>>Ask *Mark Seifter* All Your Questions Here!<<

[WXOXW]

Greetings all,

I've got two questions. I'm new to this site. However I've been playing the game for years. I have a question about the Monk Of Many Styles and Improved Unarmed Strike. My DM is saying that since the Bonus Feat section of the MOMS says that...

"This ability replaces a monk’s standard bonus feats."

...the MOMS has to spend a feat slot to actual have Improved Unarmed Strike and Stunning Fist, for that matter, since they are "standard bonus feats" for a monk.

Is my DM's interpretation how all of you are interpreting this?

Was the MOMS intended to start at 1st level without Improved Unarmed Strike and Stunning Fist as bonus feats?

On the pfsrd, the link for BONUS FEATS from the MOMS archetype goes to the BONUS FEAT section of the monk class, I disagree with the DM.

[Xelaaredn]

WXOXW wrote:

Greetings all,

I've got two questions. I'm new to this site. However I've been playing the game for years. I have a question about the Monk Of Many Styles and Improved Unarmed Strike. My DM is saying that since the Bonus Feat section of the MOMS says that...

"This ability replaces a monk’s standard bonus feats."

...the MOMS has to spend a feat slot to actual have Improved Unarmed Strike and Stunning Fist, for that matter, since they are "standard bonus feats" for a monk.

Is my DM's interpretation how all of you are interpreting this?

Was the MOMS intended to start at 1st level without Improved Unarmed Strike and Stunning Fist as bonus feats?

On the pfsrd, the link for BONUS FEATS from the MOMS archetype goes to the BONUS FEAT section of the monk class, I disagree with the DM.

Improved Unarmed Strike is mentioned as being given as a bonus feat under Unarmed Strike, not under Bonus Feats. So, no, you don't lose that feat as a first level Master of Many Styles. Same with Stunning Fist as that also has it's own section apart from Bonus Feats.

Otherwise it would say, "This ability replaces the monk's standard bonus feats, unarmed strike, and stunning fist." (Though to be fair, it should say alters not replaces in my opinion.) Which would pretty much cripple the monk even with the new bonus feat ability you'd get.

Edit: redacted

[WXOXW]

Xelaaredn wrote:

WXOXW wrote:

Greetings all,

I've got two questions. I'm new to this site. However I've been playing the game for years. I have a question about the Monk Of Many Styles and Improved Unarmed Strike. My DM is saying that since the Bonus Feat section of the MOMS says that...

"This ability replaces a monk’s standard bonus feats."

...the MOMS has to spend a feat slot to actual have Improved Unarmed Strike and Stunning Fist, for that matter, since they are "standard bonus feats" for a monk.

Is my DM's interpretation how all of you are interpreting this?

Was the MOMS intended to start at 1st level without Improved Unarmed Strike and Stunning Fist as bonus feats?

On the pfsrd, the link for BONUS FEATS from the MOMS archetype goes to the BONUS FEAT section of the monk class, I disagree with the DM.

Improved Unarmed Strike is mentioned as being given as a bonus feat under Unarmed Strike, not under Bonus Feats. So, no, you don't lose that feat as a first level Master of Many Styles. Same with Stunning Fist as that also has it's own section apart from Bonus Feats.

Otherwise it would say, "This ability replaces the monk's standard bonus feats, unarmed strike, and stunning fist." (Though to be fair, it should say alters not replaces in my opinion.) Which would pretty much cripple the monk even with the new bonus feat ability you'd get.

Edit: redacted

Yes, thank you for the quick response. For other archetype I've read, it is sectionally specific. I'll convey this information.

[Xelaaredn]

WXOXW wrote:

Xelaaredn wrote:

WXOXW wrote:

Greetings all,

I've got two questions. I'm new to this site. However I've been playing the game for years. I have a question about the Monk Of Many Styles and Improved Unarmed Strike. My DM is saying that since the Bonus Feat section of the MOMS says that...

"This ability replaces a monk’s standard bonus feats."

...the MOMS has to spend a feat slot to actual have Improved Unarmed Strike and Stunning Fist, for that matter, since they are "standard bonus feats" for a monk.

Is my DM's interpretation how all of you are interpreting this?

Was the MOMS intended to start at 1st level without Improved Unarmed Strike and Stunning Fist as bonus feats?

On the pfsrd, the link for BONUS FEATS from the MOMS archetype goes to the BONUS FEAT section of the monk class, I disagree with the DM.

Improved Unarmed Strike is mentioned as being given as a bonus feat under Unarmed Strike, not under Bonus Feats. So, no, you don't lose that feat as a first level Master of Many Styles. Same with Stunning Fist as that also has it's own section apart from Bonus Feats.

