Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
Pathfinder Society

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

>>Ask *James Jacobs* ALL your Questions Here!<<


Off-Topic Discussions

24,551 to 24,600 of 47,502 << first < prev | 487 | 488 | 489 | 490 | 491 | 492 | 493 | 494 | 495 | 496 | 497 | next > last >>

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Cojonuda wrote:

Hi James,

I am DM'ing Skull and Shackels and one the PC's is a female sorcerer who got pregnant after being raped. The sorcerer is looking for a way to have an abortion. Regardless of how the sorcerer does it, the PC is LE and follower of Gozreh.
In the party there is a Cleric of Gozreh (a devout worshiper).
1) If the PC gets an abortion what would Gozreh do? Will not allow the cleric to cast heal spells on the sorcerer?
2) In general, how Gods behave/act when the murder of innocent life takes place (this is how I intepret the situation) this not being a sacrifice to a diety.
3)Would there be an allignment shift once the PC gets an abortion?

The PC wanted someone to cast cure disease but I said being pregant is not a disease.

THX

from what i know only Pharasma is against abortion in any situation, in your case i'd rule the abortion a neutral act at worst and a good act eventually. i mean come on better the child not be born than be hated as a reminder of a rape (those tend to end up in child protection services after a lot of abuse in our world), and for the good part it's cause an half rotten pirate boat simply isn't a good environment to raise a child, even more true if we're speaking of the Wormwood.


Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
The NPC wrote:

Mr. James Jacobs,

If a character gains a channel energy ability but at their character level -6 but also gain an ability that allows half of their class level to count to their level of channeling energy would these two abilities stack and would it equal out to the character's level or exceed their character level if it was over?

Is there a specific example of that?


Dear James:

Do you ever find it weird that your first name is the Greek version of your last name?

:D


James Jacobs wrote:
Stazamos wrote:
Can Brew Potion be used to make oils for offensive purposes? Would it work exactly like using the spell on which the oil is based, including holding the charge, or would the fact it's a substance change things, such as needing the opponent to sit still as you apply the oil, or the character applying the oil being affected by it, being the first creature touched?

As in, an "oil of fireball" that you throw and it blows up when it hits the target and the flask it's in breaks?

Nope; that's a Wondrous Item.

I was thinking more along the lines of Vampiric Touch or Inflict Light Wounds.


Here's a question: Ultimate Combat has gladiator weapons in it...but no gladiator armor (ie, retarius or secutor getup). I saw gladiator armor in Dragon Annual #1, so there are WotC versions of gladiator armor.

Which statement is true?

1. Gladiator armor could have gone into Ultimate Combat (because it's based on real-life stuff), but didn't because of whatever.
2. Gladiator armor couldn't have gone into Ultimate Combat, because the WotC-rules versions were both non-OGL and 'correct', thus you couldn't put in the same rules into your book and gotten away with it.


ohako wrote:

Here's a question: Ultimate Combat has gladiator weapons in it...but no gladiator armor (ie, retarius or secutor getup). I saw gladiator armor in Dragon Annual #1, so there are WotC versions of gladiator armor.

Which statement is true?

1. Gladiator armor could have gone into Ultimate Combat (because it's based on real-life stuff), but didn't because of whatever.
2. Gladiator armor couldn't have gone into Ultimate Combat, because the WotC-rules versions were both non-OGL and 'correct', thus you couldn't put in the same rules into your book and gotten away with it.

Consider using the Piecemeal Armor variant rules for Gladiator armor.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

An Unexpected Briefing Air New Zealand flight saftey video.

Thoughts?

Paizo Employee Creative Director

kagenotora wrote:

1- does a melee weapon with a range increment can be enchanted with Special Abilities that "can only be placed on a ranged weapon"?(some questions assume the answer is yes, mainly because of the Ricochet Hammer)

2- what's the range increment of for example a dagger when enchanted with Distance and thrown by a character with a belt of mighty hurling? 30 feet or 40 feet? (since i thought about it i keep imagining a warrior throwing a pilum/spear/light hammer at some on the first floor of the Eiffel Tower from the ground floor :p)

2- about Designating:
a) does it work for the one owning the weapon?
b) for a character that use a Designating dagger(or an other throwing weapon) i'm assuming the Designating Special Ability only work when it's thrown, am i correct?

