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

Serum's page

FullStar Pathfinder Society GM. 865 posts. 1 review. No lists. No wishlists. 7 Pathfinder Society characters.


RSS

1 to 50 of 865 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Shadow Lodge

Jim Kiley wrote:
Since I had six players, I encouraged the players (but did not require them) to each take their Black Rider bonus to a different attribute. They were happy to do it, said it seemed like a cool idea, and negotiated it quite pleasantly with one another.

That's an interesting idea.

Shadow Lodge

blackbloodtroll wrote:
Duderlybob wrote:
Yes, but the feat's requirement shows a precedent. A hand cannot wield two weapons at the same time. A hand can only wield one weapon at a time, that's all I'm using the feat for, it's an example of the RAI that you're arguing for BBT.

I understand.

It just should not be something that anyone should have to prove you can't do.

You can't wield a Dagger clenched between your butt-cheeks, and you can't wield two weapons with the same hand.

No one should have to go to great lengths to have to prove why you can't do either.

So, I can't use my highest iterative to attack with the dagger, then my second iterative to attack with the cestus, when they're both in the same hand?

Shadow Lodge

My big idea right now is to have a Winter Fey / Witch encampment on the other side (why would they fortify only one side of the portal?), and the Black Rider trying to fight his way through.

A couple fey would try to come to the Taldor side to request help from Teb only to find he's in the middle of his own fight (or dead, if the PCs have killed him outside and are now staring at the portal). Looking through allows them to see the encampment and the sight of battle, and if they succeed at a perception check, the sound of battle.

When they go through, they find the Black Rider in all his glory trying to fight his way to the portal, leaving carnage in his wake before eventually succumbing to his wounds.

Shadow Lodge

In the ~3.5 seconds it takes you to swing your readied sword, the caster could've gone immaterial/material 7 times.

Shadow Lodge

Or the 4th adventure could be set in the thrice tenth kingdom, although isn't Rasputin pretty much invading it in book 5? The logical extension of that would be that the PCs get to earth via the first world instead of the Hut.

Shadow Lodge

I will be starting to GM Reign of Winter soon, and I am looking to minimize the role of the Dancing Hut's keys (in order to reduce the effects of plot coupon mentality), and the effects of the Black Mantle or maybe removing it entirely.

Note that this entire post has spoilers running through it for the entire AP.

--------------------

I'm sorry for the disorganization of the following. It's mostly my rambling thoughts, presented here in case anyone else desires to contribute or that it provides ideas for those thinking along the same lines.

Positives that need to be accounted for in my final version:
The Black Mantle and the Black Rider give the PCs direction. He specifically tells them to get to the Dancing Hut, throw the two keys that he holds into its cauldron, and find Baba Yaga, since she's the only one who would know enough about Elvanna's ritual to stop it (oh, and then he puts the Mantle on them to force them to do so). He's a massive info dump.

The keys give a reason for the PCs to be in such wild locations. They provide the trail for the PCs to follow toward Baba Yaga, without letting the players know where each teleport will take them, so that books 4 and 5 are a massive surprise for players who haven't read the books.

One large thing about how the keys allow the Hut teleport across the universe is that the players don't know where they will end up (aside from the two clues in the keys themselves). This keeps each of books 3,4, and 5 a surprise.

Negatives that I wish to reduce:
The Black Rider is a massive exposition dump. In one encounter, the PCs go from being completely clueless about what's going on to knowing their goal for the rest of the adventure path, which is then enforced by the Black Mantle. Over the course of the AP they see first hand how evil/petty Baba Yaga can be, so they ideally they are weighing the evil of Baba Yaga over the fate of their world. The Mantle seems unneeded for anyone but the selfish. The only story piece for it seems to be allowing them full access to the Hut without springing all the wards, since otherwise none of Baba Yaga's minions even know the PCs have the Mantle.

