Razz's page

Asgetrion wrote:

How many templates are there in the book, James?

Not many, maybe four or five.

Oh, sweet. I thought there were none because an earlier poster said, as if it were a definite, that there wouldn't be any.

I'm aware the Pathfinder version grants a +8 save against mind-affecting effects and not total immunity as in 3.5e, but let's just assume I am talking about the 3.5e version. Is anyone aware of anything that allows you to actually defeat Mind Blank, other than deities/artifacts/dispel magic?

On another note, the Pathfinder Mind Blank says it works against See Invisible, but The Sage had said no, See Invisibility, True Seeing, and Detect Magic do not work against Mind Blank and were never meant to, that was what Nondetection was for. Which I agree. Don't want Mind Blank to be imbalanced. Why did Paizo make Mind Blank extremely uber again?

I could've swore James or one of the other Paizo staff had ruled that Augment Summoning does work on eidolons and the summon monster SA?

Second, does he still suffer the -2 AC for being blinded? It doesn't state it, even though the no Dex. bonus applies, which is odd.

Yes. Its not that odd. His senses allow him to know that there is someone in the square next to him. It doesn't tell him exactly where the person is holding their dagger or swinging their staff. Something with blindSIGHT would have echolocation so good and precise that they may as well be seeing the metal in the thief's hand.

Ok got it. What I meant by it being odd was, for Blindsense, they mention you don't get Dexterity bonus to AC and movement penalties, but don't mention whether you suffer the -2 AC for being blinded or not. This led me to believe if you have Blindsense, you don't suffer the -2 to AC but still have no Dex. bonus to AC.

Ok, so far I think I got it.

Blindsight works like normal sight, with exceptions noted in its entry. Anything outside the range of blindsight and a creature is considered blinded (as in they need to make a Perception check for someone outside their range).

As for Blindsense, you still suffer ALL the blinded condition penalties with the exception that you can sense other creatures location without Perception checks?

Ok, that's what I figured. Thanks! What happened was my player was grappled, and he had the spell Heart of Water on. One of the effects of the spell allows you to mentally choose to affect yourself with Freedom of Movement for 1 round/level and then the spell expires. So he used it while being grappled and wanted to make sure that he still needed to use that Standard Action to get out and away.

I have a question concerning Blinded/Blindsight/Blindsense. According to the wording, it sounds as if the Blinded condition still affects a character and that Blindsight/Blindsense only alleviates some of the detriments of the condition. Look at the following:

BLINDED: The creature cannot see. It takes a –2 penalty
to Armor Class, loses its Dexterity bonus to AC (if any), and
takes a –4 penalty on most Strength- and Dexterity-based
skill checks and on opposed Perception skill checks. All
checks and activities that rely on vision (such as reading
and Perception checks based on sight) automatically fail.
All opponents are considered to have total concealment
(50% miss chance) against the blinded character. Blind
creatures must make a DC 10 Acrobatics skill check to
move faster than half speed. Creatures that fail this check
fall prone. Characters who remain blinded for a long time
grow accustomed to these drawbacks and can overcome
some of them.
---------------------------------
BLINDSIGHT: Some creatures possess blindsight, the extraordinary
ability to use a nonvisual sense (or a combination of senses)
to operate effectively without vision. Such senses may
include sensitivity to vibrations, acute scent, keen hearing,
or echolocation. This makes invisibility and concealment
(even magical darkness) irrelevant to the creature (though it
still can’t see ethereal creatures). This ability operates out to
a range specified in the creature description.

• Blindsight never allows a creature to distinguish color or
visual contrast. A creature cannot read with blindsight.
• Blindsight does not subject a creature to gaze attacks
(even though darkvision does).
• Blinding attacks do not penalize creatures that use
blindsight.
• Deafening attacks thwart blindsight if it relies on
hearing.
• Blindsight works underwater but not in a vacuum.
• Blindsight negates displacement and blur effects.

BLINDSENSE Other creatures have blindsense, a lesser
ability that lets the creature notice things it cannot see,
but without the precision of blindsight. The creature
with blindsense usually does not need to make Perception
checks to notice and locate creatures within range of its
blindsense ability, provided that it has line of effect to
that creature. Any opponent that cannot be seen has
total concealment (50% miss chance) against a creature
with blindsense, and the blindsensing creature still has
the normal miss chance when attacking foes that have
concealment. Visibility still affects the movement of a
creature with blindsense. A creature with blindsense is
still denied its Dexterity bonus to Armor Class against
attacks from creatures it cannot see.
---------------------------------

My problem is this --- I have a player who has been blinded. However, he has Blindsense out to a range of 50 ft. According to Blindsense, if he has line of sight to the enemies, he can pinpoint where they are. He still suffers 50% miss chance, no Dex. bonus to AC, and half speed.

