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

Tarantula's page

2,539 posts. No reviews. 1 list. No wishlists.

1 to 50 of 178 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
taldanrebel2187 wrote:

Do we really think the game developers intended to give level 4 magus a pounce ability? Sorry guys this is common sense.

If the spell text trumps full attack you get a single attack as per the spell. There are no similar spells of similar level and strength. RAI seems clear here. It was intended to provide magus a charge ability with a bonus attack. Not pounce.

No, they intended for the magus to be able to cast a spell to gain all of its benefits, as well as get a full attack action.

So the magus as a full-round declares spell combat. He casts bladed dash.
He gets to move up to 30 feet in a straight line, and attack one creature along that line. He then gets to finish his spell combat, which is his full-attack sequence.

He alternately could cast any other level 2 magus spell he knew and had prepared, and gain those benefits instead.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
_Ozy_ wrote:
Tarantula wrote:

There are plenty of examples of arrow nocked on a bow held in one hand. You only need the 2nd hand for actually firing/reloading the bow.
Do you have any Pathfinder examples where having an arrow at the ready provides any mechanical difference compared to free action drawing?

Sure. You have to spend a free action to draw an arrow and reload the bow prior to shooting. If someone readied an action for "when he draws an arrow I sunder his quiver" then you would not be able to shoot unless you had some other source of arrows. If the bow was already loaded, you would have gotten to shoot once, then draw an arrow which would have triggered the readied action.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The tentacles cannot see. Therefore the target is not invisible with respect to the tentacles. Thus invisibility has no effect in respect to the tentacles. The same way that being invisible doesn't give you a 50% miss chance for being in the area of any other spell.


Ignoring Concealment: Concealment isn't always effective. An area of dim lighting or darkness doesn't provide any concealment against an opponent with darkvision. Characters with low-light vision can see clearly for a greater distance than other characters with the same light source. Although invisibility provides total concealment, sighted opponents may still make Perception checks to notice the location of an invisible character. An invisible character gains a +20 bonus on Stealth checks if moving, or a +40 bonus on Stealth checks when not moving (even though opponents can't see you, they might be able to figure out where you are from other visual or auditory clues).

Varying Degrees of Concealment: Certain situations may provide more or less than typical concealment, and modify the miss chance accordingly.

The fact that the tentacles affect all creatures in the area, not by sight, makes it pretty clear they aren't seeing a creature, so in respect to the tentacles, there is no concealment.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
_Ozy_ wrote:
Tarantula wrote:

Reload implies that it was previously loaded.

If they intended that you could load the bow as part of the AoO, they would have said "load" not "reload".

Reload implies nothing of the sort. In fact, there is no difference in pathfinder:

In english, you cannot reload something until it has been loaded. Once loaded, then you can reload the thing.

_Ozy_ wrote:

All reloads are 'loads'. In fact, how could it be anything but the same? If I shot a bow last round, am I 'loading' it or 'reloading' it if I shoot again this round? What if I shot it 1 minute ago, or 10?

What is the time cutoff for your word 'previously' which turns loading into reloading? There is none, they are the exact same action.

Yes, all reloads are loads, that is what the word means. "Load again." The FAQ using the word reload implies that they had in mind that the bow was loaded, and that you are firing it, and reloading it so that it is ready for the next attack of opportunity. The FAQ question is if multiple attacks can be made with a bow. The answer was yes, because you can reload the bow as part of the attack. If the bow isn't loaded, then you can't make an attack. If you can't make an attack, then you can't reload it as part of that attack.

So, you have a loaded bow. Someone provokes. You shoot them, and reload the bow as a free action. Someone else provokes, you shoot them, and reload as a free action.


You have an unloaded bow. Someone provokes. You can't attack because you are not loaded, you can't take a free action to reload because you are not attacking.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Reload implies that it was previously loaded.

If they intended that you could load the bow as part of the AoO, they would have said "load" not "reload".

1 person marked this as a favorite.

RAW: Its not defined so I'd default to Line of effect.

Personally I'd houserule you have to be able to make an attack into the square the enemy is in. You could feint with a ranged weapon, by drawing back and pointing toward the enemy for example, or with a melee weapon by faking a swing. I don't see how you could feint outside of your reach without a weapon though.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Grey_Mage wrote:

Thank you for the lengthy replies. My contention was wands being declared a weapon only to qualify for the exception for drawing on the move. My argument was it's not a weapon, but I understand you all are not declaring it a weapon-like object for drawing, you are declaring it a weapon outright along with anything else.

