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

Skylancer4's page

3,948 posts. No reviews. 1 list. No wishlists.


1 to 50 of 3,948 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Dr Styx wrote:

Eidolons don't get a BAB of +6/+1

All of there attacks are at full BAB... Witch would be +6
There max attacks/ round at BAB of +6 is 5 natural attacks
But here he is using Weapons with the Multiwepon Feat
So with 4 arms, he would only get 4 attacks
My mistake is saying "Primary" instead of Main Hand and Off Hands

Main Hand +9
Off Hands +6

Any creature using natural attacks wouldn't get additional attacks from BAB. Eidolon have limitations on natural attacks, they however do not have a limitation per level on attacks with weapons.

The eidolon is using weapons and using multi weapon fighting. They get the additional attacks from BAB.

You probably need to go read the combat section of the book to brush up on your rules. You are just flat out incorrect with your post.

The weapon masters book that just came out had several options for ranged attacks. From what I saw when I skimmed it at my friends, I would say anyone who likes to play martials regularly should pick it up. There were definitely ranged Combat Manuevers, not 100% if one was trip.

Dr Styx wrote:

Benefit: Penalties for fighting with multiple weapons are reduced by –2 with the primary hand and by –6 with off hands.

Normal: A creature without this feat takes a –6 penalty on attacks made with its primary hand and a –10 penalty on attacks made with all of its off hands. (It has one primary hand, and all the others are off hands.)

Primary Attack : +9
All Other Attacks : +6

You only get ONE Primary Attack.

Um.. They get two primary attacks, they have the BAB to make two.

Unless you are playing that when creatures use TWF/ITWF/GTWF they only get one main hand attack during a full attack action. In which case that is a heck of a (horrible) house rule to be playing with.

Zenogu wrote:
Heretek wrote:
Tossing on resist/immunity will end up making it feel like you are punishing the players for playing the class. That creates resentment etc.

No. It will make it more challenging. You cant expect the same 1st level spell to carry you to 20. And the GM is not going to pamper you either.

It will require him to divert from a typical nova, and turn to either helping his party or coming up with a different approach.

When the answer to the problem is "make them immune to the character's main attack" that is just poor and lazy GMing. There are NUMEROUS ways to lessen their impact which don't amount to "pampering" them. Are you going to keep the barbarian from using Rage and PA, or the rogue from using their SA and skills, or the wizard from using their spells, or the ranger from being able to use their combat style and abilities, because you don't want to "pamper" them?

The magus' are using an extremely common tactic, which their class is based on and intended to use. Making the enemies immune or resistant to just that is plain lazy, especially when there are other more effective ways to deal with the [/i] perceived [/i] problem that don't involve neutering the characters themselves. This is the same issue you run into with any spellcaster, a nova, and the real solution is to make them think about how to use their limited resources. It is quite literally that "simple", you don't make those resources useless. You make them use them, so that way they think about how and when they use them. After a few sessions of encounters and them not having resources they will start holding back and change tactics.

If you are going to be pursuing the crafting aspect, wizard is hardly ever a bad choice. Any class that restricts spells known to a small list will be a hindrance in crafting items with such varied abilities as ioun Stones.

That being said, the 3/4 BAB and buffs from the stones might help you play a combat mage type. One of them is basically toughness, and several are + to various attacks.

kinevon wrote:
Skylancer4 wrote:

Also, would you be able to cast a second spell is something to be aware of. You have flame in your hand (effectively holding a charge), that normally keeps you from casting another spell.

Obvious not explicitly called out as such, but definitely something else that could complicate things.

Produce Flame is not a held charge spell, it has a duration. Using the flame to make an attack reduces the duration.

So you could, technically, cast Produce Flame, then cast Shocking Grasp next turn, or quickened in the same turn, and deliver the Xd6 electricity and the 1d6+X flame damage in a single touch attack.

While RAW I agree, you are still holding flame in your hand with which you can make melee touch attacks. It is holding a charge in absolutely every way except name.

In games where intent is actually a consideration, instead of blind obedience to RAW, it could matter.

Heretek wrote:

The classic Magus strategy relies on shocking grasp, so toss in lighting immune enemies. Also to keep in mind is spell combat is a full round action, so if the magus can't full-round, then he is in a poor position, but really so is any martial.

