cwslyclgh's page

It only really matters whether it has 2 slams or 3 available if you use the fast zombie variant... normal zombies can't make full attacks, they are limited to one move or standard action only.

I agree with hapless mage that the zombie template is not meant to add slam attacks if the base creature already had one (simply because it wouldn't matter at all given a zombies permanently staggered condition)... I think the wording is more a problem of not accounting for the fast zombie variant when writing up the template.

in the end whether you give a fast cave giant zombie three slams on a full attack or four slams on a full attack it would probably not be enough of a change to adjust its CR any further... so just pick one and go with it.

vulnerability only affects the damage that the creature actually takes, so your GM handled it correctly.

Heh - I don't think even paralyzed foes get a penalty to Reflex saves... but if you're shaken or sickened you do.

paralyzed creatures are helpless... a helpless character has a dex of 0, so their dexterity modifier is -5. Thus a paralyzed character at best has a much worse chance of making a reflex save then when he is not paralyzed.

It doesn't... unless you want to... you know.... hit something. Spray and pray doesn't really work very well with guns and certainly not with repeating crossbows.

Another vote for yes a horse can grapple, but is unlikely to do so under normal circumstances.

Interestingly enough my group fought an adult red dragon last week, and they didn't even try any cold based spells upon it, assuming (correctly in this case) that it would be resisted/protected against them.

vulnerability only affects damage that you take, damage that is resisted or blocked by protection is not affected.

since voting is over.... here are my votes (in no particular order)

Skinchanger
Red Adder Magus
floodwalker
wandering judge
lonesome rider
Green Knight
River Warden
and
brinebinder

I have finished voting, but have decided not to reveal my picks until the final day of voting this year, in an attempt to stave off swaying the voting process... people thinking stuff like "Joseph Kellog seems to have enough votes already that he should make it through with out my help, so I am going to vote for Adman Blanchard instead because even though I hated his archetype I loved his item and would like to see what he can do in the next round"... (note that I just used those names as examples, it is not indicative of what I thought of their archetypes).

dimensional doorknob and bracers of daring exploits both survived the cull according to my list.

I recorded the Fellhound Collar, Irrisen Sacrificial Athame, Paint of Discerning Demise, Battle Standard of Perilous Defiance and the Helm of Hive in my list post cull.

rules and logic do not always mesh... and when they do not rules trump, because logic can throw game balance all out of whack.

Thus we end up with horsesh!t like gorillas having strengths of 15 (to fit with in a certain CR).

here is a list of some items that I really liked that didn't make the top 32

Relativistic Boots (step into the future)
Winter’s Clutch (Bag of bone meal can make a blizzard)
Cloak of the Shadow Provocateur (provoke 2 nearby creatures into conflict with each other... sadly the tacked on skill bonuses may have killed it)
Door Chalk (Draw door or window in wall and it works... to loony tunes to make the top 32, but a fun item).
Tapestry of Tomes (book shelf you can roll up and take with you)
Restraint Ooze (magical shackles, but with an awesome visual and flavor)
Flute of Silver Winds (changes the planar properties of the area around the player to match Elysium)
Earthen Spine (instant bridge opf giant stone bones)

This item was an early favorite of mine (I saw it early on the first day of voting) and it stayed way up there as I voted more and more. I am very happy that it made the final 32. Good Job and keep up the great work.

I just love the visual of these boots.

This was my favorite item from the competition, great job Steven. Now keep up the great work!

Grats to the top 32, it is somewhat gratifying to see so many of the items I placed in my keep file make it through, including my personal favorite item.

Good Job, and good luck with the rest of the competition.

Whether or not the target saves, it takes 1 point of cold damage per caster level each round it is helpless or entangled in the ice.

if it is not encased or entangled it would take no damage.

I could get behind Kaz's ruling on this.

I agree... since invisibility purge is neither an abjuration spell nor a force spell it will not affect ethereal creatures when cast from the material plane... neither will detect evil.

in fact, it specifically says you can target the creature normally.