First, does he still suffer the -4 penalty to Strength/Dexterity skills? I assume yes, as it's a part of the movement penalty.

Second, does he still suffer the -2 AC for being blinded? It doesn't state it, even though the no Dex. bonus applies, which is odd.

Now, what about Blindsight? According to the entry, it only says blindsight allows one to ignore concealment and invisibility. Now I know there're creatures with regular sight and blindsight. So, if a creature with both is blinded, does he suffer the blinded condition and have the blindsight effects overlap? Or is blindsight the exact equivalent of actual sight except for the effects described?

It's a confusing matter. Also, do blinded creatures still receive AoO or no? I assume not?

Thanks!

According to Freedom of Movement, you automatically succeed on checks to escape grapples.

A player of mine says he's automatically free, and still has all his actions to use.

However, according to the wording, it just says checks made to escape automatically succeed. It sounds like you still need to declare you're "escaping", which is a Standard Action.

So, does escaping with Freedom of Movement still require a Standard Action (or Move Action for those with Greater Grapple, I believe)? Or is it really an auto-escape?

Thanks!

Face_P0lluti0n wrote:

The background: I'm running a 3.5/PF game (pretty much anything WotC or Paizo printed for 3.5 and PF respectively is allowed) set in Eberron. It's been an optimization arms race for several months now, and I'm ready to end it.

I haven't read the other responses, so this may have already been mentioned, but if you're playing in Eberron and you want to scare them you could always just threaten to switch to 4e if they don't scroll back their cheese. I know that would scare the everliving crap out of me.

Good one. From what I read on 4E books, they can optimize as much as they want because, surprisingly, all of it ends up being the same as anyone else. The only pro to having everything balanced to near-perfection; nothing gets out of control for DMs. 4E completely demolished overpowered optimizations.

Take that Epic Level Handbook, open up to the monsters, and start using them as BBEGs. Simple.

What I would do? Fiend Folio, 3 (advanced HD) Blackstone Gigants guarding a slumbering Paragon Tarrasque that apocalypse-worshipping cultists are trying to awaken to devastate the world. If the Paragon (from ELH) is too much, use the Multiheaded template in Savage Species instead.

Point is, you just need to outdo them with tougher monsters. They can whine about a TPK all they want, it's what they deserve for min-maxing. Break the game, it'll break you.

Now if you really want to frighten them, use the ELH Quest ideas. I remember one of them saying something about 20th-level Lizardfolk mercenaries riding Prismatic Dragons try to conquer the world as an example. You can always freak them the hell out and send a wyrmling time dragon from Dragon Magazine #349.

Beckett wrote:

:-) no you are right, it is much better and thematic to have a bunch of priests unable to practice or participate in what they preach. :-)

That's a bit hyperbolic. Moreover, it's just wrong. The "selflessness" of the preacher is core to any benevolent faith. The empowerment of the warrior who fights in the name of the preacher or faith, for instance, would belong very much to any martial faith. For the manipulative and minion hoarding zealot, empowering others to fight (and die) in the name of the deity makes perfect sense.

And clerics of the strength domain do get to practice what they preach, just not until level eight. ;)

Those only apply to Strength checks and Strength skills, not CMB checks and melee attacks, which is what they should also receive.

jreyst wrote:

If you activate an effect with a one round or greater duration, the effect ends just before your initiative in whatever round is the last round of its duration. In the case of an effect with a one round duration, it comes into effect as soon as you finish activating it, then ends just before your next turn. If it requires a standard action to activate it, and it has a one round duration, then you can never benefit from it.

I think you have that wrong, but I don't have a PF page to look at right now. It should end at the end of your next round. I know in 3.5 it was clearly at the end not the beginning of your next round.

Think of a 1st level caster Summoning. That would make all Summons useless because you spend your entire turn casting it appears, and then vanishes just before you can actually have it do anything. Even True Strike specifies the end of your next turn.