Otherwise it would say, "This ability replaces the monk's standard bonus feats, unarmed strike, and stunning fist." (Though to be fair, it should say alters not replaces in my opinion.) Which would pretty much cripple the monk even with the new bonus feat ability you'd get.

Edit: redacted

Yes, thank you for the quick response. For other archetype I've read, it is sectionally specific. I'll convey this information.

Keep in mind, I'm not a developer/designer, nor am I Mark. Just a guy who plays and usually gets the DM slot at the table.

[Chess Pwn]

is it possible in PFS for a bloodrager to be both an Id Rager and an Urban Bloodrager? My biggest issue is that the Adopted magic adds spells to your spell list and spells known. And the Id's Atavistic Caster makes your spellcasting psychic. So I don't know it that is technically altering the same thing and just not listed in the altering section, or if I'm good to go.

[Lab_Rat]

BigNorseWolf wrote:

Huh. So that superman pose doesn't just look cool, its actually required....

Wait, DAZED while flying will get you killed?

Yeah. Flight just got A LOT easier to combat. Your also totally screwed if your dazed or stunned because there will be NO feather fall from the fly spell and no actions to cast / activate feather fall from a spell or ring.

[QuidEst]

Lab_Rat wrote:

BigNorseWolf wrote:

Huh. So that superman pose doesn't just look cool, its actually required....

Wait, DAZED while flying will get you killed?

Yeah. Flight just got A LOT easier to combat. Your also totally screwed if your dazed or stunned because there will be NO feather fall from the fly spell and no actions to cast / activate feather fall from a spell or ring.

Meaning that the question of which pre-req for flight an Aerokineticist should take is now "definitely Air's Cushion".

[Lab_Rat]

QuidEst wrote:

Lab_Rat wrote:

BigNorseWolf wrote:

Huh. So that superman pose doesn't just look cool, its actually required....

Wait, DAZED while flying will get you killed?

Yeah. Flight just got A LOT easier to combat. Your also totally screwed if your dazed or stunned because there will be NO feather fall from the fly spell and no actions to cast / activate feather fall from a spell or ring.

Meaning that the question of which pre-req for flight an Aerokineticist should take is now "definitely Air's Cushion".

I think the only way to counter this as a spell caster is with a contingency spell set to cast feather fall.

[TriOmegaZero]

I thought rings of feather fall activated automatically.

[Lorewalker]

TriOmegaZero wrote:

I thought rings of feather fall activated automatically.

They do.

"This ring is crafted with a feather pattern all around its edge. It acts exactly like a feather fall spell, activated immediately if the wearer falls more than 5 feet."

It doesn't take an immediate action, it just activates immediately. So, no decision process, just activation.

[Lab_Rat]

Ah. I read "exactly like a feather fall spell" and read into that that you had to actually spend an immediate action.

Now a must own ring for any flyer.

[Lorewalker]

Lab_Rat wrote:

Ah. I read "exactly like a feather fall spell" and read into that that you had to actually spend an immediate action.

Now a must own ring for any flyer.

To be honest, it always was. Without one, going unconscious midair could be a death sentence.

[Mcarvin]

I have a question about the Medium Archmage spirit Seance Boon. I've been told Mark designed the class. I was hoping for some clarification of RAW or a statement on intent.

Here is a link to the thread http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2t79t?The-Medium-Archmage-Spirit-Seance-Boon#10 .

In summary,

"Does the seance boon benefit for the archmage spirit add to ability score damage?"

"This is like a Rogue sneak attacking or a Paladin smiting with Calcific Touch."

"I'll note that "...of the same type that they would normally deal..." clause in the ability text may set this apart from rogue or paladin ability text.
Neither the Paladin or Rogue have this qualifier."

"Also, I found this very interesting
In the "Damage" section it talks about "types" of damage.
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/basics-ability-scores/glossary"

Ability damage is specifically categorized as a type of damage and therefore, unless I'm missing something, the archmage seance boon will increase ability damage from spells.

[Imbicatus]

Lab_Rat wrote:

Ah. I read "exactly like a feather fall spell" and read into that that you had to actually spend an immediate action.

Now a must own ring for any flyer.

Air Cushion is a must for any air kineticist looking to fly now too. It was always better than Air's Leap, but even more so now.

[Luthorne]

Mcarvin wrote:

I have a question about the Medium Archmage spirit Seance Boon. I've been told Mark designed the class. I was hoping for some clarification of RAW or a statement on intent.

Here is a link to the thread.

In summary,

"Does the seance boon benefit for the archmage spirit add to ability score damage?"

"This is like a Rogue sneak attacking or a Paladin smiting with Calcific Touch."

"I'll note that "...of the same type that they would normally deal..." clause in the ability text may set this apart from rogue or paladin ability text.
Neither the Paladin or Rogue have this qualifier."