Also seriously 6 players, and you are only using 1 big monster? No. Just no. Always include fodder, or even multiple mid-boss type enemies instead of just fodder. 6 players will annihilate a single enemy before it can even act unless it has a leg up on them, like DR they just can't bypass, or really high AC. Spell Penetration isn't a typically taken feat for Magus either, so toss in some decent SR enemies as well to mess with their spell combat/spellstrike.

Also, please inform us exactly what actions the magi are taking to ensure they are playing as they should, and that they aren't doing things they normally would not actually be capable of through poor reading of their mechanics or something.

I highly doubt that they are running it incorrect. Given that the GM is not familiar with the Magus, the burst damage they can put out is most likely what is causing the concern.

@OP: Back to the basics. 4-5 encounters per day and multiple enemies are what you are probably going to have the best luck with. Having 1 opponent most encounters just means the Magus can nova the enemy down. They probably have at least enough spells to do it once if not twice per encounter if they are remotely optimized. And you have 2...

Tossing on resist/immunity will end up making it feel like you are punishing the players for playing the class. That creates resentment etc. The class isn't the problem really, it is your preference to running one large monster versus a group (which is basically a losing proposition as explained above). It makes it easier on you obviously, but now you are seeing why it doesn't pan out well challenge wise. The more characters you run and the further you deviate from the core assumptions, the more you will see the chinks in some of the logic the game runs on and the mechanics start to fail.

Ninja'd. See above.

Also, would you be able to cast a second spell is something to be aware of. You have flame in your hand (effectively holding a charge), that normally keeps you from casting another spell.

Obvious not explicitly called out as such, but definitely something else that could complicate things.

London Duke wrote:

My DM is pretty skeptical about being able to apply potentially 10 debuffs to a single standard action. Could you possibly provide a link to the developers saying there is no limit? I am hoping they give a reasoning for this. I would love to play my cryptic as a debuffer but as it stands I am stuck as a damage dealer (however he is allowing me to use brutal disruptor with ranged bow attacks so that's pretty cool).

I think his fear is that while he can adjust for PCs that can do tons of damage. Adjusting for someone that can in 1 round reduce his monsters to puddles of penalties & conditions, could prove unbalancing. He says that Rogues, Investigators, Alchemists are all limited with how many effects they can tack onto a sneak attack / studied strike / bomb and he doesnt see any reason the same shouldn't apply to Cryptics.

Maybe you should post on DSP's actual website as well?

They definitely check these forums regularly but I know things have been busy with various RL issues for quite a few of the people working on DSP products. If you want/need an answer it can't hurt to cover your bases. At least if you need an "official" answer.

Quintain wrote:

It states that the destination "focus" lasts a number of days equal to the int bonus of the cryptic. What it does *not* say is that the destination must be re-established after each use. Additionally, if the destination is set up and in place, then logically the ability can be reused as the conditions for use are there.

If DSP intended it to be a one use at a time ability, then I would think that they would have some sort of usage text -- but they did not.

This can be argued either way, but you are adding text to limit the ability to support your interpretation, imo.

As is the interpretation of multiple uses, to support yours.

The ability states you can teleport the creature you touch to that point. It is much less a "stretch" to say the power is then concluded, opposed to let us say, indefinitely available to be used again when it doesn't state that.

You should read the Magic School Transmutation: Polymorph rules to see what you get when you wildshape. Then look at the Wild Armor to see what that changes.

Those two sections will answer your question.

I haven't looked, but I believe typically ongoing damage takes effect at the beginning of your turn. So if you start your turn in lava, you would not take damage on the new turn?

They are Bracers of Disruption, from Ult Psionics.

Each insight is an SU ability which modifies the disrupt pattern ability, typically an SU ability is a standard action. So I would say that yeah, you get to choose which insight you want and that allows for the attack.

So if you are standing in lava when you start your turn, you don't get burnt because you are going to move out of it and it won't affect you this turn because of it?

You are in the hazard, regardless of what your plans are, the hazard exists and you started your turn in it.

But it also doesn't mention multiple uses. It states what the "set up" is, and that at a later point when you do finally "use" the ability, that creature (self, willing or unwilling) completes the "usage" of the ability.