3- now that i think about it, what about other Special Abilities like seeking?

4- would a rogue with a seeking dagger be able to sneak attack someone with concealment (like from dim light)?

5- about the ricochet hammer, what happen in the case of a, for example, level 11 fighter wielding 2 or 3 of them with those feats: rapid fire, two weapon fighting, improved two weapon fighting, greater two weapon fighting, quick draw? does he throw 3 hammers one coming back immediately and the other two will bounce up to 3 times each? or does he throw 2 hammers one bouncing 4 times the other 3 times? also can a ricochet hammer bounce back and forth between 2 targets?

6- about the Ring of Sustenance, doesn't the 2 hours thingy make a group of characters all wearing this ring (and their mounts too if they have any) effectively double their travel speed ? as they can make cycles of 8 hours walking 2x2 hours sleeping? or enabling them to craft as if not traveling each day while traveling if they have the right traveler's crafting kit?

1) Yes.

2) 40 feet.

2a) Yes.
2b) Yes, only when thrown.

3) Only when thrown.

4) Yes.

5) He'd only be able to make the normal number of bonus attacks his high BAB grants.

6) It certainly could, assuming that everyone in the party has a ring and is willing to devote a precious ring slot to the ring.


Has any progress been made on improving the RAW Stealth since the Playtest? I heard it had to be hugely delayed, but any news on it?

Link here to the stealth playtests: Stealth Playtest 1
Stealth Playtest 2


Cheapy wrote:
The NPC wrote:

Mr. James Jacobs,

If a character gains a channel energy ability but at their character level -6 but also gain an ability that allows half of their class level to count to their level of channeling energy would these two abilities stack and would it equal out to the character's level or exceed their character level if it was over?

Is there a specific example of that?

Order of the star cavalier and the empyreal bloodline.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Gauss wrote:

Ahhh I think I understand the confusion. There are two types of corners and I was not specifying the type of corner. (I thought it was self-explanatory in the question, my bad.)

Example: The letter "L" has an inside corner with perpendicular walls. The outside corner has no perpendicular walls. Thus you can brace on the inside and not the outside. Hence the wording on page 91 where you can brace in a corner that has perpendicular walls.

So to restate the question: Can you brace in a corner that has two perpendicular walls (the inside corner of the "L") as per the climb rule quoted on page 91?

If not, what exactly does that rule mean? How do I use it?

- Gauss

"Climbing a corner where you can brace against perpendicular walls" would probably indeed mean just that—bracing against an "L" shaped corner. It's certainly confusing though.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Cheapy wrote:

I just read your Xoan from Sean's Hungry Little Monsters. Are there any creatures like that in Pathfinder? I found the idea of quickly switching between emotions and going mad due to it to be really cool.

A somewhat popular trope is that of the mysterious "caretaker race". Beings who for many years have been following some ancient order to ensure the upkeep of something. Kind of like those beings on The Citadel in Mass Effect. I recall that this occurs in the Darklands somewhere, but does it occur elsewhere in Golarion? If so, are there any products to read about that?

Xoans don't need "creatures like that." We can just use xoans. Since it's all open content, and since the publisher and author work for Paizo... I'm pretty sure that they can be encountered in Golarion.

The "Caretaker race" trope is pretty much in effect only in the presence of the Darkland vaults and the strange ruins at the north pole as far as I know... and they're not necessarily "caretakers" as much as they are "mad scientists."

It's not something we've said much more about yet though.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

doc the grey wrote:
what devils would ratfolk or wererats worship?

Dispater and Mammon for sure.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dragon78 wrote:

1)What I mean by monsters based on those animals I mean like giant versions, prehistoric , swarms, mythical versions, undead, etc. examples would be like giant starfish, termite swarm, Encantado(shapeshifting dolphin from portuguese myth) so anything like these?

