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

Wraith235's page

FullStarFullStarFullStarFullStarFullStar Pathfinder Society GM. 877 posts (891 including aliases). 2 reviews. No lists. 1 wishlist. 28 Pathfinder Society characters. 1 alias.


RSS

1 to 50 of 877 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Shadow Lodge *****

I personally have several characters that dipped into lore warden (2 levels) however the loss of a feat in those instances does Irreparable harm to all of those characters

I support Grandfathering ... or at the very least Full Rebuilds of the affected PC's

Shadow Lodge *****

1 person marked this as a favorite.

check amazon ... when I thought mine had gotten lost I went ant looked there and they had a couple

but yes Delux Harrow Deck lists as unavailable on paizo

the normal one lists as out of print Pathfinder Chronicles: Harrow Deck

Shadow Lodge *****

lol thats hilarious

Shadow Lodge *****

shadowhntr7 wrote:
as well as voting in the poll that was linked.

what and where is said poll ?

Shadow Lodge *****

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite.

Id like a ruling on retraning as it relates to Alternate classes going into the parent class (Ninja -> Unchained Rogue) for example

Shadow Lodge *****

I just want to be able to retrain Ninja into Rogue without paying the Prestige twice in order to do it

Shadow Lodge *****

James Risner wrote:


If it’s leather and no names material it’s cows.

Sorry James but I gotta troll you here

your just racist against Cows ... #Buffaloleathermatters #Pigleathermatters

ok Im done now .... sorry I giggled

Shadow Lodge *****

Nefreet wrote:
How much is Celestial Armor made of Steel?

wanted to save this for another thread but meh whatever

we all know Mike Brock said there is no path to upgrade to Celestial Armor back in 2012 ... which I still Ascribe to
however in 2014 when UE was released .. the description of it changed to

Ultimate Equipment pg. 125 wrote:
This +3 chainmail is so fine and light that it can be worn under normal clothing without betraying its presence. It has a maximum Dexterity bonus of +8, an armor check penalty of –2, and an arcane spell failure chance of 15%. It is considered light armor and allows the wearer to use fly on command (as the spell) once per day.

vs

CRB pg. 465 wrote:
This bright silver or gold +3 chainmail is so fine and light that it can be worn under normal clothing without betraying its presence. It has a maximum Dexterity bonus of +8, an armor check penalty of –2, and an arcane spell failure chance of 15%. It is considered light armor and allows the wearer to use fly on command (as the spell) once per day.

now while Im not saying its legit, Right or should override what Mike said in 2012 but a discussion can happen on it once again because the "Silvery Gold" description was removed

Shadow Lodge *****

the issue the Necro is having is that "upgrading isn't the same thing as Creating or Visa Versa"

I spent several hours last night Trying to correct him that the Process of creating a Magic Item IS a series of Upgrades

Base Item is a MW <Insert Item Here> THEN you apply the enchantment
- or in other words -
you upgrade the base Item Into the magic Item

as soon as the Base Item is of a Material that the Named Item is not it is no longer an option to create

the end result was "its Too Risky to sell a GM on anyways"

I gave up

there was a silver lining to the conversation tho but thats a discussion for another thread

Shadow Lodge *****

I agree that there seems to be incomplete information but there are defiantly some things to consider

I'm kinda surprised that they didn't go with 1st come 1st serve but like has been stated there may have been some extenuating circumstances

but on the flip side 8 players and a GM is very doable ... you break into tables of 3 and 4 with 2 GM's and a a pregen at one table - I know that when I coordinated with and ended up with 8 players and a GM this is what we did and this is something that the VC in attendance should have thought of

but on that note it is very possible that none of those players wanted to GM - or noone had anything prepped (even though there are always evergreens)

again without complete information its hard to make a judgment

Shadow Lodge *****

bugleyman wrote:
Wraith235 wrote:

the problem is that the nerfs and table variations are hurting PFS as a whole

of my group of 7 players I am now the only one that still even regards PFS as fun

DM Beckett put it perfectly with regards to his wife

we get invested in our characters and then have them nerfed out from under us

I realize that 6 players is a relatively small number of people compared to the grand scheme of things ... but look at all the contention on the forums as a whole ... this thread alone is 529 posts long ... others crack into the thousands

BNW also stated it well ... "if the day ends in a Y someone will argue about it"

there are people that I know that refuse to come onto the forums because its so toxic ... all of these things hurt the health of PFS as we know it ....
its got to stop somewhere

I lost interest in PFS a few years ago, mostly because of what I perceived to be an emphasis on new mechanics which did nothing to improve the experience. YMMV.

