|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Mark Seifter wrote:
Thanks Mark. This works. I might do an FAQ later for those with less lenient GM's. Yeah I know it could backfire. :)
BumpIf you think I should FAQ it, that is fine.
Mark, I have another arcanist question.
The core books says you can use higher level slots for lower level spells. This applies for spontaneous and prepared casters.
Can an arcanist prepare lower level spells in higher level slot like a prepared caster, and also burn higher level per days uses to cast lower level spells?
If not then how does it work.
The core rule books are setting neutral. The setting line of books are for Golarion.
bump in case Mark accidentally missed it. <last bump for this question>
Chess Pwn wrote:
toughness and extra ki and extra anything else don't modify a mechanic that has a set regain lower than the max. HP goes to full, ki goes to full, extra anything else goes to full. when you take the feat you gain three more in your pool right then. Then when you prepare spells you gain 3+1/2 your level.
That is a terrible comparison because hit points dont work like the arcanist feature does. However I think most people know the correct way so I am going to let it go. Run it however you want at your table.
Dimensional Slide (Su): The arcanist can expend 1 point from her arcane reservoir to create a dimensional crack that she can step through to reach another location. This ability is used as part of a move action or withdraw action, allowing her to move up to 10 feet per arcanist level to any location she can see. This counts as 5 feet of movement. She can only use this ability once per round. She does not provoke attacks of opportunity when moving in this way, but any other movement she attempts as part of her move action provokes as normal.
Now I am 99% sure the intent is for the target to actual move as in "use movement", but the ability only calls out a move action.
Would I be correct?
Yeah I know the ACG errata was just released, but I will still start an FAQ if you say I am correct so we can get this officially fixed.
PS: If I somehow missed this despite checking the errata several times someone just let me know.
You gain three more points in your arcane reservoir, and the maximum number of points in your arcane reservoir increases by that amount.
I see that as affecting the starting amount "and" the max.
It specifically says you gain 3 more points in your arcane reservoir, which would be whatever you currently have. As an example if you only have 1 point left then you have 1 point in your arcane reservoir. <-----that handles the current amount explanation.
It also specifically calls out in a seperate section that the max increase--> "the maximum number of points in your arcane reservoir increases by that amount"
If your max only increases then the part about the increase to your arcane would not even be needed. They could have just said "The maximum number of points in your arcane reservoir increases by 3", and called it a day.
You have not made one valid point here.
What the GM aught to provide is subjective and does nothing to change "how things are" mechanically speaking.
I never said they could memorize all spells so that statement is pointless and as I have said countless times before casters do not need "the perfect spell" to solve a problem, and even before level 10 they are unlikely to run out of spells in a day. <---Other issues related to this have been broken down several times on this forum.
What your ideal world is does not matter because not everyone plays the game like you do, and if you don't get the relevance of "At the end of the day the answer basically boils down to "different people have different requirements in order to be satisfied" in response to "why do martials need nice things", then you are likely beyond any help that anyone could give you.
1. Then get the rules right or let people know up front that you play loosely with the rules.
2. Some of us don't have to look the rules up to know you are wrong, and "just go with it" is terrible general advice for enough reasons that I am sure you can think of some without me having to list any.
Most PC's do not get to choose the point of combat since they are likely invading enemy territory.
Also a caster could potentially put out the fire, and attack an enemy. Most martials can't do that.
At the end of the day the answer basically boils down to "different people have different requirements in order to be satisfied".
Nope. It specifically calls out wild shape so unless we have stealth errata or errata it won't work. As of now it officially only works with wild shape. It is basically a druid tax enhancement., just like natural spell is a tax feat.
I do not have as much money invested in PF as other people do so a rework that would overhaul most of the game could work for me, but many people have a lot of money invested, and those what percentage of the "heavy buyers" Paizo would lose has to be taken into consideration. That is why completing redesigning from the ground up is risky.
I think it will happen one day, but I dont think they are trying to push the issue.
The issue here is that once something leave the plane you are on distance is trumped, and the weapon has a distance limit of 100 feet. That bag may be 5 feet away, but the weapon is still farther away than that.
However the text also says the weapon teleports, but I dont think the devs intended for it to cross dimensions. I think it was meant to be more like how dimension door lets you teleport, but you still end up on the same dimensional plane you started on.