Yeah, I responded to that it means that you don't have to guess target a 5 foot square and hope the displaced creature is in it (the normal process of targeting a creature with full concealment) instead you can just attack the creature (with the 50% miss chance), also you can target a displaced creature with ranged Target: spells (something that you normally can't do to a creature with full concealment) because target: spells require line of sight.

look at it this way, blur prevents sneak attacks, displacement is a more powerful version of blur, ergo it should prevent sneak attacks as well.

However , you can sneak attack someone with Displacement because Displacement is MISS CHANCE (not cconcealment ) . So many times done wrong in the past by me , my gm's and other people too !

I dissagree... the spell says as if it had total concealment. So it should be treated as such accept for the fact that it can be 'targeted normally' (ie you don't have to try to guess what square it is in).

If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and does everything as if it were a duck it should work like a duck unless the rules specifically say otherwise (ie. unless rules flat out state 'displacement does not prevent a rogues sneak attack' or some such).

Sorry - my question assumes no flank or flat-footedness, and no concealment for the opponent.

Where is it mentioned in the rulebook about requiring the total concealment? My guess is somewhere it says total concealment makes them flat-footed, making sneak attack viable?

It doesn't it is inferred from the invisibility modifiers in the Attack Roll Modifiers table (Table 8-5) which notes that in addition to +2 to hit with melee or ranged attacks your opponent is denied his or her dex bonus to AC... no place in the rules does it say such for a character attacking from (non total) concealment.

No, it would not be a sneak attack, since there is no facing in pathfinder the target would automatically know that you were suddenly behind him (unless you were also invisible or hidden somehow) no perception check needed.

Can a rogue make sneak attacks from within partial concealment (such as obscuring mist, blur, displacement), or only from within total concealment (such as invisibility)?

sure as long as the opponent is flat-footed or the rogue is flanking the opponent... concealment doesn't grant you the ability to deny your opponent their dex bonus simply by virtue of having it (as opposed to total concealment such as invisibility which does grant that perk).

(note that in the case of obscuring mist, the opponent would have partial concealment from the rogue as well, which would mean that no sneak attack was possible).

Yes but grappled on top of dazed doesnt give you anything. Also the CMB check vs something big like a golem or a giant is not very high %.

Well it means that the creature is going to stay grappled and take the damage each round for a minimum of 4 rounds if it fails its initial will save... and like all spell combinations it is going to be situational... don't cast it on golems or giants then (although assuming that a rod is not used, the min caster level for a dazing black tentacles means that the tentacles CMB is +20, easily affecting hill giants, flesh, wood, and ice golems, and having a better than 50% chance of working on stone, fire and frost giants and clay golems.

If cast on a group of 6 Hill giants (a CR 13 encounter), each tentacle would need to roll above a 3 on d20 to successfully grapple a giant, inflicting 1d6+4 damage and requiring the giant to make a will save (with its whopping +3 to will saves) or be dazed for 4 rounds, each of those rounds it cannot attempt to escape from the grapple, so it automatically takes the 1d6+4 damage and must will save again or reset the daze to 4 rounds from that save...basically any hill giant from the group that is grappled (80% chance) and that fails its initial will save (chance will vary by caster, but likely at at least gonna happen 80% of the time) is very unlikely to ever get free taking the full 15d6+60 (112.5 average over the course of 15 rounds, enough to kill a hill giant)...

How would it work with black tentacles?

Black Tentacles

School conjuration (creation); Level sorcerer/wizard 4

Casting Time 1 standard action

Components V, S, M (octopus or squid tentacle)

Range medium (100 ft. + 10 ft./level)

Area 20-ft.-radius spread

Duration 1 round/level (D)

Saving Throw: none; Spell Resistance: no

This spell causes a field of rubbery black tentacles to appear, burrowing up from the floor and reaching for any creature in the area.

Every creature within the area of the spell is the target of a combat maneuver check made to grapple each round at the beginning of your turn, including the round that black tentacles is cast. Creatures that enter the area of effect are also automatically attacked. The tentacles do not provoke attacks of opportunity. When determining the tentacles' CMB, the tentacles use your caster level as their base attack bonus and receive a +4 bonus due to their Strength and a +1 size bonus. Roll only once for the entire spell effect each round and apply the result to all creatures in the area of effect.