I would (and have) argued that the frustration you are describing is unavoidable given (1) the rapid and continuous publication of new mechanics, and (2) the need for organized play to have some semblance of balance. But I appreciate that does little to address your specific concerns. I guess my question to you would be this: When -- not if -- an unbalancing option is published, how would you prefer it be handled in PFS? Just leaving it alone will result in trivializing large amounts of content (leading to player boredom), unacceptable spread of character power (leading to player boredom), etc.

It seems to me that nerfing is the best -- albeit far from ideal -- solution, at least given the pace at which new mechanics are added.

Most of what I am stating is a Observation of whats going on from being in PFSOP for 5 years now

but if I had a say ... things need to be banned at onset not allowed to settle for Months (or in the case of the Ioun stone or Lore Warden years) before getting hit ... however the biggest issue is that this would hit their bottom line as PFS is one of the biggest drivers of sales - weve seen that with the recent paths of the rightous book which IIRC Very little to None of it was legal in PFS causing sales of that particular book to be less than its counterparts

Shadow Lodge *****

2 people marked this as a favorite.

the problem is that the nerfs and table variations are hurting PFS as a whole

of my group of 7 players I am now the only one that still even regards PFS as fun

DM Beckett put it perfectly with regards to his wife

we get invested in our characters and then have them nerfed out from under us

I realize that 6 players is a relatively small number of people compared to the grand scheme of things ... but look at all the contention on the forums as a whole ... this thread alone is 529 posts long ... others crack into the thousands

BNW also stated it well ... "if the day ends in a Y someone will argue about it"

there are people that I know that refuse to come onto the forums because its so toxic ... all of these things hurt the health of PFS as we know it ....
its got to stop somewhere

Shadow Lodge *****

Pathfinder and Specifically PFS have always been very heavy handed when it comes to "Must buy Items"

here are a few that come from the top of my head (Pre nerf obviously)

Jingasa
Bracers of Falcons Aim for Archers
Quickrunners shirt
and now the clear spindle ioun stone

just based on the track record Im not suprised to se this nerf
I AM however Suprised to see that this has sat for nearly 8 years before getting hit with the bat

Shadow Lodge *****

also the retraining of Ninja into Rogue is a mess as well since its done on a lvl by lvl basis and you cannot have levels of both Ninja and rogue

thats something else that has never been resolved

Shadow Lodge *****

math looks right aside from the Onyx cost with reguards to desecrate .... tho there are some mechanical concerns

the amount of Onyx isn't Set by the spell its set by the HD your animating

Scrolls are always assumed to be bought at Min CL ... which you've taken into account ...
Im just not sure how you would price a scroll with a variable Material Cost. at absolute Minimum it would only have 25gp of Onyx tied to it

I dunno this is above my pay grade, tho Id expect a lot of GM's (if not Most) would go by the minimum's in play

also Desecrate doesn't Reduce the cost of the Onyx it only Doubles the Limit of Undead you can animate ... 20 HD still = 500gp of Onyx

Shadow Lodge *****

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Society field guide was a $20 Book - which most people have had for 3 years
Adventurers Guide is $40

I am personally against a $40 "Tax" to be able to Continue playing a character that is Legal at the time of this Posting and has been for 3 years... but Will not be legal in 1-3 Months Time and on top of that Removes the entire reason for (at least me) taking the Archtype (for me it was the Skill point bonus and not loosing the 2nd level bonus feat - I could care less about expertise)

this Marketing Strategy is getting Dangerously Close to an EA Style Cash Grab or Micro-transaction for my Liking

Notice Im not arguing the Clear Spindle ... it was a 100% Necessary Item to buy ... Im just a little annoyed that it took 7 years for the nerf hammer to come down ... that's a Relatively absurd amount of time to let something go before Nerfing it ...