The keys (and the pieces in book 6) are blatant plot coupons that serve as the ultimate goals of books 3 and 4. Book 4 feels like filler. The fact that there are only two sets of breadcrumbs (one to Triaxis and one to Russia, with Baba Yaga straight out telling the Riders to start at Artrosa) is kind of flimsy. Either Baba Yaga should have laid an excessively long trail of breadcrumbs, or she should have provided the full information for her Riders right in Artrosa. At least Artrosa is related to Baba Yaga; no one on Triaxis knows she exists except for any minions with the winter generator at the pole.

Related to the keys: book 3's hut only purpose seems to be giving clues to the keys' locations, unlike the other four configurations. Perhaps I can remodel this as the location she uses to test a potential Rider's worthiness.

Goals:

Spread out the Black Rider's exposition over books 1 and 2. By the end of book 2, the PCs must know:
- Elvanna will bring eternal winter to Golarion if not stopped, starting with Taldor and several other locations. They can close the portal to Taldor if they interrupt the ritual in the Pale Tower.
- Elvanna has rebelled against her mother to circumvent her removal from the throne of Irrisen, helping her brother trap her on Earth.
- The winter ritual is complex enough that reverse-engineering it in order to stop it all at once would take years. Baba Yaga, on the other hand, would be able to reverse it almost immediately.
- Travelling in the Dancing Hut is going to be the best way for them to find Baba Yaga.
- anything else?

The presence of the portal, and lack of anything in the camp that looks like it could close it, should be enough to convince the PCs to go through the portal. Perhaps the sight of trees on the other side will help confer that the other side isn’t completely inhospitable (like say, the boundary between the elemental planes of air & water). Perhaps Teb or one of the other fey can shout something about the Pale Tower, or maybe Rohkar has some correspondence with Radosek stuffed somewhere in the Sentinel’s Lodge. One the other side of the portal the PCs watch the end of a battle between the Black Rider and some of Nazhena’s minions ending in him killing them all but a final ice spear fatally wounds him and his essence enters the nearest artifacts of Baba Yaga, reactivating the two keys in a way obvious that makes them obvious to the PCs.
Once in the ritual chamber in the Pale Tower, another chunk can be given: the PCs see that there are tons of portals all over the world, with more opening.
Need some hooks to go to Whitethrone, perhaps in hopes to stop Elvanna directly before realizing they’re no match for her and need to escape in the Hut before they’re surrounded and killed.

Find reasons for the PCs to go to Artrosa and Triaxus aside from getting the keys. Since the PCs are travelling space (and possibly time!) I can try to borrow heavily from Dr. Who: the doctor frequently shows up in a location that needs his meddling. Artrosa is easy: the Riders have been specifically told to go to there to find her if she doesn’t appear on time. Since Kostchtchie's minions have invaded the place, helping Jadrenka out will help prove that the PCs are on her side and allow her to tell the PCs what’s going on. Triaxis is harder: no one knows who Baba Yaga is, and no one really cares. Both sides get a key as a gift from her in disguise for no real reason aside from wanting to make it difficult for her riders to find her. I guess the point could be to make it difficult for “the assassin’s” followers to find and destroy the keys: although, at this point they would have had to kill the Riders, learn that Artrosa is the next step, and wreck Artrosa and kill Jadrenka to get here.
Perhaps, Triaxis is a fallback: Baba Yaga gave these keys away long ago as another means to get to her home world, and something happened in Artrosa that prevented the keys to Russia from working. Maybe the eagle and the bearskin are related to why Yrax started the war in the first place. I would like to have some reason for the PCs to be there other than the second breadcrumb of a two crumb trail.

Conflicts
- bypassing the wards inside Baba Yaga’s hut (due to the mantle)
- keys are the entire reason to go to Artrosa / Triaxis
- the hut configuration sections in books 3 & 4 are used as clues to find the keys in said books
- others?

