|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
But I would probably alternate my lies with things like, "Hey, look out behind you!", "Hey, isn't that Aroden?", "Hey, the sky is falling!", "Hey, your shoelace is untied!",and "Hey, is she naked?"
The thing is, you wouldn't really be telling lies, or saying anything at all, bluffing this way would be more like feinting, dipping to the left and stabbing from the right, but the mechanic this way is making an opposed skill check, rather than using an action and automatically faking your opponent out.
"It's impossible to use Stealth while attacking, running, or charging."
See, the problem I have with this statement, and it does seem to invalidate this whole process, is that if you follow it, you can't ever sneak up on someone and stab them even once. Once you make your attack, your stealth ends, if your stealth has ended, you don't get your sneak attack.
I'm under the impression that you can, RAW, use stealth and bluff in a cycle along with blur, fog, smoke, or some other effect that grants you concealment in your square to gain sneak attack damage on every strike during a full attack by making multiple successful opposed skill checks versus your opponent before every individual attack.
Feint is great, and can be used at any time, whether you have concealment from your opponent or not, but that limits you to a single strike per round, as it is always at least a move action.
By using your body language and fighting style to bluff, causing a distraction as no action, and then again using your concealment to stealth as no action, you effectively, continuously put your opponent off guard, causing them to misjudge the angle your attacks will be coming from, putting their weapons and/or shield out of position to block properly, and confusing them to the point where they are effectively flat footed to your attacks.
Imagine as an example trying to fight the Predator while he has his stealth field active....
Yes Omni, but only if you fulfill the conditions for being able to go into stealth, such as having cover like a fog, blur, or some other effect that you can use.
Usually none. Normally, you make a Stealth check as part of movement, so it doesn't take a separate action.
Normally you have to move to find cover or concealment, but in the case above, you already have it.
Using Stealth and Bluff this way are both no action. Not a move, not a swift, not an immediate action, nothing. It says that right in the rules.
If you do the research, you'll find Blur is sufficient for stealth, but I don't need to convince anyone of that, just look it up.
Fretgod seems to be the only one getting it, RAW this is all possible. He's also right in the fact that this is hardly a game breaker compared to the latest and greatest builds that are out there.
All of this mechanic relies on is making multiple successful opposed checks every round. Any failures and you don't get the bonus on that attack.
So I was reading the Stealth skill and came across this part:
If people are observing you using any of their senses (but typically sight), you can't use Stealth. Against most creatures, finding cover or concealment allows you to use Stealth. If your observers are momentarily distracted (such as by a Bluff check), you can attempt to use Stealth. While the others turn their attention from you, you can attempt a Stealth check if you can get to an unobserved place of some kind. This check, however, is made at a –10 penalty because you have to move fast.
Creating a Diversion to Hide: You can use Bluff to allow you to use Stealth. A successful Bluff check can give you the momentary diversion you need to attempt a Stealth check while people are aware of you.
And I know that it's been ruled that the Blur spell's concealment is enough to allow you to use Stealth.
Looking at the Bluff skill description, it says nothing about this at all. It does mention Lying, Secret Messages, and Feinting, and describes what kind of action they each are.
So, from what I can gather from the rules, it looks like you have the ability to perform a full attack while "stealth cycling" to continuously make your opponent flat footed to you by distracting them and quickly hiding again after every attack. Sort of like using your magical concealment and fighting style to continuously slip under the guard of whatever creature you're fighting because they can't really tell where your weapons are coming from.
By attacking, bluffing successfully, stealthing successfully with a -10 to your stealth roll, attacking, bluffing successfully, stealthing successfully with a -10 to your stealth roll, and etc., until you run out of attacks, you can sneak attack on every attack if you have that ability.
Bluffing this way uses no action, and neither does stealth, since you don't have to move to get back into concealment.
Best of all, you can end the round in stealth by bluffing and stealthing once your attacks are done. One 5 ft step later and they no longer even know which square you're in.
