About the DC (since the text doesn't even specify the DC), I'd go for 10 + half your inquisitor or cleric level (minimum 1) + your Wis modifier. Until this gets clarified by Paizo staff, I'll suggest this to my DM.The text for Inquisitions actually covers this, which is why i didn't mention it in my post:
If an inquisition’s granted power calls for a saving throw, the DC of the save is equal to 10 + 1/2 the character’s inquisitor level + her Wisdom modifier. Unless otherwise stated, the caster level for granted power spell-like abilities is equal to the inquisitor’s class level.
Thanks! So it's just a matter of knowing what kind of save it is. I'd say Fort in this case.
|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Conflicting text issue:
- In 'Table 2-1: Feats' page 83, Knockout Artist benefit is listed as "Gain +2 damage per sneak attack when dealing nonlethal sneak damage".
- Page 107, Knockout Artist benefit is listed as "when using unarmed strike to deal nonlethal damage (blah blah), you gain +1 damage per sneak attack die you roll".
Considering Improved Unarmed Combat is a prerequisite, it's understandable this could be meant as a "Knockout Punch". Being a tier 2 feat, I'm not sure how to process the mechanics of the damage. The most likely answers I could reason are: +2 every (condition), +1 per sneak attack die every (condition), or +2 per sneak attack die every (condition).
Mechanics inquiry:
A few sneak attack feats are described in benefits as "(do such) per sneak attack dice rolled". For the feat Sap Mastery (pg 116), you are allowed to roll sneak attack dice twice in certain conditions. Would this add to the effective number of "Sneak attack dice rolled"?
|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Conflicting text issue:
- In 'Table 2-1: Feats' page 83, Knockout Artist benefit is listed as "Gain +2 damage per sneak attack when dealing nonlethal sneak damage".
- Page 107, Knockout Artist benefit is listed as "when using unarmed strike to deal nonlethal damage (blah blah), you gain +1 damage per sneak attack die you roll".
Considering Improved Unarmed Combat is a prerequisite, it's understandable this could be meant as a "Knockout Punch". Being a tier 2 feat, I'm not sure how to process the mechanics of the damage. The most likely answers I could reason are: +2 every (condition), +1 per sneak attack die every (condition), or +2 per sneak attack die every (condition).
Mechanics inquiry:
A few sneak attack feats are described in benefits as "(do such) per sneak attack dice rolled". For the feat Sap Mastery (pg 116), you are allowed to roll sneak attack dice twice in certain conditions. Would this add to the effective number of "Sneak attack dice rolled"?
In general, text trumps table, so Knockout Artist does +1 damage per sneak attack die.
As to the mechanical inquiry, I would be extremely dubious of this claim as you are still rolling the same number of dice. You are reolling the mtwice, but the end result is best of x dice, not 2* x dice.
Since most communal spells simply increase the base spell's spell level by 1, it seems that communal resist energy's caster level for the Ranger (3) must be an error. Otherwise, both communal resist energy and the superior communal protection from energy are 3rd level spells for rangers. What ranger would ever choose the former given the choice?
Since most communal spells simply increase the base spell's spell level by 1, it seems that communal resist energy's caster level for the Ranger (3) must be an error. Otherwise, both communal resist energy and the superior communal protection from energy are 3rd level spells for rangers. What ranger would ever choose the former given the choice?
Any ranger who is expecting to come under a lot of energy attacks. Although resist energy has a smaller buffer, more often then not, it doesn't run out like protection from energy does.
Running into a burning building to get people out? Resist energy. Using protection from energy will get you killed one it has sucked up too much damage.
Notice that in the Ultimate Combat on Wagons it says:
Propulsion: 4 Medium creatures or 1 Large creature.
But in the Core Rulebook it say:
Wagon: Two horses (or other beast of burden) must draw it.
A heavy Horse (as Horse in Bestiary 1 with advanced templat) has a strength of 20 and as such has a max Heavy Load of 2000 lb.