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Neo2151 wrote:
I'd say that the "miss chance" for a Ranged Touch is so low in most encounters that it shouldn't really factor, but it's not a point I'm willing to argue. :)

Unless you're willing to invest in the point blank shot -> precise shot -> improved precise shot chain, especially at low level, a party with a melee character is frequently going to have its spellcaster take -4 to an effective -8 on its ranged attack rolls.

I don't care that you're only targeting touch. Scorching ray at level 3 at a -1 to -5 ranged touch attack modifier isn't hitting anything with any degree of accuracy.

Shadow Lodge *

Hrothdane wrote:
I haven't seen either yet, but I'm betting Valais will show up in the season 6 plot. It mentions in her backstory that her team was reassigned from Numeria.

That would depend how many groups reintegrate her into the Society or get her out of the city, I imagine.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Perhaps pounce in general should only apply to natural attacks.

Shadow Lodge

Distraction is only 1 round. Mad Monkeys only adds an additional condition to it with a different duration.

Shadow Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Marthkus wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:

Greater Magic Weapon.

Shield of Faith.

Greater Magical Vestment.

Great now both the rogue and the bard have those buffs.

So.. nothing changed!

So, your example is that the rogue is receiving buffs from someone else, while the bard is casting them on himself? The rogue is sucking up party resources, while the bard is providing them himself.

You don't think it's a little lopsided that, in the rogue's party, someone is casting heroism on everyone (costing 4 spells), while in the bard's party someone is casting heroism on everyone except the bard (costing three spells), and the bard has to cast something on himself instead?

Shadow Lodge

Cevah wrote:
The spell gives a +10 bonus due to being a polymorph spell. It does not gain additional bonuses to offset the penalties for other things just because the spell lets you change size. That was already in the +10. You would get the +5 minor changes if you looked like another human (if you started out human). Using the spell to make a human look like a goblin results in: +10(spell) -2(race change) -10(size change) = -2.

You're not disguised as a different size category, you are a different size category, so you don't get the -10. Race change penalty would still apply, since you still have the human subtype.

Shadow Lodge

Skaldi the Tallest wrote:
Serum wrote:
Raith Shadar wrote:
I'm also thinking of focusing on vampiric touch with Empower Spell (which with the new ruling can be used with frostbite).
Could you point me towards this ruling?
Seconded.

Since Raith Shadar's disappeared, does anyone else know what he's talking about?

Shadow Lodge

ryric wrote:
Robert, others have come up with your interpretation before and it's been shot down. That way of doing things would make Flyby Attack a must-have for every caster build so they could do two spells a round.

Considering it's only by DM fiat that said casters could get them (since it's a Monster Feat), that's not much of a problem.

Shadow Lodge

Wow, Flyby Attack is pretty insane! Two standard actions a turn means:
- a roc can fly down, use flyby attack to attack and grapple if hit, ending its movement, all with a move action. Then, it can use its standard action to maintain and move the creature half its movement speed.
- a dragon can use flyby attack to swoop down and attack someone with a bite, get back out of range, then use a spell or breath weapon.

Shadow Lodge

I don't see any problem with this, since the touch attack for a touch spell is a free action.

Shadow Lodge

Voadam wrote:
So why did you expect using the keys would help on your quest? Just a get out of Irrisen card?

The Black Rider pretty much tells you everything.

Shadow Lodge

Aram Zey's focus (which is on the bard spell list) is nice if the entire dungeon isn't covered in mechanical traps that you can't dispel, avoid, soak etc.

Shadow Lodge

Interesting; that's quite a bit longer than I anticipated. What is your party currently doing, and how focused have they been on their objective?

I should probably add that to the OP!

Shadow Lodge

How many days has your party been chasing Baba Yaga for, both in-game and out?

What is the party currently doing? Have they taken any breaks along the way? At what points?

Shadow Lodge

Raith Shadar wrote:
I'm also thinking of focusing on vampiric touch with Empower Spell (which with the new ruling can be used with frostbite).

Could you point me towards this ruling?