"Also, I found this very interesting
In the "Damage" section it talks about "types" of damage.
Glossary"

Ability damage is specifically categorized as a type of damage and therefore, unless I'm missing something, the archmage seance boon will increase ability damage from spells.

Remember that not all information on the Pathfinder SRD is actually from Paizo material. Can you say what book that piece of information came from? It's not in the glossary in the Core Rulebook at least.

[Tels]

Luthorne wrote:

Mcarvin wrote:

I have a question about the Medium Archmage spirit Seance Boon. I've been told Mark designed the class. I was hoping for some clarification of RAW or a statement on intent.

Here is a link to the thread.

In summary,

"Does the seance boon benefit for the archmage spirit add to ability score damage?"

"This is like a Rogue sneak attacking or a Paladin smiting with Calcific Touch."

"I'll note that "...of the same type that they would normally deal..." clause in the ability text may set this apart from rogue or paladin ability text.
Neither the Paladin or Rogue have this qualifier."

"Also, I found this very interesting
In the "Damage" section it talks about "types" of damage.
Glossary"

Ability damage is specifically categorized as a type of damage and therefore, unless I'm missing something, the archmage seance boon will increase ability damage from spells.

Remember that not all information on the Pathfinder SRD is actually from Paizo material. Can you say what book that piece of information came from? It's not in the glossary in the Core Rulebook at least.

The Medium class is from Occult Adventures, so too is the Archmage spirit and it's Seance Boon. So they're both Paizo official.

[KingOfAnything]

Tels wrote:

Luthorne wrote:

Mcarvin wrote:

I have a question about the Medium Archmage spirit Seance Boon. I've been told Mark designed the class. I was hoping for some clarification of RAW or a statement on intent.

Here is a link to the thread.

In summary,

"Does the seance boon benefit for the archmage spirit add to ability score damage?"

"This is like a Rogue sneak attacking or a Paladin smiting with Calcific Touch."

"I'll note that "...of the same type that they would normally deal..." clause in the ability text may set this apart from rogue or paladin ability text.
Neither the Paladin or Rogue have this qualifier."

"Also, I found this very interesting
In the "Damage" section it talks about "types" of damage.
Glossary"

Ability damage is specifically categorized as a type of damage and therefore, unless I'm missing something, the archmage seance boon will increase ability damage from spells.

Remember that not all information on the Pathfinder SRD is actually from Paizo material. Can you say what book that piece of information came from? It's not in the glossary in the Core Rulebook at least.

The Medium class is from Occult Adventures, so too is the Archmage spirit and it's Seance Boon. So they're both Paizo official.

Luthorne was referring specifically to the glossary discussion of types which is a composition of many different sources and may have distorted the meaning by changing or removing the context of the published material.

[Rysky]

KingOfAnything wrote:

Tels wrote:

Luthorne wrote:

Mcarvin wrote:

I have a question about the Medium Archmage spirit Seance Boon. I've been told Mark designed the class. I was hoping for some clarification of RAW or a statement on intent.

Here is a link to the thread.

In summary,

"Does the seance boon benefit for the archmage spirit add to ability score damage?"

"This is like a Rogue sneak attacking or a Paladin smiting with Calcific Touch."

"I'll note that "...of the same type that they would normally deal..." clause in the ability text may set this apart from rogue or paladin ability text.
Neither the Paladin or Rogue have this qualifier."

"Also, I found this very interesting
In the "Damage" section it talks about "types" of damage.
Glossary"

Ability damage is specifically categorized as a type of damage and therefore, unless I'm missing something, the archmage seance boon will increase ability damage from spells.

Remember that not all information on the Pathfinder SRD is actually from Paizo material. Can you say what book that piece of information came from? It's not in the glossary in the Core Rulebook at least.

The Medium class is from Occult Adventures, so too is the Archmage spirit and it's Seance Boon. So they're both Paizo official.

Luthorne was referring specifically to the glossary discussion of types which is a composition of many different sources and may have distorted the meaning by changing or removing the context of the published material.

Only Golarion setting-specific is altered on d20. The PRD and Archives of Nethys are unaltered.

Since OA is a setting-neutral core rulebook everything should be unaltered from it.

[Luthorne]

Rysky wrote:

KingOfAnything wrote:

Tels wrote:

Luthorne wrote:

Mcarvin wrote:

I have a question about the Medium Archmage spirit Seance Boon. I've been told Mark designed the class. I was hoping for some clarification of RAW or a statement on intent.

Here is a link to the thread.

In summary,

"Does the seance boon benefit for the archmage spirit add to ability score damage?"

"This is like a Rogue sneak attacking or a Paladin smiting with Calcific Touch."