2)Yeah they did put out that feat that gave sorcerer bloodline powers to any one that has a good cha score so I don't see how a familiar could be game breaking? I could think of some interesting archtypes for classes to get an animal companion. I could see how tomany animal companions could be gamebreaking but I would still like those kind of options.

3)Seen any movies lately and if so what did you think of them?

1) Probably. We make new monsters every month, after all.

2) Just because we do something once doesn't mean we can or will or do something again... especially if it's something that breaks or goes against game design philosophy.

3) Sinister: VERY good movie. Some nonsensical parts, but overall, very effective and spooky.
Paranormal Activity 4: The worst of the series, and the first in the series I didn't really like. Doesn't do anything new, relies too much on false scares, and rips off better movies like Paranormal Activity 1–3, REC, V/H/S, and Grave Encounters too much.
Beyond the Black Rainbow: One of the weirdest movies I've seen lately. Not sure what to make of it.
Apartment 143: Bleh. Lame.
Lovely Molly: SUPER creepy movie, with one of the most chilling penultimate scenes I've seen in a movie in a long time.


James Jacobs wrote:
doc the grey wrote:
what devils would ratfolk or wererats worship?
Dispater and Mammon for sure.

Or anyone who promised them an eternal supply of cheese?

Paizo Employee Creative Director

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Stratagemini wrote:
Now that you've finished it and it's out for review by Kickstarters, what's you're favorite part of the Enigma Vaults?

The weird treasures in the main vault.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

AlgaeNymph wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
Stratagemini wrote:
How did Sorshen gain immortality? Was it bathing in the blood of a thousand Virgins?
That's a secret for a later day and a later product.
** spoiler omitted **

There ya go.

Turns out, after 75 or so Adventure Paths, it gets hard to remember what we have and haven't revealed.

And in cases where someone asks me something that I've got plans for, I tend to be close-lipped about things as a default.

In this case, though, yes, we've revealed that Sorshen gained immortality via a blood sacrifice. What form and how that sacrifice worked and looked, though... we'll see.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

The NPC wrote:

Mr. James Jacobs,

If a character gains a channel energy ability but at their character level -6 but also gain an ability that allows half of their class level to count to their level of channeling energy would these two abilities stack and would it equal out to the character's level or exceed their character level if it was over?

You'd gain both of the channel energy options. One would grant you uses at Character Level –6, and the other would grant you uses equal to half your class level.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

6 people marked this as a favorite.
Cojonuda wrote:

Hi James,

I am DM'ing Skull and Shackels and one the PC's is a female sorcerer who got pregnant after being raped. The sorcerer is looking for a way to have an abortion. Regardless of how the sorcerer does it, the PC is LE and follower of Gozreh.
In the party there is a Cleric of Gozreh (a devout worshiper).
1) If the PC gets an abortion what would Gozreh do? Will not allow the cleric to cast heal spells on the sorcerer?
2) In general, how Gods behave/act when the murder of innocent life takes place (this is how I intepret the situation) this not being a sacrifice to a diety.
3)Would there be an allignment shift once the PC gets an abortion?

The PC wanted someone to cast cure disease but I said being pregant is not a disease.

THX

Topics like rape and abortion and the like are best handled by your game group, as appropriate for your table and players and GM.

Whether or not abortion is an evil act is a matter of opinion, and not one I'm interested in getting into arguments about here. And me ruling whether or not it's evil or not would derail this thread instantly.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Changeling.Jack wrote:

Dear James:

Do you ever find it weird that your first name is the Greek version of your last name?

:D

Nope.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Stazamos wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
Stazamos wrote:
Can Brew Potion be used to make oils for offensive purposes? Would it work exactly like using the spell on which the oil is based, including holding the charge, or would the fact it's a substance change things, such as needing the opponent to sit still as you apply the oil, or the character applying the oil being affected by it, being the first creature touched?

As in, an "oil of fireball" that you throw and it blows up when it hits the target and the flask it's in breaks?

Nope; that's a Wondrous Item.

I was thinking more along the lines of Vampiric Touch or Inflict Light Wounds.

