Curious as to how many here have chosen to put this book aside until an errata file is soon put together, considering the huge amount of errors in the book there are?
Search Posts
I'm looking for a Play by Post forum that allows Private threads only (as in I invite the players in, others can't enter or can only watch) that also has a dice roller built in. Where can I find such a site?
I'm told errata isn't released for download unless a new printing is done. That sounds ludicrous to me. What if there is no new print run? Does that mean no fixes to errors? What if a new print run doesn't happen for months? Why must we wait that long, those of us that have it? It's silly. It's like sending in my TV to get fixed but the company says ,"We can't fix it until all these models of TV are sold out of stock and our improved model is manufactured."
No pun intended but I have a big problem with this spell. A player casted it on an ally. Problem is, there isn't enough space. But it's not from objects or room size --- it's because of creatures being in the way for him to take up a 10 foot space. The spell says make a Strength check if objects were in the way, but nothing for creatures. So what happens? I doubt he stops growing, I doubt he's constrained, also. I don't think it allows a free bull rush or knocking everyone prone. There's gotta be some ruling on this somewhere?
I found that by combining some of the Complete Adventurer's Ninja class into the Pathfinder Ninja class by making some of their class features new ninja tricks. Some were redundant with what the PF Ninja already had. The only one I wasn't able to squeeze in there, which I believe would've been nice to have but was too weak to offer as a ninja trick, was the benefit of receiving +2 bonus to Will saves for keeping at least 1 ki points. Maybe Paizo will offer some sort of Ninja trick along those lines along the way. I also wanted to somehow include the Wisdom bonus to AC, but I guess dipping 1 level of Monk fixes that. Anyway, here they are. Enjoy! NEW NINJA TRICKS
Ki Dodge (Su): A ninja can spend one daily use of her ki power to cause an attack against her to miss when it might otherwise hit. When a ninja activates this ability, her outline shifts
NEW NINJA MASTER TRICKS
Ghost Mind (Su): A ninja with this master trick gains a special resistance to spells of the scrying subschool. To detect or see a ninja with such a spell, the caster must make a caster level check (DC 20 + the ninja’s class level). In the case of scrying spells (such as arcane eye) that scan the ninja’s area, a failed check indicates that the spell works but the ninja simply isn’t detected. Scrying attempts targeted specifically at the ninja do not work at all if the check fails. Ghost Walk (Su): A ninja can enter the Ethereal Plane for an extended period of time. This ability functions as the ethereal jaunt spell with a caster level equal to the ninja’s class level. Each use of this ability uses up 2 ki points. The ninja must possess the ghost step ninja trick before selecting this trick. Greater Ki Dodge (Su): A ninja can spend one daily use of her ki power to cause an attack against her to miss when it might otherwise hit. When a ninja activates this ability, her outline shifts and wavers, granting her total concealment (50% miss chance) against all attacks for 1 round. Using this ability is a swift action that does not provoke attacks of opportunity. See invisibility has no effect on concealment granted by the greater ki dodge ability, but true seeing negates the miss chance. This concealment does not stack with that caused by other effects that grant concealment or by spells such as blink or displacement. Each use of this ability uses up 1 ki point. The ninja must possess the ki dodge ninja trick before selecting this trick.
Excuse me, but my friend is pretty pissed off, as am I, for you guys merging his account with mine. He sent an email to you to note his displeasure and is finished purchasing products from you. The only link between me and him was he lacked his credit card since he lost it, so I let him use mine to purchase the PDFs he wanted for his games. Then he got the email from you guys stating that me and him are the same person and you merged our accounts, wrongfully. That's rather ludicrous statement and you have no proof of that. I'm quite appalled at this as is he. He might consider giving you guys his business again if he gets his account back to normal, otherwise you lost 2 customers.
I came back to check on the thread I had discussing why PFSRD was being so touchy about someone linking to their Ultimate Combat material and it was deleted? What for? It was a legit and curious question.
Someone linked to some Ultimate Combat material PFSRD was posting but now all you see is this: How does viewing the page delay their work on it? I think it seems rather overdramatic to post that.
