Salama's page

Yes, and when Magical knack says that your caster level can't be higher than you're hit dice, it means your character level. You see that when you have 5 levels of sorcerer (5d6) and two levels of DD (2d12), your hit dice (and your character level) is 7 (5+2). It doesn't matter if the hit dice is d6 or d12, you get one hit die per level.

P.S. Terveisiä etelästä myös.

Maernanea wrote:

Salama. Terveisiä Etelästä

I just wonder one thing. Sorcerer have hd6 and Dragon Disciple hd12
So isnt the rule go little confusing. for common sence at L6 when i get first DD then my hd change from d6 to d12 ?
So in common (dumm as knob) sense tell that 8 isnt bigger than 12?

Back to sniff ink..

You roll each level separately.

As an example you

8 levels of sorcerer give 8d6+con mod
3 levels of DD give 3d12+con mod

For the sake of argument lets say your sorcerer levels average out to 5 hp per level after the con modifier is added and your DD levels average out to 8 hp per level after the con modifier is adder

sorc=8*5=40
DD =3*8=24

24+40=64hp

Is that what you were asking?

Hi.

Question 1:
The first option. Because like you said, MK doesn't affect your class level, just your caster level.

Question 2:
You add your DD levels to sorcerer levels only when determining bloodline powers. With your 2nd level of dragon disciple, you add +1 level of existing arcane spellcasting class (as said in the DD table). So when determining your sorcerer's spells, you have 6 levels (but only when determining spells, this doesn't affect your BaB from sorcerer levels or so on).

Question 2b:
Now here is an example where you apply your caster level. Your caster level at this point is 5 from sorcerer, 1 from DD and 2 from MK, which equals to caster level 8. Magical knack however can't raise your caster level above your hit dice(7), so your caster level is 7, thus you roll 7d6.

Question 3:
You gain the benefits of a 2nd level Dragon disciple. Caster level and class level are two very different things.

Does this help?

Hi.
We have bad little fight about this compination.
The Summa Summarum is this:
- The physical level is 7, 100% agreement.
- The rest, 0% agreement.

Background:
- 5 lvl sorcecer with Draconic bloodline
- 2 lvl dragon disciple
- +2 magical knack to dragon disciple at physical level of 6

Because DD text says: "..A dragon disciple adds his level
to his sorcerer levels when determining the powers
gained from his bloodline. If the dragon disciple does
not have levels of sorcerer, he instead gains bloodline
powers of the draconic bloodline, using his dragon disciple
level as his sorcerer level to determine the bonuses gained."

Question 1:
SO. Because i used Magical Knack +2 to Dragon Disciple, therefore DD is lvl 4. BUT Magical Knack gives +2 caster levels not physical levels, therefore to calc BAB is about this like ?
- Sorcerer lvl5 BAB 2 + lvl 2 DD BAB +1 = total 3 ?
- Sorcecer lvl7 BAB 3 = total 3 ?
- Sorcecer lvl5 BAB 2 + lvl 4 DD +3 = total 5 ??

Question 2:
Because DD adds his level to Sorcecer levels. That makes little arguments between all GM's in this town..
Hypothetical : Physically Lvl 7, but with MK +2 caster level makes sorcerer to Lvl 9, so in theory My Sorcecer can use level 4th spells like "Ice Storm" or "Wall of Fire" ?? Or did i walk to the cutter ?

Question 2b:
in fighting situation;
- I use Lvl 3 spell "lightning bolt" and it does powerful stroke of electrical energy that deals 1d6 points of electricity damage per caster level.
...right...
So Do i throw 7 or 9 dices of d6 ?

Question 3:
Do i gain DD lvl 4 or lvl 2 ?? lvl 2 there total str plus +2 and lvl 4 there is total str +4.

Honorly and head between the pages with nose full of inkmarks..
Please reply with proper answers, because im Stupid like a knob

So, apparently this one just got the axe... It's a shame.

Kobolds have sling damage listed as 1d3, while it should be 1d3-1 due to their str penalty.

This sounds interesting, I'll be sure to check it out if you post it here.