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Frog God Games' Fire As She Bears 3rd party supplement innately lets everyone be involved in ship combat. Modifications are required to fit the S&S ships into FaSB rules, though.

Shadow Lodge

Quote:
I'm running it on Maptool and projecting it onto the TV.

This intrigues me. How do you keep your players engaged, if you're the one moving all the miniatures around? How do they accurately relay what they want to do on the screen?

Shadow Lodge *

Why does subtier 10-11 Durriya have level 5 spells when she's only a sorceror 3? Does it say anywhere that the Rakshasa caster level stacks with sorceror levels, or is it just implied, since it has spells known instead of spell like abilities?

With respect to season 5, do characters who have Dogged Adventurer still automatically get their second Prestige without doing anything, or do they still need to fulfil the secondary success condition to get it?

Shadow Lodge *

Omar Kintale wrote:

--One keeps Mites as housepets

--One has experimented with eating other sentient races

To be fair, I don't think she knows that elves are sentient.

Shadow Lodge

The nuckelavees are confusing to me. Their purpose is to destroy creature who corrupt the world (by inflicting corruption on them and their surroundings)... but I don't see how the maftets could instill that rage.

They seem to have a vendetta against the Queen herself, threatening to corrupt all she holds dear if she doesn't acquiesce to their demands.

Shadow Lodge

Especially since she should know that, at this point, only gods, demi-gods or her mother can actually stop the ritual. There's not actually any reason for her to be in the room anymore, except as a nervous busy-body.

Remember that the mirror gate only functions for her, so your players will have to find their own way to the palace (which is currently at least a couple solar systems away. A plane shift (to get from the Wandering Hut plane to Golarion on the Material plane), then a teleport to Whitethrone is within their abilities. If not, they can always call for Zilvazaraat to help them. They've got two days to figure it out, although the longer they wait the more likely they'll be outmatched.

They'd probably be best to dispel the gate as well, otherwise Elvanna can just step through it again when they finally reach her, and they'll have to plane shift back to the Hut...enduring Dear Grandmother's scathing remarks the whole way.

Shadow Lodge

For the gunslinger, what about allowing that class to make called shots, while still keeping everything at move action reloads.

Of course, the called shots as stated are pretty absurd, so they would need to change, too, one idea being that every hit is resolved as a critical called shot.

Shadow Lodge

Wyrmholez wrote:
Serum wrote:
Houserule #1: The action to reload a gun barrel cannot be reduced to a free action.

Between class features and feats a gunslinger should be able to make a full attack if they are otherwise allowed one.

Serum wrote:
Houserule #3: Firearms are martial weapons. Characters with simple weapon proficiency can use Firearms without penalty, but the action to reload one increases by one step.

Are there other weapons that have special rules for non-proficiency? It seems to me that the Ultimate Combat suggestions for "Firearms in your Campaign" were sufficient.

Yes, based off the Bastard Sword model.

Quote:
Serum wrote:
Houserule #4: Firearms have the standard 10 range increments for all projectile weapons.
Guns don't have 10 range increments?

They do not.

Oncoming_Storm wrote:
If you're just going to nerf them into crossbows, why not play without them instead? Much simpler.

Because I want them to have a presence, but for the majority of people, they should be one-shot wonders. How would you accomplish that goal?

Ssalarn wrote:

We use a system pretty similar to your houserule #2.

We call it PR (Penetration Rating).
All one-handed early firearms have a PR of 2 and all two-handed early firearms have a PR of 4, allowing them to bypass the first 2-4 points of AC from armor, natural armor, and shields.
PR is automatically increased by weapon enhancements. If you have a +2 Musket, you have PR 6.
We pretty much throw out misfires at this point, because they're terrible and they aren't needed as a balancing mechanic any more.
We also get rid of the Musket Master and Pistolero entirely since they are not balanced to the core class, and we fold their deeds into the core class to replace the deeds that used to exist for the sole purpose of mitigating misfires.

These changes have pretty much completely resolved any issues we've seen with the Gunslinger.