Im not 100% but I think it may be the Longest period of time for an Item to be Nerfed ...
previous Recordholder was the Cayden Cailene Rapier IIRC ?

Shadow Lodge *****

Lots of people went 2 level Dip into Lore Warden for Totally different reasons ....
1 was the Skill bonus
2 they didn't loose their Fighter lvl 2 Bonus Feat I could care less about expretise

TBH Im Really hoping that old style Lore wardens are grandfathered in ... the Retroactive changes because of this are gonna be steep Especially for high level PC's

Shadow Lodge *****

so after looking at the PC ... with everything active Im at a 21/21/21/16/16/11 (+1 more with about 12k spent) at 11th level ... thinking the extra -2/-2 might very well be too much

Shadow Lodge *****

Personally am trying to decide weather a +3 Holy is Better than a +5

I do have clustered Shots ..... really curious about the math

Shadow Lodge *****

gems and other things are considered Trade goods and sell for full value .... Carying 700gp in Diamonds, Diamond Dust, Onyx (most common spell components) is a lot lighter than 700 in coins

Shadow Lodge *****

Yuri Sarreth wrote:

As for the Ioun torch, if you lock up the item description it states it is a dull gray stone with Continual Flame cast on it. It is Caster Level 12 in the item write up.

Given the rules for PFS that spells are cast from the lowest level spell caster able to do so the Ioun Touch would act as a Level 2 spell with Caster Level 12. It can cancel Darkness but not Deeper Darkness, and has a caster level 12 if the target of a Dispel..

EverBurning Torch as for the description given I believe would be Spell level 2, Caster Level 3 from a wizard.

minimum level create an Ioun Stone is CL 12

OGC because its easier to quote wrote:


Aura faint universal; CL 12th

Slot none; Price: 25 gp; Weight —.

DESCRIPTION
These are ioun stones that have been burned out or otherwise rendered all but powerless. They retain the ability to float and orbit, and are useful as the target of spells such as continual flame, daylight, and silence, allowing you to keep your hands free. They may be any shape (cabochon, disk, ellipsoid, and so on).

Cracked: This stone has no powers. Price: 25 gp.

Flawed: This stone has no powers. Price: 25 gp.

See Inferior Ioun Stones for details on cracked and flawed variant stones.

caster level of Continual flame is 3 (Minimum) .. vs Dispel magic you would check vs the CL of the Spell not the Ioun stone... and dispelling the Ioun Stone would only make it stop floating for 1d4 Rounds

Shadow Lodge *****

Michael Clarke wrote:
Wraith235 wrote:


Michael Clarke wrote:
2. Is there any official spell level for the Continual Flame? Do you assume it is cast by a wizard, similar to potions, scrolls and wands, or do you specify when you buy it as one or the other? Does the price change if you want a higher level version?

Official level is 2 and buying a higher level is not an option

however IF you adventure with a PC that has the Highten Feat you can get a Higher level Version

What's your source for that assertion?

IIRC in the Guide to organized play anything bought is bought at Minimum caster level unless it shows up on a chronicle sheet at a higher caster level
e.g. Wand of Magic missile CL 5 (8 charges) 600gp is an example of one that shows up on a season 8 chronicle

Shadow Lodge *****

Michael Clarke wrote:

Can somebody please point me to an official answer to the following questions? Or at least point out RAW? Basically, I'm not interested in any opinions, just facts.

These questions are all about Ioun Torches and Everburning torches in PFS play. Both Ioun and Everburning torches are described as being items with a Continual Flame cast on them.

1. Do the items count against the limit of one Continual Flame per character? i.e. you can't have both of these items in your possession. Or, are they considered manufactured items, and therefore don't count against that limit? Or is the answer different for each item?