I also play monk with vow of peace in one of our games. I play it by the book, except for calm emotions aura and shattering skin. I thought they were lame abilities, so I just took the AC bonuses. My AC is now 34 in that game and Dm's monsters are nearly killing me every session. So biggest of your problems is the level cap between players, how did that happen? You should find a way to bring other players to same level and talk with your monk player and try to convince him to ditch the calm emotions aura, it doesn't make the game any more fun in my opinion. Book of exalted deeds isn't so broken when you alter it a bit. In our games my monk isn't the overpowered one, our wizard is. And he's done with core only.

Great sheet, but Spellcraft isn't usable untrained.

Any plans to have the sheet do calculations like your BETA sheet did?

Yeah I kind of dig the font. I certainly wouldn't want to see it become a standard, but I would like it on certain modules.

Kudos to the artist. Using "human" teeth makes the thing more unsettling.

It also seems to be suffering from the gum disease known as Gingivitis!

Hi, I updated my sheet. Fillable version is ready in other words. Here's the thred:

Licensed products

Just here to announce that I uploaded an updated sheet with fillable fields to our site:

Mediakorento

Great work, Tommi! Your sheet is so elegant, beautiful and easy to use -- thanks for sharing it with us!

BTW, we would be happy to welcome you to the Cheliax faction (not there *are* other serious choices), if you choose to join the Society! :)

Personally, I think having an optional "Spells and special abilities" page is probably better than trying to fit selected special abilities onto different versions of the front page.

The S&SA page can then have a quick-reference block at the top with alternate speeds, SR, elemental resistances etc., and spells further down the page.

I found an error from the sheet.

The AC indicators (upper left corner mark and the bottom right corner mark) are a very neat thing. But the size bonus in its current form applies only to flat-footed AC, which isn't right. It applies to touch AC as well.

It wouldn't be a problem with a sheet that has white borders, but yours has this squiggly-lines art thing. Having a bit cut from the top and bottom and having large white areas really does annoy. Using scissors just feels wrong.

More edits: I looked at it a bit closer, and I'd say you could scrap the whole "Spell resistance". I have never seen a character who'd have Spell Resistance worth mentioning for, and even then they get it via spells, not magic items. I could also argue that having multiple speeds isn't necessary, although some sorcerer bloodlines grant different forms of travel.

This would give one row of space to use. I'd see this row useful for "Special attacks" under the attacks. Special attacks would be Deadly Aim and Power Attack (-1 att & +2 dmg / BAB +4), Point Blank Shot (+1 att & +1 dmg w/in 30ft). With an archer ranger, for example, these things tend to add up very quickly. Deadly Aim, Rapid shot, point blank shot, favored enemy ... I've often used a separate paper for all different attack bonuses, though.

Thanks for your input!

-T

Heladriell wrote:

I'm playing a rogue and I noticed that there are almost no restrictions on the talent Bleeding attack. Maybe I missed something:

Does it work with:

-all weapons? (Clubs as well as swords?)

-Subdual damage?

-All types of creature? (constructs, undead) (I know you cant on those imune to sneak)

- Touch and ranged touch damaging spells?

I don't see anything wrong with the bleeding working on things and attacks that don't shed blood( the attack could cause an internal bleeding or a bloodless creature could recieve some other kind of degenerative damage). Just wanted to know.

I would say it doesn't work with blunt weapons.

It would say it doesn't work with subdual damage. Cos you are deliberatly targeting a vital area of a critter.

Won't work on constructs or anything which can't bleed/leak a fluid. As for blanket undead dunno non-coporeal certainly not but vampires? Do they "bleed"

Wouldn't work with spells cos IMO cause energy damage not physical cutty type damage.

Salama wrote:

Thanks Watcher, I intended not to make my sheet public before making it fillable, 'cause that's what I certainly want to offer with my every sheet. But then I got excited when the design was ready and I couldn't help myself =). I'll try to have the fillable version ready for you soon as possible!

That would be awesome Tommi.

And again, I was reluctant to critique a free product because it was ingrateful, but I think other users would really apppreciate it as well.

Thanks for listening!

Surely it would be a simply matter to upscale it at print time?

Assuming you're using scalable fonts.

I really need to tell people this. If his name would be translated it'd be:

TOM LIGHTNING

And I'm not kidding.

Btw Salama have you thought about taking a look at Pathfinder Society? There's activity in Tampere also.

EDIT: I also have a real question. Is there an A4 (or A3) version of that character sheet? Seems like it's on 8½"x11".