Andrew Christian wrote:
And wraithcannon's assertion that you can use Bestiary 2 for Elementals is incorrect. You can only use Elementals from the Bestiary.
That was established 3 hours ago by the post with the link to the nearly three year old year old post by Mark Moreland that hasn't been updated and apparently still stands, and re-affirmed by Mike B. an hour ago.
No, I wouldn't call it frustrating, just puzzling.
The scenario that played out was this:
There was a creature in a 10 wide corridor that opened up to a room where there were a couple characters.
One of the characters seals off the opening to the corridor with Wall of Stone. The creature on the other side doesn't much appreciate this and proceeds with a full attack routine on the wall that leaves the right half destroyed and the left half with 6 hit points.
The next round the creature unleashes a 30 cone of acid into the room from 5' back from the wall. The template is cut down the middle, one half impacting the weakened wall and the other side spraying into the room. The breath weapon does 30 points of damage.
So the wall is stone and takes half damage from the acid (15). Then we applied the hardness of 8 (Stone) and the remaining 7 points of damage destroy that half of the wall with one point left over.
Our question was what happens next? Do the characters that were previously shielded by the wall take 30 points of acid? 1 point of acid? No damage?
At the time we went with the full 30 as the acid blew through the cracks and dissolved the wall, but I wasn't sure that was the correct ruling.
Funny how people keep focusing on my joke about the shower curtain and seem to miss the main point of barriers vs area effects.
I know the rules are unclear and the mechanics are unwieldy, but I do think that a blast of 3 to 6 seconds in length has the capacity to eat through an intervening barrier and continue on. It would all depend on how solid the barrier is.
If only there were some way to figure out how many hit points said barrier had........or figure out how tough it was, like some sort of degree of hardness...........that way we could figure out if the damage done was enough to penetrate it and continue on (i.e. a burning hands spell against a wooden door vs. a shoji) and how much damage the victim would suffer (did the barrier absorb any of the damage, or does it all go through like a FB/LB).
It seems unclear what happens with these area effects. Common sense says to me that the effect should continue if it penetrates a barrier, the object rules seem to give me a clear indication of how much damage would be required to penetrate said barrier, but the rules don't quite not seem to agree with un-supporting that. Right?
Oh well, I guess I'll just mark Jiggy's post as a FAQ candidate and maybe we'll get a golem to chime in.
I'd like to talk about energy attacks and objects.
On page 173 of the core rulebook it says:
Energy Attacks: Energy attacks deal half damage to most objects. Divide the damage by 2 before applying the object’s hardness. Some energy types might be particularly effective against certain objects, subject to GM discretion. For example, fire might do full damage against parchment, cloth, and other objects that burn easily. Sonic might do full damage against glass and crystal objects.
Page 174 says:
Vulnerability to Certain Attacks: Certain attacks are especially successful against some objects. In such cases, attacks deal double their normal damage and may ignore the object’s hardness.
Page 174 also has a statement about weapons that I think can be applied here with a little stretching.
Ineffective Weapons: Certain weapons just can't effectively deal damage to certain objects. For example, a bludgeoning weapon cannot be used to damage a rope. Likewise, most melee weapons have little effect on stone walls and doors, unless they are designed for breaking up stone, such as a pick or hammer.
Page 175 then gives us table 7-13: Substance Hardness and Hit Points.
This table lists 10 different materials, some of which I think can be lumped together for purposes of this discussion (i.e. iron/steel/mithril/adamantine = metal).
We know there are 5 different energy types: Fire/Cold/Acid/Electricity/Sonic. Force I feel can be precluded for purposes of this discussion.
All rules available for reference here: PRD
My question is:
Can there be some form of consensus for PFS as to which of these rules;
Vulnerable (double damage and no hardness), Particularly Effective (full damage after hardness), Mostly Effective (1/2 damage after hardness as normal), and Immune (no damage).
Is applicable to the materials listed on the table; Glass, Paper/Cloth, Rope, Ice, Leather/Hide, Wood, Stone, and Metal.