I don't see it as an ambiguity, but explanations of the stages of use the ability has from beginning to end. If it was intended to work as a semi permanent teleport at will, I have faith that the people at DSP would have mentioned as much. As it doesn't, I'm not of the inclination to add such attributes to an ability when it doesn't even imply as much.

"The rules don't tell me I cannot" and such.

Generally speaking stacking isn't just limited to spells/effects. Even in 3.5 stacking was reduced from 3.0. It is just that "powerful" in many cases.

Most abilities that do "stack" something are typically worded to not work with others that do the same thing. This is the easy part, as they are so regulated or focused in effect, when written they know exactly how they will be used. With spells it gets significantly more tricky, as there are just so many of them, you can't be 100% what they will be interacting with.

Witch could be used as well, but kinda in the reverse sense. Tossing misfortune on enemies forcing them to take the worst rolls, because you knew what they were going to do and did something to trip them up instead. Fluff the 24 immunity as time's way of telling you to "quit it" as you strained yourself etc. Similar situation with evil eye, walking your allies through what is about to happen causing the opponent to take penalties.

And if you want a more martial take, go Hexblade Magus. It has some spells but can function without them as it is a strong archetype. Grab cackle but flavor it as you talking people through tactics against what the opponent is about to do, instead of madly cackling. Also as you aren't worried about spells, dipping hurts a tiny bit less if you want to grab a level or two of something else.

I'm a huge fan of DSP's psionic, but the Misfortune/Evil Eye + Cackle would be very hard to beat as a consistent and reliable way to mechanically portray a precog with "official" material.

Ambrosia Slaad wrote:

In Ultimate Options: Power of the Ninja, one of the introduced ninja tricks was Shadowblade:

UO:PotN wrote:
Shadowblade (Su): As a swift action the ninja can create a weapon made of solid shadows (this can be any light weapon with which she is proficient). This weapon is treated as magic for purpose of bypassing DR, and has an enhancement bonus to attack and damage equal to +1 for every three full levels of ninja. It has the same hardness and hit points as a normal magic weapon of its type, and dissipates at the end of any round it is not held in the ninja’s hand. A ninja may dissipate the weapon at will. A ninja must have at least 1 ki point left to use this trick.

While a strong option for the Ultimate Combat ninja, or a core rogue with a ki pool, it wasn't overpowered because of those classes' overall subpar offensive capabilities.

Now that the unchained rogue has been offensively empowered with finesse training, debilitating injury, and getting sneak attack damage on concealed opponents, shadowblade seems like it needs an adjustment. Any opinions on how to nudge it down without completely nerfing it?

  • Slow the autoscaling enhancement bonus to +1 for four full levels?
  • Eliminate the enhancement bonus entirely and just let it bypass DR as a monk's ki strike (bypass cold iron & silver at 7th, bypass lawful or chaos element matching rogue's own alignment at 10th, bypass adamantine at 16th)? (This is what I'm leaning towards.)
  • Break it into two separate tricks?
  • Something else?

If you do go with your 2nd option, I would give something back. Maybe allow the character to make any weapon OR 2 light weapons (for TWF'ing) similar to how a psionic Soulknife can with their mindblade.

It becomes a decent choice early on to deal with magic DR, mid game it probably loses out to real magical weapons which are customizable. But it still has the "always there" and occasionally niche opponents your magic weapon won't effect, aspects. It becomes a safety net, which is probably in line with what a trick should do. It doesn't have uses per day or limitations, so design wise it should be in the realm of "it is nice but not necessary, and will occasionally make life easier".

A free scaling magic weapon for a trick is pretty much a no brainer, no rogue would not take it unless they were focused on range or natural attacks (and even then it would be a contender probably, for things that might be bad to touch, stuck in melee, etc). Even at two tricks it is a super strong contender, which is bad.

VRMH wrote:
The weight of the armour worn still adds to the overall encumbrance though, right?

Yes, which is why the worst of the two would matter.

They could be wearing medium armor yet still be carrying a heavy load, due to combination of low strength and weight.

Omernon wrote:
There are half-drows in Forgotten Realms, so I guess the same thing will apply to any other setting. Just as in real life - such mixture will make their skin darker, but not as much as real drows have. Hair and eye color on the other hand may resemble more surface elves.