In 3.5e, Clerics that wanted to have a true Neutral alignment could only worship a deity that was only Neutral in alignment (and not the one step rule of LN, CN, NE, NG). Is the Pathfinder Cleric limited in the same way? The original ruling was in the Alignment subtext in the Cleric description of the 3.5 PHB, but in Pathfinder I can't find any text re-stating this. Does this mean a PF Cleric that is Neutral is free to choose not only a Neutral deity, but also a NE, NG, LN, or CN deity?
Uncanny Dodge in 3.5 used to say you keep your Dex bonus to AC when caught flat-footed. Now, in PF, it's saying you cannot be caught flat-footed, omitting the part about keeping Dexterity. So does that mean characters with Uncanny Dodge not only keep their Dex bonus but also can make Attacks of Opportunity, as well, since that's PF's definition of Flat-Footed?!
I'm aware that you need a weapon enhancement equal to the same enhancement bonus or higher of the weapon you want to sunder. Does this also apply to armor and shields? I hope so, because I have a PC that loves to take down an opponent's shield and armor with ease and I hope the enhancement bonus rule also applies to those magic items as well?
One of the things we noticed was when there are lists given for Sorcerer/Wizard spells in a product like "Ultimate Magic", for example, the spells are not categorized by school. Which makes it rather annoying considering it's important for specialist wizards to search by school than turning to each spell to see what school it is in. Any reason for stepping away from that format?
Is there a limit to how many times you can Channel Energy per turn? According to Ultimate Magic, you can use up 2 uses of Channel Energy to use it as a Move Action. Does that mean I can then use a Standard Action to pull off another Channel Energy if I wanted, getting two of them used in one turn?
When I jumped into Pathfinder, I was hoping to get my "3.5e crunch fix" from Paizo. Which I have been getting a lot, thankfully. However, I am concerned at the sudden washing away of Prestige Classes. Many of us enjoy using prestige classes, still. Why does it feel like this concept is abandoned? Building a character towards something is fun for my players. They also enjoy the fact that a prestige class may or may not be built towards a specific class in mind, but in both cases, as long as you met the prerequisites you can enter it as you wish. Whether a Wizard/Assassin or a Paladin/Horizon Walker, it didn't matter. I have been noticing this rise in "Archetypes". They're cool and interesting and easy to implement, but I feel they've been hogging away the spotlight from prestige classes too much. In fact, many archetypes I see would've been a lot better if they were built as prestige classes. A couple of cons of archetypes is: 1) They only apply to ONE class 2) It's an "all or nothing" mechanic, and would've been a lot better if they were alternate class features to cherry pick from, and not lock yourself out of a class feature you wanted to keep for your class just to grab a class feature from the archetype you wanted take; there's no customization! 3) Lack of accessibility and flexibility My prime example is the "Gunmage" archetype for Ultimate Combat. It's only for Wizards? This sounds like it would've been a lot more accessible if it was a prestige class for spellcasters, that way a sorcerer or magus can play as a "Gunmage" character. Another example is my player wants to make a Rogue and really only wants one ability from the "Rake" archetype, and doesn't want to give up the other. Problem is, archetypes are all or nothing. So, instead, him (and other players) have shied away from a tightly constricting mechanic that forces you to give up flexibility. Quite a number of other archetypes would have made great prestige classes. Prestige classes are also good for dipping. If you're fine with 5 levels of it, then you're done. If you want 8 levels, go for it. If only 2 levels, more power to you. Archetypes, again, fail to give this kind of flexibility. Personally, I was really hoping for more prestige classes in Ultimate Magic, and it didn't happen. I now realize Ultimate Combat will not have any, either, which is pretty whacky if you ask me. Unless Paizo is coming out with a "Book of Prestige Classes" sometime in the near future, I will just continue to express disappointment on these forums at the lack of them. I was thrilled to see more in the APG, but why stop there? I don't understand if I missed some kind of online vote that polled if we want more Archetypes in place of PrC?
Pretty much my thread title explains it all. I was glad to see WotC brought them back with Player's Handbook 2, but then 3.5e got cancelled so soon after that. That was a relic from 2e that I missed and it made for some much more interesting, mechanical, and flavorful spells in D&D. I know they avoided it to make things simpler, but I didn't see the complication of bringing it back and they did, to an extent. I guess what I am hoping for is to see Paizo bring some dual-school spells to light. Think of the possibilities! No longer will you be tied to the confusion and limitations of picking one school a spell most likely belongs to. And, personally, I found dual-school spells more fun to sling around.