This is a slippery slope I'm not entirely comfortable with, but not sure why. Maybe it's all the Haversacks I bought that are unneeded under that interpretation. Perhaps it's because it benefits PC's more than NPC's who are more likely to use potions rather than wands, but there are posters here saying they are a weapon to. I think they would have to be to maintain the proper balance. If not my NPC's will favor wands for the same reason and my PC's will be burdened with lots of wands with only a few charges each, overwhelming any "readied slots" but that will cheapen them.

Haversacks let you 1) have a stored item retrieved with a move action (even in a really full backpack)

2) not provoke for drawing whatever it is you are pulling out
3) Reduce carried weight because it is all extradimensional

Versus weapons and weapon-like draw as move which
1) are only a move action to draw
2) don't provoke because they are weapon like
3) MUST be within "easy reach". A condition determined by agreement with the player/GM with reasonable limits on it

Haversack basically makes anything you put in it "easy reach" but you can't combine drawing from the haversack with a move action. While "easy reach" is determined by the player and GM as to what they like in their game.

I don't see overlap between the two.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
The Human Diversion wrote:
Tarantula wrote:
How many swings do you give the cockroach before its "not a weapon"? Cause, a potion bottle might take three or five...
I can kill a roach with a Mio bottle, and that's gotta be a bit smaller than a potion bottle in fantasy RPG settings. Doesn't matter if it'll shatter on first swing, if you can draw a spiked chain or a warhammer as part of a move, there's no reason in my sad little mind why you can't draw a scroll or a potion as part of a move as long as it's not stowed in a backpack or bag.

I just want to be clear, I am in full agreement with you.

Not just for killing a cockroach, but really, if anything could potentially be used as a weapon, and reasonably stored in a way that is readily accessible.

Really, I say write down where things are stored on your character sheet. If you have a large amount of things, let your GM know. If you're on such completely different pages from your GM as to what is "reasonable" then once it comes up, have a chat, and go over what you have readily accessible. Problem solved.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
lorenlord wrote:
Devilkiller wrote:
I played a gnome alchemist once too. He failed a Will save and was compelled to blow up the party's Oracle. I know which PC I'd rather travel with.


Yeah, once I got him flying and either dropping bombs that exploded in a 20' radius or turned into 80' long strafes, the party (and the townsfolk) got really nervous lol.

I also once had a gnome alchemist. Our party barbarian failed a will save and became confused and obliterated him in a combat. The party later sent him out on a funeral pyre.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Amrel wrote:
Claxon wrote:
Dustyboy wrote:

Well if unarmed strike is in the monk category, and taking crusader's flurry with lance.. Would that not extend pummeling charge to lances?

No. Pummeling Charge/Style is specified only to work with Unarmed Strikes. The only possible way to make it work would be Martial Versatility. However, since Pummeling Style isn't a feat that you choose a weapon to work with, it just happens to be restricted to unarmed strikes only, I don't think that works either.

You can make a pummeling charge while mounted, but you can't use a lance.

Actually it just says "a feat that applies to a specific weapon." And pummeling strike applies specifically to unarmrd strikes. It does not have to be a feat you choose a weapon with. So this might work.

Shield slam works only with shields. You can't use martial versatility to change shield slam to work with longswords.

The proof is in the example provided. The example shows it is for abilities which you choose a specific weapon for. Abilities that work only for a specific weapon get no benefit from martial versatility.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Your best bet is to ask your GM if you can simply subtract the cost of the +3 from the armor, and add on the cost of a +1.

Base price: 22,400
+3 costs 9,000

Removed +3 = 13,400
+1 costs 1,000

Add +1 back in, 14,400.

Since you aren't wanting to change any of the other properties of the armor, that is how I would price it. Then ask if you can either craft or find +1 celestial armor instead of the listed +3 at this cost.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Murdock Mudeater wrote:

Sorry, wrong quote. The "when applying poison" is part of the poison use ability. Example, poison use from the assassin prestige class:

"Assassins are trained in the use of poison and cannot accidentally poison themselves when applying poison to a blade (see Poison)."

Under the poison rules, there is one paragraph that actually covers two concepts:

Part 1: "Applying poison to a weapon or single piece of ammunition is a standard action. Whenever you apply or ready a poison for use, there is a 5% chance that you expose yourself to the poison and must save against the poison as normal. This does not consume the dose of poison."

