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

Skylancer4's page

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber. 2,911 posts. No reviews. 1 list. No wishlists.


RSS

1 to 50 of 2,911 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber
Nyaa wrote:

Oh, I guess I shouldn't take that archetype and use the feat with martial maneuvers vanilla Paladin gets!

Wait a second...

Because the archetype is the only way to get maneuvers? Martial Training is a "thing" since the first PoW book, as well as multiclassing. Imagine that, options!


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber
Nyaa wrote:
Prince of Knives wrote:
Quote:
Paladin loses Lay on Hands.
Yep. Replaced with another ability.
Makes him unable to take Battle Fervor though, kinda counter-intuitive.

Only if you are, for some reason, operating on the assumption the paladin should have access to everything published in the book at the same time.

Archetypes prohibit feats that classes could use normally, fairly often. I don't see why warpaths and the like would be any different.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

Unfortunately real life and the game mechanics are hardly ever as neatly parallel as we would like, for numerous reasons. Real life doesn't have any bearing on RAW rulings and we cannot base answers on it.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber
Ross Byers wrote:
Douglas Muir 406 wrote:


Quote:
Plus, while they're only 2 HD, you can summon three of them with a single casting, and their gestalt ability allows nine of them to combine into a really nasty monster.
Hm, three of them could work pretty well, actually. Good catch.
This doesn't actually work. Lesser planar binding explicitly gets only one creature. (And when you do start using planar binding to get three 4-HD gophers instead of one 12-HD monster, keep in mind each needs its own magic circle.)

Was caught several posts up thread.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber
Kchaka wrote:
The Klar is a spiked light shield (shield bash:1d4 x2 P,light weapon) with a blade attached to it ("Klar" blade:1d6 x2 S,one-handed weapon). The blade is a "separate" weapon, it may or may not be masterwork (depending if you paid for it) and it can have it's own enchants. The Klar's blade can be a Black Blade. The shield can be enchanted separatly as a regular spiked light shield.

Link to relevant ruling or are you just stating your opinion on the subject?


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber
TOZ wrote:
Don't I count? :(

*pats poor link on the head*

Not having a build to actually compare/realize the intent, those classes could be meshed up to do a few things... Sorry I didn't realize off the bat that was your intent. It seemed the OP gravitated to the builds that were explained as opposed to looked into/figured out what they were regardless.

But don't worry, someone still cares about you little oradin!

*points to the "I <3 Oradins" bumper sticker on my wagon*


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

Well the only way to do it RAW (Rules as written) is Rule 0, which is "get the okay from the GM, and ask how much it will be" which moves into house rules and leaves the general purview of RAW as there are no written rules or tabled prices for those specific abilities.

The magic item write up states specifically some items don't follow the "guidelines" and when trying to figure out prices. How can you use items that don't follow the guidelines to reverse engineer due to the fact they don't actually follow the same rules. It is all guess work, possibilities and "undefined" for a reason (which is explained). You "make up" a price by subtracting what you know from the total, but it isn't actually RAW to do so. That ability doesn't exist except for that one instance.

Mainly because that is what the OP was asking originally.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

In game "counts as" isn't the same as "identically the same" each of the references also has the function of pointing to different damage ranges and material for purposes of use. Mechanically, a shield spike is different than a klar. Even though a klar counts as a shield with a shield spike in terms of the damage done and material it is made from.

The reason this difference matters is the FAQ states the black blade cannot be enhanced. The klar isn't a shield with a shield spike, it doesn't have distinct parts though it is like one. The klar doesn't have a shield spike to be enhanced separately strictly speaking. It is "all in one" so to speak.

Now a normal one, sure enhance the klar separately. Add things that can be added to shields or shield spikes. It counts as both so can take both types of enhancements unless there are outliers.

But that wasn't the question from the OP. The question was whether the Black blade could be enhanced like that. RAW and the FAQ state it cannot.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber
Zwordsman wrote:

Because the shield portion isn't techincally the blackblade. by the wording of equipment and how shield+shield spikes work and how blackblade is worded. Technically only the spike (or blade in a klar's situation as it counts the blade as spikes in it's text) is the blackblade.