Also, by having it end before your next turn, you are actually robbing the character of time, because by the beginning of their next turn, a full round cycle has not gone by yet, not until the end of that characters actions.

Not exactly. Summon Monster takes 1 round to cast. So, before the beginning of your next turn, the monster appears. You and the monster than both act on your next turn. If you're a 1st-level caster, the monster sticks around for 1 round, which means it will disappear right before the beginning of your turn after.

As for appearance concerning with Charisma, appearance CAN play a role, but it doesn't. I've seen genders put off by handsome/beautiful people because, despite their looks, they're real jerks, lack self-esteem or self-confidence, too shy, try to stay out of everyone's way for personal reasons, or they just don't have that "aura" about them that begs to be noticed.

A lot of women say they look for a guy with self-confidence and I personally know some rather average-looking to somewhat ugly men with very beautiful women just because they had the skill and talent to woo them over. I've seen women of average or uglier appearance do the same.

So Charisma is NOT entirely based on appearance. But appearance can play a factor. An ugly person probably has low Charisma because their ego and self-confidence has been severely damaged from being treated like a freak, whereas a person with great looks may have high Charisma because he's sorta had no choice but to get involved in social circles because others are attracted to him. But it's only one possible factor. As pointed out, illithids, undead, and devils or demons have high Charisma and yet they have some really horrifying appearances. Just look at the nalfeshnee!

To me, there's Raw Ability, and then there's Skill.

Raw Ability is what the stats represent. Sure, someone more intelligent than me can easily recall answers to a lot of topics. But if I spent my life, time, and money to studying a particular subject, I will know more than the genius IQ person who only knows what they remember about the subject.

One example is a player I DM that has a Dexterity of 6. Pretty damn clumsy. And he plays him as such. BUT, when you get him on a mount, his coordination and balance are almost unmatched. Why!? His character spent years training his body to become one with whatever steed he is mounted on, he has a Ride over +30 despite having Dexterity of 6. Will he ever be AS GOOD as someone of equal skill and higher Dexterity? No, but that's only because that other person has a better raw ability, better reflexes and balance naturally than skillfully than his character.

Another example is a player I DM that has a character with a Wisdom score of 8.

It's how you choose to RP it. I wouldn't recommend putting on any additional penalties. Sure, your Charisma 4 character is probably a real D-Bag to everything and everyone, and has severely low self-esteem he's trying to overcompensate for, has a low sense of ego, and does not really care about standing out. BUT if he puts the time to train himself into being more formal, sensitive, and empathize with people he chooses to (grudgingly) deal with. At times, he's still going to come off as grating (it is his personality, or lack thereof, still in effect, that is what the penalty represents!) but he's tempered it. At maximum ranks, he's never going to be as good as the guy with 18 Diplomacy (compared to a Charisma of 4, that's an extra +7 modifier), so more people will still flock to the 18 Charisma guy. But if the guy with 18 Charisma has no real negotiating skill other than his natural ability of having a strong presence to others around him, even a Charisma 4 character can show them up.

Does that help?

Well, it's not like an Orison at all. There's a limited number of times per day you can use it.

And, yes, I agree with it being lame it's only effective on another character. Someone had mentioned on another thread that even the Paladin can use his lay on hands as a swift action for himself. But not Strength Surge (Strength) or Battle Rage (War) clerics?!

In that case, since Paizo keeps ignoring this clear screw-up (Cleric of a Strength or War god but...you can't bless YOURSELF properly with their power?), I hereby houserule it to a swift action.

It'd be nice for Paizo to do an official errata on it.

Can someone explain to me why a Cleric with the Strength domain can't even use the Strength Surge ability on himself effectively?

It only lasts 1 round, which means the ability will wear off before the Cleric can use a Standard Action on his next turn to utilize it. The best he can do is pull off a Move Action that makes use of a Strength-related roll. I don't think this was intended, as the 3.5e Strength domain power version allowed it to be used as a free action.

I think there needs to be errata so the text reads "Until the end of the cleric's next turn". Or the ability should be changed to a Swift Action and not a Standard Action.

While putting in rules for real-world martial arts is nice, I really look forward to more "fantasy" styles of martial arts that don't exist in the real world.

I also believe, being a fantasy game and also a suggestion that can double as inspirations for Oriental Adventures/Anime-themed campaigns, that there needs to be some supernatural elements to some of the styles, even real-world ones, like judo-flipping a storm giant, for example.