Those would still be wondrous items. Although you could, for example, make a potion of inflict light wounds. Undead could drink them for healing, and foolish PCs could drink them and get hurt.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

ohako wrote:

Here's a question: Ultimate Combat has gladiator weapons in it...but no gladiator armor (ie, retarius or secutor getup). I saw gladiator armor in Dragon Annual #1, so there are WotC versions of gladiator armor.

Which statement is true?

1. Gladiator armor could have gone into Ultimate Combat (because it's based on real-life stuff), but didn't because of whatever.
2. Gladiator armor couldn't have gone into Ultimate Combat, because the WotC-rules versions were both non-OGL and 'correct', thus you couldn't put in the same rules into your book and gotten away with it.

Gladiator armor is best modeled by existing armor types, or via a piecemeal armor system.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tels wrote:

An Unexpected Briefing Air New Zealand flight saftey video.

Thoughts?

Didn't watch more than a second before I decided it was too goofy to continue watching.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Xethik wrote:

Has any progress been made on improving the RAW Stealth since the Playtest? I heard it had to be hugely delayed, but any news on it?

Link here to the stealth playtests: Stealth Playtest 1
Stealth Playtest 2

No.

The idea to tinker with possible adjustments to the rules in the format of a mini playtest on the blog was an experiment. A failed one, in my opinion.

Furthered by the fact that I've NEVER had a problem with the stealth rules in my games or in games I play in. Perhaps because with the application of a little common sense, they work fine as they are.

Andoran

James,

How would you rule a Magus using Spell Combat with dimension door?

1) Dimension door indicates that no other actions can be taken after you cast it.

2) Magus Spell Combat basically is its own Full Attack Action, where you can cast a spell and still perform your attacks afterwards.

Since the Spell Combat Full Attack action is a single action as defined by what a Full Attack action is, then after a Magus casts dimension door they wouldn't be doing any other actions, but just finishing the one they started by casting the spell by using Spell Combat.

Is this a legitimate interpretation of the rules?

I'd say it is strict Rules as Written, but the design intent of dimension door was written prior to the creation of a magus and the spell combat ability.

Thanks,

Andy

P.S. force hook charge a 3rd level Magus spell, seems to do something similar anyways, although there is a ranged touch attack involved, and the movement does provoke Attacks of Opportunity. It also only has a close range. On the other hand, dimension door is a 4th level spell.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Are there any plans to revisit the Dimension of Dreams? I just read up on it and mentioned it was possible that you could only get to Leng through it. Will AP #65 answer that?

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Bbauzh ap Aghauzh wrote:

James,

How would you rule a Magus using Spell Combat with dimension door?

1) Dimension door indicates that no other actions can be taken after you cast it.

2) Magus Spell Combat basically is its own Full Attack Action, where you can cast a spell and still perform your attacks afterwards.

Since the Spell Combat Full Attack action is a single action as defined by what a Full Attack action is, then after a Magus casts dimension door they wouldn't be doing any other actions, but just finishing the one they started by casting the spell by using Spell Combat.

Is this a legitimate interpretation of the rules?

I'd say it is strict Rules as Written, but the design intent of dimension door was written prior to the creation of a magus and the spell combat ability.

P.S. force hook charge a 3rd level Magus spell, seems to do something similar anyways, although there is a ranged touch attack involved, and the movement does provoke Attacks of Opportunity. It also only has a close range. On the other hand, dimension door is a 4th level spell.

The trick with dimension door is to take your actions you want to do BEFORE you cast it. If you cast dimension door at the end of your turn, then who cares if you can't take any more actions? :-P

If a magus casts dimension door... he'd best do so at the end of his line of attacks, because once he casts it... he's done for the round.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Cheapy wrote:
Are there any plans to revisit the Dimension of Dreams? I just read up on it and mentioned it was possible that you could only get to Leng through it. Will AP #65 answer that?

We've tinkered with the Dimension of Dreams a lot. Mostly in "The Harrowing." We'll be going there again in the future though.

You can get to Leng via other routes.

Pathfinder Adventure Path #65 will indeed have some answers.