Part 2: "Whenever you attack with a poisoned weapon, if the attack roll results in a natural 1, you expose yourself to the poison. This poison is consumed when the weapon strikes a creature or is touched by the wielder."

Part 1 regards applying poison to a weapon and is what is covered via poison use. Part 2 is in regards to rolling to hit and is not applying poison, but an additional feature that functions on attack rolls with a weapon with poison applied to it.

The key confusion is that the natural 1 should also be 5%, but if you read the two closely, these are clearly different effects, as one consumes the poison and the other doesn't.

This is also why many of the classes with poison use also feature high poison resistance or immunity, as they normally risk poisoning themselves when they attack.

Again, you are ignoring my quote. I will requote it for you.

Applying poison to a weapon or single piece of ammunition is a standard action. Whenever a character applies or readies a poison for use there is a 5% chance that he exposes himself to the poison and must save against the poison as normal. This does not consume the dose of poison. Whenever a character attacks with a poisoned weapon, if the attack roll results in a natural 1, he exposes himself to the poison. This poison is consumed when the weapon strikes a creature or is touched by the wielder. Characters with the poison use class feature do not risk accidentally poisoning themselves.

Notice how in this paragraph, it discusses 2 things. 5% chance to poison yourself when applying a poison to a weapon. And Natural 1 poisoning yourself when attacking with a poisoned weapon. It then goes on to say that characters with poison use do not risk poisoning themselves. It makes no qualifiers on this statement, so all poison use negates all chances of poisoning, both on application and attacking with poisoned weapons.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Murdock, in the Poison section which I posted above, there is no mention about "when applying poison." It merely is "do not risk poisoning themselves." Which means both applying or attacking.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Better rogue talents. Less "once a day" more "as an action".

2 people marked this as a favorite.
wraithstrike wrote:
Otherwhere wrote:
Tarantula wrote:
I'd agree that its both. Its options which are so worthless they shouldn't have wasted the paper on them, and its options which are too far into power creep that they turn older options into worthless ones.
I dont think "being created first" should offer any option protection. That is why I dont mind other classes replacing the rogue.

I don't either. My problem is power creep. If new classes are 30% more damaging in combat that the original classes, then adventure paths written when only the original classes existed are going to be a walk in the park for the new classes. Likewise, APs written after the new classes might be too hard for average original classes to effectively fight. Or, they'll be geared for the original classes, and the new ones still have a walk in the park ahead of them.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Xah Doom wrote:

Interesting idea.

In real world terms (cause we know that always helps in fantasy :) ),
a Chimp walks on 2 feet (land speed) slower than it climbs across the ground with hands and feet (climb speed).

Food for thought.

Climbing across the ground isn't a thing. You aren't "climbing" any more than you can fall off the ground.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Avatar-1 wrote:
johnnythexxxiv wrote:
I could actually see this becoming a potential problem if you replaced 'fighter' with 'rogue' or 'monk' thanks to (improved) evasion.

The way a reflex save works when you're in the middle of a fireball is already difficult enough to wrap your head around.

If someone wants to willingly jump in the way of a fireball as a readied action, I'd rule that's the opposite of trying to "evade" it, and I'd give them a standard reflex save for half, but not their evasion benefit.

I think that's a pretty generous compromise for such a foolhardy maneuver.

If I let someone purposely intercept the fireball, it would be at full effect. No save.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dilvias wrote:
Be sure to take an extra limb or two so you can fight from the ceiling. (I think I've had nightmares about things like this.)

Interesting idea. If you take 2 limbs, do you now have hands which you now have to use while climbing?

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Without handholds. A cave ceiling is varied, not smooth, and has various cracks and crevices in it which someone could grab onto.

A wooden drop ceiling is flat, and has no available hand holds, so no climbing on it.

And yes, my earlier point was that if you can't fall from the place you are at, if say, you chose to stop climbing, then you aren't actually climbing, you are merely standing in that space. Climbing isn't defined because it is assumed the players understand what it is. Trying to climb across the ground is as nonsensical as trying to fly through the water with a fly speed.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

"Weapons and armor normally made of steel that are made of adamantine have one-third more hit points than normal. Adamantine has 40 hit points per inch of thickness and hardness 20."

So, because a spear is not normally made 100% of steel, it doesn't get the adamantine HP/Hardness bonus.