Drow in Golorian aren't the same drow from FR from the bits and pieces I've read on the forums.

They are still elves however.

I guess it would really depend on if it was for a PC or NPC. Full on drow tend to be more powerful, so not a great idea for PCs in a group that doesn't all have the same bump.

The racial traits would probably be the best bet for a PC and just re-fluffed as needed by background.

As per genetics, pretty much everything from full on normal elf, to full on drow is possible. Similar to tieflings and Aasimirs. Sometimes there is just the tiniest little difference.

Rub-Eta wrote:
Skylancer4 wrote:

That sorta sounds like "GM entitlement" rage. You choosing to take that role on yourself isn't a "good reason" to not be capable at the role.

I have always subscribed to the "if I'm going to do something, I'm going to do it well" mentality. If you are incapable of doing the job, don't do it.

I really hope you're not trying to advocate that not knowing every page of every book of rules equals to "not doing it well" or "not capable at the role". Because that's exactly what you do when you respond like that, the "you're just raging and being butt-hurt because you're doing a s+&%ty job" when I'm saying that knowing every rule is too much to ask from anybody.

And there is many, MANY cases where the DM doesn't choose to DM, he does it to even have any game. Because nobody else, none of his players, would bother even attempting doing what he does for them.

It would help to read my whole post to get the answer to your insinuation. Not to mention partial quoting it so as to make it seem like I said something, which I didn't.

"What he does for them"... Kinda proves my point no?

FYI, I quoted your WHOLE post, just to make sure nothing relevant was lost. Not that it mattered in this particular case.

I read it as a one use ability. Set location, persists for X days until you send someone there (aka is used) or ability times out.

Falls in line with the whole "trap" theme.

It never mentions multiple targets or uses. One creature, and later it states that creature can be yourself.

Lastoutkast wrote:
maybe a construct of some kind ? Also when you drop a construct to 0 hit points does just blow up or is it disabled ?

Barring exceptions, when they hit 0 they are destroyed.

Cao Phen wrote:


Does Augment Summoning affect the Spark of Life Utility Wild Talent?

Spark of Life wrote:

Element Universal; Type utility (Sp); Level 5; Burn 0

You breathe a semblance of life into elemental matter, which takes the form of a Medium elemental of any of your elements as if summoned by summon monster IV with a caster level equal to your kineticist level, except the elemental gains the mindless trait. Each round on your turn, you must take a move action to guide the elemental or it collapses back into its component element. By accepting 1 point of burn, you can pour a bit of your own sentience into the elemental, removing the mindless quality and allowing it to persist for 1 round per kineticist level without requiring any further actions. At 12th level, you can choose to form a Large elemental as if by summon monster V; at 14th level, you can choose to form a Huge elemental as if by summon monster VI; at 16th level, you can choose to form a greater elemental as if by summon monster VII; and at 18th level, you can choose to form an elder elemental as if by summon monster VIII.

The feat doesn't mention having to cast the spells etc. Just if you do happen to summon creatures they are "better". Sadly the prereq is probably completely useless to you.

dragonhunterq wrote:

Oh! absolutely it is a valid target for the spell, I was just questioning whether it actually did anything. It is possible to target something and the spell still does nothing (don't scorching ray a red dragon!)

I think you are better off using a more appropriate example. Casting charm person on a dragon, or something like that. Because the target isn't actually valid the spell poofs. Sure your unarmed strikes mighbe valid targets for spells that target weapons etc. But unarmed strikes are still a creature, not an object (is I think what you are getting at).

Anzyr wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:
Magic jar says you use the host body's stats except where noted otherwise. So, yes, you use the host body's creature type while possessing it.

This is correct. Let's take a look at the relevant section of Magic Jar.

Magic Jar wrote:
If you are successful, your life force occupies the host body, and the host's life force is imprisoned in the magic jar. You keep your Intelligence, Wisdom, Charisma, level, class, base attack bonus, base save bonuses, alignment, and mental abilities . The body retains its Strength, Dexterity, Constitution, hit points, natural abilities, and automatic abilities. A body with extra limbs does not allow you to make more attacks (or more advantageous two-weapon attacks) than normal. You can't choose to activate the body's extraordinary or supernatural abilities. The creature's spells and spell-like abilities do not stay with the body.