"I'll note that "...of the same type that they would normally deal..." clause in the ability text may set this apart from rogue or paladin ability text.
Neither the Paladin or Rogue have this qualifier."

"Also, I found this very interesting
In the "Damage" section it talks about "types" of damage.
Glossary"

Ability damage is specifically categorized as a type of damage and therefore, unless I'm missing something, the archmage seance boon will increase ability damage from spells.

Remember that not all information on the Pathfinder SRD is actually from Paizo material. Can you say what book that piece of information came from? It's not in the glossary in the Core Rulebook at least.

The Medium class is from Occult Adventures, so too is the Archmage spirit and it's Seance Boon. So they're both Paizo official.

Luthorne was referring specifically to the glossary discussion of types which is a composition of many different sources and may have distorted the meaning by changing or removing the context of the published material.

Only Golarion setting-specific is altered on d20. The PSRD and Archives of Nethys are unaltered.

Since OA is a setting-neutral core rulebook everything should be unaltered from it.

This glossary is not from Occult Adventures, nor from the Core Rulebook. I am unsure of where the information came from. Also, your statement is not entirely correct, the Pathfinder SRD has been known to include information from 3.5 - which is not necessarily relevant to Pathfinder material - as well as various third party sources, which may primarily be relevant to their own material rather than necessarily Paizo material.

At any rate, if you can provide the Paizo source for the Damage section in the glossary he linked - which, as I noted, is not from the Core Rulebook or Occult Adventures - my caution may be unneeded, but I have seen people before referencing information from the Pathfinder SRD that turned out to be from non-Paizo sources, and thus not necessarily relevant to the discussion at hand.

Edit: And as I said, I'm not referring to the Medium or the Archmage spirit or the seance boon, I'm referring to the glossary which he seems to be basing his argument on.

[Tels]

The SRD only includes information from 3.5 if it was published by Paizo in Golarion, such as in one of their adventure paths or in Elves of Golarion. If a new, updated, version is released, they replace it, such as what happened with content from Rise of the Runelords.

You are correct though, the glossary entry does not exist in a published book. As is stated, directly in the glossary entry itself, it's a compilation of different sources for ease of use. Hence the whole "Editor's" tag and all that.

You'll find that, if one actually pays attention to the SRD, it's a far better source of rules than the PRD, because the PRD is only ever updated when the website team has time to do it, and when a new print run of a book is done. So any FAQs or errata released outside of a new printing of a book are not updated on the PRD as they released, whereas they are done so on the SRD and on Archives of Nethys.

[KingOfAnything]

Rysky wrote:

KingOfAnything wrote:

Tels wrote:

Luthorne wrote:

Mcarvin wrote:

I have a question about the Medium Archmage spirit Seance Boon. I've been told Mark designed the class. I was hoping for some clarification of RAW or a statement on intent.

Here is a link to the thread.

In summary,

"Does the seance boon benefit for the archmage spirit add to ability score damage?"

"This is like a Rogue sneak attacking or a Paladin smiting with Calcific Touch."

"I'll note that "...of the same type that they would normally deal..." clause in the ability text may set this apart from rogue or paladin ability text.
Neither the Paladin or Rogue have this qualifier."

"Also, I found this very interesting
In the "Damage" section it talks about "types" of damage.
Glossary"

Ability damage is specifically categorized as a type of damage and therefore, unless I'm missing something, the archmage seance boon will increase ability damage from spells.

Remember that not all information on the Pathfinder SRD is actually from Paizo material. Can you say what book that piece of information came from? It's not in the glossary in the Core Rulebook at least.

The Medium class is from Occult Adventures, so too is the Archmage spirit and it's Seance Boon. So they're both Paizo official.

Luthorne was referring specifically to the glossary discussion of types which is a composition of many different sources and may have distorted the meaning by changing or removing the context of the published material.

Only Golarion setting-specific is altered on d20. The PRD and Archives of Nethys are unaltered.

Since OA is a setting-neutral core rulebook everything should be unaltered from it.

The editor's note calls out that it is a compilation.

FYI wrote:

Editor's Note: The following information was compiled from multiple places for ease of reference. The text below is only meant as an aid to understanding various aspects of the different damage types.

That a compilation may have taken some terms out of context and given a false impression that ability damage is considered a damage type for all purposes is my own conjecture.

[Luthorne]

Tels wrote:

The SRD only includes information from 3.5 if it was published by Paizo in Golarion, such as in one of their adventure paths or in Elves of Golarion. If a new, updated, version is released, they replace it, such as what happened with content from Rise of the Runelords.

You are correct though, the glossary entry does not exist in a published book. As is stated, directly in the glossary entry itself, it's a compilation of different sources for ease of use. Hence the whole "Editor's" tag and all that.

