

Quote:


Intentionally searching for stimulus is a move action.

Now, it is applied in game thusly:

While in combat, if you do anything in relation to your invisible attacker, and you have not already pinpointed him, you are intentionally searching for stimulus (you have to make a check to beat his stealth).

Ergo, move action.

Moreover, pinpointing can be foiled surprisingly easy: All the archer has to do to foil all the passive pinpointing attempts that you guys say the defender is entitled is take a 5' step after all his attacks are done. Once that 5' step is taken, all your reactive perception checks are rendered moot.

Quote:


If the invisible creature moves, its location, obviously, is once again unknown.

It's really that simple.

Lastly, it falls down to common sense: in order to remain in stealth, the hiding character has to dedicate move actions to perform this activity, it stands to reason that someone that is focusing on this stealthed opponent should also have to dedicate an equal amount of time and effort to find him.

P.S. If you are blindly sticking to RAW, you might as well have all perception checks take 20 given that they are reactive to "observable stimulus" if you apply the "Try again rules".

Reactive + observable stimulus + Try again = Take 20 on Perception.

Quote:


He claims I misrepresented him so I brought up an example of someone talking in combat as well since it is also sound based, and asked him to cite the rules and explain why he thought it would work a certain way.

How does one determine if someone else is speaking? It isn't just the sounds being transmitted -- it is the visual cue of the mouth moving in specific ways that the listener recognizes as words he understands.

Watch a badly dubbed Chinese Martial arts film for examples.

Quote:


Quitain,
Stealth is separate from Invisibility, you're combining the two. You can be Stealthed and Invisible, Stealthed but not Invisible, and Invisible but not Stealthed. Stealth breaks on an attack, unless sniping, even if you have full concealment, even if you are Invisible. You would still need to do a move action to re-apply Stealth (note: you don't need to USE a move action to use Stealth, but it is attached to a move action). As the Archer did a full attack, he no longer has a move action to reapply Stealth with.

No, you are irrationally separating the two. "Stealthed" is a MMO term. In Pathfinder, there is no "stealthed" condition. Invisibility is a enhancement bonus to stealth and it provides total concealment -- automatically considered hidden, resulting in a 50% miss chance on attacks.

You would apply the stealth rules to someone that is invisible as you would someone who is using their stealth skill actively (using it actively allows for better results, obviously).


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Quote:


For us mere mortals, absolutely not. For someone with a +50 to their perception skill?

The bonus to the perception skill isn't as material to pinpointing the location as the active use of the skill. Even at +50 (which would obviously have the aid of magic) it requires *effort* to do what is being talked about when you are in danger of being killed.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I wouldn't even say that stealth broke after the 1st attack given that invisibility ensures total concealment.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Quote:


My reply was to Quintain, who is making the claim that in combat you cannot possibly hear a bow being drawn. I used the worst possible conditions. There could certainly be more favorable conditions to make things easier.

To clarify, my intent was not to state that you cannot hear the bow being drawn, but you would not be able to isolate out the sound of a single bow being drawn from the background noise of combat.

Example: You have 1 invisible archer, with two other enemies nearby (within say 10 feat of each other...one is an archer, the other a melee combatant). Can anyone honestly say that a human would be able to isolate the sound of a bow being draw between the invisible archer and the visible archer given they are in close proximity and they are both shooting inside the same 6 second window while being attacked?

That is why the combat is so important to the scenario. The focus required in combat in order to actively defend yourself is incredible (for a modern equivalent, take a look at offensive linemen in football and how they will often focus on one defensive lineman and completely miss a linebacker on a blitz).

The perception/stealth rules are such a mish-mash of illogical and contradictory rules with modifiers that are so ridiculous so as to defy description -- hell, Paizo had to re-word stealth so that you could actually sneak up on someone, which is kinda the whole point with stealth in the first place.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Quote:


I'm honestly not sure what we're actually talking about anymore...And none of the perception rules or pinpointing rules ever say anything about needing to take a move action to make such a check, unless I've missed something at some point.

I disagree. Pinpointing is an active attempt to locate a hidden creature. Thus a move action is required. In essence, you are trying to actively find the guy.