If the tentacles succeed in grappling a foe, that foe takes 1d6+4 points of damage and gains the grappled condition. Grappled opponents cannot move without first breaking the grapple. All other movement is prohibited unless the creature breaks the grapple first. The black tentacles spell receives a +5 bonus on grapple checks made against opponents it is already grappling, but cannot move foes or pin foes. Each round that black tentacles succeeds on a grapple check, it deals an additional 1d6+4 points of damage. The CMD of black tentacles, for the purposes of escaping the grapple, is equal to 10 + its CMB.

The tentacles created by this spell cannot be damaged, but they can be dispelled as normal. The entire area of effect is considered difficult terrain while the tentacles last.

So if a foe is grappled and takes the damage he needs to make a will save or become dazed for 4 rounds (seems simple enough), the next round since he is dazed, the foe doesn't get a chance to try to break the grapple, so he automatically takes the damage and has to will save or be dazed (with a failure simply adding more duration to the daze to a maximum of four rounds after the last failed save). This could potentially happen to every creature in the area of effect at the time of casting or that enters it during the spells duration.

If the spell is on your list it costs one slot to prepare, regardless of what other lists it might appear on.

About the DR:

Creatures do not get DR against magic attacks/spells.

The PRD states: "Spells, spell-like abilities, and energy attacks (even nonmagical fire) ignore damage reduction."

Are you talking about pellet blast here? The spell specifically states that DR applies to its damage. This is a case of the specific (spell description) overriding the general (DR section).

Based upon the art work (not always the best way to go, but basically all we got given the minimalistic descriptions in the Pathfinder Bestiaries) a barghests hybrid form is more animalistic than a lycanthropes, which are still bipedal in hybrid form I believe, whereas the barhgest is apparently not.

Yes, it still applies, the tower shield penalty is not a penalty for wielding a weapon one size category to large.

In order for a half-giant to be able to use a tower shield with out the penalty the Powerful Build racial trait would have to mention it specifically.

hmmm... must ponder the whirlwind ending question...

non-flying creature stuck: it would seem so, the will simply get carried along with the whirlwind unless the elemental chooses to eject them, but remember they can still take actions, including attacking the 'whirlwind' (air elemental) that is holding them.

agreed, two bites is out...

uhm... if you use acrobatics to move through a threatened square by making an acrobatics check (DC = opponents CMD) you move at half speed (ie threatened squares count as two each, assuming there is nothing else at play that also lowers speed such as difficult Teriann)... if instead you beat his CMD by 10 or more you can move through those squares at your full normal speed (again, assuming there is nothing else at play that also lowers speed such as difficult terrain).

Not all uses of acrobatics force you to move at half speed while doing them.

in goblin form yes and no...

Armor specifically for hybrid form? I'd probably say yes it would cost double...

As for a shield in hybrid form I'd say see Grick's ideas about weapons above.

Now I have a different Barghest question.... how come the greater barghest's crushing dispair and charm monster DCs are the same as the normal barghest even though its charisma is 2 points higher?

the way I understand it to work... yes, bite and gore both at -5, and no, head follows no such rule (gargoyles get both a bite and a gore attack for instance as does the half-fiend minotaur used as an example of the half-fiend template).

I'd say not necessarily, since whirlwinds have a limited a duration and end after the time limit runs out... I'd say that if the elemental wanted to end the effect early they could do so as a standard action (similar to dismissing a spell) but if the whirlwind time limit expires it just ends (not an action on the elementals part).

therefore it appears he would be helpless with regard to that enemy approaching from behind.

except Pathfinder has no facing rules, characters can apparently see in all directions at once for all general purposes.

it is not specifically spelled out for you... I figure the designers must have thought that it was obvious from reading the construction sections (and it was more obviously spelled out in the 3.5 Monster Manual, but the wording was changed around a bit in the Pathfinder Bestiary and the obvious bits sort of got lost).

most of the examples use two words... but yes... "kill him/her" while pointing at a specific person should cause the undead to attack that person until he or she is dead, then stand there and wait for other orders... of course if you said "Fight" then the skeleton or zombie would probably just attack who ever was closest to it.