I wouldn't say to blatantly rip off of fighting games, such as channeling ki to shoot out a "hadouken", BUT I do believe you guys need to play games like Street Fighter and Fatal Fury for some ideas on mixing supernatural elements into martial arts, and maybe some japanese anime. Akin to Sagara Sanousuke in "Ruroni Kenshin" when he learns Futae no Kiwami, Rock Lee and Gai when they open their "gates" in Naruto, or even techniques seen from "Fist of the North Star".

Ok, I see this not only in a lot of WotC books, but also in Pathfinder's.

The Knowledge skill basically lets you know answers to questions based on the topic you're skilled in. The more esoteric the knowledge, the higher the DC.

Now, in some instances, I've seen a number of situations where the PC needs access to a library and then making the appropriate Knowledge check to find out an answer to something. For thorough/large libraries, you can get circumstantial bonuses to the check, usually from +2 to +6.

Now, what constitutes an answer that requires the need of a library? Which ones require a simple Knowledge check (because it's assumed PCs with higher Knowledge ranks means they definitely would know the answer to a lot of questions, without a library, mainly because the ranks are supposed to represent their time spent in the libraries!)

Or is it really a DM's call? As in, if something is really secretive and requires piecing info together, then only a library access AND a Knowledge check can answer the question. If something is more accessible, then just a simple Knowledge check?

I dunno what to do, but I've devises a few methods, one of which I need to decide on sticking with:

A) DM's call; very esoteric knowledge requires a DC check + library research
B) Libraries can be used to make untrained Knowledge checks
C) Libraries can be used to make Knowledge checks, in addition to the skill roll (thus, you have TWICE the chance of getting a question answered, if your personal check fails, you can go to a library and make one extra check)
D) Only one Knowledge check is allowed, but you can go to a library to gain a circumstantial bonus to the check

Norse themed monsters in the book eh? I'm sure many other European flavored ones, too, along with outside of Europe.

My question is this: Will Bestiary 3 be a helpful supplement to the Tan Xia book coming out so that Bestiary 3 will have a healthy chunk of Oriental-themed monsters?

Yeah, leave the "us-against-them" to WotC, Paizo is much better than that.

Obviously, I'm bitter at the stranglehold WotC has on mind flayers, beholders, and a number of other monsters they should've made open content. Sucks we're limited to what's in the SRD and Tome of Horrors.

One day, all of D&D will be public domain...one day...or century...

I was planning on getting the PDF once I was sure all of errata was incorporated in it. Since it has been quite some time, has all (or most) of the errata been incorporated into the book? If so, then I can finally purchase it.

Sounds cool, actually. :)

Since it's a spell-like ability I would be inclined to give the target a Will save to negate the effect. Or maybe a Will save to reduce the effect to one round.

I'm suggesting that because melee touch attacks are pretty easy and you are essentially granting concealment to all other creatures in your party with this. Peg a rogue with it once and they can no longer sneak attack anyone for the duration...

Well it should be fine the way it is mainly because I just based it off the Darkness domain 1st-level ability, Touch of Darkness. This is essentially the same thing, just opposite, and the extra effect of the glow.

I've been trying to think of a way to convert the Radiance domain to Pathfinder.

For starters, the granted power from 3.5 gave immunity to pattern effects. So that sounds like a keeper, but since patterns aren't common, I need a good 1st-level ability.

For an 8th-level one, I have one idea.

Aura of Brilliance (Su): At 8th level, you can emit an aura of brilliance that causes all allies weapons within a 30-foot radius (melee, throwing weapons, and ammunition only) to gain the brilliant energy property for a number of rounds equal to 1/2 your cleric level. You can use this ability once per day at 8th level, and an additional time per day for every four levels beyond 8th.

Seems decent?

For a 1st-level ability, I've been tossing some things in my mind. My best one is this:

Touch of Radiance (Sp): As a melee touch attack, you can cause a creature’s vision to be fraught with blinding, colorful radiance. The creature touched treats all other creatures as if they had concealment, suffering a 20% miss chance on all attack rolls. This effect lasts for a number of rounds equal to 1/2 your cleric level (minimum 1). In addition, the creature sheds bright light in a 20-ft. radius. You can use this ability a number of times per day equal to 3 + your Wisdom modifier.

Well, first, they gave the spells all Clerics will need --- Bull's Strength, Bear's Endurance, Owl's Wisdom, Eagle's Splendor --- Str, Con, Wis, Cha.