You get the possessed Body's creature type for two reasons:

1. The spell is specific about what you keep, namely your "Intelligence, Wisdom, Charisma, level, class, base attack bonus, base save bonuses, alignment, and mental abilities". Creature type is not one of those, so you don't keep it.

2. You gain the body's natural and automatic abilities. Creature type is "Each creature has one type, which broadly defines its abilities." Therefore, because creature type defines the bodies abilities you get it as well.

That's the RAW of it. That being said Magic Jar has a lot of interactions where the rules are genuinely unclear. This just isn't one of them.

For that to be "the RAW of it" it would have to state you gained the type. As this is an exception based rule set, things don't happen without being told they do.

Gaining type means a great deal more than "stats" and physical properties. Gaining type is called out to happen in every situation I can find that does so. This doesn't state it to happen so, so how can you say "that is the RAW of it" with a straight face, knowing full well how the game is designed and functions?

Kaouse wrote:
Calth wrote:
Just a note, "Weapon Master Weapon Training" is not actually "Fighter Weapon Training" as it does not meet the requirements of the archetype replacement FAQ. That's why the new companion had to add an explicit exception letting that archetype take and benefit from the advanced weapon training feat.

I know this comes from an FAQ, but that's an incredibly stupid semantic argument that doesn't even make sense, considering Gloves of Dueling don't mention "Fighter" Weapon Training, only "Weapon Training."

Gloves of Dueling wrote:
These supple gloves grant the wearer a +4 bonus to her CMD against disarm attacks, attempts to sunder her wielded weapons, and effects that cause her to lose her grip on her weapons (such as grease). The wearer doesn’t drop held weapons when panicked or stunned. If the wearer has the weapon training class feature and is using an appropriate weapon, her weapon training bonus increases by +2.
So yeah, Weapon Master Fighters, and even Swashbucklers, can totally use the item.

Rules decisions pretty much always come down to semantics...

SmiloDan wrote:
Well, this is a game, not a story. Try to emphasize more gameplay and less authoring. Just because the written module is written one way, that doesn't mean it was written in the way to maximize the fun of your players. If your players aren't having fun, they probably will stop playing your game.

In our group, that is usually about the time we let that person run the game. 1) It lets us see what they consider a "good" game. 2) Others tend to appreciate the break, and if it falls on it's face they can see firsthand just what it is like to be on the other side of the screen. Sometimes we need reminding (on both sides of the screen).

I will say, I don't think I've ever been one of those players who plays the game "because of the game". It has always been a social thing, we play with friends and that is why we are there. The game is secondary, at best. Not to say we haven't had great games, but the reality was we were there to enjoy each others company. So maybe we are a little more forgiving on when things don't meet expectations or something like that.

It is good that you are trying to figure out how to make it better, but there exists the possibility that there isn't anything you can do as well. Maybe your games aren't the right fit for that person. Who knows, maybe it would be better off they did decide to stop playing.

Ravingdork wrote:
Magic jar says you use the host body's stats except where noted otherwise. So, yes, you use the host body's creature type while possessing it.

It actually lists particular attributes, notably the attributes you get from your type are ones you don't get access to and retain the use of yours (skills, BAB, saves).

I would have to say this points to you retaining your type. Does it lead to some odd things, sure does. But you are you, using the physical body of someone else. A better version of Polymorph for all intents and purposes. There are very few mechanics that change something as fundamental as your type. They spell it out for you when they do. This doesn't mention that, so why would you assume it would?

D6Veteran wrote:

Context - they are 12 and 13 years old. This is my daughter and here friends and they have played 7-8 sessions with me. I totally got them hooked :)

I wasn't concerned about party balance when we had our first game because it was just a little dungeon crawl intro. But then they wanted to keep going and they are too attached to their characters. I have to take them to complete this adventure (2 more sessions).

I'd like to both help them, and also teach them about party balance. Not having a true Cleric + their lack of experience, has been super tough as a DM. I've had to pull back and open escape routes several times. I've already killed both Druid's animal companions twice.

I'll guide them on the witch and druid cure___ spells, and I'll need to read up on leadership and healer cohort feats.