I assume the one in the Core Rulebook is the same as the light wagon (closest in Price (GP)) and that means with max load on a light wagon the single horse is drawing 1400 lbs (Wagon + Cargo)
A medium wagon is then a total weight of 2400, already exceeding the max weight (and then i calculat that the medium wagon weight as much as a light one.. and that is doubtful... so its probably even more).
I wont even mention the Heavy wagon :P
Had a discussion in another thread that due to the wagon being on wheels he could use the Pull/Push Rules, but i think this is wrong as the following text proves:
First on p.169 Core Rulebook. Last paragraph.
A character can generally push or drag along the ground as much as five times his maximum load. Favorable Conditions can double these numbers, and bad circumstances can reduce them by half or more.
Meaning, although if it was possible, a road aren flat, but goes up and down, and as such would make it impossible for a wagon going uphill to pull x5 max carrying capacity.
Second there is the Handle Animal skill, last bulletpoint, p.97 Core Rulebook.
Work (DC15): The animal pulls or pushes a medium or heavy load.
That one is pretty clear.
And to further back up that animals dont pull/push more than their Max carrying Capacity, you can look at APG p.187, 5th paragraph, last sentence.
Dog Sled:*text*. A dog sled can carry up to the carrying capacity of all the dogs that pull it.
|
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
Notice that in the Ultimate Combat on Wagons it says:
Propulsion: 4 Medium creatures or 1 Large creature.But in the Core Rulebook it say:
Wagon: Two horses (or other beast of burden) must draw it.Had a discussion in another thread that due to the wagon being on wheels he could use the Pull/Push Rules, but i think this is wrong as the following text proves:
First on p.169 Core Rulebook. Last paragraph.
A character can generally push or drag along the ground as much as five times his maximum load. Favorable Conditions can double these numbers, and bad circumstances can reduce them by half or more.Meaning, although if it was possible, a road aren flat, but goes up and down, and as such would make it impossible for a wagon going uphill to pull x5 max carrying capacity.
I'd actually argue that the pull/push rules are for an object not necessarily designed to move over the ground, like a boulder or statue. A wagon with wheels should qualify for favorable conditions and get a x10 max carrying capacity therefore.
That doesnt negat the rest of the example i showed, showing the intention is that they cannot pull more than their max load (and then the animal must be trained to do so, otherwise they can only pull and push their Light Load (as Shown under Handle Animal)).
|
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
how the animal is trained really isn't an issue. It's a pretty safe assumption that if an animal is pulling a wagon, it's a trained draft animal. It would only really come up if you used say, a warhorse, to pull your wagon.
As for the issue that a trained animal can pull it's max load, that's fine, since their max load is then modified by pulling/pushing an object per the standard encumberance rules.
If the rules had meant that they could pull/push up to x5 their carrying capacity they would have stated that, not that they can pull or push up to Maximum carrying capacity.
I could see the use of Pull/across town on cobbled and flat street, cause then its only for a very short period of time, but when you start looking at uneven roads with hills and a lot of other hindrances, for eight hours, thats not what the Pull/push rules are meant to deal with, thats where the Carrying capacity comes into play.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
In light of the latest FAQ on 2WF, the Shielded Fighter Archetype should really be Errata´d:
Shield Fighter (Ex): At 5th level, a shielded fighter gains a +1 bonus on attack and damage rolls when making a shield bash. These bonuses increase by +1 every four levels beyond 5th. With a full attack action, a shielded fighter may alternate between using his weapon or his shield for each attack. This action does not grant additional attacks or incur penalties as two-weapon fighting does. This ability replaces weapon training 1.
The bolded section is totally superfluous since this is how it apparently works for everybody.
I beleive that you´ve already stated that you plan a similar Errata to the Pole-Arm Fighter Archetype whose Sweeping Fend Ability is partially superfluous in light of how Trip works for everybody (the Bullrush aspect is still a useful addition).
|
| 2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Cad archetype - Page 45
The Cad archetype says:
"Skills: Acrobatics (Dex), Bluff (Cha), Escape Artist (Dex), Sleight of Hand (Dex), and Stealth (Dex) are class skills for a cad."