Dex and Int are common dump stats.

Also, it makes sense to leave spells out the general list to give something unique to the Domains. That's half the fun of Cleric Domains, accessing spells the general Cleric doesn't get.

Well if he wants to be a sage or a scholar...

He could just take profession: sage or profession: scholar. :)

Well, yeah, but not a sage of broad amounts of lore (which can be rather OP, anyway, cause what's the difference between Profession (sage) and the Knowledge skill then?), but a scholar of a specific topic and not a broad range of topics lumped together in the same field.

Basically, how we have people that specialize in one area of study like archaeologists, biologists, horticulturalists, herbalists, psychologists, etc., I was wondering what is the title of someone that studies the field of law&politics? And not just domestic, but international as well.

Yeah he didn't want to be an interpreter of laws, as a barrister might seem to do, just be a sage/scholar in all things law and political in a multitude of nations. He is then having his character write a book of his learnings and commentary of the different nations laws and politics, and offer his own treatise on how governments can be more effective (not IRL writing a book, of course, in-game his character plans on writing one).

He's a Wizard/Eldritch Knight in liege to the Lord of Daggerdale. Besides being a warrior mage protector of his home and lord, he does travel the world to its various people and he is absorbing all the knowledge can on each of their laws and politics. Something his character does as a sort of career hobby, besides adventuring.

Thank you for the titles, they will indeed help.

I have a player that wants his character to study the lands he travels to and learns what he can of the politics and laws of those lands.

Now, I know Knowledge (local) encompasses something that like, however we run a Forgotten Realms game. It requires Knowledge (local) ranks for EACH region. He doesn't have that amount of skill points to use, and Knowledge (local) is also covers a broad range of topics. He wants something more specific. So we decided to go with the Profession skill.

Knowledge (nobility) he is aware will help and he'll have ranks in that, too. But it won't cover laws, traditions, and politics, it seems it will just cover more about heraldry, nobility titles and stations, who's who in the upper echelons of society, and history of said nobility. Knowledge (history) helps, too, but again not specific enough. And while he'll be interested in how a nation's history has developed and progressed their laws and politics, it won't help with present-day topics.

Now according to the Profession skill (at least by Pathfinder's standards), it can be used just like a Knowledge check if the the topic is a major part of the trade. So what I am looking for is the job title of someone that spends a career studying, researching, recording, and being very knowledgable about the politics and laws of all sorts of nations, city-states, etc.

Anyone know what title would fit best? Thanks.

I see that Paizo is putting out the 2nd installment of Book of the Damned out, but was wondering if Angels and Archons would get the same treatment as the Devils and Demons are. I ask b/c i was quite excited with the 3.5 material in Fiendish Codex 1 & 2, but was a little let down when it happened that no Celestial Codex would be printed. =/

Im currently writing a "Hellgate" esc. style campaign in which Demons are the invaders and have effectively decimated all life on the Material Plane. The surviving native (including my future PCs) have allied themselves with either Devils or Angels and are doing what they can to close the portals to the Abyss...so you can see my frustration with so little material on the Celestials.

All in all, this looks to be yet another AMAZING addiction..I MEAN addition to the Pathfinder collection. =D

+1

Oh jeez, January 5th!? What gives!? It feels like everytime I check its schedule, it's pushed back another month. I'm starting to think we're never getting it.

I have a player constantly using Detect Scrying and I was wondering if anyone could recall a way that could counter it without the caster knowing? Basically, anything that can actually bypass Detect Scrying.

I seem to recall some spell in 3.5e, or maybe it was a magic item, that did manage to avoid that spell's effect.

If not, no biggie, it just means one less 4th-level spell slot for the PC; and I doubt they'd spend a ton of their treasure crafting wands and scrolls of the spell.

I'd like to see more RP/story-based spells. WotC created quite a number that was fun.

Spells like Familial Geas, where the Geas not only affected you, but your descendants as well. There was one that caused great harm to a loved one when casted on you, there was another that cursed an arcane caster from casting spells or suffer negative levels (Laeral's Crowning Touch). There was Mindrape, which allowed the caster to completely change every aspect of a target's memories. There was also Morality Undone, where your character lost their conscience completely, so that even thinking about doing something evil actually sounded like a good idea in the character's mind to do.

Spells like that, and definitely less damage-dealing/combat-type spells.

