|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
I can assume there is more of a feeling of I have less control over events playing a pregen than a character I know. I would feel more comfortable failing using my own character that I have leveled since the outset and know fairly well than one I just picked and don't know how every piece of the watch works.
The idea above of unlocking the scenarios once a character hits 12th level might have a bit of merit if you move it to unlocking once that character is either retired or marked dead. It would however need a way to determine when that unlock occurs if you have a character who has a chronicle for playing it and a chronicle from a GM use or a replay. Possibly only unlocking them once you have either no active chronicles from it or track it only for the 1st play-through and only worry about when that chronicle is retired?
Keep in mind I am offering an outside opinion as I am not active in PFS.
Swashbuckler Finesse (Ex): At 1st level, a swashbuckler gains the benefit of the Weapon Finesse feat with light or one-handed piercing melee weapons, and she can use her Charisma score in place of her Intelligence score as a prerequisite for combat feats. This ability counts as having the Weapon Finesse feat for purpose of meeting feat prerequisites.
Gonna actually say this might work you gain the benefit of finesse with those weapons. That would be a clear ask your GM case and expect table variation in PFS case but I could actually see this being allowed.
But it doesn't change all longswords just the one. If instead you had an ability that allowed you to pick a type 1-h weapon and make it finessable then you would have something but the ability to make a single item of a type different doesn't make all weapons of that type different.
Looking at Mithril if you had a class feature that said "when wearing light or no armor" such as uncanny dodge for a rogue then mithril armor works. However if you had one that read "picky a type of light armor you suffer no Arcane spell failure while using it." then Mithril breastplates don't count.
True and a 5th level shocking grasp would do 5d6+10 but that is on one hit each. Magic missile isn't 1 hit it is up to 5 each dealing 1d4+1 thus the variance in how to apply it.
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Well a strict reading says "an arcane class you had before" So it would be reasonable to assume that any arcane class counts.
I will have to correct myself there you actually could use it that way I got confused and was remembering the 3.5 version which only gave extra spell slots.
Jiggy if you really want to have a laugh Google Grandline 3.5 it is a web comic that portrays One Piece as a DnD game.
Dave Justus wrote:
Actually it would simply require a special requirement that states this prestige class/feat/whatever is not available to drow/half-elves/or humans with that one feat.
Clearly there are two extremes that need to be avoided. On one end you have what is basically an arms race where only those players with high system mastery stand a chance. On the other end you have a situation where even combat aimed at high level characters rarely last more than one round. The question is where is the happy medium, and are we there now?
This is further exacerbated by the fact that a group can vary so much that a challenge to Group A is a cake walk for Group B and was just right for Group C.
Just based on my understanding of the rules I'll do my best here.
1. They don't those require you to take a type of weapon and chair and such aren't weapons. If a feat is simply active when wielding for instance a 1-h Bludgeoning weapon then your GM might allow it. (I would)
2. Not unless a character has a specific ability saying so which I don't think exist. If for instance you had a feat that said you treat a crowbar as a light club that would but otherwise no.
3. At current no and no.
Which is how I would rule it's just some people seem so hung up on the "what ever is most disadvantageous" line that I wonder if they would.
So, when the caster wants to hit someone in a lesser globe with his empowered fireball, it counts as a 5th level spell, but if he doesn't want to hit the person inside, it counts as a 3rd level spell. That's how it works, right?
That would be backwards it's 3rd level since penetration of the sphere would be beneficial. The real question is if my friends are in the Globe not a bad guy is it now a 5th level spell since hitting them is the more detrimental choice?
But its more than just saves or would that fireball penetrate a Lesser Globe?
I agree just I feel the use of level as the term here needs to be shored up and that might be something for someone to look at. In my example we use level three times and refer to 2 different numbers however the rod's text and the Globes match up perfectly both refer to spell level. That I believe is the crux of the arguement. Basicly we have a spell that has an actual level of 3rd using a slot that is 4th but the spell level (not the slot level since neither rods or globes look at that) is both higher than 3rd but lower than 4th at the same time until a particular effect is checked against it. That is where some clean up needs to be done. I agree the rods most likely were meant to use slot level not spell level and also to be applied last. I think the best answer would be to errata the rods to use slot level not spell level.
I guess its the wording of the Rods that is in most contention. The rods say what spell level they work with not what slot level they work with. Same as my Globe earlier. However because of the FAQ not only do meta-magic spells have a different slot level than their spell level but have 2 different spell levels based on what effect it comes into contact with.
Simply put an enlarged fireball is a 3rd level spell being cast with a 4th level slot. So if I want to use an ability to recall the used slot it has to work on 4th level spells slots. But if an enemy has a lesser globe of Invulnerability up then the spell doesn't hit because it's spell level is 3rd, however at the same time a lesser meta-magic rod which says it works on only 3rd level or lower spells can't work on it because it also is now being called a 4th level spell as well.
So spells have 2 levels if meta-magic is involved? And for x number of situations x can change based on what would be worst? That seems to be a flaw not just my issues with it.