This is one of those situations where the abilty was made without a corner case in it. Because without specific text the Klar falls under "shield with spikes" rules. A normal shield is both weapon and shield. But once you put spikes on it your unable to normally bash with it, and can only attack with the spikes.
** spoiler omitted **
They'er two different entities. By Raw anyway. So the shield techincally is breakable as well. Just as you can sunder a shield spikes or a shield but techincally not both at once. (though generally if you were to sunder the shield you wouldn't be able to use the shield spikes by how shield spikes attackes works)
It's something like how Double weapons work. Each portion is techincally a different weapon for all those purposes;despite the fact its one object.

this is very much the case of newer content conflicting with older abilities that were made prior to said content being created.

You used "technically" quite a bit there and I'm going to suggest you re think it.

"Technically" you dont need a shield spike to shield bash. It just improves/alters the damage when you use the shield in an offensive manner. So "technically" the shield being enchanted as offense or defense is the same item unless otherwise stated. The klar has no statement indicating the item is two distinct entities. It states it can be used in multiple ways. That is what we actually have, RAW.

The klar doesn't have a "shield part" or "weapon part", if it did it would be stated it did. And would probably be written up like a double weapon. The klar is a klar, and can just be used multiple ways. Like an unmodified shield, but mainly intended to be an offensive item where as a shield was mainly intended to be a defensive item. As such, a klar black blade would be unable to be given an shield enhancement via feats unless specifically ruled it was allowed in an ability/item write up due to the FAQ. At this point (barring another FAQ) RAW makes no distinction between weapon enhancement or armor/shield enhancements being added, it is simply improved via magus class abilities, spells, or other temporary improvements.

Essentially if you want to improve the defensive aspect of a black blade klar, you need to find a way to get the magus class to do it (which probably would be impossible as they would likely alter the same abilities as archetypes) or use temporary enhancements like magic weapon/vestments or the like to get what you were after.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

Officially it isn't allowed in PFS.

As a named item it is priced for balance for its specific abilities. Adding to it, can cause it to skew power wise. The sum of abilities added with given prices combined could be more powerful than the total price depending on the abilities. And to be honest this is why most people look into doing it.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

It would probably be more cost effective to have a 1st level wand of the spell and keep personal castings of it for times you need the extra abilities. That being said, not having a +1 weapon until 5th level would be... Disadvantagous to say the least.

And yes you could bump that up with the magus abilities, but then you run into (1) Using up the resource you'd be using to get your weapon out when you needed it most and (2) Possibly wasting that resource due to the target having SR or defenses vs illusion/shadows so being ineffective with your main weapon.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

The FAQ that states black blades are unable to be enhanced via anything besides the class abilities would keep it from being enhanced from an outside source (feats etc).

How are you trying to enchant it as a shield?


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber
Bardofcyberspace wrote:
That is a neat trick, but how does that allow me to cast a level one spell at will? I guess I coulduse it with spell recall. That would work,

And it wouldn't come online until 9th level at least. Your "main" weapon wouldn't be usable regularly until halfway through your adventuring career.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

I'm surprised no one mentioned the Oradin (Oracle/paladin multi class) as a potential build for tanking. Looks like the OP has made their decision and hasn't been back for awhile too bad.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

Talk to the GM about a custom magic item that allows you to use the spell a few times a day. Then maybe later on, make a staff of it? At low levels 3-5 times a day at 1 minute is more than enough for most if not all encounters you'd need it. Later game, the staff would allow you to cast it numerous times using your own stats and CL to cast it.

Most of the ways to do it wouldn't come on board until late game and require a good amount of resources to get working so probably wouldn't be what you are looking for.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

Also, you paraphrased (incompletely) in your opening post instead of quoted which could make a difference.

d20pfsrd: Cybertech wrote:


Each piece of cybertech has an implantation value that indicates how invasive the implant is. The total combined implantation values of all cybertech implanted in a single creature can't exceed either that creature's Constitution score or Intelligence score—a creature's Constitution sets the physical limit of what its body can accept in the form of cybernetic implants, while the creature's Intelligence sets the mental limit of what its brain can control. An implants whose implantation value would cause the total to exceed either of these two scores does not function but still takes up a body slot. In addition, as long as a character has cybernetic implants installed whose combined implantation exceeds his Constitution or Intelligence, he takes a -4 penalty on all saving throws.

A creature with neither a Constitution score nor an Intelligence score cannot receive benefits from cybertech, but a creature with only one of these scores can.

