Veragond's page

Really, you announce this on the day that it goes live? No warning? The search function on AON still says it's in Beta. With Paizo redesigning their website making it almost impossible to find content, the new edition playtest, shipping off their own reference document to a 3rd party without any warning, and the debacle that was mustering for GenCon, I'm just about done with Paizo. Used to be a really good company with fun games. Hope they can find good leadership again someday.

Tony, I hate to say this, but you are the one ignoring the language.

The Alchemist does not cast spells, the Alchemist does not know spells, but ALL formulae are based from SPELLS. The rules say so.

Try rereading the Alchemist Formulae section.

---

At this point I do think that we all agree that Alchemists neither Cast nor Know spells, requirements for making wands. So the OP has been answered.

What we keep hitting now is the question of are they spells. The answer is Yes AND No.

Yes they are Spells, but No they aren't spells by the time the Alchemist Learns and Uses them.

It seems like there are 2 different arguments going on here:

I think the realy question should be, "Could an alchemist assist another spellcaster in creating a wand of an alchemist-only spell?"

From the Magic Item Creation section of the CRB:

Note that all items have prerequisites in their descriptions. These prerequisites must be met for the item to be created. Most of the time, they take the form of spells that must be known by the item's creator (although access through another magic item or spellcaster is allowed).

(emphasis mine)

So it certainly seems, according to RAW, that an alchemist could supply the alchemist-only spell (in the form of an extract perhaps) to another caster who could use the craft wand feat to create a wand of an alchemist-only spell.

Elves have always been immune to sleep, going back to the original D&D (1976 edition). Just like they have always been immune to ghoul paralysis. Why? You'd have to ask Gary Gygax, and he probably based it on something he found in Tolkein (which he based most things on in the game, including the "Common" tongue). It has nothing to do with "reverie" as found in 3rd edition. Which has never shown up before or since, but most players today still think it's something that elves do. It's just a race ability, alongside the dwarven bonus to saves vs spells, and the halfling bonus to saves vs fear. It's called "flavor".

Next question: When you summon animals, they always have a planar template on them. So does that make them outsiders or are the still animals?

If they are outsiders, are they effected by the extra damage from spells like order's wrath or unholy blight?

Technically, according to the spell Summon Monster (X), all of the creatures you can summon with that spell are of the extraplanar subtype: [Q] This spell summons an extraplanar creature (typically an outsider, elemental, or magical beast native to another plane).[/Q]

I realize that some ways of dying will preclude a raise dead on their own; I'm thinking more of situations where it doesn't make sense for the body to still be intact.

If you're looking for a specific example, I had an animal companion get swallowed by a gibbering mouther once. We were able to defeat the creature, but the AC died. If the PCs were really unlucky, and a TPK occurred with one of the PCs being swallowed by something then I could see the DM ruling that the "Recover the corpse" party was unwilling to look through ogre droppings to try to find some remains to be raised. What fun!

Don Walker wrote:

As far as I know ...

Summoned creatures ... no.

Animate dead ... yes. Only one.

Summoned creatures only last a short time. An undead "companion" could hang around for the whole adventure.

The intent is to prevent one player from dominating the game and taking far more time to resolve their turn than other players.

Sorry for the necro but this came up this weekend and it was really annoying.

I don't think the short time span really changes much. A medium-high level character could summon all day.

I think we had a level 8 or so sorcerer that flooding the battlefield was his MO. When there was a hint of possible combat he started flooding and didn't stop until everything was dead. I gave him a bit (possibly a lot) of hell and cited the animal limit rule and its reason for existence to help make the point that it sucks waiting for one person to take longer than the rest of the party combined. Luckily he backed off for the next two fights and only started flooding again on the last. We got out an hour late. Normally I don't mind running long if it is because we are having fun and don't have anywhere else to be; neither was the case here.

While I admit that as written it doesn't seem like it applies to summons, is there any good reason it shouldn't?

How about because that's the entire point of the summoner class? Their entire reason for being is to summon monsters to pummel the bad guys. Usually they do it with their eidolon, but if the eidolon goes down then they can fall back on their summons.

For other spell casters, Summon Monster is a legal spell. It shouldn't be made illegal just because a few PCs can't manage their time. What if we said no more than 3 attacks per round for fighters, because any more attacks just take too long? That wouldn't be fair to fighting types. Let's not be unfair to spellcasters.

I agree with Kyle's suggestion to use a timer, but it needs to be applied to the entire table. I have seen several examples of PCs without pets or summoned monsters taking way too long to get their turn in. I try to think of what I'm going to do while everyone else is taking their turn, so that I know exactly what my PC will do when it is my turn.

The whole point of the game is to have fun. If playing with this guy is no fun, don't play with him anymore. Or if he floods the field again with SMs, say something like "Hey, that looks like a lot of dice you need to roll, need any help?" That way everyone can be engaged, and people aren't made to feel like either they don't get to contribute, or that no one appreciates their contribution.

This kind of got me thinking about a related question: Under what circumstances should a GM rule that a body is too badly damaged to be raised normally? For instance, if the PCs are killed by a wild animal, do their bodies remain whole, or are they eaten down to the bone and require a resurrection? If Krune wipes out a party, does he just dump their bodies on the garbage pile, or burn them and scatter their ashes to the wind so that a couple of wishes are required to bring them back?

If the PC got really unlucky and failed their Fort save vs. a disintegrate spell, and they were reduced to 0 hp then they would be turned to a small bit of dust. No raise dead possible, but a resurrection would still work. There is a current scenario where the BBEG uses a disintegrate spell, but I haven't had any players unlucky enough to fail the save.

ok, this is what I got so far. I'm ranger so no class skills in perform or profession. My wisdom is highest for day job purposes. Im going to buy Hunting Lodge with 2PP, Get a compass (+2 Survival). Can I use the rangers Track also?

I assume I can use Compass and Track because the Hunting Lodge talks about finding and killing prey. Both would be needed to hunt and kill prey.

Hunting Lodge (2 PP): You are a master hunter and
have been recognized as such by being invited to join an
elite hunting lodge. As a member, you may take part in
special hunts for rare and exotic prey each year, both on
restricted hunting grounds and in the wild. You can use
Survival to make Day Job rolls.

Why no class skill in Profession? Every class gets Profession as a class skill, except for Barbarian. If you're playing a Barbarian, take Craft as your Day Job skill. The free +3 class skill bonus will more than make up for a low ability score penalty.

My question is, what would the effect of Deeper Darkness be on a character with darkvision who carries a lit torch into an area of Deeper Darkness? The torch casts normal illumination within 20', and the Deeper Darkness spell causes the illumination to be reduced by 2 levels (so normal illumination becomes darkness). Is the PC with darkvision able to see out to 20' due to the radius of the torch, but not beyond that because of the supernatural darkness of the spell? That is what my reading of the rules suggests to me.