A reactive perception check would not be able to pinpoint someone that is invisible, it would, however, let the checker know that someone is there and thus give him a knowledgeable option that he isn't totally wasting his time. He now has the option to do a move action perception check that he knows might pinpoint the location of the invisible/stealthed creature.

This is slightly different than pinpointing someone that is blinded by darkness (which is a free action), because darkness is a 'natural condition' whereas invisibility is a magical effect even a high steal check is quasi magical (something a bit more powerful than just being in the dark).

Quote:


And none of the perception rules or pinpointing rules ever say anything about needing to take a move action to make such a check, unless I've missed something at some point.

That's just it, the perception check rules say two different things -- one is a reactive check to "observable stimulus" (which is interpret-able) and another where there a perception check requires a move action to perform.

Show me where *anything* describes a perception check as anything other than a reactive check (the only example I can come up with is that a perception check to check for traps). Which would make requiring a move-action based perception check completely superfluous because a reactive one accomplishes the same thing without the loss action economy.

Hell, even the description for a move action perception check is contradictory -- actively searching for stimulus. According to Wraithstrike, if the stimulus is there, you get a check, making using a move action to do so being a waste of an action.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Quote:


So far you have no statement equating "I am invisible" to "You have no chance at hearing me during a combat."

Deliberate mis-interpretation of statements is not exactly a subtle method of debate.

I'm not saying that you cannot be heard while invisible in battle. I'm saying that the ambient noise of combat will overwhelm the ability to isolate said sounds enough to give anything more than the idea that someone invisible is lurking about -- and then the person will need to make a decision to devote actions in order to locate them.

The DC of 25 for hearing a whisper in detail at 100 feat assumes total silence at the moment of the check.

Here's my whole point: Circumstances matter.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
wraithstrike wrote:


Actually you posted it since the first time I asked and two since the rules say some perception checks are immediate in response to observable stimuli, which noise is, then no move action is needed. Now if you have a quote saying ____ changes observable stimuli into a move action then provide the quote.

Like I told the last post the rules say if you bypass a perception of X you get to pinpoint the location. Do you have a rules exception?

Like I said, I don't troll the forums 24/7.

In a combat situation, where metal is clanging off metal and people are screaming in pain from damage being taken, it begs common sense that barring magical assistance that you can even attempt to isolate a single yell that you have no idea where it is coming from on a passive/reactive basis.

Sound is not an observable stimulus in combat any more than isolating a specific cup of water is observable in a lake.

Especially without effort or the aid of magic.

Despite the lack of RAW that makes a distinction between sound and sight, a human being's senses cannot pinpoint anything with sound. Especially something that is using stealth coupled with invisibility. The best you can do is determine direction and then guess. If you move around and try to echo-locate, that is one thing (aka move action). Standing still is another.

Now, to be fair, you aren't completely blind and deaf while in combat -- which is why I would allow for a reactive skill check with a default of 1 in order to react to "observable stimulus". But there is no way that it is even conceivable that you can do so without any effort at all whatsoever -- thus the requirement of a move action to pinpoint.

As a kid I played plenty of blind man's bluff (literally hours of this game), and I can tell you from personal experience that a human being cannot "pinpoint" a single sound like a bow being drawn while being surrounded by extremely loud ambient noise -- especially when there is significant life threatening danger that accompanies that ambient noise.

Here is the rule I am using in my descriptions:

Quote:


Action: Most Perception checks are reactive, made in response to observable stimulus. Intentionally searching for stimulus is a move action.

Our disagreement is what qualifies as "observable stimulus". I've been quite clear on what I believe is and is not observable stimulus. Do you have a RAW adjudication on what specifically is and is not observable stimulus?

Other than your opinion, I have not seen any RAW examples.

Here's some help: there aren't any. A search of the term "stimulus" exists in the PRD only in the quote above". So, your and my disagreement boils down to nothing more than what you would do as a GM and what I would do as a GM.

So, kindly kick the message board warrior attitude.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
wraithstrike wrote:
Krith wrote:

Quintain,

You're still missing a lot and not understanding what I'm saying.

Mr.Q has not responded to my question about yelling, which I have asked twice. I am assuming he has dropped the case or he is trying to find a way around my question. :)

No, I don't happen to troll the message boards 24/7, so your premature declaration of victory is just that, premature.