I remember finding a thread where one of the designers said it was legit to do more than one Bardic Performance per turn if you can use them faster. For example, if you can start them as a Swift Action, you were allowed to use one as a Swift Action, end it, then use a Move or Standard to use a different one all in the same turn. Is this true? (I can't find the original thread talking about this tact)
For example, four characters have the Shield Wall teamwork feat. A character increases their shield bonus if adjacent to an ally with a shield and the feat (+1 if light shield, +2 if heavy). So, if 4 characters with heavy shields and one is adjacent to his 3 comrades, would his shield bonus increase by +6? (+2 for each ally) or does it not stack and remains at only an extra +2?
So, say a trap is located in the center of a 50 by 50 foot room. The range of vision the trap has is 40 ft. How exactly can a character discover the trap before it springs if the trap is located in the center of the room? They'll spring it before they can get near the spot to search. Or does the area where the trap affects also count as the entirety of the trap? As in, searching an area where a trap will affect if sprung is the same as searching for the source of the trap?
What exactly is allowed with this spell? What if you make an image of darkness, can you hide in it? What if you create an image of a tree, can you use it as cover to make a Stealth check? I assume if you make an image of a wall you have "total cover" and cannot be seen (but not really cover, since it's not real). Just curious on the clarification.
Yes, I am having problems understanding how a cantrip works. Ok, so there's a Range and a Target. But the description of the spell is confusing. Does this spell allow ONLY the caster to cast it, choose 1 target/level, whisper to them and receive replies from them? Or does it allow the caster and all targets chosen to have the ability to point to anyone targeted by the spell to be able to whisper and receive replies to one another? Example, Brenier, Valdierr, and Tzedd are together. Tzedd casts Message and targets Brenier and Valdierr. Tzedd can whisper messages and receive replies from them. Can Brenier and Valdierr whisper and reply to each other also? Or is it only between caster and target?
I'm confused about the Deadshot deed. As a full-round action, the gunslinger can take careful aim and pool all of her attack potential in a single, deadly shot. When she does this, she shoots the firearm at a single target, but makes as many attack rolls as she can, based on her base attack bonus. She makes the attacks in order from highest bonus to lowest, as if she were making a full attack. If any of the attacks hit the target, the gunslinger hits the target. For each additional hit made against the target beyond the first, the gunslinger increases the damage of the shot by the base die roll of the firearm. What the heck is the difference between doing this and just making a full attack? In fact, I'd rather do a full attack since each shot will add sneak attack and precision damage per hit. Why would I bother doing this? The only thing I can think is so I can get over the damage reduction some more. Or am I reading this wrong? Do I get to make each attack at my highest base attack? Because that would make the most sense.
As a full-round action, you can move up to your speed and make firearm attacks at your highest base attack bonus with each loaded firearm you are wielding. You can make these attacks at any point during your movement, and if you are wielding two firearms, you can make the attacks at different points during the movement. At the end of this movement, you fall prone. This deed costs 1 grit point to perform. Again, what is the difference between this and Shot on the Run feat? This looks no different than Shot on the Run except for a +2 Acrobatics and the ability to make an extra shot if I have another firearm in the other hand(s). It also costs a grit point? I'd rather do Shot on the Run. Unless, again, I am reading this wrong? The only reason I can see this feat being worth getting and using 1 grit point on is if I was allowed my FULL set of attacks during my movement. So if I have three attacks at BAB +11/+6/+1, I can use a full-round action to move and make these 3 shots at any point of my movement, finish my move, and fall prone. (or if I have two pistols, I can get off shots with both). That would make more sense and worth the feat and use of a grit point. So which is it?
Let's all put our suggestions neatly into one thread to make it easier for the devs. Reviews should be left in their own thread as well. It is best to state a suggestion and apply the reason why you think that way. I will start. ----------------------
As I read this spell, your body is comatose while you inhabit your shadow and gain Shadow abilities as if you were the monster. Do you still retain your original abilities such as spellcasting, class features, etc? Or do you only have shadow abilities?