It is dependent on the lowest score of the two, not just constitution, normally. For undead who don't have the score at all that the lowest score would be intelligence by default. At least by RAW.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber
Drejk wrote:
Skylancer4 wrote:
Drejk wrote:
Actually we have quite explicit statement that magic and technology mix with each other quite well in Pathfinder default setting: technology devices can be made into magic items, already mentioned Eoxian liches and neigbourhood Vercites combine magic and technology and produce various devices and augmentations.
Does it say anything about undead skeletons running around with cybernetic muscles? Or undead being augmented by cybernetics in general?
Yes. Which part of my earlier post: "Also, bone sages (Eoxian liches) are explicitly stated to sometimes augment their undead bodies with robotic parts." is hard to read? I have my Distant Worlds open at the moment and it says about bonesages sometimes using robotic replacement parts. Page 29, right column, near the bottom.

Great so we have fluff (which isn't always backed by crunch/rules) and just may be plot driven (aka "special") and not something that is supposed to be allowed normally, or at all outside the stated exception.

In absence of written rules to cover the point, ask the GM what to do. If you are the GM make the decision due to lack of written rules. We don't have a definitive answer, we have flavor text suggesting it is possible, but nothing covering the situation due to it's differences from the "norm" that the rules do cover. Flavor text isn't the same as written rules, they often dont "mesh" this isn't anything new.

Again I'm not saying it is or isn't possible, just the rules don't give details on what is happening in such a case, and anything being suggested to do anything besides what the rules say, is opinion and conjecture, which could go either way. But apparently that is "hard" for you to "read."


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber
Drejk wrote:
Actually we have quite explicit statement that magic and technology mix with each other quite well in Pathfinder default setting: technology devices can be made into magic items, already mentioned Eoxian liches and neigbourhood Vercites combine magic and technology and produce various devices and augmentations.

Does it say anything about undead skeletons running around with cybernetic muscles? Or undead being augmented by cybernetics in general? In guessing not (as you are here asking).

Mixing magic and technology is common, creatures imbedding technology into an otherwise magical or mystical force, or their bodies (that were used to maniputlate those forces) is where the 'hiccups' often occur. Not saying it isn't intended or that it is not possible, just saying we don't know. Thus your questions.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber
AbsolutGrndZer0 wrote:
Pathfinder isn't Shadowrun. Shadowrun's rules make it clear that cybernetics and magic don't mix. But again, Pathfinder isn't Shadowrun.

Shadowrun isn't the only game, though it might be the first that comes to mind for some. Rifts is another, Robotech is a third, various fantasy writing does the same. We're talking a niche ruleset with little background. What is clear is that we don't have enough in the rules to answer the question for this instance.

We don't have rules for what happens, so it is all guess work. Your opinion is as valid as mine, which is as valid as the next person's.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber
Vera Gemini wrote:
Yes, they would substitute Charisma for Constitution, as per standard undead rules.

Problem is, they don't.

PRD wrote:


No Constitution score. Undead use their Charisma score in place of their Constitution score when calculating hit points, Fortitude saves, and any special ability that relies on Constitution (such as when calculating a breath weapon's DC).

Cybernetics aren't hit points, fortitude saves or a special ability. They are gear. Quite often in games cybernetics and magic are antiethical to each other and cause problems if outright aren't even allowed to be combined. It would be quite possible that undead aren't even allowed to have cybernetics due to no constitution score. They could interfere with the magic that sustains the undead.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber
Byakko wrote:

Adding another question that's come up:

Quote:

Twin Soul (Su)

...
This replaces the witch’s major hex at 10th-level.
...
Major Hexes: The following major hex complements the beast-bonded archetype: beast eye.

15) Can a Beast-Bonded Witch take Major Hexes?
Since it recommends taking a major hex, this seems to imply that the intent was to only give up the 10th level major hex, and the witch can take major hexes at level 12+ or with the Extra Hex feat. But as written, it appears the beast-bonded witch loses all access to major hexes.

If that is all the pertinent information, how does that limit you from ever taking major hexes again?