Secondly. So what if he does yell? It's immaterial to the situation.

Lastly, if he did yell, can someone in combat discern which specific 5' square a yell comes from?

He might be able to tell distance or direction in an approximate arc from his location, which is a deduction on his part, but it still wouldn't allow for pin-pointing of the archer.

So, your question is immaterial. He doesn't know the source...it's no different than trying to back track the path of the arrow. Is it in a cave with echoes? The simple fact of him being in combat and being able to deduce the origin of a yell is highly unlikely, and would take more effort than a simple reactive perception check.

If the archer yelled, I would say "you hear a yell". He would have to take a move action to try to discern location.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Krith wrote:

Quintain, a few things about what you wrote:

First, Perception is a reaction to stimulus. Per the PRD:

"Action: Most Perception checks are reactive, made in response to observable stimulus. Intentionally searching for stimulus is a move action."

If you miss the observable stimulus (ie person attacking you) and then want to use a move action on your turn, you can, however, whenever something presents an observable stimulus, it's a free roll.

Yes, the key is "observable stimulus". There is no way that someone that is engaged in combat and thus observing threats against his person that are immediate and proximate will be able to see an arrow coming at him at 300ft per second that starts ~30ft away. No chance. It is not physically possible (barring the use of magic) to track an arrow in flight unless you know where it originated from or are looking down it's flight path at the time it launches and you know to look for it ahead of time. And since the start of the launch of the arrow is invisible, there is no observable stimulus from which to base your roll.

The only "observable stimulus" is the thwack of the arrow into whatever it hit when it missed it's target. At that point, you can deduce the route that it took, but given all the archer feats that allow you to shoot around and ricochet things, that is where you get your move action to actively search for the archer.

Krith wrote:


Second, you wrote "Especially since stealth never ends after the attack." Which is wrong and actually the opposite is almost always true (Sniping being the exception). Per the PRD:

"Your Stealth immediately ends after you make and attack roll, whether or not the attack is successful (except when sniping as noted below)."

So yes, the first attack does break stealth even though the archer is still invisible. Now that the archer is no longer stealthed and is "in combat," which per invisibility rules gives a -20 to the DC to notice, the perception check to know where the archer is becomes the distance modifier.

Now once the archer's turn ends, that -20 goes away and becomes a +20 for standing still, however, as they full attacked, they cannot stealth until their next turn.

Kirth, the archer in question was using Greater invisibility, not regular invisibility, which does not end after an attack. There was no sniping going on, because sniping would have be superfluous.

Quote:


Being invisible is like a constant, auto-succeeding feint in combat. Doesn't matter if they know where you are, they still can't see it coming.

Exactly. Not being able to see it coming means no observable stimulus until after the attack is resolved. This by itself prevents a reactive perception check and as a result requires a move action on the target's turn in order to locate the invisible archer.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

The bones of dragons could have a dark matter component that resists the pull of gravity while maintaining mass and density.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Quote:


By the rules you need a perception check to hear the creature.

By your logic since you are in combat nobody can hear the creature yell.

No, by what I stated is that no one can pinpoint the creature without a move action perception check. -- This simulates actively looking for the creature -- if you are in combat.

A reactive perception check is a "take one" type of check that allows you to hear it -- but since you are in combat, you cannot pinpoint without actively looking/listening.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Quote:


Being invisible doed not restrict you from perception checks you would get anyway.

That is correct. However, while in combat, you are pretty well distracted by the threats that immediately surround you...and as has been demonstrated, you can't really re-actively pinpoint an invisible attacker at range after he shoots at you with an arrow based on the mere existence of an arrow thumping into something nearby. Especially since stealth never ends after the attack

The rule exists under the Take 10: when not threatened (aka in combat), you can take 10 which amounts to a passive or unknowning reactive perception check. However, per the OP description, that threat exists based on immediate circumstances -- no take 10 -- which means you are required to perform a move action to make the check.

In combat, you can "take 1" to allow just your modified perception skill to determine awareness and not have to take a move action, but you likely won't be very successful against a good stealthy opponent.