When exposed to one of the five energy types; Fire, Cold, Acid, Electricity, and Sonic.
I personally vote that ice is immune to cold and vulnerable to fire, but I leave the rest of the choices up to all of you.
Maybe if someone could be so kind as to make some sort of table we could tally votes and come up with a final model for most general situations.
Or we could just leave it all.......subject to GM discretion.
Another GM and I were recently having a discussion about breath weapons and other evocation type effects.
The first point of contention was that RAW, fireball and lightning bolt specifically state that any barriers that interfere with their areas of effect must suffer the damage inflicted by the spell. If they are destroyed, the spell continues to fill the area beyond it up to it's normal size, and if they are not destroyed then the spell stops there.
No other spells say that, not burning hands, not cone of cold, nothing. Also, nowhere in the chapter on magic, or universal monster rules, does it say that any other evocation, conjuration, or other abilities such as breath weapons have this effect.
So, the question is whether or not, RAW, other cones, spheres, or lines that inflict energy damage would share the same characteristics as fireball and lightning bolt and continue past a destroyed barrier.
I know it sounds silly to think you could dive into your camp tent to avoid a red dragon breathing on you for one round, but can you show me where it says you can't?
The second point of contention we had was that of saving throws.
In the case of fireball and lightning bolt (and any other evocation effects that might follow the same rules), we were wondering if you get a bonus to your save for being behind cover, improved cover, or total cover for being behind something like a closed door or other barrier that is destroyed by said effect.
Or would you have no cover bonus because said door or other barrier is now nothing but gently glowing embers/blasted into flinders/dissolved into goo?
I understand RAW this is not covered, and some of you have suggested alternative rules. That's kind of what I'm looking for, what people think of the idea.
Oh and this..
SquidSPECIAL ABILITIES Ink Cloud (Ex) A squid can emit a 5-foot-radius cloud of ink once per minute as a free action while underwater. This cloud provides total concealment. The ink persists for 1 minute.
Lincoln Hills wrote:
Crummy little clay vials that you can crush in your gauntlet-ed hand or across your chest, thereby releasing all the ink at once, you mean?
So the party was fighting a huge underwater monster the other day and we were really taking a pounding from it's AoOp's and the fact that it had reach.
Normally one of my favorite tactics to mitigate reach is a smokestick, but that obviously wont work underwater. So I thought to myself, what would?
The answer of course lies with the humble squid, that can shoot out cloud of ink that provides basically the same benefit, and lasts the same amount of time.
So why not put a standard vial of ink to the same use? It costs 8gp in UE (a little less than half the price of the smokestick) and would only be able to provide this additional use underwater.
What do you guys think? Would you let a player get a 5ft radius cloud of ink that lasts a minute out of a single vial of ink? Or do you think we need to make up a whole new piece of equipment to fulfill this task?
F. Wesley Schneider wrote:
Just think, a few less pieces of that nice pretty art and we could have had the custom summon rules that every 5th post seems to be upset that weren't included.
It's not the missing stat blocks that I have a problem with, it's the change in format of the maps.
I used to be able to click on the map in the older pdfs, copy, open MS paint, and paste it there.
It would show up without any of the map icons, room numbers, "S" for secret door symbols, and highlighted trap areas.
Ever since season 4, this layering effect was changed so that now, if I want to print out and use the nice map in the scenario, I have to spend all kinds of time editing it to remove those symbols becuase the cut and paste method doesnt work to strip out all the "GM Only" symbols. Most of the time I cant do a convincing job and wind up just drawing lines on graph paper.
Seems a shame to include a nice map that only I as the GM can see.
Entangled: The character is ensnared. Being entangled impedes movement, but does not entirely prevent it unless the bonds are anchored to an immobile object or tethered by an opposing force. An entangled creature moves at half speed, cannot run or charge, and takes a –2 penalty on all attack rolls and a –4 penalty to Dexterity. An entangled character who attempts to cast a spell must make a concentration check (DC 15 + spell level) or lose the spell.