I am curious as to how DMs or Players take measures to prevent their magic items from being so easily sundered/destroyed? I was hoping Paizo offered an "enchanted items are tougher than normal" kind of ruling with the release of Pathfinder, but the only thing they did was made it tougher to Sunder if someone has high CMD, that's it. Are there spells, feats, or methods of item creation that allows one to increase hp and hardness of magic items? It seems silly that an expensive Robe of the Archmagi, which is made of cloth (Hardness 0, hp possibly 2 or 5?) can be sundered with any simple attack, even a rusty dagger! I know the Hardening spell is an option, which means everyone would be silly not to cast that on all their items. But are there other methods of protection?
I've noticed many new feats, spells, gear, magic items, etc. from Pathfinder's other lines, like their Player's Companion, Chronicles, APs, and Modules. Why aren't these compiled by them to make it easier to sort through? Also, many of them seem to need clarifications, revisions, or more properly playtested (for example, anyone here think the metamagic feat Threnodic Spell, is a bit imbalanced as is?) My best, and one and only, site I use for access to such material is found here: Archives of Nethys Now I appreciate the guy's hard work and his site has been very useful for many people, but I am curious as to why Paizo has 3rd-parties doing their work for them? Personally, I'd like to see these formatted on Paizo's website and given the playtest, corrections, and stamps of approval necessary to run in Pathfinder games.
Is that Paizo keeps trying to keep it as an Alternate Class. I know, it's like beating on a dead horse, but hear me out. It's a Rogue Alternate Class. Which means it is a Rogue replacement. However, the problem with that is there is no way to make a proper Ninja without making it shine better than a Rogue. Because, let's face it folks, the Ninja is more than a Rogue. It's part Rogue and part Monk mostly. A skilled deceiver, infiltrator, spy, and assassin with supernatural powers. So what you end up with is something that'll always be better than the Rogue. It's like a spellcasting Rogue without the spells. And a Monk with a firm role that the Rogue usually fills. So, clearly, part of the solution is to keep it a base class separate from the Rogue. And give it FEW Rogue abilities. Most of its abilities should be supernatural only. If it wants the Rogue abilities (and Extraordinary ones, to not be caught unguarded in antimagic fields) it will simply have to multiclass as a Rogue. Some folks suggest Ninja should be an Alternate Monk. But then you lack the Ninja/Monk multiclassing, which coincide as perfectly as Paladin/Fighter or Rogue/Fighter or even Druid/Ranger. But then again, maybe it is better off as an Alternate Monk instead. My point is, being an Alternate Rogue class is what's causing the problems. Being an Alternate Class at all is the bigger problem, but if Paizo is sticking to their guns on this silly alternate class garbage, then my best suggestion is it should be an alternate Monk class.
Here is my conversion for the Diabolic domain presented in Fiendish Codex II. As I am not a fan of "Subdomains", many of my conversions borrow abilities from subdomains (for this one, it was the Devil subdomain). DIABOLIC
Diabolic Aura (Su): At 8th level, you can emit a 30-foot aura for a number of rounds per day equal to your cleric level. All enemies within this aura suffer a -2 penalty to their Will saves against compulsions and mind-affecting effects. This penalty increases by 1 for every four cleric levels you possess beyond 8th. At 14th level, the aura acts as a targeted dispel magic to all enemies but only affects spells and effects that protect them from being influenced by compulsions or mind-affecting effects (such as from the protection from evil spell). These rounds do not need to be consecutive.
Conduit of Life spell, from COMPLETE CHAMPION CONDUIT OF LIFE
The next time you use a class feature or racial ability to channel positive energy (such as turn undead or lay on hands), you also heal a number of points of damage to yourself equal to 2d10+1/caster level (maximum 10). If you are already subject to an ongoing healing effect (such as vigor), or if you receive a cure spell while conduit of life is still in effect, this spell instead heals a number of points of damage equal to 3d8+1/caster level and it is discharged.