Quote:


In addition if you beat the perception DC then the invisible creature is located. The perception check is not worth less just because you didn't use a move action.

See my "take 1" above. When you are threatened, you *have* to take at least a move action in order to make a perception check, otherwise, you make stealth essentially useless unless otherwise invisible -- and at the point where an opponent can use greater invisibility, you'll have true sight going anyway.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Avoron wrote:

Is there a rule preventing creatures from attacking with multiple natural attacks from the same limb or part of the body during a single full-attack action?

Examples:
a tiefling alchemist with the alternate racial trait for claws and feral mutagen to get four claws
a barbarian with Lesser Fiend Totem and a Helm of the Mammoth Lord to get two gores

All of the relevant rules text seems to refer only to the combining of manufactured and natural attacks, and not to the use of multiple natural attacks.
** spoiler omitted **...

Yes, there is a rule against using the same natural attack multiple times in the same full attack sequence. Its the fact that you are attacking with natural weapons, and not manufactured weapons. It is simply the way that natural weapon attacks are resolved that prevents what you are trying. Natural weapons use a full BAB for each and every primary attack per natural weapon. You also get one attack per secondary weapon. At no point (barring effects like haste) can you attack more than once with a specific natural weapon in a round.

Manufactured weapons and unarmed strikes allow this because you are losing -5 on your BAB for each attack with the same weapon. They are different.

Now, you could invent a feat that works similar to Feral combat training that would allow you to choose to treat a natural weapon like a manufactured weapon/unarmed strike, but without an exception like a feat in the rules, what you are trying is impossible.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Other than bite and gore, you need one limb available to correspond the natural attack with -- so, a tiefling alchemist that already has two claws gains nothing from feral mutagen, as feral mutagen does not state that you grow extra limbs. The assumption in the description is that you are a standard humanoid that doesn't already have claws.

Same for Barbarian -- if you don't have a second head, you can't get two gore attacks.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Don't forget that in order to pinoint an invisible attacker, a perception check must be made and perception checks in combat require a move action. It's not free just because the character gets shot at by a invisible foe.

This means that while the character being targeted by the invisible archer is looking for said archer, he is limited to one standard action (his move action being consumed by the perception check).

Moreover, because it is a move action and not an immediate action, the perception check *must happen on his turn* and cannot be done while being attacked by the invisible archer.

So, by default, the rules state that the archer's target cannot pinpoint the archer until his turn comes around.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Jamie Charlan wrote:

Level 3 Metaforge is usually where you want to stop. 4-6 levels of Aegis (to taste) and Student of the Astral Suit, Fighter's Blade, wear skin form with actual magical armor, and the rest of your levels in (usually gifted blade) soulknife. The metaforge abilities are kinda 'meh' beyond 3rd, as you get more abilities/mileage out of splitting levels between the two classes than you do using the hybrid PRC.

Effectively what you need to avoid is a situation where you cannot achieve +9 or +10 enhancement total with your mindblade/bolt/whatever by 20th when a crystal hilt/bow/whatever is added in. Not having a good handful of blade/bolt skills is also a drag.

Not because campaigns usually get so high, but because if your progression wouldn't get you there in the long run, it means you're behind the entire time, and neither Aegis nor Soulknife offers accuracy bonuses or training. If everyone's running around with +2 speed or keens, and you're still stuck with a non-special +1, AND you're paying for that +1 with class abilities, you've basically pigeonholed into playing catch-up. At that point why aren't you using even a fellow player's leftovers or a weapon of your own?

Crystal Hilt/Bow, etc items lessen the disparity here...as to Crystal Spaulders.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

One thing that you will want to do is ensure that the DC for your Unwilling Participant Collective ability is as high as possible -- all of the healing and or damage redirection you will be determined based on the saving throw DC established by this ability.

Using the collective to transfer healing from one person to another is a magical effect, but it doesn't change the nature of the healing itself...so "natural healing" transferred between party members is still considered natural healing.

Balancing the Khymer ability is easy enough -- change it to ability drain vs ability damage, then Body Purification won't apply. However, given that it is a DC 25 fortitude save, I don't see you making that save very consistently.