It doesn't use the words "gains" or "replaces." So what happens then? Do these skills replace a fighter's skills or are they in addition to them?
Edit: likewise page 47
Tactician's Strategic Training ability lists some class skills it gets. Is this in addition to a fighter's normal skills?
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Cad archetype - Page 45
The Cad archetype says:
"Skills: Acrobatics (Dex), Bluff (Cha), Escape Artist (Dex), Sleight of Hand (Dex), and Stealth (Dex) are class skills for a cad."
It doesn't use the words "gains" or "replaces." So what happens then? Do these skills replace a fighter's skills or are they in addition to them?
Yes, when you get an archetype you don't lose anything from the base class except what is explicitly taken away.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
page 111, Net and Trident
It says:
"Normal: A net is a two-handed ranged weapon."
...Since when?
Seriously I can't find anything in the core rules about that.
If this is an error, this feat doesn't do much beyond the damage bonus as it's allowing you to do something you already could.
|
page 111, Net and Trident
It says:
"Normal: A net is a two-handed ranged weapon."...Since when?
Seriously I can't find anything in the core rules about that.
If this is an error, this feat doesn't do much beyond the damage bonus as it's allowing you to do something you already could.
I haven't actually read UC, but I do recall mention of a feat in it that basically acted like Power Attack for throwing weapons, allowing you to throw them two-handed to add additional damage. Is it possible that before UC there were no rules for how many hands you needed to throw a weapon, and UC invented the concept of "two-handed thrown weapons"?
I haven't actually read UC, but I do recall mention of a feat in it that basically acted like Power Attack for throwing weapons, allowing you to throw them two-handed to add additional damage. Is it possible that before UC there were no rules for how many hands you needed to throw a weapon, and UC invented the concept of "two-handed thrown weapons"?page 111, Net and Trident
It says:
"Normal: A net is a two-handed ranged weapon."...Since when?
Seriously I can't find anything in the core rules about that.
If this is an error, this feat doesn't do much beyond the damage bonus as it's allowing you to do something you already could.
I have the PDF. Two-Handed Thrower does not nerf nets, and two-handed thrown weapons already existed in the sense that anyone could try to throw a two-handed melee weapon... as a full-round action with only the base Str bonus to damage (CRB p. 141, Thrown Weapons). Two-Handed Thrower lets you throw one-handed weapons two-handed, lets you throw two-handed as a standard action, and applies 1-1/2 times the Str bonus to damage when throwing two-handed.
|
|
There's no explicit statement that says nets are two-handed weapons in the core rules, but as someone who used to use weighted fishing nets to get bait fish, it's very, very, very difficult to throw one properly with only one hand. They don't unfold properly when thrown with just one hand unless you know exactly how to fold them and throw them. It's also really impossible to fold them one-handed (at least in a time and space sensitive manner, as in combat).page 111, Net and Trident
It says:
"Normal: A net is a two-handed ranged weapon."...Since when?
Seriously I can't find anything in the core rules about that.
If this is an error, this feat doesn't do much beyond the damage bonus as it's allowing you to do something you already could.
I'll buy that, having never used fishing nets myself but seen them cast in various media. Regardless, it should probably be mentioned in the core rules. I'll post in the errata thread for that book.
Somewhere hidden in the core rulebook is a sentence that specifically tells you the handedness of thrown ranged weapons within the (core) game. I've seen it before, but can't seem to find it now.
I'll post it should I find it.
| 4 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Working from the PRD so no page number.
Also not sure if this should be UM or APG errata.
We have this in Ultimate Combat:
Rage Powers: Any barbarian who meets the powers' prerequisites can select and use the following new rage powers. Totem rage powers grant powers related to a theme. A barbarian cannot select from more than one group of totem rage powers; for example, a barbarian who selects a beast totem rage power (see the Advanced Player's Guide) cannot later choose to gain any of the dragon totem rage powers (any rage power with “dragon totem” in its title),
Vs. this in the APG
Rage Powers (Ex): The following new rage powers can be taken by any barbarian that meets the prerequisites. Totem rage powers grant powers in a theme. A barbarian cannot select from more than one group of totem rage powers. For example, a barbarian that selects a beast totem rage power cannot later chose to gain any of the spirit totem rage powers.