It doesn't say your 10th level and every major hex after that point (like some abilities state you lose your level x, y, z feats for them). It states you lose that particular level's hex. I'm fairly sure you can read the archetype rules/FAQs/errata to answer that one easily enough that it doesn't deserve to be on the list.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

Society adventures maybe worth looking into, they are meant to be played in a set amount of time (probably longer than you have, so you could get more than one session out of them, my guess would be 2 or 3 worth) and are set up in a more linear fashion to facilate that from the one or two I've read. Also due to them being meant for organized play the expectations for the adventures are more "loose" most of the time. You never know what the party composition will be which may make it more forgiving for the players you are introducing to the game. I believe that they are categorized and some of them are loosely linked as well. Also, they are relatively inexpensive which is also a plus in a situation like yours.

Another option, the adventure paths. These are full blown adventures from level 1 to 16+. Each book leads from one to the next and are more "open" in the way of progression. This is good and bad, it let's you have more freedom to poke around, explore and learn about what is going on (there is a TON of background information to be found typically if that is what your group is into). The bad is, sometimes the group can flounder trying to figure out what to do next because there are more options. Each book as several encounters that can be run as quickly or as slowly as you want to go, and is all about building up to the next book so overall is is that "epic story" feel when you get done. Unfortunately, they are going to be more expensive as well. I want to say each book of the AP is roughly $20 and there are 6 books in every AP up to the most recent. That being said, they are just as much fun to read through as play as a GM. With so much going on, the back story that the players may not know about, things happening which come to fruition later, it is often like reading a good book which helps you do the sometimes boring job of GM.

Also as you are using basic rules, you could always take and look up older free modules and rewrite them to PFRPG. That way you could customize the adventure to the players and know exactly what to expect or how to tweak them for your group.

Regardless of what you do, I would always suggest reading through the adventure in its entirety at a least once just so you have an idea of how things "should" progress. You would be able to see "problem areas" that might occur for the players and figure out how best to gloss over or deal with them when the party gets there.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

Dreamscarred Press with psionics might do a much better job of filling the role honestly. Power points means he/she can decide how much or little they want to invest into a power when they use it so it has a very different feel compared to a prepared caster. Also because of the wide range of abilities they are interested in, there are quite a few niche classes/archetypes that are more easily filled vs shoehorning with some other classes.

Case in point, here is a power that does exactly what you are looking for.

Everyman:
Http://www.d20pfsrd.com/psionics-unleashed/psionic-powers/e/everyman

Psychic warrior has access to it, which is one of the more martial classes in the book. So they wouldn't be a slouch in combat if they didn't want to be.

Not saying investigator isn't a good option, but I'm betting that the character concept they are envisioning will be much more readily available through a class like psychic warrior. Built to be a combat chassis with your choice of combat or utility powers. And if you didn't want to play around with power points there is the class Aegis, which while being a "psionic" class can pretty much be non-psionic due to the fact it is basically all class abilities you can choose from that are self contained on the write up of the class. It has full BAB as well as a very wide variety of abilities to choose from. It is basically what the summoner(synth) should have been, fully thought out, fleshed out and balanced.

You should at least read through both of the classes before deciding to go investigator for sure.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

There is no need to repost, if it is incorrectly placed the Paizo forum mods will move it.

The main reason it doesn't belong in the rules forum is there are no hard rules for it. Spell research, custom magic items or anything that the rules may say can happen but say "check with your GM" means it is open to interpretation. That is why you're better off in the suggestions/house rules/advice forums. No one can give you an answer besides your GM.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

I would say, expect table variance. The eidolon isn't "defined" when it isn't around and the only thing we have to rely on is flavor text in this regard.

RAW, it is around when the summoner calls it. The item effect you are looking for takes 24 hours to gain. So if you manage to keep it summoned for the 24 hours you are golden. The moment the eidolon "ceases" is where you can expect the variance. You can flavor it as them lounging around in another dimension, but you can aso flavor it as not existing at all until summoned.

If you want to pursue the build, look into things that will remove your need to sleep or the like. That way you have what you want "effectively" for the period you are adventuring. For PFS, I would error on the side of caution, just because you may run into a GM who won't let do it.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

Wrong forum for this, a better choice would be house rules/suggestions or advice.
The rules forum is intended for questions on the published rules.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber
LazarX wrote:
I'm pretty sure that that Warpriests are only treated as full BAB for the purpose of qualifying for those feats. They don't shift into full BAB characters on USING them. The whole point of the WarPriest revision was to lock them into 3/4 BAB for combat purposes, and make up for it with self buffs.