Leadership might be a a good idea as you can control who/what the NPC is. But it can also be a bad idea, as they end up relying on it, instead of learning and playing "smarter".

Also, maybe take a page out of the Mythic rules or hero points sub system. Mythic characters get something called Recuperation, that causes them to be fully healed after 8 hours of rest and they can use a mythic point to spend 1 hour and heal half their HP and regain their daily abilities. Give them all one, maybe two points, so that way they can take a breather if they get too roughed up. It takes long enough time that things get "broken up" if they are time sensitive, but not so long as to end the adventuring day.

Rhazgul wrote:
Rynjin wrote:

For the Assassin PrC, you need to kill someone for no other purpoe than to become an assassin. Essentially, it's a cold blooded murder of anyone you want or are told to kill.

What you want is probably the Slayer class. They have no Evil only restriction, full BaB, Sneak Attack, an ability that gives them increased damage and skill bonuses versus their specified target(s), and probably most relevant to your interests, at 10th level can take the Assassinate Advanced Talent.

Assassinate is, simply put, a much, much, MUCH better version of the Assassin's Death Attack (it only takes one round of study instead of 3...which is a lifetime, and does the exact same thing otherwise).

Same flavor if you want, a more Neutral or Good oriented flavor if you want that instead, and a very easy to build class that doesn't involve any fiddly multiclassing, especially with PrCs that have weird Special prerequisites and skill ranks and so on (good for your first character, in other words).

I think the Slayer class is not included in my book (I bought it in Mexico, spanish language), I'll check about it.

Thanks a lot for all your answers, guys!

D20pfsrd- Slayer

I don't think the "specific vs general" rule really applies here. It is more like two specifics.

Rub-Eta wrote:
Tumatan44 wrote:
Am I that far off base, that no GM understands every rule? If a table consensus is wrong should the GM take the blame?

No and No. I don't think even any one on the Paizo staff knows all the rules (there has been cases where the design team made a FAQ or an errata that they later realised contradicted other rules, which lead to reversing the FAQ/errata). There's literally thousands of pages with rules, only counting the Paizo official material.


The DM has the veto when it comes to on-the-spot rulings, but that doesn't mean the DM is to blame. The players can make an argument and give their point of view, but what the DM says is what goes (it's only when the DM enforces their way that players should be allowed to whine when s@~+ goes south). If they can't get by the fact that you made a mistake as a DM, they either need to take on the cape as DM or leave the group.

That sorta sounds like "GM entitlement" rage. You choosing to take that role on yourself isn't a "good reason" to not be capable at the role.

I have always subscribed to the "if I'm going to do something, I'm going to do it well" mentality. If you are incapable of doing the job, don't do it. This isn't to say mistakes won't be made, but you absolutely can mininize them, by knowing the rules of the game you chose to run. If you are a new GM, the party should know, and also be forgiving about it. If you say you will GM but aren't familiar with the rules, and fail to mention to that, that is pretty much on you.

Imbicatus wrote:
Feeblemind would stop you from casting SLAs. However, I'm not sure Break Enchantment would remove Feeblemind. On one hand, Feeblemind is an enchantment spell of 5th level. On the other, Feeblemind states it can only be removed by heal, limited wish, miracle, or wish.

The second paragraph in the spell states if it is a spell that cannot be removed by Dispel Magic or Stone to Flesh, it only works if the spell/effect is 5th or less. So looks legal.

As a GM you are taking a responsibility, part of that is to be fairly competent when it comes to the rules. As others have said, you might not be able to know all of them, but you absolutely should know all the regularly referenced rules. Be it skills, or combat or magic spells. You might be aiding the group to have fun, but that doesn't change the fact YOU are choosing to take that mantle upon yourself. Sure the PCs should know their abilities, but YOU are the one who is supposed to be able to tell them when they are wrong. You shouldn't have to stop the game to look it up, as you should already be aware of it.

That being said, you should absolutely look up all the classes your players are playing and be read up on what they are capable of. The majority of it is straightforward, a bunch of pluses and minuses to add to rolls. Some GMs require they have a current copy of the PCs characters so they can be aware of the items and abilities they have. You should also read ahead in the adventure to be aware of what they will run into and look up anything that might be "tricky" or that you don't feel 100% sure on.