"Any wooden or mostly wooden item (such as a bow or spear) made from darkwood is considered a masterwork item and weighs only half as much as a normal wooden item of that type. Items not normally made of wood or only partially of wood (such as a battleaxe or a mace) either cannot be made from darkwood or do not gain any special benefit from being made of darkwood. ... Darkwood has 10 hit points per inch of thickness and hardness 5."

Spears are explicitly called out as benefitting from darkwood, so you could have a darkwood/adamantine spear, with the darkwood Hp/Hardness and adamantine for dr/sunder attempts.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Nicos wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
This is the first time I have seen bloat = "too many weak options". Many people complaining of bloat just say that causes power creep, option paralysis, and so on. So it might be a good idea to for anyone using the term bloat to give their definition so they are not put in the wrong group. With that said bloat is not the problem if the complaint is about trap option. We as a community need to let the devs know that "floor" of power for feats needs to be higher.
perhaps Bloat= Options that overshadow previously balanced options or are just so horrible that nobody take them and are basically page filler.

I'd agree that its both. Its options which are so worthless they shouldn't have wasted the paper on them, and its options which are too far into power creep that they turn older options into worthless ones.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Indeed. If the summons make the enemy creatures spend attacks on them, that is attacks your fighter/barbarian/paladin/whatever didn't have to take, and is healing spells you don't need to cast. So, summons are powerful as an anvil for the martials (hammer) to smash the enemies against. They also block charge routes, protect the squishies, take up space, and often have decent secondary effects on their attacks (grapple/trip/blind/poison/etc).

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Best bet is to go with a Elven curve blade if you want a finessable 2 hand weapon.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
the secret fire wrote:
Matthew Downie wrote:
I think there's a guy with a sack full of scrolls who follows adventuring parties around from village to village hoping they'll buy something.
Actually, there's this little hobbit/leprechaun thing that follows you around with a big sack of potions slung across his back. Occasionally, the little freak appears at the left edge of the screen, and you've got him and punch him and whack him with your sword and stuff as fast as you can before he exits stage right. For every blow you land, he drops a potion. Thing of beauty. High magic for the win.

Ahh golden axe. Fantastic!

1 person marked this as a favorite.
TriOmegaZero wrote:
I don't know why you think the GM is going to give Chess the resources to overcome these house rules..

He won't. They'll die, and then someone who isn't a !@#$ can GM.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ragnarok Aeon wrote:

The answer is actually in the rules section you quoted

Regenerating creatures can regrow lost portions of their bodies and can reattach severed limbs or body parts if they are brought together within 1 hour of severing. Severed parts that are not reattached wither and die normally.

Yes I know, but which parts are severed? Which part is the "main" part which regrows? If I put a troll through a wood chipper, what part regrows into a new troll, and leaves the rest to all die?

1 person marked this as a favorite.

It says "any magic weapon coated". The weapons section of magic items says, "Ammunition fired from a projectile weapon with an enhancement bonus of +1 or higher is treated as a magic weapon for the purpose of overcoming damage reduction. Similarly, ammunition fired from a projectile weapon with an alignment gains the alignment of that projectile weapon."

Since the ammunition fired is treated as magic only for the purpose of DR, which ghost touch is not, I would say no, mundane arrows with balm shot out of a magic bow do not get ghost touch.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Anzyr wrote:

High magic starts at the cantrip level to be perfectly honest.

Need Water? The most important thing for civilization? Any society can now get started for the low low price of Create Water.

Oh yeah, water which disappears after a day if not drank. At the whopping rate of 20 gallons/minute (for level 1). Its not like you can keep a town irrigated with that.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
blackbloodtroll wrote:
Tarantula wrote:
JoeJ wrote:
Kthulhu wrote:
Pan wrote:
What % of failure is acceptable for most of y'all?
What I usually get from threads like these is that 0% is the absolute maximum chance of failure that should be allowed.
Exactly. Fighters and rogues having to roll to hit is okay, because those classes are so overpowered, but wizards need their spells to always work perfectly or it just isn't fair. [/sarcasm]
Fighters and rogues don't get 4 or 5 power/sneak attacks a day.
You vastly underestimate the power of the Wizard.

My point is that wizards are limited in power by spells per day, not by "well maybe this one will hit".

