|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
so any thoughts about would be much appreciated.
hey, i'm pretty new to gming, and i've got a bunch of questions about this one as i'm looking to prep it. if anyone has any insight, i'd greatly appreciate it. so here goes:
1. on p. 6 it says that pathfinders can suppress an individual effect of the Guards and Wards spell for 24 hours. how does that work mechanically? do they just say, "we decide to suppress the fog?" Do they have to succeed at a spellcraft check to recognize the spell first? Do i have to tell them that they have the ability to suppress one effect? it seems very vague.
2. on p. 8 under the fire mephits description, it says they start north of A1. Does that mean in area A5? or does it mean at the north end of the hall of A2? or something else? The mummies start "near area A5," so I assume that means the north end of A2. In general, i'm having a hard time figuring out where they are all supposed to be once the PCs enter.
3. more on that first fight. I can't tell how involved B and S are supposed to be. Does S just stay in A3 and observe with claivoyance? does B leave A5 and join the fray? if not, how does B know what's going on? I feel a bit at a loss how to set that up so that B and S are there but so they don't automatically become indistinguishable to the PCs and immediately just get attacked and end any chance of dipomacizing and whatnot.
thanks in advance for any thoughts/clarifications.
in the description of ghoul touch, it makes it seem that the save is just in relation to the sickened feeling for those in the 10 ft. radius of the paralyzed person and that the person touched becomes paralyzed with no save if the touch attack lands. that seems kind of crazy but definitely how it seems to read in plain english. is there any precedent for the way spell descriptions work that points to the save also being in regards to the touch effect.
hmm, unseen servant is an interesting one. having it bite it from area damage would be annoying, but that might still be the winner for me compared to 10k or more for an item/glove or the weapon cord (maybe i'll have a change of heart, but right now I'm not really digging the visual of my dervish dancing scimitar wielder having a wand flapping around him on a string).
Bbauzh ap Aghauzh wrote:
i'm not convinced the other reading of it turns it into fluff. it turns it into a feat that the animal companion can take if smart enough but cannot use. that doesn't seem like just fluff to me so much as the way the rule reads in conjunction with the mechanics of the game.
hmm. thanks for the thoughts. one of the characters i was thinking about this with is a dervish dancer, so i'm thinking that the dangling wand would interfere with fighting since he can't have anything in his off hand and take advantage of the feat. looks like i might be just dropping it.
Hi, i was wondering if there is any way to store a wand as a free action? i wouldn't need to access it again easily, but after using it to cast something, i'd like to be able to get it out of my hand (without dropping it) and move if possible.
anyone know of anything?
thanks in advance.
oh, and i'm already locked into being a half-orc, so no tail (not that i'm sure if that would work with a tiefling or not)
i can't say i've thought about this overly much, but i've always liked the idea of having crossbows be against touch ac. it has always seemed to me that this would be balanced by the lack of iterative attacks since loading would always be at least a standard action (light) if not a full round. and maybe up the damage a bit on heavy or whatever. i like some of the strength rules for reloading a heavy one or some such as well.
Bbauzh ap Aghauzh wrote:
this is where it seems to me that you are arguing based on the belief that "physically capable" is the same as "mechanically capable." i can see an argument for that, but i don't think it's and open and shut case. it seems to me that using the word "physically" in that statement evokes or connotes more of a connection to the common sense meaning of capable than the game mechanic capable. if that's the case, then an animal can clearly take ius (i'm assuming you wouldn't argue with the common sense idea that animals are capable of unarmed attacks even though you argue that the mechanics of the game change these to being called natural attacks or somesuch) but it would simply be a wasted feat within the game (obviously except for taking it as a prereq).
i'm curious about your thoughts on this as well as on why what i've taken to be your reading of it should be assumed.
thanks in advance.
exactly, but weren't some people stating that they felt there was no mechanical way for the animals to take advantage or use that within the game rules?again, i may have missed something in the argument as i was skimming and such.
from a pfs perspective, has it been stated anywhere that "physically capable of" is the same as "mechanically capable of?"
i haven't read everything on this thread, but i thought it looked to be that the argument against allowing ius is because there's no mechanic to allow the animal to use an unarmed strike, but that seems possibly different from the limitation of "physically capable of." "physically capable of" seems to be more of a common sense threshold. and if that's the case, then it would seem that animals with the requisite int could take ius in order to take other feats but not actually use unarmed strikes, which seems fine to me.
sorry if my lack of reading the entire thread means that this has been covered elsewhere or is totally off point.
well, i think the first thing for me to do is push for a relatively detailed recap before each meeting that we all chip into. without that, i (and the rest of us) just get more and more detached from the back story.
i think that last question from harald was directed at the op and not me.
i think the idea of having them involved in the world building sounds intriguing. for me, the problem with APs that only get played once a month at most is that there's so little context to everything that is going on (in the grand scheme of everything else that is happening in my life over the course of 4-6 weeks), that most of the detail and backstory simply washes over me after the first session. once that happens, every session the details become harder to connect and therefore harder to retain and therefore harder to care about. i think having the players involved in creating some of the backstory could help more in terms of simply helping them to remember more of the backstory details (since some of them will be recognizable from their own suggestions) and once things are easier to remember, they might tend to be more interested/interesting. not sure how clear that was.