As a GM, you are the only person who ends up having to do homework. You can't adjudicate the game if you don't know the rules. And consistency is key when running a game. I cannot stress that enough.

Rhazgul wrote:


I'm new in this world, just started last week. So, reading the Core Rules find the Assassin Class very interesting but says that I need to kill somebody to become an Assassin as a prerequisite.

Who I need to kill? An NPC, a Player's Character, a friend, a dog...?

Thanks for your answers.

First and foremost you should make sure your GM is okay with allowing Evil aligned characters. That is definitely not the norm for most tables due to the issues that crop up.

Wolin wrote:
There's more to a hit die than the size, is the thing. An extra hit die also impacts saves, and skill ranks. I hope my logic isn't quite that dodgy.

And all of those extras, are determined by the Type. Each Type has a preset BAB/Save/skill progression. Type determines it all when advancing racial HD.

Wolin wrote:

It's just an example. You've made your point. Type adjudicates racial hit dice.

Although since you did deny that such a thing is possible (without an ability to do it), you're going to have to agree that racial hit dice also define type. It's just you can have a type without racial hit dice. Hopefully you agree up to this point. This is one of the preliminary things to consider with the question I posed in the first place.

So, if you have no racial hit dice and for whatever reason your type is undefined, you can't use the racial hit dice to determine what your type is.

Do you now understand the initial question?

Those are contradictory statements, are you confused on something?

Type determines hit die. FULL STOP.

If you had HD and then gained a template that changed your type, ALL racial HD would be adjusted to the new type (barring exceptions).

This fact means HD never determine type. Ever.

When a creature or race is created, it has a type as part of its creation. Flip through any of the bestiaries to look. It is a core property of any "real" creature, and by "real" I mean creature that will do more than persist for a single specific purpose.

If the "creature" is a spell effect it has whatever properties the spell assigns it, no more, no less. As a spell it is pretty much the definition of "exception to the general rule(s)."

cartmanbeck wrote:
@Skylancer4: No changing race, and no refluffing, since this is for a PFS-legal character. It was just something fun that I came up with based on the use of an illusion to make her look like a succubus to fit into a demon-infested area.. she decided she liked the way she looked, and might enjoy becoming an actual succubus for a short time for some dalliances. :-P

Ah, okay. Playing a PFS legal adventure isn't the necessarily the same as actually playing PFS. That was what threw me.

Most items that grant access to just one form typically have other abilities to compensate (and probably end up being more expensive than the guidelines).

Price reduction is for limiting who can use it, as that makes the item less attractive in the group. Making an item that only changes to one shape to lower cost isn't grounds for a reduction. The shape is going to be be fully taken advantage of when used, it isn't a drawback. It is attempting to use the pricing guidelines to get the effect cheaper than it "normally" would be available. Which is why they are guidelines and have examples of how they don't work often.

Can you change your race?

You can be a gnomish sized Tiefling. Just fluff your traits and physical description to those similar to a Succubus.

You get your flavor and keep your size, and depending on on the variant Tiefling you use, might keep similar racial stats.

Edit: Actually there is this spell Angelic Aspect. Just refluff what the effects look like. It is from Champions of Purity, but there wasn't a counterpart on the Champions of Corruption. You could ask the GM if they are willing to convert it to an Evil version through Spell Research rules as well.

Any low level arcane magic can be bought as an item and UMD'd by an Oracle who focuses on CHA. Wands and potions being the obvious ones normally. But you could do scrolls easily enough as well.

A better way to look at it is, what arcane spells do you absolutely want? Trim the list down to necessities and see if it really is worth trying to get access to limited spell list opposed to consumables. Then depending on the list you can shave some off with the Samsaran Past Life alternate racial as well.

Matthew Downie wrote:

"if they apply different non-bonus effects to the same rules component, the most recent spell takes precedent."

It doesn't say the better one applies - it says to use the most recent one.

Soooooo... Graystone's worry is unwarranted. Even better, no confusion at all, just need to worry about the last thing cast. "Yay" for overthinking things.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Isonaroc wrote:
Goddity wrote:

Step 1. Learn high level mind control spells.

Step 2. Find a dragon.

Step 3. Profit.