Would you say using Channel Energy to heal counts as "curing" yourself? I have a PC with this and he can basically cure 2d10+10+5d6 damage to himself each time he uses Channel Energy to heal, which is OD healing. But the spell only specifies "Cure" spells and ongoing healing effects, neither of which Channel Energy is
He can choose feats from his selected combat style, even if he does not have the normal prerequisites. At 10th level, Greater TWF gets added to the list. So a Ranger can bypass TWF and Improved TWF and just use 1 feat to get Greater TWF? He basically gets 2 feats for free to use for something else by waiting a little longer in level?
If someone is immune to Ability Damage, are they immune to Ability Drain as well?
Can you knock an opponent prone that is grappled, or grapple a prone target, and the effects stack?
As the title states, I've been wondering this for sometime. It sounds like an easy way to let the rogue know there's a magic trap to search for and disarm. Or is the magic aura not there until it is activated? Which doesn't make sense, especially for magic traps requiring an alarm spell or such. Wouldn't detect magic detect the sensor?
I know you HAVE to move with the enemy, but what if you have an ability that tells you that you don't have to move with the enemy you bull rush (like the Pathfinder spell, Inheritor's Smite, for example) and you use it on an enemy grappling you? Does he get knocked off or do you have to move with him?
When a spell specifically targets a melee weapon, or states it affects only a melee weapon, does a natural attack count? Or is melee weapon synonymous with manufactured/wielded weapons?
I noticed the quickling was built from the Tome of Horrors and upgrade to Pathfinder, of course, but it's missing its useful and traditional spell-like abilities. Was this an error or intentional? If the latter, why? I could easily just do a variant quickling where it has the SLA and it's CR is +1 higher, but just curious why it was taken out?
I think the Samurai should be able to take Fighter only feats, but counting as if he were a lower-level fighter. Four levels lower would be the key. I would like to add that I believe the class needs more bonus combat feats to help the Samurai choose its "samurai warrior style" of combat better. I would go the Oriental Adventures route, which was a bonus feat at 2nd, 4th, and every 3 levels thereafter (7th, 10th, 13th, 16th, 19th). Take away the Mounted Archery and Mounted Combat stuff, these can just be bonus feats. This is a somewhat selfish thought, I must add, because I have a player who is hoping this Samurai class does two things: 1) Keeps the bonus feats the same as the 3rd Edition Oriental Adventures Samurai so he doesn't have to rearrange his entire character 2) Allows the option of bonded mount or bonded weapon(s) just like the OA Samurai (which allows TWO weapons, katana and wakizashi, mind you). The rest of the class would be great for him to keep. Otherwise, we'll stick with the OA Samurai.
Has anyone on WotC's team or here at Paizo's ever actually clarified the age old debate of the Freedom of Movement spell? Or is that war just going to go on forever? What exactly can it stop from impeding your movement? My interpretation has been anything "designed" to stop or impede movement, but anything you're simply walking over or around doesn't count, and neither do obstacles you can't ever phase through anyway (like doors, pillars, and walls). Armor isn't designed to impede movement, so I ruled that out of Freedom of Movement. Tanglefoot bags, however, are. Undergrowth is something you're moving over or through and isn't trying to impede you, it's more of an obstacle. Now an entanglement spell is consciously trying to impede you, so it counts against that. Strong winds and water I've explained being counted simply because you're not stepping over or around it, but rather it is affecting your whole person and is inherently restrictive because of water's resistance or the wind's slowing down effect. Some would argue if that would make one immune to bull rush (or possibly drag and reposition) because those are not impeding movements, they're changing direction of movement. Though the act of being bull rushed, some would say, is an impediment to movement because your character is actively trying to resist from being moved, but I believe it means you're just being moved and not being impeded from moving, the creature becomes more of an "obstacle" moving you away and not really a "grapple trying to hold you down and impede movement completely". I doubt Freedom of Movement would stop a rolling boulder from smashing into you, likewise with a bull rushing giant. Squeezing through tight spaces I did not allow, it's not designed to impede movement, it's an obstacle, just like one couldn't walk through a door "impeding" their movement. So those are my interpretations. I just wish there was actual clarification!
Say a cave troll with a BAB of +6 charges, pounces, and full attacks. It has 4 claws and a bite (2 claws, 2 rakes, bite). Can it replace all 5 of its attacks with trip attacks? Or does CM have to follow BAB, meaning it'd only get 2? I know in 3.5 a creature can replace any of its attacks with a maneuver that uses an attack, such as trip, sunder, or grapple.