So, you'll be spending 3 power points to recover 5 power points for a total of 2 power points at the cost of potentially staggering yourself once per round. While powerful at lower levels, this tactic will quickly become less of an issue as your power point pool increases.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Has he traveled to and returned from the Underverse?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Just let it do what it does -- allow for attacks to bypass armor and shields on the attacks -- instead of trying to extrapolate from ridiculous interpretations of RAW.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I'd have the wish effect manifest like this:

Anytime that he casts a spell, his armor phase shifts into an alternate dimension, leaving him unprotected until the start of his next turn at which point it reappears.

2nd Option -- you can use the retraining rules to replace the character's last feat gained with arcane armor training.

3rd Option -- allow no arcane spell failure -- if the caster makes a concentration check as if taking continual damage.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

That is true. But the severity check is just for additional effects. It will always be maximum damage regardless, which in most games is pretty significant for those who are able to jack up their AC pretty high, but can't do the same with their hit points when being attacked by high damage but not high CR creatures.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Bill Dunn wrote:
He's an alchemist. He already has a fraction of that power, and can control it. So to add a bit of that wild power and bind it on... Add wild surges to his alchemical magics. And make sure their presence and effect are not under his control.

This.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Heine Stick wrote:
Necroblivion wrote:
If you want to auto confirm crits, just have them automatically deal a light critical hit. Or add +10 to the severity check, which along with the d20 roll should net at least a light critical.
+10 it is. :)

On the opposite note, does anyone modify the DC required for severity if the initial attack roll is a crit, but would have otherwise missed?

Like a Nat 20 that auto hits but when modified could have missed mathematically speaking?


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

It depends on how many and what type of natural attacks you can get.

The standard is claw/claw/bite through claws of the beast and bite of the wolf. So that will net you 3 full BAB attacks per round, which is the maximum number of attacks that the cryptic BAB will net you. However, a weapon wielding cryptic allows for two weapon fighting to eventually get 5 attacks per round (with improved two weapon fighting).

Natural attacks have two advantages. They increase your power at lower levels due to having more attacks per round than normal, and they don't lose out to iterative BAB progression.

At higher levels, your power level will level out in comparison, as you can't get more attacks per round above and beyond your ccb attack routine (unless you use further magical augmentations).

Natural attacks do have the issue of not being enchantable outside of amulet of mighty fists and those types of magical items. They also have issues when attacking things that do damage when attacked within melee range.

One pattern is a good feat to have. Improved Disruption is another (they stack).

If you want some ridiculous reach with your brutal disruption attacks, use dual wielded whips. They are melee weapons that use ranged touch attack mechanics to deliver their damage at 15'. With the attendant precautions regarding provoking attacks of opportunity, etc.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

From Ultimate Psionics:

A soulbolt adds his Strength modifier to damage rolls when using the mind bolt in the short range form.

In the medium and long range forms, he uses his dex as the ability modifier to attack.

Short range form are essentially thrown weapons, medium and long range are "shot" projectiles.

All ranged attack feats (like far shot) work with the mind bolt.

Soulbolts are good for the ranged attack role in the party. They also work well with the various snapshot feat chain for second line damage dealers with attacks of opportunity as enemies close for melee.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I think that magic outweighs technology on a small scale/personal basis (it makes individuals very powerful against other individuals), but it doesn't have the capacity that technology does on a large scale such as with trade. The only question is where is the fulcrum of the balance between magic and technology.

What do you guys think about "magic" being the fuel of technological devices -- such as interstellar engines, and in turn, these engines power the ship scale weaponry. Or perhaps being able to charge personal technological gear -- or should there be a hard line separating the two?


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Quote:


That's up to you really. Worlds have a large variety of flavor, some will be more tech, and others less. It all depends on what kind of story you want to run.

Assuredly. What I'd like to have is sort of a space opera akin to Star Wars -- with less technology and more magic.

One thing I don't like about modern based campaigns is the lessening of importance of melee in combat -- if you watch anything 20th century or later, everyone stands in one spot trading ammunition. I'd like to retain the importance of melee in combat if at all possible (it may not be possible).

What do you think should be the interplay between magic and technology (ala psionics/magic transparency) of any, or should it depend on mechanics?

Can magical-ish items (say spellbooks) be digitized or is it strictly analog?