Totem Warrior
A barbarian often has a special totem that is the patron of her tribe. While individual totems vary, those in the tribe that call upon a totem receive similar abilities. Totem warrior barbarians can select from the following rage powers.
Rage Powers: The totem warrior is based entirely upon his totem rage powers. In addition to the totem powers themselves, the following rage powers complement the totem warrior archtype (depending on the totem chosen): animal fury*, low-light vision*, night vision*, raging climber*, raging leaper*, raging swimmer*, and swift foot*.
So in UM Totem Warriors can take powers from multiple totems. But in the APG they cannot. As the Totem Warrior archetype gives up nothing to gain the multi-totem ability why have the single totem restriction as all barbarians can freely be Totem Warriors in addition to whatever else they are?
|
|
Litany of Warding p. 235
missing descriptor, all other Litany spells have "language dependent" in the descriptor, shouldn't this one too?
Nah, none of the litany spells that have "personal" as the target information have [language-dependent] as a descriptor, only the ones that target other creatures. Litany of Defense, Litany of Sight, and Litany of Warding are all personal spells.
|
|
I know this was discussed already on pages 3 and/or 4 of this thread, but I wanted to be sure because it seems nobody answered this conclusively (thought we did but I think there were some misunderstandings).
The kensai (pg. 55) 7th level ability Fighter Training. It seemed like we decided that Fighter Training replaced the 10th level ability of the same name, but one person took that conclusion and assumed that at 10th level, when a magus normally receives this ability, they gain access to other weapons (not just his favored weapon). Is this true? or is Fighter Training at 7th the only time he receives this ability at all, only gaining Fighter Training for his one and only favored weapon?
The confusion originated from the fact that it's not expressed anywhere that the 10th level Fighter Training ability is replaced, just moved to 7th level and it's a different version of it, replacing the 7th level ability Knowledge Pool. If this is true, then that means the 10th level of the kensai is a dead level (well, except for the access to a new spell level).
Somewhere hidden in the core rulebook is a sentence that specifically tells you the handedness of thrown ranged weapons within the (core) game. I've seen it before, but can't seem to find it now.
I'll post it should I find it.
If only I had a PDF, then I could use Ctrl-F. But I don't really care $10 worth, when I'm satisfied with the index. <shrug>
I'd like to know the average overland speeds of various vehicles.
|
|
Edit: Nevermind i read something wrong, specifically the OR part and focused on the BOTH part.
Anyway another question for that deed, does the "free action each round" means that this free action can be used only once per round (much like 5 foot step)?
Correct. Removing two of the prepositional phrases will make it more clear:
"...she can reload a single barrel each round instead."
What it's essentially telling you is you can do this as a free action once, freeing you up to do a swift action if you like (or allowing you to reload at all in case you did an immediate action before the start of your turn).
|
|
O-Yoroi leg piece armor bonus?
Is this an error?
In the Piecemeal armor rules it is listed as providing a +2 armor bonus while the bonus of every other piece is only +1. This results in the statistics for a full O-Yoroi suit having a higher total armor bonus than its separate listing under Asian armor in an earlier chapter.
Which is correct? Is the total armor bonus for a full O-Yoroi suit supposed +8 or +9?
Not sure if our books differ, but the math adds up to me:
O-yoroi arm piece: +1
O-yoroi leg piece: +2
O-yoroi torso piece: +5
Total: +8
Somewhere hidden in the core rulebook is a sentence that specifically tells you the handedness of thrown ranged weapons within the (core) game. I've seen it before, but can't seem to find it now.
I'll post it should I find it.
Pg 202, under "Two-Weapon Fighting"
Thrown Weapons: The same rules apply when you throw a weapon from each hand. Treat a dart or shuriken as a light weapon when used in this manner, and treat a bolas, javelin, net, or sling as a one-handed weapon.
O-Yoroi leg piece armor bonus?
Is this an error?