What would you do to make guns attractive to someone who doesn't get a gunslinger's DEX to damage?

Gilarius wrote:

In real history (as far as I can tell from basic knowledge) it appears to me that early guns were the exact opposite of the way Paizo presented them to be: wildly inaccurate but capable of devastating damage and very easy for anyone to learn to use them.

How does it seem to you?

Well, in the current rules, anyone can just pick up a gun, fire it, and have it be wildly inaccurate (the -4 nonproficiency penalty), so there's that. How much more devastating is a bullet. To be fair, muskets were incredibly inaccurate just because they were made that way so they could reload faster during battle (more bullets in the air, and tons of bodies to hit worked more than the ability to aim). Even when barrel rifling was invented, it didn't become a mainstream war weapon (aside from sharp-shooter teams, perhaps?) due to the increased load time, until they figured out percussion caps and breach loading.

On the other hand, the gun rules seem to assume rifled accuracy, with smoothbore reload speeds and muzzle-loading. Perhaps because it's just not fun otherwise.

Shadow Lodge

In this thread, I ask for input on several firearm houserules. My goal is to get them inserted into a setting, where a large number of people can use them as, at the very least, an opening shot before wading into melee.

Houserule #1: The action to reload a gun barrel cannot be reduced to a free action.

Houserule #2: Shooting with a firearm no longer targets touch AC in the first increment. Instead, they ignore X amount of armor+natural armor, at all range increments. X is probably 4 or 5.

Houserule #3: Firearms are martial weapons. Characters with simple weapon proficiency can use Firearms without penalty, but the action to reload one increases by one step.

Houserule #4: Firearms have the standard 10 range increments for all projectile weapons.

A couple of thoughts of my own: This effectively replaces the crossbow once characters can afford it. It still has the issues that crossbows have in terms of damage scaling, and can't make multiple attacks a round without a pepperbox (which has its own complications once its barrels are empty).

Likely pricing will change. Firearm costs go down (1/2 or 1/4 price), as well as other supplements (alchemical cartridges especially, such that they're the common item: 1gp per round/5 rounds or so).

What else would need to change in order for you to want to use a firearm as:
A) a secondary weapon for any character, and
B) a gunslinger?

Shadow Lodge

How about some Nox spellcasting?

Shadow Lodge *

Thanks for the answers, everyone.

One final question:

If the PCs set off the cave-in while the centipede swarm is in the bury/spill zone, does it take any damage? It's bludgeoning damage (typically associated with weapon damage), but it's also AoE damage.

Shadow Lodge

Bbauzh ap Aghauzh wrote:
pauljathome wrote:
Bbauzh ap Aghauzh wrote:
Jiggy wrote:
RedDogMT wrote:
An animal is not physically capable of doing an unarmed strike
I don't even know how to respond to a statement like this.
The point being, every unarmed strike a creature makes is inherently considered a natural attack.

Improved unarmed strike allows one to make a lethal or non lethal attack.

In the real world, animals can be trained to do non lethal attacks.

So, by your own logic, animals MUST be able to take improved unarmed strike. They are physically capable (as shown by real world examples), they have the INT, they can buy the feat.

Animals do lethal damage all by themselves already.

They need to be taught a trick to do non lethal damage.

IUS is not that trick. IUS allows someone who normally does non lethal damage to do lethal instead and not take the AoO.

That's not the only thing IUS does, though. Another large part of it is that the user can now deal nonlethal damage without either taking a serious attack penalty or provoking. Can you not think of a single reason for someone to take the feat for that option?

Shadow Lodge *

Shamus Woodgear wrote:
PolydactylPolymath wrote:
Shamus Woodgear wrote:
Serum wrote:
I know someone has 4 gnome sorcerer sisters who are nearly identical.

Slicks back hair

"Can you introduce us?"

Believe me, that would be a VERY bad idea.
Thats what they said about firing me out of a catapult, and that worked out fine.