Also, I know some here would be dismayed at me suggesting this, but no repeats from Spell Compendium. Spell Compendium spells (or any spells from WotC) work just fine in Pathfinder, why would you want repeats? What could Pathfinder do to make them more...Pathfinderized? Very little, if at all.

So, in Ultimate Magic, I'm looking for really new and unique spells not seen elsewhere (particularly the 3E D&D books). In fact, there's a ton of 2e spells that never got updated, those old Priest and Wizard Compendiums are perfect sources for new spells not done before.

Does that seem broken to anyone else?

Creatures with constriction have always been deadly.

It seems broken, but look at the disadvantages. They're wide open to attacks from their target's allies.

The problem is the whole "facing" idea.

Facing was an optional rule in 2e, and even 3e thanks to Unearthed Arcana, but it's not used for simplicity's sake. During combat, it's assumed you're trying to stay aware of everything around you, turning about every second to change your line of sight so you can try to fend off any attack coming at you. Using Stealth during combat shouldn't be simple.

Now, I think the problem is Stealth outside of combat. It's going to have to be DM's call. I doubt someone standing at a cliffside keeping a lookout for enemies in the valley below, or also even the skies above, is going to constantly be turning his head back to check on a sneaking enemy, especially if they don't think an enemy will be advancing on them and there's no concealment or cover around at all (though, someone with more experience via high Perception modifier will be the one turning at the last second to notice a sneaking enemy).

In that instance, the DM should make the call of whether the enemy is even observing your area, and thus, YOU. If the DM calls that the guards in the other room are looking down the hall with their backs turned to you, then you should be free to make the Stealth check. If the bear in the forest is looking at the river and swatting for fish with its back turned to you, and you need to dive from one tree to the next, then a Stealth check should be allowed.

As for the farmer and his dog. Well, if the dog is sleeping, he's not going to easily detect an advancing enemy. A Perception is needed (he smells or hears the person coming). The farmer, if he's constantly observing the area, yes, he's going to see you the minute you're out of cover or concealment in bright daylight. Makes sense.

But this is where causing a distraction comes into play. Simply make a Bluff check. You throw a rock or cause some other disturbance, then rush to hide elsewhere before they observe the area again. That's one way.

Maybe hating is too strong, but anyone else have a problem with dm's disliking their alchemists? I have a half-orc alchemist with a 21 INT. We started at 7th lvl, so I'm tossing around 4d6+8 bombs. Now I only have fire for damage, and most of the creatures we've been encountering have fire vulnerability, so he's understanding that, but he seems really bummed that I'm blowing things up so easily. He was wondering (I think semi-jokingly) how much the alchemist had been playtested as it seemed broken.

I could point out to him that rogues do more damage (since they get weapon dmg too) with sneak attacks and the half-orc fighter power attacking can get similar damage (16-27 each attack) out assuming he hits, but I don't know, it just seems like he's really not liking it. Anyone else experience this?

No offense to your DM but...he's acting like a word that can also describe a "female dog". He's set up a quest with a particular theme and set of encounters, and he didn't check into how effective the guy tossing exploding fire all over place was going to be.

In other words, he didn't do his homework. If he did, he'd have realized what your character was capable of and learn to come up with different challenges to that. For example, the enemies should be ganging up on your deadly alchemist. Or the enemies, if intelligent, will run and formulate a plan to take him down, trap your party somehow, or incapacitate one or two other party members before ganging up on you.

If he's running dumb beasts, well, then he needs to throw more dumb beasts, simple as that.

How many party members do you have? Are you the only "spellcaster" able to perform crowd control? You'd be no different if you had a fire sorcerer or a wizard with fire magic and fire magic items (like scrolls and wands) at his disposal. If you are the only one, then you're doing your job fine and your DM lacks the experience to handle it, it seems.

Also, the names of classes and prestige classes are not static. It's just a "generalized" name used to represent the ideals and theme of the class/prestige class.

Sure, any wizard can dub themselves an "archmage".

But only the kingdom of Exeloria grants wizards the title of High Arcanist of the Moonborn Brotherhood, and offers training and forms of magic that no other arcanist can have access to (hence, the Archmage abilities no other Wizard has access). Or the Guild of Extraordinarily Supernatural Mages can grant thee the title of "Supreme Wizard", and give access to the rituals, magic, and power to harness energies even the mightiest wizards don't have access to unless they learn from the guild.