You'll find that, if one actually pays attention to the SRD, it's a far better source of rules than the PRD, because the PRD is only ever updated when the website team has time to do it, and when a new print run of a book is done. So any FAQs or errata released outside of a new printing of a book are not updated on the PRD as they released, whereas they are done so on the SRD and on Archives of Nethys.

That is an incorrect statement, there is 3.5 material on the Pathfinder SRD, usually to cover what is viewed as a hole in Paizo's own material by presuming that where it does not specify otherwise it matches 3.5's own rulings. I do not say this is necessarily a bad option, since it may help guide a DM to a possible solution, but it can be confusing when consulting the site for rules elements. I have been tripped up myself a few times with material drawn from the Pathfinder SRD that seem to have no presence in an actual Paizo-published piece of material, particularly when it comes to the glossary.

I am perfectly aware that it says that the damage section is a compilation of different sources, I merely question what those sources might be.

Regardless, I am not saying that the PRD is the best source, what I am saying is that the sources used are not listed and I personally do not recall seeing that wording in Paizo material, though of course I do not have an eiditic memory, and since it has happened with the Pathfinder SRD before, I suggest locating the relevant text in an actual book to make sure the context and wording is correct. I linked the PRD because it clearly states the source of the material. I use the Pathfinder SRD on occasion myself, though I prefer Archives of Nethys myself, but for rules elements (which Archives of Nethys generally avoids), given the issues I have had on occasion with the Pathfinder SRD, I generally ask for the relevant book the information is in, rather than simply taking for granted everything on the Pathfinder SRD.

As I said, this is not to knock on the Pathfinder SRD, which provides a valuable service for free, even if there are a few quirks here and there. But presuming that this compilation is in fact a compilation, the original wording should be intact in some piece of material, and should be available to be properly referenced if it did indeed come from Pathfinder material published by Paizo. Regardless, this has gotten far off-course, so I do not think I will continue to respond to further posts on this subject here; this is for Mark Seifter to answer questions, after all. I just wished to helpfully point out that the basis of their argument might be flawed.

Cheers, all, and happy holidays.

[Rysky]

I think they're may be a disconnect going on here. The PRD/d20 (a fan run site) cuts out Golarion flavor and does have 3pp content.

The System Reference Document is run by Paizo and only contains official Pathfinder content (from 3.5 and onward). It contains absolutely no 3pp content.

[Thomas LeBlanc]

Rysky wrote:

I think they're may be a disconnect going on here. The PRD/d20 (a fan run site) cuts out Golarion flavor and does have 3pp content.

The System Reference Document is run by Paizo and only contains official Pathfinder content (from 3.5 and onward). It contains absolutely no 3pp content.

You really derped that up. The PRD is the official Pathfinder Reference Document hosted on the Paizo website.

[Rysky]

Thomas LeBlanc wrote:

Rysky wrote:

I think they're may be a disconnect going on here. The PRD/d20 (a fan run site) cuts out Golarion flavor and does have 3pp content.

The System Reference Document is run by Paizo and only contains official Pathfinder content (from 3.5 and onward). It contains absolutely no 3pp content.

You really derped that up. The PRD is the official Pathfinder Reference Document hosted on the Paizo website.

There's the disconnect!

Lol there's a reason I refer to the PFSRD as d20, I don't confuse myself as much :3

[Rysky]

PRD

d20

Archives of Nethys

That's enough of that!

[Mcarvin]

On the topic of the officially kept PRD...

In "Designing Spells" under "Hierarchy of Attack Effects" the possible effects are organized. Damaging effects include examples like fireball and poison. Fireball being an example of an effect dealing energy damage. Poison being an effect dealing ability score damage.

http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/ultimateMagic/magic/designingSpells.html #damage

Being that energy damage effects and ability score damaging effects are both categorized under "damage effects" provides support for this ability to be applicable to ability score damage types.

[Link-Bot]

Mcarvin wrote:

On the topic of the officially kept PRD...

In "Designing Spells" under "Hierarchy of Attack Effects" the possible effects are organized. Damaging effects include examples like fireball and poison. Fireball being an example of an effect dealing energy damage. Poison being an effect dealing ability score damage.

LINK

>LINK ADDED FOR MEATBAG HUMAN CONVENIENCE

[Alanya]

Merry Christmas Mark! I hope you and Linda have a nice, illness-free holiday this year. Did you get everything you wanted from Santa?

[Scavion]

Hey Mark, beat Divinity yet?

[Ning]

1.I am Primal Companion Hunter.
My Animal Companion is a Roc.
Could I choice Wing Buffet Evolution to it?

2.I am Primal Companion Hunter.
My Animal Companion is a Ape.
Could I choice Gore Evolution to it?

The requirements of Evolutions restrict Primal Transformation or not？

[Thrawn007]

Does a Medium/Harrower work? How? What level of spellcaster do they count as to qualify?