I have a player that uses Levitate and another that can fly. He wants to have it where the flying PC can drag his character around in the air horizontally. Which means I assume the PC can move more than half their own speed, they'll be moving the flier's speed? Assuming the flier can drag that weight...I assume creatures/objects aren't necessarily weightless during levitation, too?
These are my final thoughts on the Ninja before I get to see "Round 2" of the Ultimate Combat playtest for these "classes". I feel my voice would be drowned out so started a new thread to share. First off, I have already pointed out my dislike for the Alternate Class route Paizo seems to be going on the thread in the Playtest forum. So I won't reiterate that here. I don't have the time or people to get to playtest this for me, but I am experienced at the game enough to know what I am seeing. What I am seeing is a failed compromise. Instead of making it a base class or archetpye, it went to a strange zone in the middle as an alternate class. I like many things about this class, from its class abilities to its ki points and its ninja tricks. Even its 20th-level cap is awesome. What I do not like is it being compared to the Rogue so much. No one compares the Paladin to a Cleric or Fighter, and clearly it is a mix of both. No one compares the Ranger to a Druid, Fighter, and Rogue. Because clearly it is a mix of the 3 with its own uniqueness. I don't understand how the Ninja can't be made into a class that is a mingling of Monk and Rogue without stepping on the shoes of either. All I see is complaints of it being an overdone archetype or being compared to the Rogue class. I feel as if a middle ground is trying to be accomplished, but it's not working. The simple fact of the matter is, you're going to have to choose to make it a Base Class somehow or make it an archetype, I don't think it's going to work as an alternate class. You end up narrowing what you can do with it. Also going the way of an alternate class, or even archetype, me and my players will probably never see new rules support for it in future products. Unless Paizo makes it a point to give more goodies to the ones playing the Ninja, Samurai, Antipaladin, (if it becomes an alternate class) Gunslinger then there's no point in playtesting or ever introducing this into my games. It's a sad day to see the core classes get the goodies while the rest are hosed. I hope alternate classes don't go that route. Personally, I have high hopes of seeing Gunslinger as the new base class for Ultimate Combat and the Samurai is looking great just at first glance and I know it can easily get better. But I fear for the "life" of the Ninja class. I think, to avoid backlash, the archetype route might be taken and I will be sorely disappointed. I might end up just using WotC's Ninja class, which was pretty close to how it should've been save for some lack of optimization, while making it different than the Rogue. But at this point, I don't think I can participate in anymore Ninja discussions until the choice is made, which I believe it will be by Round 2. Then I can see the final cuts and either find myself extremely satsified or extremely disappointed. I was hoping for Paizo to be the first to actually launch a really well written Ninja class (not alternate class, but CLASS!) My suggestions have already been posted elsewhere on what to do with the Ninja class, including here, so take what you will. In the meantime, I'll meander over to the Gunslinger and Samurai forums, which have more promise as of now.
I see that Paizo seems to be hooked on this idea of introducing alternate classes. I apologize for the bluntness, but I think the idea is total crap. And here's why. We already have archetypes, base classes, and prestige classes. Why do we have to muddle things up with this Alternate Class thing? What is so wrong with a Base Class, or just making it a Prestige Class? These Alternate Classes are what I like to call "Half-Ass Classes", because it feels like they're kind of a class and still kind of not and their existence leaves things very underwhelming. My other problem is support. I have yet to see support for the Antipaladin class, so why should I believe the Ninja, Samurai, and (maybe) Gunslinger will get continual support like the other classes? A class remains interesting in a game if the players can see it is being supported just like the others. If the Fighters, Wizards, Cavaliers, Summoners, etc. keep getting new toys, the Gunslinger, Ninja, Samurai, and Antipaladin should receive the same treatment. I also do not understand why NONE of these are base classes. We have Ultimate Magic coming out and it has one new base class. We have Ultimate Combat and we have ZERO base classes? Why do the martial types get hosed and the spellcasting classes receive, yet, ANOTHER new member to the family? Is it so bad to create more martial classes? These could be made into base classes and receive their own archetypes, as well. I hope Paizo reconsiders what I believe is a completely contrived system to introduce and to just please stick with the base class/prestige class/archetype rules.