Well, the hair grease might be a problem. Three of them start setting things on fire when they get excited.

Shadow Lodge

SlimGauge wrote:
I'd be fairly certain that Expeditious Retreat's explicit statement that it has no effect on other modes of movement is fairly definitive. If that explicit exclusion wasn't there, you'd have a case.

Agreed.

The Travel Domain's power, for example, would increase your fly speed, since it doesn't have that exclusion.

Shadow Lodge

Yes.
No.
No.

Shadow Lodge

Wraithcannon wrote:
PRD wrote:
Entangled: The character is ensnared. Being entangled impedes movement, but does not entirely prevent it unless the bonds are anchored to an immobile object or tethered by an opposing force. An entangled creature moves at half speed, cannot run or charge, and takes a –2 penalty on all attack rolls and a –4 penalty to Dexterity. An entangled character who attempts to cast a spell must make a concentration check (DC 15 + spell level) or lose the spell.
My question is does this count as being anchored to the floor, wall, etc. if the creature targeted is in contact with some kind of solid surface. Like a tanglefoot bag made of shadows.

Unlikely. There's no mention of it in the text. Generally it's pretty explicit.

Shadow Lodge

In general, polymorphing into a humanoid allows you to keep your gear (including your spell component pouch), and the form has digits with which to make the manipulations required to cast your spell.

Shadow Lodge *

I know someone has 4 gnome sorcerer sisters who are nearly identical.

Shadow Lodge

Thomas Long 175 wrote:
Marthkus wrote:
Thomas Long 175 wrote:
Marthkus wrote:

Rogues have slightly faster sneak attack, rogue talent, and advance talent progression than that one bard archetype.

And I think we can all agree that Paizo made rogue talents the equivalent of rage powers, dare I say even hands down better. That's why the Viking fighter archetype isn't herald as hands down better than the barbarian.

I'm not good with people skills. Is that sarcasm?

Rogue talents even work when the rogue is NOT raging.

I mean moving at full speed while sneaking!? Holy Shiite Muslim! Look out wizard the rogue can move slightly faster.

Seriously, i can't tell. Is this sarcasm or not?

It's sarcasm.

Shadow Lodge *

Kyle Baird wrote:
With Xiangnuer, I ask for the party's most expensive item (via detect magic). If the party's already pissed her off (maybe attacked but then surrendered?) I ask for everyone's most expensive item. Or die. :-) This has lead to some great moments of "player defeat," but in the end, even if they agree to give up the goods, I only charge them the gp value suggested divided by # players. Asking for gold and not shiny objects is lame. Also keep in mind, often the flail found on the dead npc is often the most expensive item in the party.

I need a bit more of a clarification for this, if you don't mind. If they give up an item, do they lose that item?

That is, if they give up a player's +2 weapon, does he mark that weapon as consumed on his inventory tracker?

If they give up the +1 frost flail, do they lose access to it off the chronicle sheet, in addition to losing the gold from it?

Or is this just a way to make them give up 7000/15000gp in character, and that's the only consequence?

Shadow Lodge

Jiggy wrote:
Serum wrote:
Could I ask where it says that a (Sp) need only reference a spell in order to be considered that spell's level?

Alternatively, you could ask where it says that a spell-like ability's spell level would ever be anything other than the spell that it's based on.

Even so, here you go. :)

Thank you.

Back on topic! I still recommend a half-moon battle axe: different from a longsword while roughly equivalent, and fits with Tsukiyo semi-thematically.

Shadow Lodge

LoneKnave wrote:

If you want to win at all combat maneuvers forever, going Magus and getting a wand of truestrike could also work.

Whip magus with truestrike wand is a really hilarious build.

As long as you have weaponwand or Prehensile hair, anyway.

Shadow Lodge

andreww wrote:
Serum wrote:
Majuba wrote:
It shouldn't't be enough period, modifications or not, but regardless...
Serum wrote:


Did that question asked about the caster level of (Sp) abilities that aren't spells ever get answered?
If you mean Spell Level, it is in the book. The level of the equiv. spell, or the highest spell the class can cast at the level it's gained.