Just like playing a Paladin doesn't mean the same thing everywhere. You can be Holy Knight of the Lost Truths in one land, or called a Divine Cavalier in another, or be known as the Warrior of Light elsewhere...but all use "Paladin" training, abilities, etc.

Wizards could be known as Arcanists, Mages, Bookblasters, whatever. But to be an "Archmage" or "High Arcanist" or "Noble Mage" or "Wizard of the Silver Robes", etc., should not only be prestigious in title but also power.

So I think Paizo's stance on not making prestige classes based on titles of a class being a more powerful version of a core class is very flimsy logic. If it was as simple as a name change, then they should've changed the name. But I see nothing wrong with meeting requirements to acquire a new "tier" of power of a class, as long as there are sacrifices made (hence, the Archmage lost spell slots).

That's the problem with RPG companies these days; don't always pander to people's sensibilities. Tell them "It's your game, your imagination, if you need an explanation why being an archmage is a prestige class and not part of being just a high level wizard, here's our suggestion, but only you should fill in the rest how you please."

Does anyone know if its planned to be remade? Or what?

Just as everyone here says, althought the Hierophant and Archmage prestige classes work fine as is in Pathfinder. I actually keep them in game alongside the APG feats for the sole purpose of two things:

1) Not ALL the Archmage abilities made it as feats (and no Hieorophant abilities did, either) so you should still use it

2) The PrC is an option to get what the feats get you, but for free, instead of using a feat slot for it

Razz wrote:

What sourcebooks are the feats Improved Balance and Perfect Balance from?

They are not feats. They are class features of the Two weapon fighter variant in the APG.

Ah thanks for clearing that up. Have yet to read all the new alternate class features in the APG

What sourcebooks are the feats Improved Balance and Perfect Balance from?

Sounds like a good regional book for the future. After an Oriental one, of course.

Then have the Orient characters (Tian Xia is the name I think?) face Numeria denizens. Instant Japanese-anime styled Pathfinder game!

Why do I sense some Final Fantasy-like campaigns being planned right now? ;)

I don't get the Enlarge Spell feat.

Why does it need to mention it doesn't work on "spells not defined by distance" and then continue to say "if the range is not close, medium, or long"? Isn't that redundant? The first implies that it would work on Lightning Bolt, until you get to the second phrase which then knocks Lightning Bolt back out the picture. Why didn't they just say "the spell's range has to specifically be a close, medium, or long range. Fixed ranges or spells without a defined distance (such as touch or 0 ft.) are invalid."

As for Widen spell, Line is part of the listing for "Area" and since Widen Spell affects those types of area spells, I would definitely rule that the "line" doubles.

How do you "double" the line? I would say use two lines, parallel from each other, on adjacent corners of the spellcaster's square. Whatever squares those two lines pass through or touch is affected by the spell.

That's just my guess on the whole matter.

Someone here mentioned it, why didn't they just limit the spell so it had to be anchored to something solid between its ends if cast horizontally?

Such a simple, overlooked fix.

WotC's Miniature's Handbook, take the Pushback feat, requires Strength 17, Power Attack, Improved Bull Rush; allows you to push a foe back 5 ft. after an attack.

Enjoy.

One other interesting note is the fact that maybe at least one of the new art pieces isn't a specific monster at all, but an illustration for one of the new monster templates.

Ok, if I had been eating something when I read "Pope Dragon", it'd might have turned into a first Paizo-related death because I would've choked from sudden laughter. LOL Good one.

WotC's Libris Mortis book has some new Divine feats that can help with that, such as Empower Turning, Heighten Turning, and there was a Dragon Magazine article that had Undead Legion and Greater Undead Legion which increased the number of HD of undead you can command.

Though, being Pathfinder, the feats need tweaking. Empower Turning, I would say, should make you use up two uses of Channel Energy to increase the healing/damage rolled by 50%. Not useful for commanding extra undead, though.

Heighten Turning, I believe the best way to handle that was you can use up more uses of Channel Energy to increase the DC by +2. That's how I converted it, at least. Again, no extra HD commanding.

You did make me realized something --- Evil clerics no longer rebuke undead. I don't understand why. They had the ability to rebuke or command, now it's limited to just command in Pathfinder. Don't understand why.

Your best bet is Undead Legion, though it only adds +2 HD, and Greater Undead Legion an additional 4 HD (total of 6 HD with both).