[Ning]

#A and #B are allies. Both have Broken Wing Gambit Feat, and #A hit #C with it.

Can #C choice attack #A without the +2 bonus to avoid opportunity attack from #B?

[The NPC]

Mr. Mark Seifter,

Some questions if you are of the mind :)

1. Has there been any change in the status of the Harrowed Medium? I must admit, it would most likely be the version I prefer.

2. Which of the mythic paths would you match up with the kineticist?
3. In your estimation how would the kineticist and its powers work with/interact with the Divine Source mythic ability.

4. Much like there is a Planar Oracle that links the character to one of the outer plans and eventually turns them into an outsider of that plane, would a Planar Kineticist that is linked to an outer plane and eventually becomes an outsider of that plane be doable? Within the mechanics of the class and the company?
5. Would allowing a player to take 3.5 Warlock or Dragon Shaman invocations in place of wild talents be something you allow and from a game mechanic perspective do you think it would be effective?

[Mark Seifter]

137ben wrote:

Kalindlara wrote:

Is it actually possible to work in the tabletop games industry without something else as your "real job"? I've heard a lot of doom and gloom.

I don't need to be rich... but I'd like to focus on this career (including plenty of freelancing, as necessary). I also like eating and having a roof over my head. Are both possible?

Bradley Crouch (Interjection Games owner) makes a living of of just Interjection Games products. He said at one point that the secret is that he is a prolific writer as well as a publisher and stuff, so he can produce high quality work without needing to higher a bunch of other people, so the revenue he gets is enough to sustain himself.

Once you start splitting the profits between many people (e.g., DSP's two owners plus artists plus freelance writers), then it becomes much harder to use it as a primary income source.

It's also important to note that a third party publisher (or one of the few professional freelancers) can choose to live in a less expensive place than the extremely pricey Seattle area. When we were back in North Carolina at Linda's parents' place, she went to get some things changed at the bank and they wouldn't believe that Linda's half of the rent was just half. The guy was like "You mean that's the whole rent, so your half would be half of that, right?"

[Mark Seifter]

Rycaut wrote:

to clarify however that "air walk" while flight like actually isn't flying? So a creature with Air Walk who is stunned etc will just fall down but remain in air?

Air walk has never used the Fly skill, to my knowledge.

[Mark Seifter]

WXOXW wrote:

Greetings all,

I've got two questions. I'm new to this site. However I've been playing the game for years. I have a question about the Monk Of Many Styles and Improved Unarmed Strike. My DM is saying that since the Bonus Feat section of the MOMS says that...

"This ability replaces a monk’s standard bonus feats."

...the MOMS has to spend a feat slot to actual have Improved Unarmed Strike and Stunning Fist, for that matter, since they are "standard bonus feats" for a monk.

Is my DM's interpretation how all of you are interpreting this?

Was the MOMS intended to start at 1st level without Improved Unarmed Strike and Stunning Fist as bonus feats?

On the pfsrd, the link for BONUS FEATS from the MOMS archetype goes to the BONUS FEAT section of the monk class, I disagree with the DM.

Xel is correct; the monk's unarmed strike and stunning fist abilities, while they grant bonus feats, are different than the bonus feats class feature.

[Mark Seifter]

Chess Pwn wrote:

is it possible in PFS for a bloodrager to be both an Id Rager and an Urban Bloodrager? My biggest issue is that the Adopted magic adds spells to your spell list and spells known. And the Id's Atavistic Caster makes your spellcasting psychic. So I don't know it that is technically altering the same thing and just not listed in the altering section, or if I'm good to go.

They both alter spellcasting, so no, you couldn't take them both by the rules. I would be likely to allow it in a home game, though, since I feel that those two alterations don't conflict with each other (assuming there aren't any other conflicts, as I didn't look them up).

[Mark Seifter]

QuidEst wrote:

Lab_Rat wrote:

BigNorseWolf wrote:

Huh. So that superman pose doesn't just look cool, its actually required....

Wait, DAZED while flying will get you killed?

Yeah. Flight just got A LOT easier to combat. Your also totally screwed if your dazed or stunned because there will be NO feather fall from the fly spell and no actions to cast / activate feather fall from a spell or ring.

Meaning that the question of which pre-req for flight an Aerokineticist should take is now "definitely Air's Cushion".

To be fair, I don't see why people didn't like air's cushion even if they didn't know that part about flying. If you're going to be flying a lot, you'll fall at some point, possibly far. Granted burn might save you from KO->instadeath like most other flyers, once you're high enough level.

[Mark Seifter]

Mcarvin wrote:

I have a question about the Medium Archmage spirit Seance Boon. I've been told Mark designed the class. I was hoping for some clarification of RAW or a statement on intent.

