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

Riggler's page

277 posts. 8 reviews. No lists. No wishlists.




I know this is going to come up today. I have a druid with an Ape animal companion. The "dungeon" the PCs will be needing to trough will involve climbing a cliff, going into a cave, and jumping down into underwater totally submerged cavern system.

Now, RAW, a druid can pretty much get their animal companion to do any trick it doesn't know via a Push DC check as a move action.

I'm seeking how you guys would handle a situation where the Druid is going to want to take the Ape into the dungeon. I'm sure water breathing will be case on all party members and the ape.

Options I can think of:
1) Allow the Druid to "push" the ape to go in the water, and not worry with it the rest of the dungeon.
2) Require the Druid to "push" the ape every round to keep it from freaking about about diving in the water.
3) Simply say that the ape (orangutang)is just not going to dive into the water.

It's a bit bothersome to me that the idea of a diving orangutang, even that could magically breath water and has a rank in Swim, would not freak out and refuse to go there.

So how would you guys run with this in your game as GMs?


Golorian is supposed to be human-centric, correct?

But I see a trend among players at my table that Human is rarely selected as a PC race for them. Thinking about it as a GM and a player I attribute this to the Point-buy system for generating PC attributes.

It seems that because of the graduated cost of higher stats, the +2/+2 boost and -2 penalty to attributes is a far greater investment with the point buy system than the human's simple +2. The reason obviously being is you can buy up low stats to cover the +2 for 2 CP, but get the boosts to higher stats that wouldn't be a 1 for 1 cost.

The human benefit of bonus feat and skill point doesn't seem to be enough incentive when comparring demi-humans. I mean for general purpose feats that do the same thing there is Toughness (well I can get a demi-human bump to Con and get the same impact, but a bonus to Fort saves and any other con-related check). Or I can get Dodge and get that bonus to AC that a Dex bump might get me, but also get a bonus to reflex and Dex-based skill checks.

It's really easy math to figure out why with a Point Buy system, it is handcuffing a player to choose to play a human.

DIE ROLLING STATS IS NOT AN OPTION. While it may correct the issue I've mentioned above, it brings with it issues that the culture of gaming in my group is just not likely willing to deal with.

SO, is there any suggeestions out there to make the Point Buy system be a human-centric system? Should it cost 2 CP to build a demi-human race under Point Buy?


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

My question centers around actions underwater, specifically speaking and understanding others who are speaking underwater. I have an Aquatic Druid in my campaign. And it's also important for a published encounter for which I will be vague about it's origins. If I need to spoiler this let me know.

In the encounter, the tactics indicate that the aquatic bad guy druid (who speaks Aquan) prior to combat she casts Speak with Animals. And then she uses Summon Nature's Ally. Hence, one would assume the Speak with Animals is to more easily control the summoned animal. This seems to indicate that she can communicate underwater. While the setting includes some above water surface air pocket, most the of combat and the summoned creature will be underwater. Speak with Animals is allowing her to speak with a creature obviously without a language in this case. So is the reason she can speak and the creature can understand because A) Rules are silent on communicating underwater as to whether one can or can't; B) Because both creatures are aquatic; C) She speaks Aquan; D) Other?

This is the only example I've seen in official Pathfinder products that indicates any hint at the answer to can creatures communicate underwater. And the answer seems to be yes, but doens't educate as to why.

As for why is it important for the rest of the campaign? My PC Aquatic Druid is a dwarf (non-aquatic, doesn't speak Aquan, yet) and has a non-aquatic animal companion (Croc).
So can he use Handle Animal on the croc while underwater by speaking commands? He also doesn't yet have the ability to breath underwater via abilities or spells or magic items. If not, what would he need to be able to do so?

Thanks for any insight you guys can offer, as I'm sure this will come up throughout the AP and the answer might differ depending on the player's choices as he levels up.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder SRD said regarding Heal wrote:


Long-Term Care: Providing long-term care means treating a wounded person for a day or more. If your Heal check is successful, the patient recovers hit points or ability score points lost to ability damage at twice the normal rate: 2 hit points per level for a full 8 hours of rest in a day, or 4 hit points per level for each full day of complete rest; 2 ability score points for a full 8 hours of rest in a day, or 4 ability score points for each full day of complete rest.

