|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
This has been debated several times, and the devs have yet to give a direct answer on how invis works in this case.
It is a flat DC 20 to notice that someone invis is around. The pinpoint DC is 40. That assumes no stealth is in play. If the person is standing still then it is a 40 to notice and 60 to pin point.
For stealth is makes sense to say that you add your stealth roll to those numbers along with other modifiers. I really don't like it though, and I would hope the devs would clear it up one day.
They already get full BAB with flurry of blows, but not when they are not flurrying.
Just tell the player you will allow it on a trial basis. That way he will understand he might not be able to keep it.
If you don't have line of sight to the light, then you can't see the light.
If you just want to use the tactic I would just houserule the FF into an SU that does work in against darkness, but by the rules it won't work.
I've thought about doing something like that so the drow can attack from farther out than 60 feet.
It would keep the normal drow below drow nobles, but still have them above elves, and in the older game editions they were supposed to be more dangerous than normal elves.
Nicholas Pettinato wrote:
I think it was an error on their part, not something intentional.For my games I would just have change the numbers to add up to +6, but if you want something official I would suggest starting a new post, and asking for an FAQ so they can put it on the errata list.
I meant to say "ranged magical attacks" not "rays", but the same principle applies.
The books says how certain attacks work. There is no rule saying it only applies to nonmagical attacks.
Yes you can fill a higher level spell slot with a lower level spell, but you can not fill a lower level spell with a higher level spell.
At level 1 you do not have level 9 spell slots. You only have level 1 spell slots. That chart you see in the wizard class entry tells you how many slots you have for each spell level. Those "bonus slots" are of the same level that you can cast, just like the bonus slots from intelligence are of the same levels that the wizard can actually use.
Ideally speaking if the party has good teamwork, and the right spells are used damage can be mitigated because it becomes neccesary to heal. However if the GM just goes out of his way to make encounters hard enough that healing is needed, that may not matter.
Edit: Now that I see you are playing Carrion Crown which I am GMing I can say the GM is altering the NPC's if that is a common theme. A few(less than 5) monsters in that book have an AC of 30.
Warrior in Red wrote:
That question should really go to the 3pp provider. It would be up to them to decide if they wanted to allow their standard actions to be able to do anything any other standard action can do or be limited in scope.
From a rules(by the words) perspective it seems to work, but I don't think that was the intention. I think it is an unintended side affect so I would ask your GM if he will allow it. If it is for PFS I would not build around it because if it gets FAQ'd it could be changed to a non-legal use of the ability.
Are you even allowed to do that?
I don't play in PFS so I am not affected. I am just asking because I keep seeing varying statements in when a GM is allowed to turn someone away. It is almost like each area has its own house rules for that.
Dave Justus wrote:
Ok, I can agree with that(result), but ChessPawn's "how" was still off.
Chess Pwn wrote:
I already explained that. The rules say the bow passes properties to the arrow. The rules do not say the arrow passes anything to the bow.
Chess Pwn wrote:
+1 bane arrow is +3 for the purpose of the target and does +2d6. It does not really change into a default +3 arrow, nor lose bane.Also you missed where I said adding bane twice does not allow for doubling up on damage. I said that because an FAQ said that is how it works. So once again you can bane a weapon twice, but it wont increase the damage.
Lilith Knight wrote:
I think we agree but where are you getting your numbers from?
I have 1d8+2d6+7 first example.
For the 2nd I have 1d8+2d6+5
Both assume a medium sized wielder.
Chess Pwn wrote:
The arrow can only have the bane property apply once so the bane from the arrow and bow would overlap. There would be no 4d6. It is the same reason why attacking a demon with double baned weapon that goes after chaotic and evil outsiders only works once.
I agree with this also.
I viewed their claws as able to manipulate items so they should be able to swing a weapon. It is however not efficient to do so.
Cleave takes a standard action, and it can not be used for an attack of opportunity unless you have some special feature to allow you to do so. However, I don't know of any.
As to the main question I think both are legal targets, however since any one act only allows for one AoO you should not get to attack both. That would allow you to get more than one AoO per provoking act, and they are both using the same charge/movement
The GM is not allowing them to explore. He tells them what is in the building, and the uses that as an excuse to stop them from exploring.
He says he is it is because we are not fully exploring the dungeons, and that is fine but he does not understand that once you introduce a strict timeline/race against the clock, you kill the desire to explore. Also we use spells to take short cuts through stuff and we are generally not allowed to re-visit dungeons once we leave. See, once we beat the last boss of a dungeon, he tells us everything we missed so now if we go back, it is meta. We are in book 5 right now, by the way.
That is a dumb thing to do. He should just stay quiet, and let you search the rooms. The game also has no built in "you must do this in ___ days". I would just ignore it. If the campaign ends then it ends.
Enlarge Person works.
You can cast personal spells, and spells that don't normally affect that creature type on your eidolon/familiar/animal companion.
Basically either condition works.
However it must come from that class.
As an example if you are a wizard/summoner the spells you cast as a summoner would use the share spells feature. Your daily wizard spells would not work.
This will vary by group. If you are good at explaining, the players understand well, and you drop a few rules then no, but otherwise the way you explain position of objects and creatures will likely be misunderstood or something will be forgotten.
Jeff Merola wrote:
That is an SLA with a specific exception, not a spell or general summoning SLA.
So by the normal rules it is allowed to spam monsters.