Here is a link to the thread http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2t79t?The-Medium-Archmage-Spirit-Seance-Boon#10 .

In summary,

"Does the seance boon benefit for the archmage spirit add to ability score damage?"

"This is like a Rogue sneak attacking or a Paladin smiting with Calcific Touch."

"I'll note that "...of the same type that they would normally deal..." clause in the ability text may set this apart from rogue or paladin ability text.
Neither the Paladin or Rogue have this qualifier."

"Also, I found this very interesting
In the "Damage" section it talks about "types" of damage.
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/basics-ability-scores/glossary"

Ability damage is specifically categorized as a type of damage and therefore, unless I'm missing something, the archmage seance boon will increase ability damage from spells.

Things that increase damage always increase hp damage only, unless they tell you otherwise.

[Mark Seifter]

Alanya wrote:

Merry Christmas Mark! I hope you and Linda have a nice, illness-free holiday this year. Did you get everything you wanted from Santa?

We actually managed to have an illness-free holiday. Woohoo! Also, I got a fairly high percentage of money and gift cards, which is exactly what I like to receive the most, so a good haul on that front.

[Mark Seifter]

Scavion wrote:

Hey Mark, beat Divinity yet?

I wound up restarting with the enhanced edition and am playing sporadically co-op with a friend from back at MIT.

[Mark Seifter]

Ning wrote:

1.I am Primal Companion Hunter.

My Animal Companion is a Roc.
Could I choice Wing Buffet Evolution to it?

2.I am Primal Companion Hunter.
My Animal Companion is a Ape.
Could I choice Gore Evolution to it?

The requirements of Evolutions restrict Primal Transformation or not？

The archetype doesn't mention that you can use similar abilities to qualify as the appropriate evoluitions, so technically you can't (nor would you qualify for base-form-specific evos and such. I would probably allow it in a home game on a case-by-case basis.

[Mark Seifter]

Thrawn007 wrote:

Does a Medium/Harrower work? How? What level of spellcaster do they count as to qualify?

I'm not sure it would be a good combination due to the fact that medium gets some nice goodies at the higher levels; presumably, you'd qualify based on your regular medium spellcasting and then harrower would advance you in such a way as to help out for both normal spellcasting and for archmage or hierophant casting.

[Mark Seifter]

Ning wrote:

#A and #B are allies. Both have Broken Wing Gambit Feat, and #A hit #C with it.

Can #C choice attack #A without the +2 bonus to avoid opportunity attack from #B?

That would depend on the general question of "can you decide not to use all your bonuses on a particular roll if you feel like it" (there are other examples of where this would matter, such as for beating on someone and trying to pull the punch to not kill them while still doing lethal damage). I believe the answer is no to that more general question.

[Mark Seifter]

The NPC wrote:

Mr. Mark Seifter,

Some questions if you are of the mind :)

1. Has there been any change in the status of the Harrowed Medium? I must admit, it would most likely be the version I prefer.

2. Which of the mythic paths would you match up with the kineticist?
3. In your estimation how would the kineticist and its powers work with/interact with the Divine Source mythic ability.

4. Much like there is a Planar Oracle that links the character to one of the outer plans and eventually turns them into an outsider of that plane, would a Planar Kineticist that is linked to an outer plane and eventually becomes an outsider of that plane be doable? Within the mechanics of the class and the company?
5. Would allowing a player to take 3.5 Warlock or Dragon Shaman invocations in place of wild talents be something you allow and from a game mechanic perspective do you think it would be effective?

1) As mentioned above, it will take stars aligning that I can't align, but I'm very much interested in seeing it happen.

2) It really depends on how you play your kineticist. I've built some mythic kineticisty monsters (yai onis with mythic stuff and kineticist powers for their yai element for Jade Regent) and have found that Champion and Guardian were extremely useful. Likely marshal and trickster would be too for the right builds. Just not archmage or hierophant.

3) I don't see how it would be any different than a fighter granting divine spells. Kineticists could certainly take that power.

4) Honestly, if you feel like it, you could reskin the planar oracle for kineticists; just specify that it's an elemental plane, ignore the spells part, and then trade out the 4th level utility talent for planar resistance and omnikinesis for the final revelation. It mostly works for fire, water, and air though.

5) I wouldn't recommend it without looking at the prereqs and adjusting them. I've played with some warlocks in my day (and played one for a bit), and the class struggles at dealing appreciable damage without using a large number of character resources on tricks from various, sometimes obscure sourcebooks, especially compared to kineticist. In exchange, some of the warlock's invocations come at an extremely low level for the trick in question (not always, but a few of them get access to, for instance, a fairly powerful spell at will two levels before wizards could even cast the spell once as their highest-level spell). This tends to work out for the warlock overall, as a clever player can make good use of those early-access tricks and just not worry about the lack of damage. However, the kineticist class does a lot more damage than a warlock, so you basically are going to want to bump up a few of the warlock tricks a few levels.