I'm more than "sure," the whole paragraph is about qualifying for feats. Yay for taking things out of context I guess.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

To be fair, a dispel magic can cause all sorts of havoc when it comes to "permanent" spells. Ran into a caster who tossed an AoE dispel to debuff the party? Go down the list of items and effects to see what sticks around, lost a "permanent" spell? Going to need to do it again.

And this isn't even really "targeting" you out, it is just sound tactics for any intelligent/experienced caster who might be outnumbered by the party. Or any creature, summoned by a caster, who might have the ability for that matter.

I'm fairly certain our group would be fine with you having it, just don't expect to stop the party every time something happens and you need to redo the spells. And expect to "share" when there is downtime ;)


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

They wouldn't get the spells as they are listed, but the cure and wound spells from the words list I would imagine.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber
Ashmit wrote:

@Skylancer4: Ah I see. You're right, this is the rules section, not suggestions/homebrew.

I also see what you're saying as far as balance wise. It would be a bit much now that I think of it to have let's say three of these things that only get disabled.

So in conclusion, let me get this straight. It acts as a regulat creature as far as HP and AC. That particular construct cannot be animated again, the same as an undead and the player must do the whole process over again?

There is nothing in the rules that says that is the case, there is nothing that doesn't say it, for animated objects in particular. The parallel rules for the other similar cases say you cannot, so that is what I would go with in our games.

But the rest is correct. You essentially get another creature for the casting of the spell. Due to the amount of money you would have to spend to make it permanent and the vulnerability to Dispel Magic, the spell Animate Object is often a poor choice to get a "companion" unless there is a specific reason for it.

Your best bet is the construct creation rules, they have fleshed out the core rules a little bit since the original bestiary. I think there is an option for adding intelligence via a brain jar or some such. The nice thing about the game rules is, you can alter the "fluff" or flavor text as you need to fit your situation. Just because the rules say "brain in a jar" doesn't necessarily mean it has to be that, as long as the rules mechanics are still in place using an alternate explanation that doesn't give more benefit or drawback, it doesn't really matter how it is described.

The major drawback to constructs, is they don't advance. So even if you keep them alive during your adventures, eventually they are ineffective and the gold used is essentially "lost" and unrecoverable. Just something to keep in mind.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber
Ashmit wrote:
So Animate Object, permanent would need to be recast on it?

EDIT: Actually you cannot animate a magical object, an intelligent suit of armor would not be a valid target for the spell. You would have to look into the construct creation rules for an intelligent construct.//

Yes, also I believe there is a ruling indicating that once a corpse is used in to create an undead, if the undead creature is destroyed. The corpse cannot be used to make an undead creature again. It would make sense to apply that to your situation as well.

In general animated objects and constructs are a "gold sink" due to the fact they allow you to bypass action economy, which is a large part of the game rule set. Getting two or more sets of action is a HUGE benefit balance wise. That is why there are rather strict limitations on classes that get companions or additional "help" (familiars and the like).

Once an undead creature is destroyed, the corpse is so mangled and beaten up it is useless for further undead creation. Once you put the materials together for a golem, when it is destroyed you still need to collect a whole set of materials for a new one. Following the existing rules trend, it is quite possible that the animated object used could be considered destroyed after being used by the spell due to it being roughly treated in a way it wasn't intended to be (things get destroyed by misuse all the time in reality).


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber
Ashmit wrote:

@Jerra: Alright? I dont really know why you felt the need to tell me it doesnt matter if it seems odd to me or not... But thanks?

I dont know. I think I'd rule it it becomes disabled until fully repaired. Unless of course it does actually get destroyed that normal armor most likely would.

It was a blunt way of saying, "you are asking what happens in the rules forum" and probably could have been phrased better. The rules tend to have oddities that don't make sense or sit well with people, but they are the rules. Once you start getting into "I don't think it should work that way" you start heading into suggestions/homebrew territory about how you think it should work. The rules forum is for hashing out how it does work, then once you've established that, you can start a thread in the advice or suggestions forum if you need to work on an alternate rules.