Just gonna post my question and point of contention from the other thread. If it is as people are suggesting and 3 it really bothers me that spells can have 2 effective levels.
And that bothers me, a spell should have one final level period not a level in some state of flux that we don't know if it is A or B until it encounters a check on its level. I mean if the wizard in my example was readying to counter spell then his own unmodified fireball would be enough since the sorcerer's spell would be 3rd level when checking if something can counter it.
Thrown Weapons: Daggers, clubs, shortspears, spears, darts, javelins, throwing axes, light hammers, tridents, shuriken, and nets are thrown weapons. The wielder applies his Strength modifier to damage dealt by thrown weapons (except for splash weapons). It is possible to throw a weapon that isn't designed to be thrown (that is, a melee weapon that doesn't have a numeric entry in the Range column on Table: Weapons), and a character who does so takes a –4 penalty on the attack roll. Throwing a light or one-handed weapon is a standard action, while throwing a two-handed weapon is a full-round action. Regardless of the type of weapon, such an attack scores a threat only on a natural roll of 20 and deals double damage on a critical hit. Such a weapon has a range increment of 10 feet.
Based on the bold text I have I would allow it. The feat has no mention of melee but expect some variation since finesse is a prereq.
Yep thus possibly now having unforeseen consequences. But we can hope that it holds. At least until we have a several thousand post thread in which it gets repeatedly brought to the Dev teams attention.
i dont think it will be errat'd, considering rage cycling is built into the base class at level 17.
Still have to assume that we are doing it wrong. We thought that Monks could flurry with one weapon until it was "Clarified" in the middle of AoMF discussion. After a lengthy back and forth it was settled that enough people had been doing it "wrong" that it shouldn't be changed to needing two weapons.
And this is what happens when you have to patch a spell. Since Create pit originally didn't move you there was no need for such text. So its not really a case of this spell disproves it since Create Pit never would have had such text.
Yep and after the Flurry requires 2 hands debacle I often wonder just how long anything mundane shall last.
Lemmy Homebrew Corp wrote:
Can't seem to direct message you wanted to ask permission before I posted this link to a bleach D20 system board I am on as a great way to do alternate form Zanpaktou.
I'm pretty sure that's a different definition of "stupid" than the NPC villagers are using when determining how to interact with the PCs. How do you interact with the people you cited as examples? Do you match how folks have suggested having NPCs interact with "dump-statted" PCs?
And do you treat the opposite side of the coin with that much awe? if a 8 or 7 is really causing people to notice how weak/clumsy/frail/dumb/senseless/crass you are do you treat someone with a 14-15 as a god among men in their chosen field?
Steve Geddes wrote:
Do the goblins need to get off your lawn with their newfangled music?:P
My grievance still not getting to play more than once every month or two.
Deaf creatures are immune to audible bardic performances. So if you're inspiring courage to your allies and they all go deaf, you have a 20% chance to fail at giving the performance, but none of them can hear it so it wouldn't go through anyway.
Exactly here is a quote
bardic performance wrote:
If a bardic performance has audible components, the targets must be able to hear the bard for the performance to have any effect, and many such performances are language dependent (as noted in the description). A deaf bard has a 20% chance to fail when attempting to use a bardic performance with an audible component. If he fails this check, the attempt still counts against his daily limit. Deaf creatures are immune to bardic performances with audible components.
As we can see here if anyone fails their save no musical boost for them, if you fail your save then you have a 20% failure chance however what I am not sure on is if its a 20% chance to not be able to maintain each round or is it just to start one?
Bastard Sword wrote:
A bastard sword is about 4 feet in length, making it too large to use in one hand without special training; thus, it is an exotic weapon. A character can use a bastard sword two-handed as a martial weapon.
Sawtooth Saber wrote:
Description: A sawtoothed sabre may be used as a Martial Weapon (in which case it functions as a longsword), but if you have the feat Exotic Weapon Proficiency (sawtoothed sabre), you treat the weapon as if it were a light weapon for the purpose of two-weapon fighting—the sabre remains classified as a one-handed melee weapon for all other purposes.
Just to show a text difference between the bastard sword and a weapon that is similar but not exactly the same in having differing levels of proficiency.
Talonhawke, we (most of us) are pointing out just how much interpretation is assumed in the rules. If you fire a normal arrow from a +3 flaming bow, you have a +3 flaming arrow. If you shoot a +1 Holy arrow, you have a +3 flaming holy arrow. It's simple. Some argue otherwise. We are pointing out the absurdity of requiring the text to spell out everything.
I know but looking I actually can't even find rules that flaming would transfer over.
So now I am confused if nothing carries over to the arrow then is the arrow anything more than DR penetration? Do properties such as flaming or holy deal extra damage or are they only checked for things like DR and Regeneration?
pH unbalanced wrote:
SSSSSSHHHHHHH!!!!! no no no
Kirth Gersen wrote:
I may be missing it but where and what was Fast Recovery?
EDIT: Nevermind didn't think to look into feats.