I would assume so but the Everburning torch is an Item in the Core book so maybe it plays differently

Michael Clarke wrote:
2. Is there any official spell level for the Continual Flame? Do you assume it is cast by a wizard, similar to potions, scrolls and wands, or do you specify when you buy it as one or the other? Does the price change if you want a higher level version?

Official level is 2 and buying a higher level is not an option

however IF you adventure with a PC that has the Highten Feat you can get a Higher level Version

Michael Clarke wrote:
3. Is the spell level different between the two items? Does the increased cost of the Everburning Torch indicate a higher level of spell, and therefore a higher caster level

by the way it reads its a standard Continual flame and the cost doesnt add up to higher level

[3(Spell level) X 5 (Caster Level)x10] = 150
[4(Spell Level) x 7 (Caster level)x10] = 280

TBH Im not sure why an Everburning Torch is more expensive than an Ioun Torch asidse from the fact that the Ioun Torch is in Seeker of Secrets IIRC

Shadow Lodge *****

having now run it .. these mechanics make Mass battles Look Normal

a bit upthred I asked for some assistance in interpreting the Rules - and I have to say that when noone wants to assist with these rules and instead debate the merits and flaws of adhocing the rules as they are presented .. thats sort of indicative of a REAL problem

- note Im not complaining .. after seeing this in action I wouldn't want to touch them either ... in fact I wonder who signed off on this going live .. this is hands down the worst scenario I have ever run and so bad that I would honestly suggest removing this from circulation

not only are the rules in the scenario fuzzy ...but they dont fit into the one on one Verbal duel Rules OR the Team Duel Rules

were supposed to build debate as if it were a 1 on 1 ... but PC's can be targeted ? so is this really a 1 on 1 ... or is this a 1 on 4-6 where each PC assigns their own skills to a worksheet but share a determination pool .... scenario doesn't say or even hint at an answer

this is the only scenario I have felt physically angry at prepping .. and that is not a good thing

as far as everyone not running it as written ...
unfortunately that is absolutely against PFS Rules - yes I've had an accusation levied against me in the past for JUST this sort of thing (not following the Rules because it was more Fun)...

so yes ... PFS does Log these Actions and keeps note of them if they catch wind about it

As Such my only statement is - Dont Do it ... but with these rules as presented and how much of a charlie foxtrot they are especially with all the changes to the base Rules ... I cannot Blame the ones who are changing things for trying to clean it up ...

its an impossible situation and your Damned if you do Damned if you dont

Shadow Lodge *****

this is so confusing

so for Determination ...
its the average of all 3 Mental stats + HD

is this for 1 PC or all PC's?
is it added up or averaged

Skills - is this made for each PC or as a group ?

and what effect does the fact that they are supposed to loose have on determination
what about the fact that the other group is trying to loose

Shadow Lodge *****

one reason I see is that it Nullifies the Polearm fighter Archtype
which is the only class / Archtype (that I recall) that allows a reach weapon to be used against an adjacent foe and even that is at a -2 ... Top that with allowing it to be used with Weapon finesse .. I agree .. its just too good even if it ends up being Sheylynn only (I could be wrong on that as well)

Shadow Lodge

Hey Kevin ... did you get the Writeup I sent you for the Thorn Rebuild

Shadow Lodge *****

Im not Sold - I remember back in 2nd ed and how bad spelljammer was

Shadow Lodge *****

been a while since this was linked and about a year since it was opened .. so I'll relink this so that its more "upthread"

Level 12 Character List

I made a Google Sheet list for it

Shadow Lodge

andreww wrote:
Stuff

I backed up on that after I read the entries

and digging deeper I Found the Relevant part on skill checks .. and I believe it is something we veteran players take for granted and simply look at and move on from

CRB wrote:
When you make a skill check, you roll 1d20 and then add your ranks and the appropriate ability score modifier to the result of this check.

the reason it doesn't work is the Simple "Progression of math"

d20 + ability + ranks + Bonus.... Rather than the

Skill = Ranks + ability (+ d20 + Bonus)

tho this thread has defintly brought up something else for me in a home game

Shadow Lodge *****

Thomas Hutchins wrote:
there aren't other classes that get sneak attack at level 1 I believe.