There are certain creature types that just "die" at 0 hit points, constructs and undead being the common ones. Constructs typically aren't living creatures and have no metabolic system, so they stop "being" once they hit that point. The forces that held them together, destroyed and dispersed. Incidentally, they tend to get bonus hp (depending on size) to make up for that as well if I remember correctly.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber
thunderbeard wrote:

The ranger spell Instant Enemy reads:

Quote:
With this spell you designate the target as your favored enemy for the remainder of its duration. Select one of your favored enemy types. For the duration of the spell, you treat the target as if it were that type of favored enemy for all purposes.

With the kicker being "for all purposes." Does this mean that my ranger with a favored enemy: undead and an Amethyst Pyramid ioun stone can use Instant Enemy to become invisible to any one target?

Other possible abuses:
-With favored enemy (animal), use Animal Growth as a far more powerful substitute for Enlarge Person.
-Use Speak with Plants/Animals as a substitute for Tongues
-Use Charm Animal/Command Plants to be a backup bard
-Hold Animal
-Make an ooze vulnerable to critical hits by changing its type

Unless I am (quite possibly!) reading this wrong.

Read the spell block, it is an enchantment not a transmutation or such. Mechanically it fools your character into thinking the opponent is a favored enemy so you can use your abilities on it. The actual target suffers or changes in no way, unless it pertains to your characters abilities based off of favored enemy class ability.

If the target is an invalid target to the spell you cast, it fizzles as normal.

So to answer your question, no it isn't as broken as you figured it might be.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

Mind you, none of this is for PFRPG but, Iron Kingdoms will always have a special place in my heart I believe. I truly loved the Witchfire trilogy adventure, it was a very entertaining read as the GM and a good run for the players. I actually bought twice, originally as pdf and then a print set. I never minded fire arms or the steam punk genre either so take that into consideration. It was a nice take on the mix of fantasy and steam punk, so the campaign is worth reading over to mine for ideas.

Chaositech is another 3pp from 3.5 that would be worth looking at if you were just looking for something strange and or new to toss at your players. Probably could be ported over with little fuss as it wasn't particularly over the top power wise from what I remember. If anything it might need to be tweaked up at this point.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber
Cevah wrote:

What happens if your Natural-1 exceeds the CMD by 10?

Your attack fails, yet is sufficient to cause the loss of two items.
RAW, the exceed by 10 does not require a successful attack (i.e. a 1).
RAI, I would say nat 1 = nothing happens except maybe drop your weapon.

/cevah

Mechanically a 1 isn't an attack, it would be a miss.

General English, yes you made an attack. Mechanically the roll makes the determination of what the proposed action is "resolved" as. 1 would be a miss, 20 would be a successful attack. The range of numbers between with modifiers compared to the defensive statistic with modifiers determines the outcome.

In other words the proposed action isn't determined until after the roll.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber
LoneKnave wrote:
Question: is rhino charge an extraordinary ability? Or only class abilities get pegged like that?

It is a feat as mentioned by the OP and linked to a bit further down.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber
Nyaa wrote:
Speaking of which, why didn't Practiced Spellcaster make it into PF?

It did... As a trait. Look up Magical Knack.

@Why people don't play MT build often:
MT builds tend to require A LOT of book keeping. You need to be aware of twice as many spell lists that possibly grow with each book published. Having to dig through for each spell, or make copies of each spell you have access to just in case you might need it... Can get annoying. Sometimes convenience and laziness account for class choices.

Also probably less of an issue, having to pay for spells to get them into your spell book (or equivalent) can get costly. PrC classes don't automatically provide spells as you level for wizards and the like. Especially as a "toolbox" type of caster who want a wide range of spells, this could push expenditures up quite a bit.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

Weapon finesse isn't something you take for specific weapon types. It works on unarmed strikes or touch attacks because they are listed as light weapons. Or are you talking about Weapon Focus?

A rod is a type of magic item, it isn't a light weapon (or any type of weapon) unless it is stated to work as such. Weapon finesse wouldn't help "normally" unless that qualification was made.

-----

The rod would not be able to be used to make an AoO. When an item ability or use has no stated action cost, the default is a standard action. This would prevent you using it to make multiple attacks or AoO's.

-----

Using a rod to deliver attacks as per its ability is completely different than using the rod as a weapon. Even the rods that state they can be used in such a way aren't actually weapons, they just can be used that way with specific abilities. As it isn't a real weapon it is just something that can be used like one, you would be unable to enhance it as such.