Fighters and rogues can swing all day long, provided they still have the HP. So having a miss chance per swing isn't nearly as big of a deal.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
JoeJ wrote:
Kthulhu wrote:
Pan wrote:
What % of failure is acceptable for most of y'all?
What I usually get from threads like these is that 0% is the absolute maximum chance of failure that should be allowed.
Exactly. Fighters and rogues having to roll to hit is okay, because those classes are so overpowered, but wizards need their spells to always work perfectly or it just isn't fair. [/sarcasm]

Fighters and rogues don't get 4 or 5 power/sneak attacks a day.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Anzyr wrote:
Kthulhu wrote:

Why high magic?

is just as valid a question.

No it's not.

Pathfinder is written with the expectation of a high magic game. Asking "Why play high magic in a high magic game system?" is not as valid a question as "Why play low magic in a high magic game system?". You play high magic in a high magic game system, because it was written to fit a high magic world. It's that simple.

I disagree. Pathfinder is written with moderate magic. High magic would be magic is the solution for everything. Need food? Get some out of your pantry of infinite food. Tired? Take a nap in your chair of restful naps. And so on.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bob of Mage wrote:

The first goal would be to make a better food making spell. Second any king with a brain would just spend as much gold as he could to get Sustaining Spoons for everyone. Within a few years there would be no need for any farms for food as long as there were enough Spoons and it wouldn't be too hard to stockpile some spares. With in a few years hunger would be a thing of the past.

In the long term this would have crazy effects on the world. There would be very little limit on how many people there could be. Many of the other limiting factors could also be removed with magic.

How would anyone get sick if magic removed all the sources? You'd only have to worry about being injuried, and even then those are easy to treat.

You can also build ever more building space with the help of Cardboard Boxes of Hobo Holding.

The rate of growth would keep going up as more people means more magic users, and more higher level users. This would build until it breaks something in the world. Of course there's a good chance magic can fix that too.

You think the entire populace will be content and happy with gruel for food? Even perfectly nutritious gruel, you will have people who want to cook, and others who want to taste flavors. People will farm, because they can sell flavorful food at a premium.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Wizards look funny with one on. Its personal preference. You could also go with gauntlets. In fact, a lot of heavier armored characters have gauntlets which came with their armor and they don't even know it.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Scrolls of goodberry are 12.5gp per scroll.

You can have good meal per day at a cost of 5sp. Poor for 1sp. That's eating out, cheaper for the NPC's who stay at home and cook their own food (farmers, etc).

Conjured food, even goodberry is outside the average NPCs income range (unless they have some class levels).

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Otherwhere wrote:
I'd love for Pathfinder to evolve to the point where they say: "Here - take these and run with them! Create your own "classes", using these as templates, "buy" feats and abilities that fit your character concept, but (and here's the tricky part) in a manner that is balanced so that everyone, Player and GM alike, can have fun!" This is what I am waiting for - the freedom to take all these pieces and play them in a system designed to use them.

So GURPS then?

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Whatever is giving the companion/mount the powerful charge ability should specify what the damage for powerful charge is.

Barring that, there is the guide in the race builder for what powerful charge should do.

Powerful Charge (2 RP): Prerequisite: Natural attack trait; Benefit: Select one of the race's natural attacks. Whenever a member of this race charges, it deals twice the number of damage dice with the selected natural attack plus 1-1/2 times its Strength bonus.

Double dice and 1.5x str.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

No, he shouldn't. Not at the prices you are saying he paid for them. Get rid of all of them, and no custom magic items for him going forward. That is how I would handle it. Only things listed in the book.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Magic Ammunition and Breakage: When a magic arrow, crossbow bolt, or sling bullet misses its target, there is a 50% chance it breaks or is otherwise rendered useless. A magic arrow, bolt, or bullet that successfully hits a target is automatically destroyed after it delivers its damage.
Although they are thrown weapons, shuriken are treated as ammunition for the purposes of drawing them, crafting masterwork or otherwise special versions of them, and what happens to them after they are thrown.

First, if he hits with it, the magic is now gone. If he misses, there is a 50% chance it is destroyed.

Second, luck blade is a specific magic weapon. It requires GM approval to craft a luck blade that does not match exactly what is in the book. You can just tell him "luck shurikens don't exist." I also think the UE luck blade is in error, as the core book luck blade goes from 0-3 wishes, while UE goes 0, 1, 2, 4.

Other than that, yes, you can craft a shuriken for 1/50th the price of a normal magical weapon. But once you use it as a weapon, it breaks, so its not that strong. I would strongly suggest that you tell him the specific magic weapons exist only in the form listed in the books.

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Mettattron wrote:





Can't touch this. *hammer dance*

3 people marked this as a favorite.