there are several Prc's that do ... but I know thats not what your looking at

with Sap Master and all the PRC's at 11th I think I got up to 16d6 sneak - all theorycraft tho and not sure how effective this type of character would actually be

the main issue is the depth of feats that need to be selected to make all this work

Enforcer
Weapon Focus
Dazzling Display
Shatter Defenses
Sap Adept
Sap Master
as well as all prerequisite feats

Shadow Lodge *****

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Season 4

Shadow Lodge

Tieflings make Great Paladins too with the +1 HP Regained from LoH

Shadow Lodge *****

CBDunkerson wrote:
CBDunkerson wrote:
Just as the blog says that most animals cannot wield weapons due to lack of an opposable thumb, so too do much greater variations in skeletal structure prevent songbirds from making unarmed strikes as a humanoid would. Songbird elbow strike? They'd be bending their wing the wrong way and trying to stab you with their feathers. It's just ridiculous.
Wraith235 wrote:
then I ask you 1 last time ... and until you do I consider this conversation done ... Provide Source that says you can't

As this is, in fact, the first time you have asked for a source to be provided, and it isn't clear precisely what you are referring to, I'll run through the seemingly likely possibilities;

1: GM discretion on abilities usable while polymorphed
2: Opposable thumb required to wield weapons
3: Location of a bird's elbow

1 - Refers to EX and SU (such as keen senses, scent, and darkvision), as well as any natural attacks and movement types possessed by your original form - Not Feats and Unarmed strike not an EX, SU, Movement type, or Natural attack

2 - No opposable Thumbs Needed to Use IUS ... I could Cut my thumbs off and still Punch - this is also from the monkey see monkey do Blog which handles Animal companions and familiars ... NOT polymorphed PC's

3 - not a Game Rule ... but RL Physics and even so .. they have feet and knees as well

Try again

Shadow Lodge *****

CBDunkerson wrote:
Wraith235 wrote:
Like I said ... Lots of people Hate this build and the Idea (myself included)

Ironically enough... I have no problem with the build concept. I have used a similar design with an Atomie NPC (Sir Finiwin, the Dragon Knight) in home games. If the ring polymorphed characters into Atomies or some other such flying humanoid creature we'd be all good... though I suspect that it would then cost considerably more.

Quote:
but it is legal and when you say "you cant make unarmed strikes while in bird form" (even after weve proven that you can time and time again)

Except that, you haven't.

Quote:
you are then just targeting the PC

Nope. I'm saying that the rules specifically leave what kind of actions are and are not possible for a polymorphed creature to perform to the GM's discretion... and that my personal standard for most games would then be to limit it to things the creature could actually do. Tiny songbirds cannot actually perform humanoid martial arts.

Just as the blog says that most animals cannot wield weapons due to lack of an opposable thumb, so too do much greater variations in skeletal structure prevent songbirds from making unarmed strikes as a humanoid would. Songbird elbow strike? They'd be bending their wing the wrong way and trying to stab you with their feathers. It's just ridiculous.

then I ask you 1 last time ... and until you do I consider this conversation done ... Provide Source that says you can't

Shadow Lodge *****

BigNorseWolf wrote:

even the Torag trait with the Irori Archtype is not EXPRESSLY Illegal

Worshiping two deities? Sounds illegal

sorry I went out to have some fun this evening

yes your position is exactly where my argument against it lies ... however if you read the archetype it does not state anywhere a requirement to worship Irori - other than the in the Name of the Archtype itself and the fluff text - it Just lacks the Words "Must Worship Irori"

CBDunkerson wrote:
Ragoz wrote:
That blog says once they can take the feat it can be anything they are physically capable of using. The mental arguement is baseless.
Generally speaking, these feats are off-limits to animals, but when their intelligence reaches 3, the rules state that they can use any feat that they are physically capable of using. Some people take this to mean that they can equip their animal companion in chainmail and arm him with a greatsword given the correct feats. While you could interpret the rules in this way, the "capable of use" clause is very important. Most weapons require thumbs to use properly, and even then, few animals would choose to use an artificial weapon in place of the natural weapons that have served them all their life. It's what they were born with, after all, and virtually no amount of training will change that.
Funny. That kinda seems to be saying that the mental argument is NOT baseless.