Andoran

James Jacobs wrote:
Bbauzh ap Aghauzh wrote:

James,

How would you rule a Magus using Spell Combat with dimension door?

1) Dimension door indicates that no other actions can be taken after you cast it.

2) Magus Spell Combat basically is its own Full Attack Action, where you can cast a spell and still perform your attacks afterwards.

Since the Spell Combat Full Attack action is a single action as defined by what a Full Attack action is, then after a Magus casts dimension door they wouldn't be doing any other actions, but just finishing the one they started by casting the spell by using Spell Combat.

Is this a legitimate interpretation of the rules?

I'd say it is strict Rules as Written, but the design intent of dimension door was written prior to the creation of a magus and the spell combat ability.

P.S. force hook charge a 3rd level Magus spell, seems to do something similar anyways, although there is a ranged touch attack involved, and the movement does provoke Attacks of Opportunity. It also only has a close range. On the other hand, dimension door is a 4th level spell.

The trick with dimension door is to take your actions you want to do BEFORE you cast it. If you cast dimension door at the end of your turn, then who cares if you can't take any more actions? :-P

If a magus casts dimension door... he'd best do so at the end of his line of attacks, because once he casts it... he's done for the round.

Hmmm... interesting take. I can see this take being justified by the intent of dimension door and the way it was written in previous editions. But with the rules, currently as written, this doesn't make sense.

Will there be errata either on dimension door; Full Attack Action clarifying that each melee attack (or spell in the case of a Magus) is considered a separate action for spells, feats, abilities, et. al. that mitigate how many actions can be taken; or Spell Combat?

Suggested errata for dimension door:

Quote:
After using this spell, you can't take any other actions (including finishing your current action) until your next turn.

Bolded text is added.

- OR -

Quote:
After using this spell, your turn is over, and you cannot take any other actions until your next turn.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
James Jacobs wrote:
Cheapy wrote:
Are there any plans to revisit the Dimension of Dreams? I just read up on it and mentioned it was possible that you could only get to Leng through it. Will AP #65 answer that?

We've tinkered with the Dimension of Dreams a lot. Mostly in "The Harrowing." We'll be going there again in the future though.

You can get to Leng via other routes.

Pathfinder Adventure Path #65 will indeed have some answers.

Excellent news!


Is there supposed to any sort of standard for class skills on a prestige class?

Some (Such as Arcane Archer, Mystic Theurge and Arclord of Nex) only give a handful, while others (such as Loremaster, Assassin and Champion of Irori) give a whole platter like a base class would, while a tiny few (Duelist and Dragon Disciple) are bit in between.

It doesn't seem to be based on how specific the entry is (Arcane Archer is really open and most two class entries will be missing at least one of the skills and likely more, but Arclord of Nex requires a Wizard's "Arcane School" and I don't see any way to enter without already having Linguistics as a class skill and most casting advancing prestige classes have spellcraft that is on any caster already) nor how unchanged it is from 3.5. A few also seem to be odd when one class is required, but the other half of the requirements can be met with multiple classes (Entering Mystic Theurge without Know:Religon is as simple as druid entry. Entering it without spellcraft and know:Arcana is impossible through anything but Red Mantis Assassin, which I doubt planned) Battle Herald has all of the Cavalier's class skills despite requiring an ability only they have, and oddly enough doesn't have perform, the one thing any entry will have on the other side).


James Jacobs wrote:
Stazamos wrote:
I was thinking more along the lines of Vampiric Touch or Inflict Light Wounds.
Those would still be wondrous items. Although you could, for example, make a potion of inflict light wounds. Undead could drink them for healing, and foolish PCs could drink them and get hurt.

How do you figure those are wondrous items? They both seem valid spells for Brew Potion. Let me try a different angle, if you don't mind humoring me -- oil of invisibility: Brew Potion, or Craft Wondrous Item?

And in either case, what happens if you apply it to an object using your hands? I'd guess that simply having the oil on one's hand does nothing, as it needs to be activated, and that when the oil is applied, despite the oil being in contact with both an object and a creature, which are both valid targets for invisibility, the magic just "knows" what the intended result is (it's magic, after all). Sound about right?