So beguiling gift and drugs is the best route?

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Elrond could have provided "at least a reliable description of the place."

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Diego Rossi wrote:
Tarantula wrote:

What about troll oil?


Troll Oil

Price 50 gp; Weight 1 lb.

This crimson liquid is viscous and tastes foul. If you drink it, for the next hour you automatically stabilize when reduced to negative hit points (unless the damage is sufficient to instantly kill you) and have a 50% chance each round to end any bleed effect on you. If you take fire or acid damage, the benefits of troll oil are suspended for 1 round.

Does it need to make any kind of checks, or is it just flat 50% chance to stop the bleed? Which "specific" wins? Infernal wound or troll oil?

Alchemical cure. Not magical. It make a heal check? No.

Conclusion: it don't work.

Infernal wound is silent on the use of alchemical heals though. So it shouldn't change the effect of them. Therefore, it should work. (well, get its 50% chance to work).

What about already having giant form up and then being hit by the bearded devil?

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think that RAW it is allowed to wear the belt and take the feat, then only benefit from the feat while raging.

I think it is a good houserule to prevent feats like this, which only affect temporary statuses like rage, from being taken without the actual ability score being high enough. Otherwise, why have the requirement at all?

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I second cleric as the strongest, followed by druid. All bard sounds like it would be amazing. All paladin would be solid too.

Not many people have said all ranger. They get healing and I'd think between them, rangers could each pick a favored enemy and terrains which are either all the same and completely decimate the area. Or, they pick all different ones to cover. So that ranger 1 covers undead, 2 is dragons, 3 is evil outsiders, and 4 is I don't know, magical beasts or something?

I can see a dragon age style dwarf ranger party into the underdark being super fun to play.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
LazarX wrote:
Tarantula wrote:
Cestus wrote:
While wearing a cestus, you are considered armed and your unarmed attacks deal lethal damage. If you are proficient with a cestus, you can have your unarmed strikes deal bludgeoning or piercing damage.

Just to reiterate. Cestus makes your unarmed attacks deal lethal damage and considers them to be armed. Since unarmed attacks don't take a "hand" then by wearing a cestus you have effectively given yourself IUS. The cestus doesn't say you must attack with the cestus, merely wearing it is enough. So, I say you could have a 2-hand weapon, and threaten with unarmed strikes via wearing a cestus without having to let go of the 2-hand weapon in the first place.

I don't know where that stands with PFS, but that's how I read the RAW.

That's how you creatively misread the RAW you mean. The cestus is a glove... it doesn't magically give you unarmed strike capability with body parts other than the hand that wears it. If the hand is busy wielding a reach weapon, then it's committed whether it's wearing a cestus or not.

That is exactly what it days though. Its part of the larger problem of weapons modifying unarmed strike instead of being their own weapon. The cestus is poorly worded, but the RAW does say that when wearing your unarmed strikes deal lethal damage and are considered armed. The fact that it can give you piercing headbutts and that makes no sense doesn't change the words they used for the cestus.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Lincoln Hills wrote:
Mergy wrote:
I think a zombie's natural armour would probably prevent most small fish from munching. There are certainly no rules for zombies decomposing, neither in air nor water.
There are no rules for defecation either, but that doesn't mean the GM is not within his or her rights to assume that the characters poop.

There aren't rules for any non-dead creatures decomposing. Undead are not dead, and so they don't decompose. Assume the magic of the spell is holding them together, the same way that it makes them capable of acting.

16 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm hoping this will fit, I'll spoiler it. I just used perrams spell card generator to pull a wizard list of all spells, and sorted the components line out for spells without a listed GP cost.

Here's whats in the component pouch.

