cwslyclgh's page

If you ready an action, you can only ready something that would normally be a standard, a move, or a swift action (whereas you need a full-round action to get more than one attack). So if you ready an action to attack the caster when they start casting, your readied action will get you ONE attack. If you hit, they have to make a concentration check with a DC based on the damage dealt.

And in this case I believe the opponent would have to make two separate concentration checks, one for casting defensively and one for the damage dealt... rather than a single check with an added together DC.

what I do... before a player joins my group I explain to that if he or she has a problem with a ruling I make at the table, they should make a note of it, and approach me about it after the session ends so as to not interrupt play. I will listen to what they have to say, look over any rules citations they might use to back up their argument, and then make a decision on how the situation will work in the future. Once I make that decision the ruling is final, but I like to give the players a chance to make their case (and it has led to changes in my games in the past).

Since blindness doesn't have a full round casting time, and he is casting defensively so I am assuming that your attacks are not coming from AoOs triggered by the spell casting (or a readied action to smack him if he casts, or some similar situation that interrupts his turn), it would be 15 plus double the spell level, blindness is a 3rd level cleric spell, the concentration check would be DC 21.

Bonus Types: Usually, a bonus has a type that indicates how the spell grants the bonus. The important aspect of bonus types is that two bonuses of the same type don't generally stack. With the exception of dodge bonuses, most circumstance bonuses, and racial bonuses, only the better bonus of a given type works (see Combining Magical Effects). The same principle applies to penalties—a character taking two or more penalties of the same type applies only the worst one, although most penalties have no type and thus always stack. Bonuses without a type always stack, unless they are from the same source.

It is from the special spell effects section of the Core Rulebook (page 208 of my copy).

Could one use alter-self to look like yourself?

Not by the RAW, assuming that your character is a 'specific individual'.

Unless otherwise noted, polymorph spells cannot be used to change into specific individuals. Although many of the fine details can be controlled, your appearance is always that of a generic member of that creature's type.

However as you can fine tune the details to an extent I would say you could end up looking very similar to yourself. (In fact in my game I would probably just allow it).

Heal

Target creature touched

Note that the heal spell does not include You in the target line.

An example of a spell that includes you in the target line is shield.

Shield

Target you

That is not to say that Snigg is wrong, he is right, just for the wrong reason... what he is looking for is this quote from the Spell Resistance write up:

A creature's spell resistance never interferes with its own spells, items, or abilities.

perhaps Sean could make a big list of which spells and effects use positive or negative energy (and keep updating it as new books come out) I mean it is not like he has other questions to worry or think about instead of this rare ability that only affects a handful of creatures that many (if not most) GMs probably won't use unless they happen to appear in a module they are running anyway.

1. No.
2. I don't understand the question.
3. Using the rules as Written, No, even though a 6th or higher level inquisitor with the Anger inquisition can 'rage like a barbarian' he or she does not have the Rage Class Feature, which is required for the feat (that said in my home game I would probably allow it assuming the inquisitor was high enough level to rage).
4. Yes, as far as I can tell.
5. Again, I do not understand the question.

DeathQuaker wrote:

If it says AND both are required. So for your example, you need a good-aligned weapon that is made of silver to bypass the DR.

If it says OR only one or the other is needed.

Since a +3 weapon trumps silver... does that mean a +3 or better good weapon would also defeat this DR?

yes, as would a mithral good aligned weapon (since mithral also overcomes DR/Silver)... and a +5 weapon over comes the DR with out needing to be silver or good.

However the witch class doesn't have the arcane bond class feature, it has the Witch's Familiar class feature... so it appears that you might be able to get both a familiar and a bonded item by taking a level of witch along with a level of a class with arcane bond (wizard, sorcerer with the arcane bloodline).