Thanks! It's more of a thought experiment, than anything.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Bbauzh ap Aghauzh wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
Bbauzh ap Aghauzh wrote:

James,

How would you rule a Magus using Spell Combat with dimension door?

1) Dimension door indicates that no other actions can be taken after you cast it.

2) Magus Spell Combat basically is its own Full Attack Action, where you can cast a spell and still perform your attacks afterwards.

Since the Spell Combat Full Attack action is a single action as defined by what a Full Attack action is, then after a Magus casts dimension door they wouldn't be doing any other actions, but just finishing the one they started by casting the spell by using Spell Combat.

Is this a legitimate interpretation of the rules?

I'd say it is strict Rules as Written, but the design intent of dimension door was written prior to the creation of a magus and the spell combat ability.

P.S. force hook charge a 3rd level Magus spell, seems to do something similar anyways, although there is a ranged touch attack involved, and the movement does provoke Attacks of Opportunity. It also only has a close range. On the other hand, dimension door is a 4th level spell.

The trick with dimension door is to take your actions you want to do BEFORE you cast it. If you cast dimension door at the end of your turn, then who cares if you can't take any more actions? :-P

If a magus casts dimension door... he'd best do so at the end of his line of attacks, because once he casts it... he's done for the round.

Hmmm... interesting take. I can see this take being justified by the intent of dimension door and the way it was written in previous editions. But with the rules, currently as written, this doesn't make sense.

Will there be errata either on dimension door; Full Attack Action clarifying that each melee attack (or spell in the case of a Magus) is considered a separate action for spells, feats, abilities, et. al. that mitigate how many actions can be taken; or Spell Combat?

Suggested...

The rules of the game are not meant to cover every single situation. Some rules supersede others. In this case, dimension door's cap on being able to do things after you cast the spell supersedes the general rule that a magi can finish his current action. Dimension door creates a spell-specific exception to the rule.

No errata needed.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Stazamos wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
Stazamos wrote:
I was thinking more along the lines of Vampiric Touch or Inflict Light Wounds.
Those would still be wondrous items. Although you could, for example, make a potion of inflict light wounds. Undead could drink them for healing, and foolish PCs could drink them and get hurt.

How do you figure those are wondrous items? They both seem valid spells for Brew Potion. Let me try a different angle, if you don't mind humoring me -- oil of invisibility: Brew Potion, or Craft Wondrous Item?

And in either case, what happens if you apply it to an object using your hands? I'd guess that simply having the oil on one's hand does nothing, as it needs to be activated, and that when the oil is applied, despite the oil being in contact with both an object and a creature, which are both valid targets for invisibility, the magic just "knows" what the intended result is (it's magic, after all). Sound about right?

Thanks! It's more of a thought experiment, than anything.

Because once a potion stops being a spell you drink to cast on yourself, or an oil stops being something you spread on something to work, or doesn't mimic a 1st-3rd level spell that's a legal choice for becoming a potion, it becomes a wondrous item. Like silversheen or an elixir of love.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

deuxhero wrote:

Is there supposed to any sort of standard for class skills on a prestige class?

Some (Such as Arcane Archer, Mystic Theurge and Arclord of Nex) only give a handful, while others (such as Loremaster, Assassin and Champion of Irori) give a whole platter like a base class would, while a tiny few (Duelist and Dragon Disciple) are bit in between.

It doesn't seem to be based on how specific the entry is (Arcane Archer is really open and most two class entries will be missing at least one of the skills and likely more, but Arclord of Nex requires a Wizard's "Arcane School" and I don't see any way to enter without already having Linguistics as a class skill and most casting advancing prestige classes have spellcraft that is on any caster already) nor how unchanged it is from 3.5.

No standard. It's up to the author to decide how many class skills to give a prestige class, and up to that author's developer to decide if the author was right or wrong. The choice is generally made on whether or not it makes sense for a prestige class to have a class skill.

In the end, since the difference between a class skill and a non-class skill in Pathfinder only really ever amounts to a 15% difference when it comes to skill checks (unlike in 3.5, where non-class skills are SIGNIFICANTLY less good), it's not really a big deal if some give more and some give fewer.