You can tend to as many as six patients at a time. You need a few items and supplies (bandages, salves, and so on) that are easy to come by in settled lands. Giving long-term care counts as light activity for the healer. You cannot give long-term care to yourself.

Action: Providing first aid, treating a wound, or treating poison is a standard action. Treating a disease or tending a creature wounded by a spike growth or spike stones spell takes 10 minutes of work. Treating deadly wounds takes 1 hour of work. Providing long-term care requires 8 hours of light activity.

Pathfinder SRD said regarding ability damage wrote:
Unless otherwise noted, damage to your ability scores is healed at the rate of 1 per day to each ability score that has been damaged.
Pathfinder SRD said regarding drugs wrote:
As ability score damage heals at a rate of 1 point per day, a drug that causes 1 point of ability score damage remains in a character's system for 1 day, though some might cause greater damage and thus remain active for longer.
Pathfinder SRD said regarding addiction wrote:
Anytime a character takes a drug he must make a saving throw, noted in the drug's description, to resist becoming addicted. If a character makes the save, he is not addicted and the effects of the drug persist as normal. If he fails the save, he contracts the noted form of addiction (see below). Should a character take multiple doses of the same drug in a short period of time addiction becomes more difficult to resist. The DC of a drug's saving throw increases by +2 every time a character takes a another dose of that drug while still suffering from ability damage caused by a previous dose. Keep track of how high this DC rises, even for characters already addicted to a drug, as it determines the DC necessary to overcome the disease.

The primary problem here is that a day is defined under ACTIONS in the Heal skill as 8 hours (which is shorter than any day I've ever heard of). And a day is suggested to be more akin to 24 hours in the Drug rules.

But let's go back to basics:
Ability damage: Healed 1 point per day
Drug ability damage: Healed at 1 point per day
Long-term healing: May be adminstered by treating a patient for 1 day or more
Proving Long-term healing action: Requires 8 hours of light activity
Long-term healing ability score of 2 points: Requires 8 hours of rest in a day
Long-term healing ability score of 4 points: Requires a full day of complete rest

So if I understand this correctly....
1. Patient action: Stays up 24 hours. Healer action: Nothing
Patient Result: Heals 1 point of ability points @ 24 hours
2. Patient action: Regular day and sleeps 8 hours. Healer action: Nothing
Patient Result: Heals 1 point of ability points @ 24 hours
3. Patient action: Regular day and sleeps 8 hours. Healer action: LTC (8 hours of light activity)
Patient Result: Heals 2 points of ability points @ 24 hours
4. Patient action: Complete rest during day and sleeps 8 hours. Healer action: LTC (8 hours of light activity)
Patient Result: Heals 4 points of ability points @ 24 hours.

I know that people who have been playing this game for decades as I have, probably as I have rewarded damage recovery (hp and later editions ability point damage) after 8 hours of rest. But given the rules as written for long-term care, ability damage, and drug (plus addition rules not included here) seem to suggest that at least ability damage must be recovered on a 24 hour schedule instead of an 8 hour schedule.


So the spell gives a +1 to attack and damage for every three caster levels. Does this mean that this spell gives a +1 to attack and damage until you reach 6th level?


Does the Deflection Aura impact the cleric using this power?

Here is the description of the power for reference:

Replacement Power: The following granted power replaces the resilient touch power[1] of the Protection domain.

Deflection Aura (Su): Once each day, you can emit a 20- foot aura for a number of rounds equal to your cleric level. Allies within the aura gain a +2 deflection bonus to AC and combat maneuver defense.


2 people marked this as FAQ candidate.

In searching the forums I keep finding people in posts saying that a Monk who disarms someone without using a weapon, then the Monk ends up with the weapon in hand.

I'm having a problem finding that in RAW, although I do see the leap in logic people are making.