Animal - yes .... but we aren't talking about an animal here are we ?

we are talking about someone intentionally wild shaping into an animal ...
and again ... as has been stated - you don't need thumbs for unarmed strike
As per Monk the following forms are listed "fist, elbows, knees, and feet." granted Head is not mentioned but in truth it doesn't need to be because by Following your Logic we have to ask -

1) do Songbirds have ANY of the above mentioned Body parts

A) by Using Anatomy we know that they have 3 of the 4 ... Feet, Elbow, and Knees ... so whats the problem ? they have the bodyparts required by Monk to make unarmed strikes

the Feat Improved unarmed strike is even more vague

Quote:
You are considered to be armed even when unarmed—you do not provoke attacks of opportunity when you attack foes while unarmed. Your unarmed strikes can deal lethal or nonlethal damage, at your choice.

Like I said ... Lots of people Hate this build and the Idea (myself included) but it is legal and when you say "you cant make unarmed strikes while in bird form" (even after weve proven that you can time and time again) you are then just targeting the PC

Shadow Lodge *****

Thomas Hutchins wrote:
CBDunkerson wrote:
Wraith235 wrote:
as soon as you begin saying "you cant do that because of X" when the rules directly support things like this happening ... you are no longer playing PFS .. you are playing Homebrew ..
Except that the rules DON'T directly support anything of the kind. Rather, they state that the GM needs to decide what is reasonable. To me, following the standards of the real world seems reasonable.

And so if they polymorph into a dragon they can't fly since real world standard those wings couldn't let a dragon fly right?

So in the real world, when a thrush has taken the feat IUS what happens?

or what about Flying with magic ? since that is impossible and Physics say that we as humans dont have the ability to fly as a species (our bones arent hollow, no feathers etc.) I suppose if I find that unreasonable I can just disallow it from my table

*Sarcasam off* no ... we have the rules ... they are what they are .... we have Venture officers and agents to adjudicate these matters when GM's take hard line stances on things that are Clearly within the rules

we may not like it ... but we play by the rules and if we dont want to play by the rules of PFS then we dont have to play PFS

I personally HATE this Ring and the Fox form Mouser cheese build that nearly Solo'd bonekeep 2 -
but it is not my place to Target the Character when I KNOW it is within the rules ..
and there is Nothing in the Rules that say it is illegal
even the Torag trait with the Irori Archtype is not EXPRESSLY Illegal tho it pushes the boundaries very very hard and I feel safer disallowing that combination based on the Text of the 2 Items Rather than the "Real world Physics" of everything else

oh and your entire Argument breaks if they have a Feral Combat Training

Shadow Lodge *****

CBDunkerson wrote:
Wraith235 wrote:
as soon as you begin saying "you cant do that because of X" when the rules directly support things like this happening ... you are no longer playing PFS .. you are playing Homebrew ..
Except that the rules DON'T directly support anything of the kind. Rather, they state that the GM needs to decide what is reasonable. To me, following the standards of the real world seems reasonable.
Quote:
While under the effects of a polymorph spell, you lose all extraordinary and supernatural abilities that depend on your original form (such as keen senses, scent, and darkvision), as well as any natural attacks and movement types possessed by your original form. You also lose any class features that depend upon form, but those that allow you to add features (such as sorcerers that can grow claws) still function. While most of these should be obvious, the GM is the final arbiter of what abilities depend on form and are lost when a new form is assumed. Your new form might restore a number of these abilities if they are possessed by the new form.

your only reason against a "headbutt" is Real world Physics

we have quoted many reasons why it works - citing Rules and Items
your only argument is "the GM States what is reasonable" or "Physics make it impossible" Try quoting some Rules that support your theory

Natural attacks are not (Ex) ... Unarmed attacks are not (Ex)
When polymorphed all Items are merged into your form, you can no longer activate Items but Items that grant a permanent bonus continue to function
Agile amulet - which allows dex to damage is permanent which is where 98% of the damage comes from

Shadow Lodge *****

CBDunkerson wrote:
Wraith235 wrote:
so Focus on headbutts

Ok.