[Chess Pwn]

Mark Seifter wrote:

Chess Pwn wrote:

is it possible in PFS for a bloodrager to be both an Id Rager and an Urban Bloodrager? My biggest issue is that the Adopted magic adds spells to your spell list and spells known. And the Id's Atavistic Caster makes your spellcasting psychic. So I don't know it that is technically altering the same thing and just not listed in the altering section, or if I'm good to go.

They both alter spellcasting, so no, you couldn't take them both by the rules. I would be likely to allow it in a home game, though, since I feel that those two alterations don't conflict with each other (assuming there aren't any other conflicts, as I didn't look them up).

So spells known, spell list, and spellcasting type are a part of spellcasting and not subset things that can be traded out separately.

So was there a reason why Adopted Magic from the Urban Bloodrager doesn't say that it alters spellcasting? It says it replaces DR, but doesn't mention that it alters spellcasting. Which I thought the current trend was to specify such things with new material.

[Mark Seifter]

Chess Pwn wrote:

Mark Seifter wrote:

Chess Pwn wrote:

is it possible in PFS for a bloodrager to be both an Id Rager and an Urban Bloodrager? My biggest issue is that the Adopted magic adds spells to your spell list and spells known. And the Id's Atavistic Caster makes your spellcasting psychic. So I don't know it that is technically altering the same thing and just not listed in the altering section, or if I'm good to go.

They both alter spellcasting, so no, you couldn't take them both by the rules. I would be likely to allow it in a home game, though, since I feel that those two alterations don't conflict with each other (assuming there aren't any other conflicts, as I didn't look them up).

So spells known, spell list, and spellcasting type are a part of spellcasting and not subset things that can be traded out separately.

So was there a reason why Adopted Magic from the Urban Bloodrager doesn't say that it alters spellcasting? It says it replaces DR, but doesn't mention that it alters spellcasting. Which I thought the current trend was to specify such things with new material.

I've made it in a point in the archetypes I develop as part of working on the RPG line (I know these two archetypes aren't in that line) to specify everything altered as part of my process, but freelance turnovers leave alter out all the time (maybe as much as half the time that it should be in there), so that's something the designer or developer needs to catch and won't always catch.

[The NPC]

Mark Seifter wrote:

3) I don't see how it would be any different than a fighter granting divine spells. Kineticists could certainly take that power.

4) Honestly, if you feel like it, you could reskin the planar oracle for kineticists; just specify that it's an elemental plane, ignore the spells part, and then trade out the 4th level utility talent for planar resistance and omnikinesis for the final revelation. It mostly works for fire, water, and air though.

5) I wouldn't recommend it without looking at the prereqs and adjusting them. I've played with some warlocks in my day (and played one for a bit), and the class struggles at dealing...

Mr. Mark Seifter,

thank you for the answers. Some further what nots:
3) So, a kineticist would be treated as a non caster in regards to the spells & spell-like abilities granted by the ability?

4) What elements would you assign to which outer planes? For example the Abyss = Air, Hell = Fire, etc.

5) If one was to warlock-ify the kineticist, would you change the capstone ability and if so what might you change it to?

[Chess Pwn]

Mark Seifter wrote:

Chess Pwn wrote:

Mark Seifter wrote:

Chess Pwn wrote:

is it possible in PFS for a bloodrager to be both an Id Rager and an Urban Bloodrager? My biggest issue is that the Adopted magic adds spells to your spell list and spells known. And the Id's Atavistic Caster makes your spellcasting psychic. So I don't know it that is technically altering the same thing and just not listed in the altering section, or if I'm good to go.

They both alter spellcasting, so no, you couldn't take them both by the rules. I would be likely to allow it in a home game, though, since I feel that those two alterations don't conflict with each other (assuming there aren't any other conflicts, as I didn't look them up).

So spells known, spell list, and spellcasting type are a part of spellcasting and not subset things that can be traded out separately.

So was there a reason why Adopted Magic from the Urban Bloodrager doesn't say that it alters spellcasting? It says it replaces DR, but doesn't mention that it alters spellcasting. Which I thought the current trend was to specify such things with new material.

I've made it in a point in the archetypes I develop as part of working on the RPG line (I know these two archetypes aren't in that line) to specify everything altered as part of my process, but freelance turnovers leave alter out all the time (maybe as much as half the time that it should be in there), so that's something the designer or developer needs to catch and won't always catch.

okay, that makes sense that someone doesn't add it and it's just not caught.

Bummer though, Would have been cool to go dex based rage and use the Hatred spirit for free weapon finesse.