My question is does this count as being anchored to the floor, wall, etc. if the creature targeted is in contact with some kind of solid surface. Like a tanglefoot bag made of shadows.
Dennis Baker wrote:
As for Heal... I have to go back and look at it but probably a gaff on my part. *cringe*
So which spell should we substitute for heal?
I also noticed that in the 10-11 tier, the King is casting prep spells for 7 rounds.
I know they say that they are all cast before combat, but how is he supposed to know when combat begins? If the scenario goes as written and the players are camping in C and D, the first indication he will have that combat has started is when his giants spot someone on the stairs and start whipping rocks at them. At this pont he's 300 ft away from the top of the stairs and assuming he and the gal stand there, his 3 or so giants have 7 rounds before the boss gets in on the fight?
Is that how it's supposed to work or am I missing out on something important? The only other plausible explanation there could be is that since his minion came to warn him of the harpy attack, he is casting everything he has because he's expecting a fight at the stairs, one way or the other. Is that what's going on?
James Jacobs wrote:
Ah, I understand. I was asking for PFS play reasons, where we can't just do it ourselves (as much as we'd like to).
The Staff of the Master from Ultimate Equipment;
This item only details one of the eight possible versions, could you provide us rules for the other 7? We would just need you to assign each staff a 1st, 2nd, and 3rd lvl spell from the school it was attuned to.
Allow GM credit for running the same scenario multiple times. If I can find a table of fresh players that haven't played it, for whom I can run it, why are you shorting my GM credits?
I realize that not buying new scenarios cuts into Paizo's pockets, but I think this situation is fringe enough that it wouldn't significantly bother them. Other than once or twice a year at conventions, how often do you RUN outside your local PFS circles?
And if you do have a large enough group that fresh players are cycling in, again, why are you cutting off the GM's knees by removing part of his incentive to run? If he has run that scenario, and had a great time running it, why shortchange the players in what will probably be an even better game the second time around because now he's familiar with it by making him pull out a fresh scenario so that he can get credit for it?
I know I know, "But it still counts towards your GM Stars". Whatever, I don't think it's too much to ask.
Back when we had faction missions, I can't tell you how many times myself as a player have asked, and as a GM been asked, "Hey, is this right here that flower/animal/guy I'm looking for? Or is it something we will find later?" How are we supposed to know that Byron is the guy to ask for military aid? We only met him once, at the start of the scenario, and we never got the chance to interact with him alone and never saw him again.
The briefing which you so helpfully quoted, and which more than one player actually took notes on while it was being read (myself included) states that we are supposed to ask the father for military aid. The Father, not Byron, the father.
"Excuse me mayor, but even though it looks like you kidnapped your own daughter, and we're in the middle of foiling your plot, and going to have you arrested, we'd like to take a few minutes to tell you about the poor people of Mendev." Yeah, that would have gone over well.
Before we rescue the daughter, we have exactly noting to offer them in exchange for their aid. We are standing there with our hats one hand and a begging cup in the other. Once we have the daughter, we were told to leave and fully expected to be ambushed on the way out of town by the father and his goons.
There was no way for us to secure aid from the Eagle Knight because we were given no idea that he could provide it. After all, Maldris is an Eagle Knight isn't he? Why would we assume this guy has any more ability or desire to aid us than our own resident VC? I'm sorry if I didn't read the scenario writers mind enough to figure all this out beforehand. We, all six players, wrongfully assumed their would be someone else we could ask for military aid that wasn't corrupt. I actually thought we'd run into someone in the capital that would aid us.
And as to being a murder hobo? You are mistaken. We could have turned the daughter over to the alchemist, gone back to the dad and turned over all the evidence to him, shook hands, and left with the daughter situation being taken care of, a sizable donation to the Pathfinder Orphans of War fund, and a promise of military aid to be forethcoming. Let the woman rot in a Galten prison for all I care.
Three for three and we get our prestige, murder hobo FTW.