-----

I guess unless the rod states it is made out of a specific material or has a specific appearance it could be made out of a custom material. But as you said, it would make no difference. I would imagine most if not all of the weapon-like rods have specific details of what it is made out of, that prevents you from making them out of other materials. This one states what it looks like so as a GM I wouldn't have to say anything else would be a house rule.

-----

SR wouldn't come into play, cold resistance would come into play.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber
Zwordsman wrote:

I've had one before.

there ended up being a mage who uses magic weapon spell when it's noticed on various people. Doesn't mess with the wealth either.
wand of magic missle that "happens" to be nearly empty when they die. it makes life a little scarier. granted you can hide underground awfullly easy.

Hrm.. I can't remember but is channeling blocked by substances? otherwise it might be eating an enemy cleric's channel whlie underground

Line of effect would be blocked by walls/floors.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber
Can'tFindthePath wrote:
pickin_grinnin wrote:
Skylancer4 wrote:
pickin_grinnin wrote:
Make sure that at least one party member has the capability to heal the other players. Trust me on that one.
That should go for every group, and without saying should it not?
Yes, but doubly so for this one.

I think the point of pickin's comment, and certainly my view, is that it is really easy to get the ability to heal with a good aligned divine class. They pretty much all have it, even if they don't want it.

But, when you go dark side, it becomes a chore that you have to plan for. And even then, you can never match the healing power of goodies....unless your party is all undead.

We've had multiple successful parties that relied on wands of CLW for the first 3-5 levels before worrying about spells or anything else. In combat healing is superfluous assuming you are intelligent enough to avoid it being needed, aka don't so stupid stuff that might get you killed regularly.

Post those levels there were few if any problems getting healing as needed.

I guess my point is, being evil doesn't mean healing is more important than when in a good party. Alignment is irrelevant as even a "good" party can function without spontaneously casting cure spells or channeling energy.

Healing is good for any party, it being an evil party doesn't somehow make it and even better idea or more important. Channel positive energy without selective channeling is a liability in most cases (in combat). You have to maneuver to not HELP the opponent in such cases. Out of combat the "good guys" will definitely have a possible edge in healing. In combat if you are using cure spells, you are typically fighting a losing battle as those spell slots could be used in other more useful and effective ways. As often as not, letting your ally stay unconscious for 2 rounds while you use the spell to end the fight faster is a better choice than wasting the action and spell slot on the heal and possibly provoking an AoO from casting. End the fight faster and heal out of combat using items that are cheap and renewable.

It isn't about alignment, it is about playing smart and catering to the group make up, using tactics.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber
TheTheos wrote:

AFAIK it is legal, though you would have to set more specific trigger.

Though I'm not sure what would happen if you set trigger "A does anything" and A charges you. Then you 2 would simultaneously charge each other - which is a bit strange.

Your readied action would happen before their charge, your charge would go through, possibly ruining their charge by blocking the direction they were planning on going.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

You'd have to consult the GM. Readied actions can be ridiculous to adjudicate at times. "Anyone attacks" could triggered by your allies attacking. Our personal game requires a more specific trigger to try and keep things more sane.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

Actually there is a more recent thread where one of the revs has explained why it hasn't been FAQ'd. They are trying to decide what to do about the one or two instances that don't fit the existing tables and make a mess of a unified set. They are hoping to figure out the least impacting way to go forward with it if something does needed to be errata'd.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber
Malag wrote:
Skylancer4 wrote:
Malag wrote:

Generally, you can't cast stealthy, but you could go behind a corner of a building a cast spell there hoping that nobody will hear or notice you. Distance Perception modifiers still apply in that sense.

Adam

The closest we have is sniping. Pretty much the only way to attack and maintain stealth in the core book. You start hidden, make an attack and can make a stealth check (-20?) after the attack to maintain stealth. Problem is putting the skill points into stealth for most casters. Invisibility will give a nice bonus but will fail as soon as you make an attack (which is where stealth fails as well, making an attack roll), so the stealth roll following to maintain being hidden will be rather rough.

It's not sniping. It's spell casting, so you can't attempt Stealth check, but casting a spell from 200 ft. distance would most likely incur some Perception check to notice spell caster.