Spell Component Pouch:
1 drop of devil blood
1 drop of devil blood or 1 dose of unholy water
a 3-ft.-diameter circle of powdered silver
a ball of bat guano and sulfur
a ball of pitch
a basilisk eyelash and gum arabic
a bat's tooth
a bit of bat fur
a bit of cloth made wet with saliva
a bit of eggshell
a bit of fleece
a bit of fur; a piece of amber, glass, or a crystal rod; plus one silver pin per caster level
a bit of gauze and a wisp of smoke
a bit of horse hair
a bit of sponge
a bit of sponge, damp with tears
a bit of the chosen element: earth, water, air, or fire
a bit of wool or a small lump of wax
a bone from an undead creature
a bone needle and sinew thread
a brass doorknob
a brass key
a broken tool
a bullet
a bundle of sulfur wrapped in cloth
a chameleon scale
a chili pepper
a chip of granite
a chip of mica
a chip of stone, sand, a drop of water, and a wood splinter
a chunk of dried lava
a clay model of a ziggurat
a clear crystal or mineral prism
a cocoon tied with string
a coiled length of copper wire wrapped around the palm
a coin
a copper piece
a copper rod
a crystal prism
a crystal sphere
a crystal sphere and a pair of small magnets
a cup of water
a damp piece of cotton
a dead wasp
a dragon scale
a drop of acid and a black glass sphere
a drop of blood
a drop of blood from each creature to be affected
a drop of blood mixed with earth
a drop of mercury
a drop of molasses
a drop of oil and a small piece of flint
a drop of paint and a ball of clay
a drop of sweat
a drop of water and a glass bead
a few drops of liquor
a few drops of oil and water
a few hairs, or a pinch of dung, from a bear
a few hairs, or a pinch of dung, from a bull
a firefly
a fish scale
a forked metal rod attuned to the plane of travel
a forked twig
a glass or crystal bead
a grasshopper's hind leg
a hair, scale, or feather from your familiar
a handful of clay, crystal, or glass spheres
a handful of copper coins
a handful of crystal marbles
a handful of earth
a handful of ghoul's teeth
a handful of metal pellets or handful of cold iron, silver, or adamantine pellets; see descriptions for cost
a handful of sand
a Harrow deck
a hollow metal sphere
a humanoid thumb bone
a hummingbird's feather
a lantern
a leaf
a leather glove
a leather glove coated in dried embalming herbs
a leather loop or golden wire bent into a cup shape
a leather loop studded with lodestones
a length of wire bent into a circle
a live spider
a locust
a lodestone and a pinch of dust
a lump of alum soaked in vinegar
a metal or ivory horn
a metal pin
a miniature cloak
a mixture of oil and water
a needle and a dried eyeball
a page from a dictionary
a part of the animal
a pickled predator's eye
a piece of bone and a piece of raw meat
a piece of cured leather
a piece of fletching
a piece of iron from an iron golem, a hero's armor, or a war machine
a piece of lava rock
a piece of lemon rind
a piece of metal cut from a shield
a piece of mirror and a miniature brass hearing trumpet
a piece of phosphor
a piece of phosphora crystal prism; see text
a piece of quartz or rock crystal
a piece of rubber dipped in glue
a piece of spent thunderstone
a piece of string and a bit of wood
a piece of the creature whose form you choose
a piece of the creature whose form you plan to assume
a pinch of ash
a pinch of brimstone
a pinch of dried toadstool
a pinch of dust for lower water or a drop of water for raise water
a pinch of dust, embers, wind-blown sand or drops of water, depending on the genie type
a pinch of powdered fool's gold
a pinch of powdered iron
a pinch of powdered moonstone
a pinch of sand from the Spellscar Desert
a pinch of sulfur and a single shuriken worth 2 sp
a pinch of sulfur and powdered garlic
a pinch of wool or similar substance
a poppy flower
a potion of bull's strength, which you drink and whose effects are subsumed by the spell effects
a prism
a pugwampi's hair
a rabbit's foot
a rose petal and a drop of perfume
a rotten egg or cabbage leaves
a scale from dragon that produces the energy you seek to absorb
a scale of the dragon type you plan to assume
a scrap of parchment
a shard of mirror
a shaving of licorice root
a sheet of lead, a piece of glass, a wad of cotton, and powdered chrysolite
a shred of raw meat and a splinter of bone
a silver piece
a single link from a spiked chain
a single piece of ammunition
a small block of granite
a small crystal bead
a small crystal or glass cone
a small crystal sphere
a small horn or a glass eye
a small iron ring
a small knife
a small loop of leather
a small mirror
a small piece of a map
a small pulley
a small silver mirror
a small square of silk that must be passed over the object that receives the aura
a small stalagmite-shaped crystal
a small, straight piece of iron
a snake scale
a snake's tongue and a honeycomb
a soft glove
a sprinkle of flash powder
a square of red cloth
a stick of incense or a crystal rod; see text
a stirring spoon
a stone, a twig, and a green leaf
a swan feather
a tangle of multicolored threads
a thorn
a tiny bag and a small candle
a tiny ball of tar
a tiny bell and a piece of very fine silver wire
a tiny piece of matter of the same sort of item you plan to create with minor creation
a tiny shard of a mirror
a tiny silver whistle, a piece of bone, and a thread
a tool
a tuning fork and a quartz crystal
a twig
a vial containing a bit of the caster's breath
a white ceramic cone or prism
a white feather
a wing feather
a wishbone
a wren's egg
an ape or monkey paw
an empty paper cartridge
an eyelash encased in gum arabic
an item from the selected creature or creature type
arrow or crossbow bolt
ash made from burnt thorns
bat fur and a piece of coal
black powder
burning incense, a small measure of brimstone and oil, a knotted string, and a small amount of blooda small silver rod
chain link
chameleon skin
chunk of rotten meat
clay and water
clay, loam, sand, and an iron blade
cloth and twine
cloth from a ghoul or earth from a ghoul's lair
coal dust
dire wolf tooth
dust and water
earth from a grave
either a pinch of dried carrot or an agate
eye of a mundane salamander
eye of newt
feathers or droppings from an eagle
feathers or droppings from an owl
fine copper wire
fine sand, rose petals, or a live cricket
fur and a glass rod
fur and two glass figurines
fur from a bloodhound
goose down
ground mica
hairs or dung from a fox
handful of fine sand cast into the air
handful of snow, earth, or gravel
hoof shavings from a mule
hot pepper soaked in oil
iron filings
lime, sand, and a drop of water stirred by an iron spike
lime, water, and earth
lodestone and iron filings
lump of wax
mercury, gum arabic, and smoke
miniature broken hourglass
obsidian and ash
octopus or squid tentacle
one fire source
one hard metal bar or rod, which can be as small as a three-penny nail
one melee weapon you are proficient in and you are holding
parchment rolled into cone
phosphorus for the warm shield; a firefly or glowworm for the chill shield
pieces of shaved metal
pinch of cat fur
pinch of powdered iron or iron filings
pinch of saltpeter
pinch of soot and salt
powdered corn and a twisted loop of parchment
powdered herring scales and a vial of will-o'-wisp essence
powdered iron
powdered lime and carbon
powdered peas and an animal hoof
powdered quartz
powdered silver
puppet strings
rabbit fur
red, yellow, and blue powder or colored sand
rubber tree sap
salt and a copper piece for each of the corpse's eyes
sand, lime, and water
scrap of pickled flesh
sesame seeds
short reed or piece of straw
small wooden replica of an archery target
soft clay
spider web
strip of rune-inscribed parchment
sunstone and fire source
talc and powdered silver
tallow, brimstone, and powdered iron
tattooing needle
the chest and its replica
the element you plan to assume
the heart of a hen or a white feather
the original material, which costs the same amount as the raw materials required to craft the item to be created
the skin of a toad
three nutshells
tiny fruit tarts and a feather
tiny shovel
two eggshells from two different creatures
two flies
valuable o!erings; see textone gold coin
wine stirred with an owl's feather