As for your real question: Yea, it might be some kind of treason to make my sheets letter sized when we use international paper sizes in my own country... It's just that according to google analytics, like 95% of downloaders are from areas that use letter sized paper. My players are complaining about this too, so it's possible I'll make an european version some day.

Tommi,

It's a nice sheet. I wish it was fillable however.

Here's my delimmia. I GM online and I'd like a sheet that my players could fill out and save and e-mail me.

Without a scanner, this doesn't help me that much. But don't feel bad, your competition doesn't do it either.. so I'm stuck waiting for the Exel Sheets to catch up, or HeroLabs to be updated. :(

Thanks though! I'm not griping at your hard work, just giving you feedback.

Yup, and I'm making just now a Wizard 1/Fighter 6/Arcane archer x. My character is quite happy with his mwk composite longbow from the start.

Great looking sheet Salama!

I am a little confused though - is it meant to be folded in half like a booklet? If so is there a way to print it so the pages stay in the proper order?

neceros wrote:

One very minor detail: monks are able to get higher than 4 attacks (not including TWF fighters, etc). I had a few requests to increase the normal "5" attacks to 7.

I second this.

Also, would it be possible to maybe make the skill area font smaller so that you can fit two or three blank skills slots?

I have played a Monk with this sheet who has five attacks. I recorded all of them in single attack space. Like this: Attack: Flurry of Blows + bite, Attack bonus: x/x/x/x/x, damage: 2d6+9 & 1d6+4. In second attack space I recorded single unarmed strike, and in third single bite. Still got two spaces left =). There is lots of space for attacks in the sheet, mainly because fighters etc. may have many different weapons with different attack bonuses. If you have five attacks with same weapon, I recommend that you record it to a single attack space, much simpler that way.

The second request is possible in my future sheets.

Phillip0614 wrote:

The issue with a lot of them, unfortunately, is that my players tend to like two-page sheets, as that enables them to have one front/back piece of paper to worry about during a game.

Salama wrote:

two page sheets are easy to make but hard to use. There's just not enough space.

Thanks for the Sheet Salama. My player's loved the Beta and we waited a week to rewrite characters until this came out.

The way you did this works for me in other games as well the one I run. Having everything in the first 2 pages with extra room makes it great during the game. My non Spell casters like that there isn't a spell area on their sheet, and my Spell casters love having the spells on a separate page so it works!

A gorgeous sheet once again. You do lovely sheets. (And I await the fillable version, but I'd suggest making the spaces after Perform and Craft and such fillable as well if you can.)

Just to explain what I like about it, for those curious as to what makes a "good sheet" to me:
I prefer landscape sheets as a general rule, because they almost always feel less cramped. Maybe it is the way I process information, but I can find what I am looking for on a landscape sheet much faster and easier than a portrait sheet. Both for sheets I am using, and sheets I've never seen before.
I also prefer a bit of artistry. It needs to be appealing for me to look at.

If I wanted a "plain," portrait sheet, the basic sheets provided with the rules would do me just fine.

That is only my opinion though.

The main reason there is no plain version of my sheet (yet) is the official sheet. I try to make something different instead of doing another version of the same design. That said, I will upload a plain version too in the near future.

First, I have a request, Salama: Lots of people either don't want to print color, or can't, so I'd like to see a sheet without the background print all over it.

Second:

Phillip0614 wrote:

I like all the character sheets that have been posted up to this point. The issue with a lot of them, unfortunately, is that my players tend to like two-page sheets, as that enables them to have one front/back piece of paper to worry about during a game.

I've done a one-page sheet for 4ed before. I didn't personally like it, but It'd be easy enough to accomplish. Would that interest you?

Mind you, extra information like spells and powers will still require a second sheet, but that could just be lined paper or something else.

Take care.

Second: two page sheets are easy to make but hard to use. There's just not enough space. Of course if you play non-caster, there is no problem. But spells take room, as Neceros said, there has to be another page for them. I know there is a section for spells in the official sheet, and it's a two-page sheet, but the room is absolutely too small for me... Phillip0614, I hope you try my character sheet, which can be printed in one sheet of paper (for non-casters).

As nice as I expected, Salama. Question: Are those booklet sheets popular? I had thought about making my own version, even if I don't publish it. It seems like it'd be easier to manage.