There could be some Stealth check involved if the cast spell is Silent but this is more in domain of RAI, not RAW. I believe at least that reasonable GM might grant you a Stealth check under those conditions since there is little difference at that point between regular or spell based attack.

Adam

I didn't say it did work, I said the closest thing we have to hiding an attack was sniping in the CRB.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber
carnal wrote:
Now i have a scenario that i might be in where i am a diminutive spider on a ceiling casting a spell against a single sleeping opponent. would i get any stealth spells from being so small and the target sleeping or would they just wake up.

They will get a perception role against you casting, sounds of combat with a penalty for sleeping would be my guess.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber
WilliamInnocent wrote:
I didnt think of trying to work around the lycanthrope muzzle as a draconic muzzle.

One of the great things about "fluff" is that it is malleable. If your GM is willing to work with you, changing the "details" is hardly ever an issue as the mechanics aren't changing, so "balance" isn't being altered.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber
Shane LeRose wrote:

You can finesse unarmed strike

Touch attacks can be delivered via unarmed strike

When you melee spell touch someone it's with you unarmed limb.

No, this is not explicitly spelled out. It doesn't have to be.

You can finesse unarmed strikes, correct. Touch attacks aren't normal melee attacks however, they are attacks made with a held charge against a touch AC.

Held charges can be delivered via unarmed strikes, but you aren't making a touch attack at that point, you are making an unarmed strike vs full AC. Two different things.

It is apples and oranges, so yes it should be explicitly called out if it works that way.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber
Malag wrote:

Generally, you can't cast stealthy, but you could go behind a corner of a building a cast spell there hoping that nobody will hear or notice you. Distance Perception modifiers still apply in that sense.

Adam

The closest we have is sniping. Pretty much the only way to attack and maintain stealth in the core book. You start hidden, make an attack and can make a stealth check (-20?) after the attack to maintain stealth. Problem is putting the skill points into stealth for most casters. Invisibility will give a nice bonus but will fail as soon as you make an attack (which is where stealth fails as well, making an attack roll), so the stealth roll following to maintain being hidden will be rather rough.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber
Paulicus wrote:

There are some examples in PFS scenarios of using bluff to disguise spells casting as "singing and dancing," though as others have said it's not technically 'in the rules.'

Unless you're in PFS your GM can just make up a simple system for it though. Bluff, Sleight of Hand, maybe even disguise are skills that could be useful, depending on how you're trying to do it. Silent/still spell metamagic feats and eschew materials may also prove useful.

I think arcane tricksters get an ability to hide spellcasting a few times per day.

There's a feat called Spellsong that lets bards hide their spells with a perform check. Another feat called Secret Signs lets you hide the somatic components of a spell with sleight of hand.

edit- you could also simply turn invisible and use silent spell.

Casting an offensive spell is still an attack and would break the invisibility I believe.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber
Matthew Downie wrote:

Freedom of Movement states that it allows you to move and attack normally for the duration of the spell. You could make a case that, RAW, it temporarily cures the dead condition. Whether it works on difficult terrain, paralyzing poison, and so forth, has been debated for years in past without any conclusive arguments provided by either side.

The idea that it is effective against difficult terrain is quite common and not "on the far outskirts of what anyone would realistically rule".

Again, I will disagree given the wording of the spell. Normal is normal, as in the "normal" rules apply given no explicit exemptions or exceptions as we are dealing with an "exception based" rule system. If you can supply errata or FAQs in support of the spell countering difficult terrain that isn't altered magically, naturally occurring difficult terrain, or any number of other "normal" situations that would occur that aren't specifically stated to be otherwise altered in the spell that text I would be happy to discuss those.

Otherwise it is right up there with the rather ridiculous notion that walls are impediments to movement and so the spell allows you to bypass them. It doesn't take much in the way of imagination or intelligence to come up with tangential cases and link them together to justify what you think should happen. Those same links can be pushed to unreasonable lengths because we want something to work a certain way because of wording vagueness that might have been intended to NOT overly limit the spells effects.

As this is the rules forum I'd like to keep to what the spell says, not put things in the writers mouth or "read into" it too much. I'm not saying it is impossible, but I am definitely saying it takes some "creative thinking" and leaps of "logic" to get from the words on the page start, to where some of the suggestions we've just heard are.

1 to 50 of 2,911 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2015 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.