However, you mentioned turn/command. Are you using the 3.5e rules for turning or Pathfinder's Channel Energy?

Kobold Quarterly is ok. I wish they wouldn't smother most of their magazines with 4e material.

I think what the OP wants is a Pathfinder-exclusive magazine. It's obvious why they can't do a print one, but why not a monthly or bi-monthly online magazine?

Paizo can EASILY errata this by adding a sentence that says,"Because of the speed, use of materials, and the alchemist's own magical power used to craft the item so quickly, it deteoriates and becomes useless after XX amount of time."

I hope when the APG Errata is release they do this.

APG p. 309 wrote:

Sash of the War Champion

..
The wearer treats his fighter level as 4 higher than normal for the purpose of the armor training and bravery class features.
..

If said fighter has an archetype that replaces bravery, will that also count as 4 levels higher, or will archetype fighters lose out on this?

We've house ruled it in our group that it does indeed work for archetypes (like mobile fighter's agility class feature), but I'm curious if it was intended to do so.

To make it fair for archetype characters, I would definitely allow it where it would also boost anything that replaced Bravery.

So to cross the hallway, you'll need Cover/Concealment. Simple.

This is why in Looney Tunes, the cartoons always had themselves disguised as hedges. Instant Concealment. You carry your concealment with you. Tower Shields offer total cover I believe? Though...the shield will just give him a huge Stealth penalty. He's probably better off walking with a hollowed-out hedge to carry.

Sadly, RAW, it'd actually work.

I do agree on Stealth needing a serious overhaul in the way it's written and handled.

And, not that it isn't useful, but I wish folks would stop trying to figure out how to incorporate historical elements into a class to make it a worthy class.

None of the core classes were built purely from historical records. Monks didn't move super-fast, they didn't jump exceedingly far, they didn't take down 100 men with their bare hands alone, they didn't break through stone doors with just their fist. But we have here a fantasy Monk that exaggerates and grants supernatural power to what the Monks were trained to do. Paladins weren't blessed, holy knights with divine powers to smite down evil. Rangers are from the US Military, and don't run around wielding two-weapons, befriending animals, attuning themselves to nature, and casting limited forms of magic harnessed from nature itself. But a fantasy version does.

Want to know where I first saw mention of a Paladin being a holy knight with minimal holy powers? Final Fantasy IV. The Dark Knight turned Paladin, Cecil. A true, fantasy Paladin. Copied from D&D, no doubt, and interestingly enough it was very identical to it. I am sure Japan modeled many of Final Fantasy's jobs from D&D classes. They even have a coeurl and an illithid monster in a few of the Final Fantasy games. Along with using Bahamut and Tiamat constantly.

Therefore, it only makes sense to just emulate how the Japanese have created fantasy versions of the Ninja and Samurai. They're the experts on it, clearly.

When I think of fantasy Ninja, I think of everything a Rogue/Monk hybrid can do but offered much more optional benefits that are strictly "Ninja" only and neither the Rogue or Monk offers even with multiclassing (like shadow stepping, death attack, speed climbing, invisibility, poisoning techniques, etc.) and some form of mystical power (maybe through feats or a limited, 4-level spellcasting chart).

When I think of a fantasy Samurai, I don't see a Fighter or a Paladin's abilities associated with it. And very little of a Cavalier's. I think along the lines of the supernatural Samurai akin to the Paladin, but their energy is harnessed through their ki. They can do sword techniques (make a melee attack as a ranged attack, for example), or buff themselves with ki (the ki strength from the 1e Samurai class), or harness even a little elemental power, probably. I think more along the lines of a Fighter/Paladin/Cavalier/Monk when I think of Samurai. Mounted Combat for free, a variety of ki powers devoted to martial skill, a variety of martial arts techniques, with blades or another weapon-type, even unarmed. Bonus feats, good Fortitude and Will, d10 HD, high BAB, etc. Maybe a "combat style" option like the Ranger, with a wide variety of free feat chains.

Perfect example of a fantasy Samurai, please tell me you folks are aware of the Samurai job in both Final Fantasy Tactics and Final Fantasy XI? That's my best comparison.

You can get to the same goal with Ninja and Samurai by taking many different paths to do it. Now, you can use historical aspects to help with the creativity, but I do not believe in any way it should even emulate their historical counterparts in any way at all.