Take care.
www.neceros.com

Hi, first version of my sheet is now ready. I posted a thread for it here:

Licensed products

The sheet is not fillable, at least not yet, I'm planning to add fillable fields later. I just wanted to offer it right away for your printing purposes! =)

Greetings, I am Tommi Salama from Mediakorento. We are planning to publish different supplements with Pathfinder roleplaying game compatibility license and I thought that good way to start is to offer you a free character sheet. Now few of you may have already used sheets that I have designed, and I hope you will enjoy this one too. We have many plans at Mediakorento regarding this compatibility license, but more on those later. Please feel free to visit our site and download the free character sheet!

Mediakorento

Not to be a downer, but all this errata has me questioning whether to skip the first printing and wait for the second.
Has anyone found the errors to be overwhelming, or possibly game-breaking? A few slight errors can be expected and overlooked, but I am a little disappointed by the amount turning up.

If I do wait for the second printing, how long is it before the next run?

To anyone else, you work is appreciated. Don't feel discouraged by all the "Salama love." Character sheets are very much like art, no one sheet will have everyone like it. If your sheet gets even one user, then you have done your part in helping the community.

And the PF DB is a wonderful site, thanks veector (I am assuming it is your work).

Hi everyone, thanks a lot for interest in my sheet! I think I have now nailed what I want in my sheet and it will be ready soon. I'll post a link in here when it's done!

You can make ranged attacks at multiple targets like you can make melee attacks at different targets. Your ranged attacks don't take any penalty for switching targets, but of course penalties for shooting into melee, range increments etc. still apply.

Nethys wrote:

Yes, this is possible.

Your God of Knowledge,
Nethys

Is there any official word on this?

I'm still a bit confused myself about the intent of the Vital Strike chain of feats.

The feat states that Strength, weapon abilities (such as flaming) and precision damage (such as sneak attack) are not multiplied.

But what about the weapon training damage bonus for fighters, damage bonus from weapon specialization and enhancement bonuses on the weapon?

If the intent of the feats are to only add more damage dice and nothing else, the feats should state this clearly - instead of listing a few things that aren't included, which leaves the rest open to interpretation.

Salama wrote:

Hm, you're right, I didn't read it carefully enough. Anyway, the text can't be there because of concentration check, because spell level has nothing to do with the check, only caster level and ability bonus. And now I don't really see why Paladin has the ability to summon it four times per day at 17th level, if it's not going anywhere. Or is it just that you can keep it from dying?

Actually, it does, since the DC for a concentration check to cast defensively is 10 + twice the spell's level.

And you never know when you're going to go through an area too narrow for your mount to get through. This way, you can get through the needle's eye (or climb a cliff, or whatever), summon your mount, use it in the open area, then leave and summon it back out.

Jeremy Puckett

There seems to be a LOT of different DC's for concentration. Fortunately there is a good table for those.

Hm. Dismissing the mount was free action in 3.5, but since there is nothing about it in these rules, it must be standard action like with spells?

Actually, the entry says: " This ability is the equivalent of a spell of a level equal to one-third the paladin's level." So if you look at the Mount spell, the mount stays for 2 hours/level.

The mount spell is never mentioned anywhere in the paladin description. That sentence is there only to determine the concentration DC if the paladin has to use his spell-like ability defensively or if there is a local effect preventing the use of spells of a certain level or lower (like minor globe of invulnerability). The mount can be summoned; but once it's there, it stays.

Jeremy Puckett

So far..... we've had the Classic PAIZO Pathfinder Roleplaying Game character sheet, and Salama's at the table. ——Would you believe the PCs that started using Salama's in Alpha, then Beta don't wish to change sheets yet, preferring to use the one they've been using?@?!? During the Beta Playtest, I had them "write-in" a CMD factor box, so really they're not that far off. Salama: sorry my fb will be delayed, as I didn't get any last Monday. I'll ask for some more this coming Monday and let you know. Keep 'em comin' !!!

Page 135

Stunning fist says "A Monk may select Stunning fist as a bonus feat...", While monk's get the feat automatically now.

The Wraith wrote:

"Once per day, as a full-round action, a paladin may magically call her mount to her side (...)"