James Jacobs wrote:
Xethik wrote:

Has any progress been made on improving the RAW Stealth since the Playtest? I heard it had to be hugely delayed, but any news on it?

Link here to the stealth playtests: Stealth Playtest 1
Stealth Playtest 2

No.

The idea to tinker with possible adjustments to the rules in the format of a mini playtest on the blog was an experiment. A failed one, in my opinion.

Furthered by the fact that I've NEVER had a problem with the stealth rules in my games or in games I play in. Perhaps because with the application of a little common sense, they work fine as they are.

Makes sense, and I completely agree. The only time that I was forced to play a more RAW version of Stealth was solved with some liberal book-to-face and then the Red Mantis Assassin having more fun.

Thanks for the reply.


James Jacobs wrote:
Because once a potion stops being a spell you drink to cast on yourself, or an oil stops being something you spread on something to work, or doesn't mimic a 1st-3rd level spell that's a legal choice for becoming a potion, it becomes a wondrous item. Like silversheen or an elixir of love.

Right, but I don't see any of Brew Potion's requirements being broken by the spells I'm mentioning. But I think I might have figured it out the disconnect -- is it your view that potions are only for creatures, and oils are only for objects? I actually do prefer that (answers this question, as well as others, probably), but Brew Potion doesn't make such a requirement, or even imply it, at least as far as I can tell. So is that the problem with the examples I mentioned?

Andoran

James Jacobs wrote:
Bbauzh ap Aghauzh wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
Bbauzh ap Aghauzh wrote:

James,

How would you rule a Magus using Spell Combat with dimension door?

1) Dimension door indicates that no other actions can be taken after you cast it.

2) Magus Spell Combat basically is its own Full Attack Action, where you can cast a spell and still perform your attacks afterwards.

Since the Spell Combat Full Attack action is a single action as defined by what a Full Attack action is, then after a Magus casts dimension door they wouldn't be doing any other actions, but just finishing the one they started by casting the spell by using Spell Combat.

Is this a legitimate interpretation of the rules?

I'd say it is strict Rules as Written, but the design intent of dimension door was written prior to the creation of a magus and the spell combat ability.

P.S. force hook charge a 3rd level Magus spell, seems to do something similar anyways, although there is a ranged touch attack involved, and the movement does provoke Attacks of Opportunity. It also only has a close range. On the other hand, dimension door is a 4th level spell.

The trick with dimension door is to take your actions you want to do BEFORE you cast it. If you cast dimension door at the end of your turn, then who cares if you can't take any more actions? :-P

If a magus casts dimension door... he'd best do so at the end of his line of attacks, because once he casts it... he's done for the round.

Hmmm... interesting take. I can see this take being justified by the intent of dimension door and the way it was written in previous editions. But with the rules, currently as written, this doesn't make sense.

Will there be errata either on dimension door; Full Attack Action clarifying that each melee attack (or spell in the case of a Magus) is considered a separate action for spells, feats, abilities, et. al. that mitigate how many actions can be

...

Thanks for the clarification James!

Shadow Lodge

Stazamos wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
Because once a potion stops being a spell you drink to cast on yourself, or an oil stops being something you spread on something to work, or doesn't mimic a 1st-3rd level spell that's a legal choice for becoming a potion, it becomes a wondrous item. Like silversheen or an elixir of love.
Right, but I don't see any of Brew Potion's requirements being broken by the spells I'm mentioning. But I think I might have figured it out the disconnect -- is it your view that potions are only for creatures, and oils are only for objects? I actually do prefer that (answers this question, as well as others, probably), but Brew Potion doesn't make such a requirement, or even imply it, at least as far as I can tell. So is that the problem with the examples I mentioned?

It's actually hidden in the description of Potions themselves rather than in Brew Potion or the Create Magic Items section:

Quote:
A potion is a magic liquid that produces its effect when imbibed. Potions vary incredibly in appearance. Magic oils are similar to potions, except that oils are applied externally rather than imbibed.