The problem with this statement is that there doesn't have to be a rule preventing something, if there isn't a rule to enable it in the first place. There's no rule specifically saying I can't fly, because unless I have something that lets me fly, I can't.

well I guess since there is no rule saying your characters can go to the bathroom, all your characters are going to die of bladder infections.... not all situations are covered by the rules, and it is not desirable to have every situation covered by the rules... this is a game of interaction between people, and judgement calls on the part of the GM are going to have to be made from time to time, otherwise there is no reason to have a GM at all.

The way temporary ability bonuses and penalties work is one of the few areas that Pathfinder changed where I was less happy with the results than I was in 3.5.

Maybe Yog Sothoth, being both the key and the gate, is contemporaneous to many planes of existence at the same time, where as most mythos monsters are not, the majority of mythos creatures come from the material plane, either the depths of space or from a displaced time (either the far future or distant past).

yep, once per spell is once per spell.

A primary difference between the two in that EPS only affects a single target, while MM can be divided among as many targets as you have missiles if they are with in range and relation to one another.

Seraphimpunk wrote:

semantic discussion they're slightly different:

magic missile
(1d4+1 / missile, 1 missile @ 1st + 1 per 2 levels beyond 1st )
1 @ 1st, 2 @ 3rd, 3 @ 5th, 4 @ 7th, 5 @ 9th.
variable damage 1-5 points/missile. avg damage 3. max range 10-25 dmg.

ear piercing scream (1d6 / 2 levels )
1 @ 1st, 2 @ 4th, 3 @ 6th, 4 @ 8th, 5 @ 10th.
variable damage 1-6 points/missile. avg dmg 3.5. max range 5-30 dmg.

Less different then you wrote (though still different).

Magic missile is variable damage 2-5 points per missle avg damage 3.5 max range 10-25.

So the actual range and distribution is differnt however the average damage is the same.

Hey Neil,

I didn't list my item in the critique my item thread, but if you feel that the Ragamuffin Cloak can teach a valuable lesson, feel free to use it as one of your examples.

1. nope a line is always the same width no matter who created it.

2. the Vemerek's turn.

3.a. A creature that makes its save moves immediately to the nearest open space, if there are two or more open spaces of equal distance the creature would get to decide.

3.b. I don't know for sure, if it came up in my game I would probably rule that a huge or larger creature treated the pit as difficult terrain.

4. since the summoner uses it as a standard action (rather than a full round action that most people have to use to cast the spell) this seems like it should work, but realize that the first monster is going to go away as soon as the second appears, and that this is going to burn through your daily uses of the ability quickly if you do it often.

5. only the initial attack roll is used to determine if the attack hits, the confirmation role is only used to determine whether the attack is a critical hit or a normal hit.

read Sean's responses above the duration of the spell should be listed as instantaneous, see text... the text of the spell says the daze lasts 1 round. the per two caster levels part is clearly referring to the damage and not the dazing effect. If the daze duration was meant to scale with caster level the designer would have made it explicit.

Favored Enemy (Ex): At 1st level, a ranger selects a creature type from the ranger favored enemies table. He gains a +2 bonus on Bluff, Knowledge, Perception, Sense Motive, and Survival checks against creatures of his selected type. Likewise, he gets a +2 bonus on weapon attack and damage rolls against them. A ranger may make Knowledge skill checks untrained when attempting to identify these creatures.

At 5th level and every five levels thereafter (10th, 15th, and 20th level), the ranger may select an additional favored enemy. In addition, at each such interval, the bonus against any one favored enemy (including the one just selected, if so desired) increases by +2.

If the ranger chooses humanoids or outsiders as a favored enemy, he must also choose an associated subtype, as indicated on the table below. (Note that there are other types of humanoid to choose from—those called out specifically on the table below are merely the most common.) If a specific creature falls into more than one category of favored enemy, the ranger's bonuses do not stack; he simply uses whichever bonus is higher.

Nothing about a save bonus in there, ergo none is granted.

Pathfinder Vampires don't charm or dominate by looking into your eyes, they just do it by thinking about it basically.