I will FAQ it since I can't find any hard rules to back my case.
The fighter is terrible outside of combat, and it does not get enough in combat to make up for that. The barbarian as an example is equally as good at killing things, and it can do things outside of combat, and everything you named is just there to make sure it stays around and hits things. You can't really hit things if you are unconscious or running away. So Seranov does have a point.
Also it can only swap out fighter feats which are combat feats. To only says it can swap out feats as if it can swap out any feat is not exactly fair.
The fact that it has 2 skill points is one issue, but its class skills are also poor. The cleric only has 2 skills, but it gets useful skills.
Just because something delivers what it promises that does not make it adequate, and actually depending on how you read the text it does not deliver on what it promises. Just like the core monk the flavor does not exactly hold up well in game.
They certainly are not "Lords of the battlefield,". "Rousing the hearts of armies" is also not what a fighter does. That sounds more like a bard. That is two failed promises already.
edit: I do agree that it is better than the 3.5 fighter, but that is not a high bar to jump over.
Scott Wilhelm wrote:
Some people will flame you for a necro. Other will flame you for not doing a search. You really can't win, so I say do what you want.
The only necros that annoy me is when someone responds directly to a poster as if they posted yesterday. However using that thread to talk about the topic is ok for me. I still wouldn't flame you for a direct comment, but I would ask why you did it.
That is how everyone runs it that can read the rules correctly. If everyone(99%) of us are wrong then start the FAQ, or you can cite rules. So far you have not typed anything to back your opinion, but feel free to do what you want at your table. Just know the PDT would not rule it the way you are suggesting it.
Shadow: A shadow spell creates something that is partially real from extradimensional energy. Such illusions can have real effects. Damage dealt by a shadow illusion is real.
There is no 20% rule from the magic chapter with regard to illusions.
The only time 20% comes up in the magic chapter is here.
Verbal (V): A verbal component is a spoken incantation. To provide a verbal component, you must be able to speak in a strong voice. A silence spell or a gag spoils the incantation (and thus the spell). A spellcaster who has been deafened has a 20% chance of spoiling any spell with a verbal component that he tries to cast.
Yes, I know the other shadow spells reference 20%, but that does not make it a general rule.
Project image itself does not mention the 20% rule so that does not apply.
It does say "Saving Throw Will disbelief (if interacted with)"
So what happens when an illusion is disbelieved?
A successful saving throw against an illusion reveals it to be false, but a figment or phantasm remains as a translucent outline.
The saving throw lets you know the spell is an illusion if you make the save, and that is a good thing. Otherwise you could keep trying to fight it, and getting jacked up by a caster who is laughing at you from the other side of the room.
The illusion itself is also not casting the spell. It is just where the caster is sending the spells(which are very real) from.
That is what this line is for ----> " The spells affect other targets normally, despite originating from the projected image."
Since there is nothing in the rules saying that passing the saves lessens the affect of the spells then that is how the rules work.
I found the item that was used.
This heavy stone box measures 2 feet to a side, and the tiny compartment inside is lined with lead. Inside the compartment is a half-ounce of deep green paste. This paste is made of animal fat mixed with ground-up blightburn. Once the box is opened, blightburn paste limits teleportation within 60 feet and irradiates anyone within 60 feet, afflicting them with blightburn sickness (see sidebar for details on both effects). Any creature that touches the paste is afflicted with blightburn sickness (no save), and takes 2d6 points of fire damage per round until the paste is cleaned away with a successful DC 15 Heal check.
Create: Craft (alchemy) DC 30
Blightburn: The mineral blightburn is a green-glowing crystal and burns anyone who touches it, dealing 2d6 points of fire damage per round of contact, and its radiation causes blightburn sickness.
The substance also limits teleportation. Anyone casting a teleportation spell in or teleporting to a cavern with blightburn in its walls must succeed at a DC 30 caster level check.
I just noticed this thing is hauled around in a 2 foot cubed box meaning it is likely going to need to hands to be handled so someone is going to have to pull it out of a bag of holding or handy haversack(assuming it can fit in), and then open it.