In the Piecemeal armor rules it is listed as providing a +2 armor bonus while the bonus of every other piece is only +1. This results in the statistics for a full O-Yoroi suit having a higher total armor bonus than its separate listing under Asian armor in an earlier chapter.
Which is correct? Is the total armor bonus for a full O-Yoroi suit supposed +8 or +9?
Not sure if our books differ, but the math adds up to me:
O-yoroi arm piece: +1
O-yoroi leg piece: +2
O-yoroi torso piece: +5Total: +8
But you get an additional +1 for a full suit.
|
|
But you get an additional +1 for a full suit.O-Yoroi leg piece armor bonus?
Is this an error?
In the Piecemeal armor rules it is listed as providing a +2 armor bonus while the bonus of every other piece is only +1. This results in the statistics for a full O-Yoroi suit having a higher total armor bonus than its separate listing under Asian armor in an earlier chapter.
Which is correct? Is the total armor bonus for a full O-Yoroi suit supposed +8 or +9?
Not sure if our books differ, but the math adds up to me:
O-yoroi arm piece: +1
O-yoroi leg piece: +2
O-yoroi torso piece: +5Total: +8
I stand corrected. I missed that part of the rules.
| 2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
The Final Embrace feat states:
"Normal: You can grab and constrict creatures one size smaller than you."
However, as of Bestiary 2 the Grab ability actually says:
"Unless otherwise noted, grab works only against opponents no larger than the same size category as the creature."
They can't both be right...
|
|
It says:
"Normal: A net is a two-handed ranged weapon."...Since when?
(I posted this in the Core Rulebook errata thread but it applies here as well)
Ok, so I know things looked confusing or even contradictory but I think I've figured this out. Assuming all rules from each book are correct here is what we can conclude about nets:
1) They are two-handed ranged weapons. Specifically two-handed thrown weapons.
2) While two-weapon fighting, you can treat a net as a one-handed ranged weapon as long as the other weapon you are wielding is also a thrown weapon.
3) The Net Adept feat from Ultimate Combat allows you to use a net as a one-handed melee reach weapon.
4) The Net and Trident feat from Ultimate Combat allows you to use a net as a one-handed ranged weapon while two-weapon fighting, but instead of the other weapon needing to be a thrown weapon, you can wield a light or one-handed melee weapon instead.
I know it doesn't make much sense, but rules as written this is what can be concluded and nothing is actually contradicting anything else. The only real hiccup in all this is that nets weren't specified as being two-handed ranged weapons in the Core Rulebook.
|
|
P. 144, third paragraph, last sentence.
"A creature can take the Master Combat Performer feat (see page 108), which allows any weapon it wields to gain the performance quality."
Issues:
1) The feat in question is on page 109, not 108.
2) The feat does NOT do what this sentence describes. Instead:
"Master Combat Performer (Combat)
...
Benefit: You can make performance combat checks as a free action. You are proficient in all weapons with the performance special quality."
|
|
I thought that's the intent also, but the feat doesn't actually say you CAN flank with a ranged weapon, which you normally cannot do.p. 100 Enfiladating Fire - how can a foe be flanked by only 1 ally? Should this be 2 or more?I could be wrong, but I assumed that the whole point of this feat IS to flank with a ranged weapon and a qualifying ally. So, if Bob is standing next to GoblinJoe and John is firing at him, John gets to apply the flanking bonus because he is taking advantage of Bob's ability to distract GoblinJoe.
This is a teamwork feat, after-all. So both Bob and John have "worked" this kind of ploy together, etc etc etc.
I believe what it's saying is that when you have this feat and you attack with a ranged weapon at a foe being flanked by two allies, as long as one of those allies also has this feat, you get the benefit of it. It does NOT grant you the ability to flank with a ranged weapon.
|
|
The rogue Pirate archetype replaces the Trapfinding ability twice (Sea Legs and Unflinching).
Actually when you look at unflinching closely you see there's another error, but one that's easy to correct. The last two sentences say:
"This ability replaces trap sense. This ability replaces trapfinding."