There is no mention on how much time the Mount remains with the Paladin (rounds? hours?) and which kind of action is required to dismiss it before time (if possible).

This isn't a mistake. The paladin's mount isn't "from the celestial realms" anymore; it's a real, physical mount. The paladin's special ability is to call it to his side--once it's there, it stays. This might need a clarification, but not an errata.

Jeremy Puckett

Hey there everybody,

Let me see if I can clean this up a bit.

Cleave is a standard action, which means you can use it anytime you can take a standard action. It cannot be used as part of a full-attack action, which is a full round action. You cannot use Cleave as part of a charge, since that is a special full-round action (partial charge not withstanding). The same applies to Great Cleave.

Vital Strike can be used in place of an attack action. This means that whenever you take an attack action, you can use Vital Strike instead. An attack action is a type of standard action. While this is nearly identical to Cleave, there are a few subtle differences. Anything that applies to an attack action would apply to a Vital Strike attack, whereas it would not, necessarily, apply to Cleave. The two feats cannot be used in conjunction.

I am not sure that answers all the questions here.. but I will check back later to see if there is anything I have missed.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

[
They clearly define the actions in the game: Move, Standard, Full-Round, Free, Swift, Immediate and Not An Action. Now in the Chart for Actions they give three Attack Actions: Attack (Melee), Attack (Ranged), Attack (Unarmed). Then under Full-Round Actions, it lists the action called Full Attack.

So an attack action is a Standard Action using one of those three actions unless clarified as (Melee), (Ranged), or (Unarmed). A full attack action is clearly a Full-Round Action.

I know people are waiting for them to be defined, but there are about 60 descriptions there. People should get on with playing the game and not waiting for the "Speak Action" to be defined. Seriously, do GMs not let PCs speak because the "Speack Action" has not been fully defined? Or do people not allow PCs to Charge in combat because the Charge Action has not been defined? What about the "Escape a Net Action?" Do GMs not allow PCs to try and escape from a net because that action has not been defined?

Use common sense. Make rulings of your own.
Don't wait for "official" answers. You know your own gaming group better than any game designer ever could.
Use that knowledge to your advantage, so that everyone ends up having fun around the table.
You're welcome.

Salama wrote:

Krome wrote:

[
Great Cleave is a standard attack so you get your entire movement. And you can use other feats with it (such as Vital Strike, or any of the Critical Feats)

Actually, Cleave is a standard action called cleave, you can't use vital strike as a part of it, 'cause cleave is not a normal attack action. Critical feats apply though (as do in whirlwind attack).

Charge is a full round action called "Charge" and yet Jason indicated that you can Vital Strike on a charge.

I think the problem is that "attack action" isn't explicitly defined. Is it only the standard action described as "Attack (melee)" or "Attack (ranged)"? Or is it any action that allows one or more attacks?

[
Great Cleave is a standard attack so you get your entire movement. And you can use other feats with it (such as Vital Strike, or any of the Critical Feats)

Salama wrote:

Jadeite wrote:

Salama wrote:

Am I reading it right that duelist only loses his precise strike when using two weapons? I've never tried the Duelist, but the parry/riposte feature intrigues me.

He also loses it when using a shield, but yes, it's a rather impressive class feature.

Hm, so if I can live with losing the Precise strike, I'm able to take 5 levels of Duelist to get a two weapon fighting parry/riposte-fighter.

Or, technically, you could TWF using a trident (or morningstar, odd as that sounds) and armor spikes or improved unarmed strike. It'd be...weird, but technically possible.

Salama wrote:

Hm, so if I can live with losing the Precise strike, I'm able to take 5 levels of Duelist to get a two weapon fighting parry/riposte-fighter.

With a TWF fighter, I'd take 7 levels of duelist. Eleborate Defense is a nice synergy to two weapon defense. That way, the character would get 6 points of AC from fighting defensively (two from fighting defensively, two from eleborate defense, one from acrobatics and one extra shield bonus from TWD). He'd still lose only one point of damage and attack compared to a pure fighter (although not gaining access to critical mastery might hurt a bit, too).

What do you mean by move and attack all combatants? You mean a 5' step? It sounds like if there are dudes in front of me, they have to be "adjacent" to one another - the only difference between whirlwind and great cleave since with whirlwind they just need to be "within reach."

I think I am missing something here.