1 person marked this as a favorite.
mplindustries wrote:
(in truth, a major goal of my houserules is making it so D&D is no longer a game of attrition and resource counting). And there's rarely more than one fight in a given day unless the PCs screw up somehow or foolishly seek them out.

So, in any pathfinder game, the usual reason for the party stopping to rest for the day is the magic guys are out.

Without magic, the reason is now that the martial guys are out/low on HP instead.

In normal magic pathfinder, your magic is all back the next day, ready to go, after 8 hours and some meditation/studying. This includes the martial's HP because the casters will blow whatever spells left/wands to top them up for the next day.

In your low magic pathfinder, everyone just gets to rest with natural healing (that you double for them) so that their HP tank is full again, and they can continue on.

I really don't see the difference other than all your combats are almost entirely, "I move, and attack" or some variation thereof. While spells can provide some unique effects instead.

All you're doing is making the daily resource PCs run out of HP instead of Spell Slots. Well, and making the PCs have lower to hit/dmg bonuses from a lack of magic items to buff stats.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Arikiel wrote:
It's almost like they'll have to treat combat as a life and death situation rather then just a stream of video game style encounters.

It's almost like they're not heroes at all, but just joe schmoe trying to survive.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

All I can think is, in a no/low magic game, why wouldn't everyone be an archer? Healing takes up to 3days after a bad fight. And there is no resurrection around the corner for you. So why wouldn't every martial focus on ranged attacks where they are less likely to be attacked back?

1 to 50 of 178 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

©2002–2016 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.