My point is that the sheer awesomeness of your round two entry helped carry you through later rounds, and I am sure that I am not the only person who still cast a vote for you even though they thought one of your later round entries might not have been as strong, based upon nothing more than the potential awesomeness that you showed you could bring to the table (and I never expected a Gulga Cench adventure... although I am sure that one would be awesome if you ever got around to writing it).

From my observations of previous years I agree that round two is often the hardest round, and I think that most of the voters realize that was well. While doing poorly in round two (although still well enough to advance) will not doom a contestant, I think that it makes the voters even more critical of that contestant in future rounds, while conversely if a person really nails the round two entry it can help carry them in future rounds, ass the voting public is willing to cut them a little more slack based upon their prior awesomeness.

My votes this round:
Bob D. Fear Fist and Flame
Dan J. Aegis Praxis
Thomas L. Forsaken Librarians
Benjamin M. Seers of Phasasma
Eric M. The Six Hundred Geisha
Tom P. Sisters of Channa-Zhol
Sam P. Riders of the Black Steppes
Russel V. The Foulgrip Rangers

Only three of them got votes because I really liked the organization and thought it was presented well, the rest were a combination of good round 1 items and/or fondness for the individual poster.

After reading Gulga, I paid little heed to the judges in regards to your further entries Neil, they could have been written in binary for all I cared, you still would have gotten my votes based off what you did in round two.

really?
strength damage was easy to work out in 3.5...

first know whether your strength is an odd or an even number.

for one handed weapon users with it is -1 to hit and damage for each odd amount for strength damage taken (-1,-3,-5...) if your initial strength is an odd number, and -1 to hit and damage for each even amount of strength damage you take (-2,-4,-6...) if your initial strength is even.

For two-handed users it is the same, but you subtract an extra -1 from damage for every other time you lower your bonus to hit (so every other one gets -1/-2 instead of -1/-1) starting on either the first or second lowering depending on whether your initial strength bonus was even or odd to begin with.

So if your initial strength is a 30 (+10 bonus) a two handed user gets +10/+15 if you takes 2 points of strength damage he gets -1/-2 dropping to +9/+13, at 2 more points of strength damage he gets another -1/-1 dropping to +8/+12, 2 more points of strength damage drops it by -1/-2 and so forth.

no need to do any huge recalculations just some simple subtractions from your total.

looks fine to me.

realize though that there will be times when it is more advantageous to maintain the grapple than to release it to get the full attack, such as when the target has an AC that makes always hitting with your bite (assuming that is the grab attack) attack unreliable, but a CMD that make maintaining the grapple relatively easy.

You can't stack the same metamagic feat mroe than once on the same spells. However, aside from the explicity stated interaction between Maximize and Empower, other metamagic feat stacks fully between them, so a standard intesified maximize fireball is 90 damage. Now the question is, how much damage it does if is also perfected?

Since neither Intensified Spell nor Maximize Spell provide a bonus that affects an aspect of the fireball spell, all Spell Perfection would do would be to lower the slot it takes to cast it.

sounds cool

my main point of disagreement is that I do not think Intensified spell adds any bonus at all.... Bonus is a game term, defined as "numerical values added to checks or statistical scores", the expanded damage cap from Intensified spell applies neither to a check nor to a statistical score.

Aside from that, Intensified Spell does not refer to the expanded damage dice by the term 'bonus' anyplace in the feat description.

I don't think that it is a set numeric bonus that is applied to the spell actually... at least I would not treat it as such.

a set numeric bonus is a bonus that grants a set number (+1, +4, +23, what have you) to some aspect of the spell, not a number of additional dice.

In general penalties from different sources always stack.

since the spell specifically calls out that it takes a move action for the caster to move the chain, but doesn't say anything about it taking actions on the casters part for the chain to attack, I would assume that the chain attacks on its own, once per round.

It's a rather transparent ploy for power.

much like your original post?

I see it working like and would treat it like the Intense spells ability of evokers.