Peace, I'm out. <drops mic>
Maybe it was just the way things were interpreted, I felt like once we gave our introduction and announced our intentions, we were told not to do anything because the father had received the standard kidnappers note of "tell no one, ask for no help or she dies" and then we were summarily dismissed. In fact we were told to leave and the GM asked us if we were going to go gracefully or make a stink.
I didn't address the eagle knight at the initial meeting because again, we were told to make our introductions, rescue her, and then ask for aid.
I guess we screwed up by trying to follow our instructions and being the good guys.
Back to being a murder hobo it is.
Maybe I got the timing of the evidence of Bryton's involvement mixed up. It may have been revealed to us in the epilogue that he was in on the scheme to rig elections along with the father.
I suspected that he was involved as soon as we met him, since the father didn't want to say anything in front of him other than, "Don't go looking for my daughter." It seemed suspicious, but we didn't get to interact with him. He just stood there next to the mayor and said nothing. I didn't want to start questioning him in front of the father in case either was in on the scheme. We asked if he was leaving anytime soon and we were told no, he was going to hang out at the mansion. We had no opportunity to speak with either of them alone, which is rule number one when conducting interviews. Separate the suspects and then check their stories against each other.
We were not discouraged to go talk to him, since we had no idea where he was. The last we had heard, he was still at the mansion. Thalia made no suggestions. Once we presented the evidence to the sheriff, he told us to go to Almas with it.
In the briefing we were told to make our introduction, perform the rescue mission, and then ask for aid. There was no chance to ask for aid from anyone other than the daughter.
Jeff, the Eagle Knight never said one word to us at the mansion, pretty much just stood by and let the Mayor do all the talking. Not one word.
Mist, After we talked our way past the magus and found the letters he had after he left, we went to the alchemists shop and talked with her. The alchemist explained her offer and her involvement, and we let her talk all the way through her entire schpeel, even detailing the daughter's new life. A few members of the group were playing devil's advocate for the alchemist, and explained why being "kidnapped" would actually work out better for the daughter in the long run, as well as how it would help the Pathfinders. But when the rubber hit the road and she refused to go along with the scheme, my paladin and the LG oracle said, "No, if she doesn't WANT to go, then she's not going, and we are not giving her over to be taken against her will, we are leaving with her to take the evidence we have to the sheriff." That is what triggered the alchemists fight.
After the fight, we found even more evidence linking her father, as well as the eagle knight, to the kidnapping and the alchemist was still alive. So we took her, all the evidence that we had found from the other encounters, and her apprentice, down to the jail and dumped it all in front of the sheriff. After he saw everything, he told us the only thing we could do now, since everyone in charge here was dirty, was go to the ombudsman in Almas and present our evidence to the court. He would keep the alchemist under lock and key until a trial could be arraigned. So we hit the road since that's what we were told to do.
The daughter was very polite to us and didn't try to boss us around at any time, she was very adamant about accompanying us to the alchemist and sheriff, but otherwise went along with the groups decisions because apparently we were doing what she wanted.
Just played this and was very disappointed by losing out on the second prestige point because we did the "good" thing by helping the daughter and turning her father over to the authorities.
After the alchemist fight, we never ran into the Eagle Knight again to gain the opportunity to ask him for help. The GM let it slip that the father was evil and very connected, he'd arraigned the kidnapping for crying out loud. So we figured we'd better get out of town with the daughter while the getting was good, lest we be pitted against the entire town militia, more mercenaries, or whatever. It really felt like it was the only sane choice.
Once we told the GM we were leaving town with the girl, that ended the scenario and our chances to gain our second prestige point. I really feel let down in that there was no way to encounter the eagle knight other than at the father's mansion, no chance to run into him in Almas, nothing.
I was wondering if I could get a list of all the brick and mortar retailers in my state (Minnesota) and the neighboring ones (Wisconsin, Iowa, Dakotas) that stock Pathfinder.
I am desperately trying to find an out of print Pathfinder book and am calling everyone with driving distance that I know about. I was hoping you might be able to help me with the ones I don't know about.