Sounds like you had a dick GM today.

Unintelligent undead can be controlled pretty much like robots when under the effects of a command undead spell, provided that you use simple enough commands.

air elementals can use whirlwind as many time per day as they want to.

The format mat line in the universal monster rules section is just an example of how the ability might look in a statblock.

cwslyclgh wrote:

LazarX wrote:

Nefreet wrote:

Fake Healer wrote:

An eidolon cannot wear armor of any kind.

Hmm. I knew eidolons couldn't wear armor, but does "of any kind" include mage armor? That phrase seems more restrictive to me than just "is not proficient with any armor".

Despite it's name, Mage Armor is not worn armor, it's an applied spell effect, like Barkskin. That's why it's on the Summoner class list, it's a legal buff for an eidolon.

mage armor provides an armor bonus... there for it could be argued that it is indeed armor of a kind... bracers of armor could be considered the same, as could a robe of the archmagi (which provides an armor bonus).

barkskin provides an enhancement bonus to a natural armor bonus (ie functions completely differently than mage armor), and thus is not pertinent to the discussion at hand.

Bracers of Armor however aren't standard armor, they aren't worn as standard armor. Monks, and Wizards can wear them just fine despite being unable to wear standard armor, they pretty much operate just like Mage Armor, they produce a magical effect that gives an armor bonus. As you've just illustrated, not everything that gives an armor bonus is armor.

continuing to play devil's advocate here....

"standard armor" has nothing to do with it... the eidolon ability says "armor of any kind"... armor of any kind would also include non standard forms of armor would it not?

Nefreet wrote:

Fake Healer wrote:

An eidolon cannot wear armor of any kind.

Hmm. I knew eidolons couldn't wear armor, but does "of any kind" include mage armor? That phrase seems more restrictive to me than just "is not proficient with any armor".

Despite it's name, Mage Armor is not worn armor, it's an applied spell effect, like Barkskin. That's why it's on the Summoner class list, it's a legal buff for an eidolon.

mage armor provides an armor bonus... there for it could be argued that it is indeed armor of a kind... bracers of armor could be considered the same, as could a robe of the archmagi (which provides an armor bonus).

barkskin provides an enhancement bonus to a natural armor bonus (ie functions completely differently than mage armor), and thus is not pertinent to the discussion at hand.

How many of the charter subscribers made it to marathon?

I was an adventure path charter subscriber, but had to cancel my subscription for a while due to economic hardship.

given that normal trees and shrubs can't moveof thier own volition, they have strength and dexterity scores of 0. The awaken spell accounts for this by telling you to use the characteristics of animated objects of the correct size... ergo an awakened large sized tree would have the str and dex of a large sized animated object (in this case 22 str and 8 Dex).

I'd say that all three would work based upon the wording of the ability, but I have no idea if that is what was intended.

Shaping Focus

Your powers of shapeshifting outstrip your dabbling in the druidic faith.

Prerequisites: Wild shape class feature, Knowledge (nature) 5 ranks.

Benefit: If you are a multiclassed druid, your wild shape ability is calculated as though your druid level were four higher, to a maximum level equal to your character level.

Special: This feat has no effect if you are not a multiclassed druid.

Feats can't be taken more than once unless they specifically say that they can (and even then it is often with other limitations such as weapon focus must be taken with a different weapon each time, etc.) Shaping Focus has no language indicating that it can be taken more than once... so the best air elemental you will beable to do as a 4 druid/16 barbarian would be medium sized.

:::shrug::: I could see it ruled either way and be fine with it. but if it came up at the table while I was GM, yes he would be dazed if he chose not to make (ie autofail) his saving throw.

Technically nearly all saves are optional... you don't have to save against a fireball if you really don't want too for instance... and in such cases I would let the daze automatically take effect.

Burning Disarm: if the creature made its reflex save and dropped the object with out taking damage, they would not be dazed. if the creature was denied a reflex save against the spell (because of a locking gauntlet or such) then they could make a will save to avoid the daze.

Burning Magic: I would say no, the extra damage would not trigger dazing spell in this case, as the creature is taking damage indirectly from being on fire, not taking damage directly from the spell again.