Since it says that a neutral character chooses which way he will channel when created, and after that it can't be changed... I would rule that it stays which ever way he chose no matter what alignment he later became, after all it is the deity that is granting the channel ability, and the deities alignment is not changing.

probably the best way to find an awakened creatures CR is to look at its new stats and compare them to Table 1-1 in the Bestiary (Page 291) to see where they fit best.

Once you have determined a CR that way you can add class levels like normal.

I would think that they would all be +X weapons, where X is equal to 4 minus the amount spent on AC.

comparing defending weapons to flaming weapons is a non sequitur, they do not work the same way, so comparisons are not valid.

I have run the 3.0 adventures The Sunless Citadel and The Forge of Fury along with the 3.5 adventures The Sons of Gruumsh and The Twilight Tomb, all with very little in the way of conversion, and they seemed to work just fine.

nothing in the feat says you have to move after the attack, it should work fine.

I'd allow screaming arrows (and sleep bolts) in my games with out hesitation.

if the door or wall or bridge falls with in the weight limit based upon caster level imposed by the spell I don't see why not...

even if the what you want to shatter is too large, a little creativity can often lead to the same results (door to big? shatter the hinge, etc).

Generally such cases should be applied in the order that is more advantageous to the target (which would be resistance first, then vulnerability).

The resistance bonus undoubted receives a discount because it is only effective against effects you are already suffering from.

It looks like about 300 gp 0f the base price comes from a single use/use activated cure moderate wounds... to increase the the caster level multiply the spell level (2) times the new caster level and then times 50, replace the original 300 gp with this new number (ie add the new number to 1200) after that divide the base price by two to get the cost.

for example to make it caster level 10 you would take 2x10x50=1000,

1000 + 1200 = 2200

2200/2 = 1100

therefore the cost to create would be 1100 gp.

why is it easier to qualify for colossal wild shape than gargantuan?

WHIFF!!!

My sword just went right through that thing!

That's pretty damned clear something is up.

something is up, maybe, but not necessarily that the creature is illusionary... after all the creature could simply be incorporeal or under a magical effect similar to the old 2e Forgotten Realms spell Irongaurd .

(And it specifies weapons, so the gnome would need mithral gauntlets in order to be effectively used as silver chucks, and the breastplate doesn't include them!)

or armor spikes maybe?

It should perhaps be noted that in 3.5 they did not work together, and if your GM is a 3.5 veteran that might be where he is drawing his ruling from.

since disrupt undead fires a ray of positive energy that is harmful to undead creatures I would think that it would indeed affect a creature with NEA, even though it does not have the undead type.

[petpeeve] The Correct plural of bonus in english is bonuses, and Boni would not be correct even if we were writing/speaking latin unless you were talking specifically about good men. [/petpeeve]

I read it as any bonus that is not an armor or shield bonus will still apply.

When we look at incorporeal creatures we find this:

Quote:

An incorporeal creature's attacks pass through (ignore) natural armor, armor, and shields, although deflection bonuses and force effects (such as mage armor) work normally against it.

So, if brilliant energy was like an incorporeal attack (and thus could be deflected by force armor effects), it should also ignore natural armor...

Nothing about the brilliant energy enhancement suggests that it works like an incorporeal attack. in fact it does not, as incorporeal creatures can still attack constructs and other undead.

Happler wrote:

FuelDrop wrote:

mage armour and braces of armour are both force effects, and are thus unaffected by brilliant energy. just a thought.

they are, but at the same time they are armor bonuses to AC, and thus fall under this part of brilliant energy:

Quote:

Armor and shield bonuses to AC (including any enhancement bonuses to that armor) do not count against it because the weapon passes through armor.

However, I'd rule since they are force effects they fall under the (Dexterity, deflection, dodge, natural armor, and other such bonuses still apply.) area.

that would be incorrect though, as they are specifically called out as armor bonuses in the spell/item descriptions (for that matter the shield spell provides a shield bonus and would also be ignored by a brilliant energy weapon).