Ok, I have tried playing with the Pathfinder Grapple rules for sometime, and each time it comes into play I just find it harder and harder to bother with it. I'm considering going back to WotC's version. One thing that's bothering me is the character that is grappling is MORE limited than the one being grappled. The grappler, in order to maintain the grapple, MUST use a Standard Action to maintain grapple. In addition, it can choose to Move, make ONE attack, pin, or tie up. The one being grappled, however, can choose to make FULL ATTACKS, albeit at a -2 penalty against his attacker or anyone else within reach!?!? This puts a damper on anyone bothering to grapple enemies with multiple attacks. Is there any way the one grappling can make a full attack on the one they're grappling? I don't understand how the most attacks the grappler can make is one, or two with Greater Grapple. If I'm an illithid with one tentacle wrapped on your head, I should be able to slap you around with the remaining 3 while still holding you! Or say I am a tiger that has you in a grip, I should be able to rake with all my claws while my mouth is clamped on your throat! If the grappler makes any such move, they're forced to let go of the grapple.
This may be a dumb question, since I have yet to glance over the Combat Maneuvers stuff to search for this, but when you make a Combat Maneuver check with one of your extra attacks from having high BAB, is it at the BAB for the attack you're making the maneuver or is it at your full BAB? For example, I have +11/+6/+1, and I decide to sunder on my last attack. I am assuming my CMB check to sunder is used with the +1 BAB, not the +11?
I was upset to learn that Dispelling, Bolstering, and Rebuking Undead for evil clerics was missing from Pathfinder. Can we see something along these lines for them in Ultimate Magic?
Ok, so I was making a cleric that serves an elemental deity only to find out they no longer command elementals. Simple fix, take Elemental Channel and Command Undead and Command Undead should also work on elementals. Not the case, sadly. And I don't understand why? First, I don't understand why any Cleric can take the Elemental Channel feat. Why wasn't there a prerequisite where you had to have one of the elemental domains to take the feat? That would've made much more sense. I don't like the idea of, say, a Cleric serving a god of strength or a god of life and such being able to call power to damage or heal...water elementals? Then I find out I can't give them a command elemental ability? WHAT!? So my Elder Elemental Eye clerics for my adventure that have varying elemental powers depending on which they focus on are going to be surrounded by commanded...undead...and not elementals as I had thought? Will there be a Command Elemental feat for Clerics in Ultimate Magic!? I hope so...
Ok, this is something I knew worked in 3.0, wasn't clear in 3.5, and still isn't clear in Pathfinder. I want to give some stone giants the PCs are facing Improved Grapple, but they need Improved Unarmed Strike. The problem is, it's a useless and redundant feat, because they already have slam attacks, which is whacking an enemy with their bare-hands anyway. So could a creature with a slam attack acquire feats with Improved Unarmed Strike as a prerequisite and bypass that prerequisite freely?
Can someone tell me where the Wall Climbing alternate ability came from? What Pathfinder sourcebook? It's not in the APG. Here's the link, the ability is at the bottom
So far, I like what I see a lot better than before. First off, kudos on the Spell Blending ability. I HATE unique spell lists, as it means I need to go over my entire Spell Compendium + other WotC spells in other books that didn't make it into the SC, and add them to the spell list to make them equal to the core spellcasting classes. This solves my problem. I don't have to mess with the Magus spell list now. If a PC wants spells outside the Magus list, he can take that ability instead. Which leaves me to Greater Pool Spell. Nice! This gives access to more spells outside their list, but at a HUGE cost in arcane pool points. A good sacrifice. My only problems are I hope to see feats that let them get around a few things the Magus lacks, for example, Two Weapon Fighting, maybe a feat that allows a Magus to still use Spell Combat fighting with two weapons so that we can have some two-weapon Magus builds? Or even for Multiweapon Fighting. Don't forget, us DMs like to use classes for monsters, and a Magus Marilith would be fun to send after PCs! The other issue I had was the amount of arcane points they receive. Only 1/2 level + Int bonus? That's extremely low. I was thinking more along the lines of class level + Int. bonus.
|