Step 4. Dragon blows will save out of the water.

Step 5. Dragon incinerates you.

A large red dragon's will save is +10. If you can't beat that your caster was built poorly and chose all the wrong spells. They don't even have SR at that point. Not saying it should be that easy, but if you are a caster who regularly deals with spells that allow saves, +10 isn't a particularly high bar. Especially if you are preparing for the encounter.

graystone wrote:
Byakko wrote:

Cevah, it seems the threat range and threat multiplier are intended to be treated as "effects that apply to the same rules component or situation".

That's my interpretation, anyway.

That seems to be the case even though there are other things that treat it as separate rules elements so it seems oddly inconsistent. If they ARE to be treated as one rules element, that really should be spelled out so that things that modify range doesn't stack with multiplier effects.

I'm also unsure why the spell takes precedence in the stacking over Improved Critical. How do you determine which is the 'better' between 17–20/x2 vs 19–20/x3? Making critical a linked rules element leaves this up in the air. Until that's answered, this FAQ still makes as many questions as it answers.

Off the cuff, x3 is a better potential damage output. It may not happen as often, but it is definitely the higher damage output of the two when you crit.

Quairon Nailo wrote:

I was thinking about making an Elemental Ascetic, and i stumbled upon one dilema... RAW, unless i'm reading it wrong (which is not that unlikely, as english is not my first language), it looks like it's "Elemental Flurry" feature won't allow the kineticist to take feats which require "Flurry of Blows", but i feel like it should. Am i reading it wrong? Is it really that way? And, if it is, is it intentional?

PS: I play PFS, so please don't tell me to ask my GM. I know i'd allow it as a GM, but i need to know the official thing.

It think you are correct (unfortunately). It refers to the ability in use, for mechanics, but never states it counts as such. One of those, "we saved word count by likening it to an existing ability" abilities.

A single level dip into Monk would resolve any problems and eliminate any table variation for PFS of you really want to run the character. Though I'd probably go 2 levels for the BAB/Saves/Evasion/Bonus feat.

Quintain wrote:
Skylancer4 wrote:
Quintain wrote:
I've played all sorts of games. The problem isn't in the game system, it's the idea of having to play inside the box of another's imagination (and therefore limitations).

Isn't that pretty much every game that exists?

Even in the most loose or modular games there are still rules mechanics that are the "box" of someone's imagination. Limits of whatever inclination that provide the challenges for the game to have some sort of progression, that in turn drive the players to play.

The box can be constructed in such a way to allow for customization -- as well as being balanced.

But this box was never intended to be that. There are other boxes that would actually fit your desired "criteria" as it were.

It is like buying a moped and then asking why there aren't parts that let you do off road stunts with it. Ones the person with the dirt bike can.

Sure you can make addons or other rules sets, but there are systems that actually have that work already done and probably do so with much less disruption as they are intended parts of the system.

At a certain point you can make so much change that you really aren't playing the game anymore. I mean I enjoy the d20 system too, but I'm not going to try to shoe horn it into every possible configuration when I know there are better options.

MichaelCullen wrote:
Both are valid points from a balance standpoint, but don't help me much with conceptualizing why Giant Form spells are such a comparative high level. Heck with Undead Anatomy II you can be an undead giant with a 5th level spell. If they thought regeneration was too powerful they could have held off granting it until Giant Form II.

1) You are talking about someone else's sandbox. Occasionally you will find things that rub you the wrong way. Or don't make sense to you. Whether or not it makes sense to you is fairly irrelevant, it did make sense to them for whatever reason. Which leads to the next point...

2) That is what house rules are for.

(Also this isn't actually a rules question, probably more appropriate for General or Advice.)

MichaelCullen wrote:

I am having difficulty conceptualizing why Giant Form I is a 7th level spell and yet Form of the Dragon I and Beast Shape IV are only 6th.

Why is going from a medium humanoid to large humanoid more difficult than going from medium humanoid to large magical beast or to medium dragon?

Any thoughts out there?

It allows you to take advantage of all your equipment. Other shapes meld your gear into the form so you lose a lot of their benefits.

In 3.5 most of the shapes that caused problems (aka made your caster better than your fighter) were humanoids.

1 to 50 of 3,948 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2015 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email 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.