Tiny birds are physically incapable of performing a head butt. Even setting aside the extremely limited range of forward motion afforded by their skeletal structure, it is simply impossible for them to strike something with their frontal bone... the beak inevitably gets in the way.

They CAN peck with the beak... but that is, of course, a natural attack. Not an unarmed strike.

and dragons dont exist.... people cant Conjure Beings from other planes ... Create Balls of explody fire from their fingertips ... instantaneous heal others with a touch .... this is a fantasy game .. we play by the rules we are given, and as PFS we do not Deviate from those rules ... as soon as you begin saying "you cant do that because of X" when the rules directly support things like this happening ... you are no longer playing PFS .. you are playing Homebrew ..

Shadow Lodge *****

BigNorseWolf wrote:
Wraith235 wrote:


Spellcasting is a class feature that requires Speech - Druids get around this with Wild Spell so yes - I would say that Spell casting (Being a class feature requiring a verbal component) would be Nullified by The Ring

No. You are perfectly capable of casting spells in any form: not all spells have verbal components, and psychic spells make it even easier. It isn't directly form dependant: much like bastard sword proficiency an opposable thumb might be handy but it's not form dependent. A dragon disciples scales on the other hand..

you know what I meant BNW

since were talking about Speech lets relegate it to speech requirements
Sure Silence metamagic would get past lots ... and while Psychics are considered Spell-casters ... I don't think of them as such ....

Shadow Lodge *****

CBDunkerson wrote:
Thomas Hutchins wrote:
you can make butt checks, chest bumps, headbutts as an IUS.

There are no rules saying so (except for the head butts).

so Focus on headbutts .... you can make more than 1 attack with your head as per the Errata'd Flurry Rules

Shadow Lodge *****

plaidwandering wrote:
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
plaidwandering wrote:


It's talking about abilities, senses, movement dependent on form. ANY ability from a class is by its very nature not dependent on form, because any number of races could take levels in whatever class.

Lots of abilities ARE dependent on form. You can't complete somatic gestures, or swing a weapon, if your form does not have arms or hands.

Most forms won't let you complete the vocal components for casting spells.

yes I forgot to state an exception for things that add a permanent physical feature obviously

however, you are really on the wrong track here. Spell components or swinging a sword are not class abilities. Even if they were it would still be a bad example since the game already has many non-humanoid form spellcaster examples baked in

Spellcasting is a class feature that requires Speech - Druids get around this with Wild Spell so yes - I would say that Spell casting (Being a class feature requiring a verbal component) would be Nullified by The Ring

(there is a debate if wild spell would work with the ring since its not "Wild Shaping" but that's beyond the scope here)
SLA's would not be invalidated because those are not dependant on form (no verbal / Somatic or Material)

Shadow Lodge *****

CBDunkerson wrote:


Wraith235 wrote:
By RAW the only way you can Say that a polymorphed PC Looses access to feats is if they list (Ex) AND if they require an original form

I think even most of the 'of course songbirds can be martial arts masters' crowd would agree that the Exotic Weapon Proficiency (Bastard Sword) feat is completely useless to an earthworm.

Sure... you still have the feat. You just aren't gonna be doing anything with it if you don't have arms.