An oil can be applied to a person, but an item cannot drink a potion.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Stazamos wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
Because once a potion stops being a spell you drink to cast on yourself, or an oil stops being something you spread on something to work, or doesn't mimic a 1st-3rd level spell that's a legal choice for becoming a potion, it becomes a wondrous item. Like silversheen or an elixir of love.
Right, but I don't see any of Brew Potion's requirements being broken by the spells I'm mentioning. But I think I might have figured it out the disconnect -- is it your view that potions are only for creatures, and oils are only for objects? I actually do prefer that (answers this question, as well as others, probably), but Brew Potion doesn't make such a requirement, or even imply it, at least as far as I can tell. So is that the problem with the examples I mentioned?

Yes, my preference is that potions are for creatures and oils are for objects. Oils are actually a pretty underutilized part of the game—always have been. It's not surprising that they're more or less ignored by the potion brewing rules.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
James Jacobs wrote:
Changeling.Jack wrote:

Dear James:

Do you ever find it weird that your first name is the Greek version of your last name?

:D

Nope.

I always assumed it was a pen name. Is it your real name?


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
James Jacobs wrote:
Yes, my preference is that potions are for creatures and oils are for objects. Oils are actually a pretty underutilized part of the game—always have been. It's not surprising that they're more or less ignored by the potion brewing rules.

One of my favorite tricks I pulled on my PCs was when the Skinsaw Man put out the lights by pouring an oil of darkness on the floor. "I can still SEE you!" he hissed...


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

If you were to stat up one of these for a bestiary, what would you call it? It would have to have Grab, right? Is it an aberration or some sort of mutant giant vermin? I've never seen a piece of furniture that looked more like it would eat you if you sat on it, from the huge single eyeball to the multiple grasping tentacles. :D


Can you crit incorporeal creatures with magic?
specifically Force magic, since it affects them normally...

Cheliax

Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Cards, Companion, Maps, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

James-

I am working on a home-brew pantheon, no real focus as of yet, and I was wondering what advice you could give me with regards to building the foundation of a pantheon?

Paizo Employee Creative Director

LazarX wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
Changeling.Jack wrote:

Dear James:

Do you ever find it weird that your first name is the Greek version of your last name?

:D

Nope.
I always assumed it was a pen name. Is it your real name?

It's my real name. Been using it from the start.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Joana wrote:
If you were to stat up one of these for a bestiary, what would you call it? It would have to have Grab, right? Is it an aberration or some sort of mutant giant vermin? I've never seen a piece of furniture that looked more like it would eat you if you sat on it, from the huge single eyeball to the multiple grasping tentacles. :D

It'd be an animated object with grab and a few extra attacks probably.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Demonskunk wrote:

Can you crit incorporeal creatures with magic?

specifically Force magic, since it affects them normally...

Nope.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

1 person marked this as a favorite.
the Haunted Jester wrote:

James-

I am working on a home-brew pantheon, no real focus as of yet, and I was wondering what advice you could give me with regards to building the foundation of a pantheon?

Start small, and don't be afraid to pull in deities from real-world mythology or other game settings as needed to fill in gaps if the demand for deities in your world outpaces your ability to create them.


Hey again James. I got 3 questions for ya:

1) Does the 'gore attack' that is gained from the Helm of the Mammoth Lord (in ultimate equipment) count as a primary natural attack (it doesn't explicitly say so, but I assume it does)?

2) Is the 'gore attack' gained from the Helm of the Mammoth Lord effected by the Amulet of Mighty Fists (again, I assume so, but I'm just checking)?

3) And finally, if I a character has a bite attack and a gore attack, is that character allowed to use both attacks during a full-round action (again, my assumption is yes because one uses the 'face' while the other uses 'the head'...and there also seem to be many creatures in the bestiary that can do this as well)?

Thanks again for the help :)

24,551 to 24,600 of 47,502 << first < prev | 487 | 488 | 489 | 490 | 491 | 492 | 493 | 494 | 495 | 496 | 497 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Community / Off-Topic Discussions / >>Ask *James Jacobs* ALL your Questions Here!<< All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.