You are correct, I meant spell level.

So, the spell level of Send Senses (Sp) is level 1, since it's not identical to clairaudience/clairvoyance?

Nope, that FAQ only applies to abilities which are not based on existing spells. The Scryer School ability makes explicit reference to Clairaudience. It is a level 3 ability and qualifies.

Could I ask where it says that a (Sp) need only reference a spell in order to be considered that spell's level? I don't read that at all from the two FAQ answers.

I think there's a pretty large difference between this ability and say, the Creation school's 8th level power, which explicitly allows you to cast minor creation.

Shadow Lodge

Majuba wrote:
It shouldn't't be enough period, modifications or not, but regardless...
Serum wrote:


Did that question asked about the caster level of (Sp) abilities that aren't spells ever get answered?
If you mean Spell Level, it is in the book. The level of the equiv. spell, or the highest spell the class can cast at the level it's gained.

You are correct, I meant spell level.

So, the spell level of Send Senses (Sp) is level 1, since it's not identical to clairaudience/clairvoyance?

Shadow Lodge

EvilPaladin wrote:
Unfortunately, Teleportation subschool's Shift is an Su ability. Not Sp. It doesn't comply with the FAQ.

Whoops, excuse my bad example, then.

The point is still: Scryer has a modified version of a 3rd level spell, not the actual spell. Is that still enough?

Shadow Lodge

So, what does melded actually mean to you, then? Gear that's melded is inaccessible, so it's not just invisible. You can't take off or even touch your melded armor. How is it restricting your movement? Someone wearing medium armor who uses beast shape still continues to move at a reduced speed?

Can you remove wild armor, or is it still inaccessible?

Shadow Lodge

Koethus wrote:
andreww wrote:
Koethus wrote:
Eldritch Knight has a pre-req that says you need to be able to cast 3rd Level arcane spells. This build doesn't meet that criteria.
SLA's count now following the FAQ. Jiggy even mentions it in the very first post. Did you actually read it?

Yes I did read it. I just don't agree with it. There was a series of posts about this as well regarding if the Scryer subschool actually was the ability to cast a 3rd level arcane spell. I understand what the FAQ says, I just don't agree that the scryer ability at level one functions like a level 3 spell. They have changed have the SLA functions to the point where it doesn't really function like the 3rd level spell.

That's just my opinion and I don't think the DM I play with would agree with this either. If someone lets you do it though, then it's fine.

I agree with this, unfortunately. Does having the teleportation subschool mean that the character is capable of casting 4th level spells at level 1?

Did that question asked about the caster level of (Sp) abilities that aren't spells ever get answered?

Shadow Lodge

Jiggy wrote:
It's changed remarkably little since I first posted; I did notice that I didn't like any of my options for my second Warpriest blessing (after Good) with Shizuru as my deity, and then noticed that Tsukiyo offers Good and Darkness, with the latter fitting perfectly with what I'm already doing (basically 1min of blur from 1st level), and a pretty cool flavor vibe to boot. Unfortunately, that costs me katana proficiency, which leaves me looking at either scimitar or longsword for my weapon. I'm currently leaning toward switching to Tsukiyo, but waffling on the sword choice; I like the mental image of a not-scimitar, but katana is gone and my last EK used a longsword. :( But either way, it's going to be made of obsidian (weaker and more expensive than steel, but IT IS A BLACK SWORD). :D

Use a half-moon battle axe!

Shadow Lodge

Jiggy wrote:
Also, the polymorph rules state that armor and shield bonuses stop providing their benefit, not that the armor and shield go away altogether.

Read the sentence right before that one. Armor and shields meld into the body along with everything else. Have you been forcing wild shaped bird druids to take -3 on their fly checks because of the ACP on their hide armor? Perhaps you should be!

1 to 50 of 865 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©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.