The Disarm action states: "If you successfully disarm your opponent without using a weapon, you may automatically pick up the item dropped."

What this sentence says to me is that the item does not go from the hand of the opponent to the hand of the monk. This sentence says to me that the item goes from the hand of the opponent to the ground, and the Monk has the ability to automatically pick up the item (ie. a free action). However, picking up an item provokes an attack of opportunity if threatened. So, if the opponent has someway to threaten the monk (say the opponent has Improved Unarmed Strike) or an opponent has an ally who threatens, then the Monk picking up the item still provokes an attack of opportunity?

Do I have this right? If I don't can someone clarify for me and point me to the rule that says the item jumps from the opponents' hand to the monk's hand?

Thanks.


I have a player that wants to change his Cavalier order. Here is text:

RAW wrote:
At 1st level, a cavalier must pledge himself to a specific order. The order grants the cavalier a number of bonuses, class skills, and special abilities. In addition, each order includes a number of edicts that the cavalier must follow. If he violates any of these edicts, he loses the benefits from his order’s challenge ability for 24 hours. The violation of an edict is subject to GM interpretation. A cavalier cannot change his order without undertaking a lengthy process to dedicate himself to a new cause. When this choice is made, he immediately loses all of the benef its from his old order. He must then follow the edicts of his new order for one entire level without gaining any benef its from that order. Once accomplished, he gains all of the bonuses from his new order. Note that the names of these orders might vary depending upon the campaign setting or GM’s preference.

So how would your rule in the case where a PC is 2/3 of the way through 6th level and denounces his order and starts following another?

A) He loses all abilities and he gains the abilities of his new order at 2/3 of the way through 7th level
B) He loses all abilities until he hits 8th level
C) Other


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

I don't see in the RAW that a Battle Herald must be in combat to use Inspiring Commands, although the flavor of the Battle Herald seems to go with that. The Inquisitor specifically states that Judgements must be during battle, but no such requirement I can find on the Battle Herald.

The question came up this weekend in regards to a Battle Hearld using his None Shall Fall ability outside of combat to heal party members. The party does not have a cleric or oracle, so the extra healing is very beneficial to the party.

Thoughts on whether the Battle Hearld should be able to use Inspiring Commands outside of a fight?


I'm running Legacy of Fire. The PCs are a group of 6 PCs of 5/6 level right now. Down time is rare. And there's not a lot of opportunities built in for a Wizard PC to pick up lots of spells. The Wiz's player has expressed interest in researching an alt Fireball spell (ie. Lightening Ball or Snowball).

First a question from a RAW/RAI standpoint. The rules say that a wizard can add two spells to his spell book every time he gains a level as in he's been researching "between adventures." But it also gives in the same section of the rules the "alternatively" a wizard PC can research and design new spells to add to his spell book. Should a spell such as a snowball or lightingball spell, that for all effects is a Fireball except it does a different energy type, be allowed to be added as a free spell for a wizard when they go up a level?

My other question, would be do you think it would at all be unbalancing in favor of the wizard to drop a scroll of Snowball or Lighteningball for the wizard to find and just let it be?

Thanks in adavance.


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

Grappling: You can start a grapple as a standard action.

So, if you are adjacent to a foe, as a standard action you start the grapple. I was confused about whether you could then do one of the actions listed for after you start a grapple on the same turn.

The flowcharts as d20srd indicate that you cannot do a grapple action on the same round as starting a grapple.

Can someone please clarify this rule and the RAW reasoning? Thanks.


Here is the edict of the Order of the Cockatrice:

The cavalier must keep his own interests and aims above those of all others. He must always accept payment when it is due, rewards when earned, and an even (or greater) share of loot. The cavalier must take every opportunity to increase his own stature, prestige, and power.

My group is a newly put together group and I have a player with a Cavalier. They are trying to figure out how the party's loot split will be. There is a bit of heartache over the Cavalier's edict. How they figure out how to split loot is up to them, but as a GM I've been asked to give a ruling on what the above means, in relation to when will the Cavalier lose his Order's Challenge ability for 24 hours.