Harald - what do you mean by a video diary? something like videoing yourself on your phone recapping the session as soon as it ends?
i'd like to hear more as i have some of these issues myself - with myself. i have a game with 6 other rl friends which also plays once every 4 to 6 weeks and we probably only get about 5 hours in per session. only myself and one other friend play pathfinder outside of this group, so we're the ones who take turns organizing and distributing loot and we'e in charge of knowing the rules and whatnot.
personally, i have a super hard time getting myself to care about the backstory with so much time between sessions. i think i'd prefer to get together and play shorter mods or even just pfs scenarios, but my other friend who organizes it with me really enjoys APs. I've tried forcing myself to take notes, but that has yet to work (over the course of a couple of years at this point), by which i mean the notes i do take don't help me much in that regard, and i lose interest in taking notes super fast (is there any special way that people organize their notes to help them flow better and better express the backstory so that they might seem more useful and interesting to me?). the other folks in our group are happy to just to get together when we can and have an excuse to hang out and do something different as far as i can tell, but i'd definitely like to find a way to increase my engagement in the backstory if there are any other suggestions. that brings me back to the video diary - tell me more :-)
to the original poster - i clearly have nothing other than switching to shorter mods and whatnot - which i really don't think is a bad idea. i know i personally enjoy those more on average.
Thanks for the continued info and opinions. I'd obviously need to get maneuver grapple as well, yes? Wasn't sure if you left that off for a reason (other than that you thought it was too obvious to mention).
i guess wasting a feat on imp unarmed isn't the worst thing.
while i have you, when the snake becomes large at 4th lvl, does he then have a reach of 10 ft?
Also, tell me more about this gravy if you don't mind. Maybe I'm just not imaginative enough (or haven't seen the full list in the animal companion or what not), but beyond the two attacks, and down (which still leaves me with 2 at lvl four - where I'll be starting with this character), I'm having a hard time imagining what would be worth getting excited about.
I'd be playing a druid, and taking grapple feats certainly seems useful. So flutter, you're thinking it's worth it? At lvl 4 I'd have five tricks without the added int, you think 2 more would help significantly? In terms of the druid's feats, I was assuming conjur and augment summoning as the first two
I still can't decide if it's worth it to lose the extra human feat to get my snake up to 3 int. are there feats anyone thinks would be worth getting for the snake later (now that he has a three int) to make it worth it? Or are the extra tricks important enough to be worth it? If the tricks are worth it, any specific thoughts on those?
Two quick questions.
2. I've seen multiple mentions of animals starting at BAB 0, but the companion stats show them as starting at BAB 1. I'm assuming I'm missing something. What is it?
Thanks in advance.
That human trait is intriguing, although it's hard giving up that extra feat. Do you think the extra int is really worth it?
thanks. i still think an argument can be made that the grab ability is more about the touch than the damage and would therefore fall under the second part of that, but it's good to know where the info is from, and if that's how it is generally played, so be it.
are the feats to be able to use the belt in the animal companion too?
again, i really appreciate all the feedback.
thanks for the feedback. if i stick with this druid, i'll definitely get the book.
thanks. where is this chart? i've been looking into all this druid stuff over the last week, few days and haven't come across that. and i guess i'd need the books for the feats to let them use those slots too :-(
also, there's a grapple command? is that a grapple "trick?" i haven't seen that, and i'd need to buy the book to use it in pfs.
also, also, do you mean that i should teach that in case the ac is too high for him to hit very often? or did you mean what you wrote? in my reading of the grab ability, i thought it seemed that you just had to hit with the attack, not necessarily over come dr to do damage, but i'm not up on all the FAQs and erratas and whatnot.
thanks. any thoughts on if that's a must have for a snake animal companion for a druid? this is for pfs, so it will probably be played mostly between lvl 4 and 10 or so. the one guide stated that getting barding/armor to enchant was a must do, but sometimes those guides are more about later levels. any thoughts?
so if i have a snake animal companion take the light armor proficiency feat, i can get him mithril shirt type armor for instance? it seems to mess with balance to give this to things like tigers and not, say, a snake, but it also seems weird to give it to the snake. have i missed any faq about this or anything?
thanks in advance, new to druids :-)
thanks for the responses. and thanks for the links. i've clearly been relying on the srd too much and when i couldn't find clarification in it, i didn't even think of just getting the core rule book out. /facepalm.
hey folks, i'm thinking of building a pfs touch spell focused sorcerer (you know, because it's going to be super overpowered ;-)
1. i get a free touch attack attempt the round i cast the spell. does casting it/charging it up (not the touch part) cause an AoO as per a normal spell?
2. given the free touch attack after i've cast/charged up, can i cast/charge the touch spell, move, and then take the free touch attack to avoid any AoO (assuming they happen)?
3. does weapon finesse allow me to make touch attacks with my dex bonus - i'm pretty sure this is yes, but since i think of that as being initially meant for physically damaging attacks, i wanted to double check.
4. would weapon focus unarmed strikes help with unarmed touch attacks?
again, i'm talking raw here for pfs.
thanks for the additional thoughts. the poling makes sense as well. i'm not sure what folks mean by "walkways on the side" though. does that just mean a deck of sorts that the polers stand on?
thanks for the thoughts. this is with low level folks, so i don't need inventive methods, just looking for common ways. i hadn't really thought of sails, and i had totally forgotten about the towed from shore option. thanks for the thoughts.
quick question about how folks think trade barges go up river. i've been creating some homebrew for friends and they'll be moving some merchandise up river shortly. all i can figure is that they'll be taking turns rowing. they may be being attacked while rowin away from the dock (if rowing is what makes sense).
yeah, i guess what is weird is that movement is required in an overrun.
so the flurry of maneuvers ability allows this archetype to do an additional combat maneuver during a full round action. my question is, is there anyway to use that with an overrun? if you're charging for the overrun, would you be able to add another combat maneuver attempt after the overrun since a charge is considered, in many ways, a full round action? also, i'm thinking of this for pfs, so i guess i need more of a raw interpretation.
thanks in advance.