I digress because I used the wrong terminology... loosing access was incorrect (this is what I get for writing a post in the middle of a fleet battle on eve) I should have said "Loose the ability to use the feats"

and technically if you Polymorph into a tiny bird ... I could see the bird flying around with a tiny Bastard sword clutched in its claws (tho even SoS Pads wont scrub that image from my brain)

polymorphing doesn't cause you to loose the feat but Improved unarmed strike doesnt require specific body parts ... you have a head and feet (balled up claws)

Shadow Lodge *****

BigNorseWolf wrote:
Wraith235 wrote:
.... but the beast shape 4(Technically) 7x a day, and +1 deflection bonus for4k ... is absurd

Just because the ring uses beast shape doesn't mean it's giving you the benefits of beast shape. Half the power of beast shape is the versatility. Need to go underground? Burrow. Need to find the invisible person? turn into a bat. Need a swim speed? *dolphin noise

why I said technically and TBH I would say it is horridly overpriced it has more power than the old bracers of falcons aim (permenant 1st level spell) which was banned until it was changed to 1 min / day of a level 1 spell... this is 70 min a day of a watered down 6th level spell

Shadow Lodge *****

The Only Star wrote:
Wraith235 wrote:
again ... polymorphed Creatures do NOT Loose their feats

They don't lose their feats, but since feats are usually extraordinary abilities

Most Feats do not list (EX) after them so your statement is incorrect (Im having a hard time picking any out that do but that doesnt mean they dont exist)

By RAW the only way you can Say that a polymorphed PC Looses access to feats is if they list (Ex) AND if they require an original form

Quote:
While under the effects of a polymorph spell, you lose all extraordinary and supernatural abilities that depend on your original form (such as keen senses, scent, and darkvision), as well as any natural attacks and movement types possessed by your original form. You also lose any class features that depend upon form, but those that allow you to add features (such as sorcerers that can grow claws) still function

Natural attacks and unarmed Strikes are Entirely different things because they can be combined into a single attack routine...

they have also said you can flurry with 1 weapon so your "1 attack" can be flurried with if you have the Feat (Feral combat training IIRC)

anything else is GM Arbitration based on not liking something ....

Yes this ring Should be banned .. but until it is - legal is legal ...

and yes I know the history of this build Very well ... I also know the level of people that have gone over it in an attempt to prove it that it was illegal, and the only thing that was questionable was an aparent diety specific prestige class (Or archtype) with a Deity specific Trait (Different Dietys / pantheons)

as has been suggested .. its not about the mechanics ... but about the Item which is Grossly under-priced.. Fox form does 80% of the build fine .... but the beast shape 4(Technically) 7x a day, and +1 deflection bonus for4k ... is absurd

Shadow Lodge *****

improved unarmed strike is a feat (in this case granted by a class) ...Not a Class Feature ...

so sure ... a Thrush does 1d2-5 Based on its strength
these Builds have feats and Permenant Magical Enchantments which allow them to use Dex for Damage - Neither of which Qualify as EX Relying on the original forms

again ... polymorphed Creatures do NOT Loose their feats

Shadow Lodge *****

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think its legit that people are asking ....its been over 2 months since the last update ....personally im waiting to see if i buy blood of beasts or not

Shadow Lodge *****

TBH this is more overpowered and under-priced than the old bracers of falcons aim ...and that was banned until it got Errata'd

Shadow Lodge *****

Vrog Skyreaver wrote:

And again, I would point out that I'm not sure exactly what he's trying to achieve with this character. If his goal is 'not die', there are better, more party friendly ways to do exactly that.

If is goal is to bring a subpar character into any scenario (not just bonekeep) then....I'm not sure what to say to that. You're doing yourself and your group a disservice.

my guess is "Play by Proxy" its the same Idea as Magic Jar only less powerful

Shadow Lodge *****

Kevin Willis wrote:
Wraith235 wrote:

and I actually Just found a way to extend extracts ... its a 3rd level Extract but it works

Amplitfy Elixer

and if this is his Main Schtik then it would become a necessary thing

Sadly that extract only works for potions and elixirs, not for other extracts.

Like I say I don't play alchemists but unless your playing a rapid bomb alchemist I am starting to wonder why I ever would

1 to 50 of 877 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002-2017 Paizo Inc.® | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours, Monday through Friday, 10:00 AM to 5:00 PM Pacific time.

Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, Starfinder, the Starfinder logo, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc. The Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Legends, Pathfinder Online, Starfinder Adventure Path, 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.