Type disease, contact (see text); Save Fortitude DC 22
Onset 1/day; Frequency 1/day
Effect 1d6 Con damage and 1d6 Cha damage; contact is automatic when a creature comes within a 60-foot radius, and can be blocked only by lead sheeting, 1 foot of stone, or a force effect; Cure 2 consecutive saves
So this caster has 20 CR of actual minions, but he also has gate, and there are magic items and feats that can boost you caster level by at least 3, but I think have seen builds with casters levels more than have 5 above what the caster is. I will go with 3. That means he can pull in a 20 HD monster, and just control it. Otherwise he has to negotiate with it. I doubt he will go that route unless he called it earlier, and has a prearranged plan set up. IIRC Pit Fiends are CR 20 monsters and have 20 HD. They have "trap the soul as an SLA". By the 4th round of them spamming it someone is likely to no longer be in the fight.
Those +3 caster levels also means that if he has to escape he can do so with his 2nd attempt, but that would also count as overcoming the encounter, even if the caster did not die. As for his minions he could have monsters are just have more casters, such as summoners, or clerics.
I skipped a few post so if he is restricted to monsters I guess they should be thematically chosen.
I just noticed the wizard is level 18 so those HD go up to 21 for any gated creature. I think the pit fiend is still going to be chosen, and there may be more than one of them coming in.
Also this thread is sorta pointless. We know how it ends. You can't put limits on one group, and basically no limits on the other, and not know the outcome. If we are playing basketball, and you have to follow the rules, and I can can do anything I want, to include calling in Lebron James and a young Micheal Jordan to play for me, I am winning the game.
I really don't know if those putting very hard limits on martials are the ones saying they can't have nice things. I think they are happy with how the game is. For my own games it would mess with my suspension of belief to have them level a mountain, but they can do a lot more than what is acceptable by the laws of physics. That is why I liked ToB.
Orfamay Quest wrote:
A few months ago a guy wanted a character who did use any magic(spells, SLA, or SU's), and still be a "caster killer". I would definitely look into that thread because this group faces similar issues even though there are 4 of them. I think an ability was found that was helpful, but I am not sure if it was mythic or not, but IIRC, it could be foiled if the caster knew the martial had it.
My next post will give the ability if I can find it.
I would not say "obviously" since the core summoner is likely to out perform it.
I don't think any class is worthy of an across the board ban so I would never recommend it as a general solution. I might do it based on that specific group, and campaign. It just depends on the group. Not every option is PF is good for every table. I dont care for the master summoner because if the player keeps pulling summons his turn can take forever. They also can overrun AP's as written, due to action economy, but for a game where a GM has time to adjust to the party, and the player is not taking forever on his turn, they are not so bad.
I just thought about something. The WW decided to go after a known powerful alchemist instead of just stealing the items themselves from a University?
I am sure they would know who the count was so that seems risky o me.. Let me know if I missed anything.
If not then I am going to alter the story to make this more reasonable.
The first time I ran this my group never really knew how powerful the creator of the golem was, but I still want it to make sense in case they find out this time around.
PFS will just dump him back here. It is a basic rules question, with no PFS specific elements.
I know. I just want him to know how PFS(the GM's and LT's) rule it. Of course he can continue to be stubborn, but he won't have the excuse of "I had not PFS guidance", or "I had no way of not knowing".
This is another example of someone not liking how a rule works and reading it how they want to. To the OP since you are having trouble grasping the concept of this rule in combination with PFS just go to the PFS section and see what answers you get.
The rod does say the affect is added as the spell is cast. I dont know what is confusing about that. If you have another interpretation for that line of text I would like to hear it.
"Certain metamagic feats" being too good is different from "metamagic feats", as a whole, being OP. That is why I questioned the statement.
Well it would actually be more like 20 the level arcanist or psion vs 15 arcane/15 psion, but dragons are likely 20/20 in some cases so you would still need to be a level 30 character to get that 20/20 assuming you split the levels evenly. That gives you 20 actual class level in each class, but the other side is that changing out psionic levels for "psychic magic" for those that don't like power points is easier this way if the psion is changed out for a psychic class on a one for one basis instead of reverse engineering how many cerebremancer levels are involved. That is the best reason to not use cerebremancer.
He intentionally did not use the cerebremancer(arcane/psion combo).
I will probably do it for my games, so I might put a conversion out later on. If so I can send you a PM, if you want it.
Broken?Most of the metamagic feats are not worth a feat.