Obvioulsy when there is a payment for services rendered and reward earned for some task, he must accept and not delay payment. No charity. No "you can pay me later." But what about the even share of the loot? How do you split up a magical amulet? The first two examples in the list (reward and payment) suggest when earned or when due. Loot is technically earned when found and claimed. But such a descripter is not put on loot and is not very pracitcal. Must the cavilier claim an equal portion of loot at every rest? At the end of the adventure? What if the adventure is seemless? Every time they get ready to sell?

Is an even share of non-sold items on a per item basis? Or is it on a GP value share?

Normally, I would play this situation by ear. Knowing players as I do, I doubt it would be that big of an issue. But I was asked the question.

Thoughts?


Starting my first Pathfinder Campaign on Saturday. (former 3.0 GM for many years).

I want an answer so I can be consistant with rules in the future. I have a player with a Halfling Cavilier riding a Wolf. The Cavilier will have in his arsenal (likely) a longsword and a lance. Since he is riding a wolf and a wolf gets Trip with its attack, this is sure to come up.

The Halfling Cailiver while on Wolfback has his wolf attack, hit and trip. Therefore in the adjacent square is a prone opponent. The way I read RAW, the halfling would be able to strike the prone opponent with the long sword, but not with the lance.

This does not make sense to me from a physics standpoint. So I ask these questions to the community.

1) Do I understand RAW correctly?

2) Is there a house rule you guys use that incorporates more realiy?

In my mind, the lance could reach the adjacent prone opponent, but not the adjacent standing opponent. But then there is the question of the prone opponent that is in the same square as the mounted Halfling. Does the mounted Halfling's longsword (sized for a small PC) reach a prone opponent?


The Cavalier's Braggart ability confused me. It's not clear.

I understand that the Intimidate skill can be used against one target as a standard action to demoralize a foe and make them shaken.

I understand that the Dazzaling Display feat can be used as a full-round action to demoralize all foes within 30 feet.

However, the Cavalier's Braggart ability states:

"At 2nd level, the cavalier can spend a standard action to extol his own accomplishments and battle prowess. He recieves Dazzling Display as a bonus feat. He does not need a weapon in hand to use this ability. The cavalier receives a +2 moral bonus on melee attack rolls made against demoralized targets."

So the Cavalier can use EITHER regular Inimidate OR Dazzaling Display to demoralize targets. There's really no difference how he does it. Right?

And secondly, does the cavalier get a +2 melee attack bonus if his ALLIES demoralize an opponent or only if the Cavalier demoralizes an opponent?


I'm preparing to run my first Pathfinder game. I've been out of RPG since 3.0. We are still about 3 weeks off from character creation sessions, but already players are asking about availalbe traits. I'm sure feats will come next.

I'm concerned about balance as 3.0 has some greatly game breaking abilities pretty early on.

I find that as players ask, "What about this trait?" When I look up whether the Pathfinder Society allows it, it does not. We are NOT playing Pathfinder Society. We are just playing an Adventure Path campaign.

I was under the impression most Pathfinder products were heavily playtested for balance issues. But it seems all the things my players want are from the banned list of Pathfinder Society, from traits to feats and even one piece of equipment. When I say no, they move on to another banned trait or feat or equipmetn.

So my ultimate question is: "Would using the Pathfinder Society's guidelines for allowable traits, feats and equipment be good for maintaining balance in my campaign or is that too harsh?"

Thanks in advance.


I've been away from 3.x version of the game since, well 3.5 was released pretty much. I'm impressed with Pathfinder. So I was absent from a lot of the evolution of the Polymorph spells. SO I have a question.

In comparing other 5th level spells, it seems that Baleful Polymorph has the greatest potential to wreck a BBEG encounter. Seems like a lost save means fight is over. Yet, most (all) of the spells of this type are 6th level. Should Baleful Polymorph be 6th, too? Is there something I'm missing?

I'm getting ready to run a campaign and was thinking of uping the spell level for BP. Thoughts?


©2002–2014 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.