Can technology always duplicate magical effects all by themselves (even wishes?). What limitations do you think should be there?

Great suggestions overall.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I'm not looking for anything Golarion specific, although Golarion based technology could easily be used.

I'm searching for ideas on the level of science/tech that would ultimately overshadow magic in fantasy space?

Should all "scientific/technology required items -- like say ships that are air tight, or ranged ship to ship weapons have a "magical explanation" or should that be relegated to science/technology?


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

For a spacefaring campaign with the scope the size of spelljammer, I'm polling for ideas on a the balance between magic and technology -- just how much technology should exist, and at what point does it overshadow magic insofar as the spacefaring setting is concerned.

This assumes that the information given in Distant Worlds insofar as the environment is concerned is considered cannon.

What do you think would ideally be included in such a setting and what definately should be excluded?


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Rikkan,

That's almost what I needed. Thanks. However, I'm more interested in other-than-enhancement bonuses to natural armor (and shield), not just simply increasing the shield bonus to ac.

So, in the case of a amulet of natural armor, you have a +X enhancement bonus to to natural armor -- which increases your natural armor bonus to AC via the enhancement.

I'm looking for something along the lines of +X insight bonus to natural armor -- which would then stack with any enhancement bonus to natural armor

Not just feats, but enchantments as well.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Interesting extension of the thread:

There are enhancement bonuses to Natural Armor, and Shield, that increase the Natural Armor or Shield bonus to AC -- A bonus to the bonus to AC.

The hypothetical is are there other types of bonuses to natural or shield ac that can apply alongside enhancement bonuses?


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

You would use charisma + intelligence.

The charisma replaces the first intelligence bonus for Lore Keeper, and Perfect recall adds an additional intelligence bonus.

People are treating this like criminal law instead of using common sense.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Looks perfectly legitimate to me.

Surprise round allows a standard action, charge is executed as a standard action with limited distance, pounce allows a full attack on a charge (doesn't specify required distance except that which is required in order to charge -- 10').


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I only worry about RAW when it comes to PFS.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

A plain bomb has splash, and that is what is being modified by the admixture -- eliminating the splash. The discovery only modifies how the damage is dealt. It takes the damage to the direct target to become a DoT vs DD.

While not strictly RAW, I think a reasonable reading of the two effects would indeed apply double int mod for each round of effect given that the splash damage is completely eliminated.

It doesn't seem to be overpowered to me.

However, a RAW reading would also say that the admixture would lose out to the discovery. Which would eliminate the double int mod damage per round effect.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

From what I read of the two effects, yes, there would be no splash from the bomb thrown.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Albatoonoe wrote:
So, an interesting idea. Why doesn't a group take up the task of making an alternate powerpoint system for all casters? That way, these new psychics and anyone else can be powerpoint casters, but those that like Vancian casting (counting myself and I know many others) can have our cake too.

Dungeons and Dragons 2nd Edition Player's Option Spells and Magic is the reference you are looking for.

Spellpoint system with fatigue.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

The following quote from the flurry of blows class ability prevents the use of additional natural weapon attacks along with the use of a natural weapon (using FCT) while using flurry of blows:

A monk with natural weapons cannot use such weapons as part of a flurry of blows, nor can he make natural attacks in addition to his flurry of blows attacks.

Feral Combat Training only modifies the first half of that sentence, it does not modify the second half -- that restriction still applies.

So, what basically happens is that if you pick Bite as your FCT choice, you get iterative attacks using the FOB progression applying the modifiers you have that occur with your bite attack (to each of your FOB iterative attacks), you then cannot use your bite attack as a natural weapon -- nor can you use claws, or tentacles or hooves, or any other natural weapon.

If you want iteratives and natural attacks, you get those without having to take feats or anything else. However, all natural attacks become secondary (-5 to attack and 1/2 STR damage bonus). And a monk uses is regular BAB on the iterative attacks, not the FOB progression and cannot use his natural weapons in the iterative attacks...those are unarmed strikes.

This isn't complicated.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Since a freedom of movement ring prevents being grappled, and grappled state is reciprocal, does it prevent grappling (offensively as well)?

1 to 50 of 227 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>

©2002–2015 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com 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.