This ability is gained at 3rd level, same as trap sense, and has a progression similar to trap sense. It's clear trap sense is the one meant to be replaced. Errata involves simply deleting that last sentence.
|
|
In light of the latest FAQ on 2WF, the Shielded Fighter Archetype should really be Errata´d:
Shield Fighter (Ex): At 5th level, a shielded fighter gains a +1 bonus on attack and damage rolls when making a shield bash. These bonuses increase by +1 every four levels beyond 5th. With a full attack action, a shielded fighter may alternate between using his weapon or his shield for each attack. This action does not grant additional attacks or incur penalties as two-weapon fighting does. This ability replaces weapon training 1.The bolded section is totally superfluous since this is how it apparently works for everybody.
I beleive that you´ve already stated that you plan a similar Errata to the Pole-Arm Fighter Archetype whose Sweeping Fend Ability is partially superfluous in light of how Trip works for everybody (the Bullrush aspect is still a useful addition).
I'm going to go ahead and throw this into the Advanced Player's Guide errata thread since that's where the Shielded fighter archetype is.
| 2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Should the Bard (Archaeologist) get Disable Device as a class skill considering at 2nd level he gains an ability that gives him pretty much the same thing as Trapfinding for a rogue?
Should the Bard (Archaeologist) get Disable Device as a class skill considering at 2nd level he gains an ability that gives him pretty much the same thing as Trapfinding for a rogue?
That's an interesting question. The Ranger (Trapper) in UM gets both at first level, as does the Seeker archetype for Oracles and Sorcerers in the Pathfinder Society Field Guide. However, there are some differences.
The Trapper archetype gains Disable Device, Trapfinding, and Ranger Traps, but sacrifices all of a Ranger's magical ability (including even the ability to use spell trigger and spell completion magic items). The Seeker archetype just sacrifices some class skills or a bonus feat, and only gets Disable Device and Trapfinding. The Archaeologist sacrifices Versatile Performance, which gave the option of using the class skill Performance in place of some other skills, and seems similar to what the Seeker gives up.
However, Clever Explorer is noticeably more powerful than Trapfinding. It applies to all Perception checks -- not just those made to locate traps -- and that's arguably the most useful skill in the game. The amount of time an action takes is significant, as is the ability to take 10 while distracted or endangered (just ask an asset manager how much consistency is worth).
They're all different enough that it's somewhat subjective, which is good design. However, it looks to me like adding Disable Device as a class skill on top of Clever Explorer would just be a bit too much for what was given up. Multiclassing with Rogue would make up for it, but would also sacrifice progress on the Bard abilities, so that's balanced too.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 6
|
| 2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Should the Bard (Archaeologist) get Disable Device as a class skill considering at 2nd level he gains an ability that gives him pretty much the same thing as Trapfinding for a rogue?
It was intentional that they not get it (and be a bit worse than a rogue at it as a consequence).
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Litany of Madness
School enchantment (charm) [language dependent]; Level antipaladin 4, inquisitor 6
Casting Time 1 swift action
Components V, S, DF
Range close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels)
Target one creature
Duration 1 or more rounds (see below)
Saving Throw no, see below; Spell Resistance yes
This litany is a sermon of madness. The target is confused. At the start of each of its turns, it can make a saving throw against the confused effect (DC of the spell). If the target fails the save, it continues to be confused. If it makes the save, the effect ends.
Is this a WILL save?
The Do-maru torso armor on page 204 has the 30 foot speed reduced to 15 feet and the 20 foot speed not reduced at all.
Also several of the medium armors if made into full suits will not reduce movement at all by the chart (unless we go with the core rulebook's statement that all medium armors reduce movement).
|
|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
I was looking at the Eastern Armors, and was wondering. Is there a reason that Kikko Armor is both cheaper and better than Do-Maru in armor check penalty, spell failure percentage, and weight?
The description would suggest that perhaps the stats of the two armors were accidentally switched.
Can one of the developers weigh in on that? At first I thought it was a PRD typo, but after checking my Ultimate combat and my friend's copy, I found that it was printed that way.