2radly's page

We come across this a lot in our gaming group. We haven't found any rules about regular vision, but it seems that everyone sees 360* around them at all times, even when in combat. Is this correct? There doesn't seem to be any facing rules with which to use.

I'm in a gaming group and we typically limit the books we can use to only Core & Advanced. I've been thinking of making an Arcane Trickster and wanted to do something besides Wizard/Rogue. I became interested in Witch/Rogue. Witch unfortunately doesn't have Mage Hand. Could I use Rogue trick: Minor Magic to get Mage Hand and make this combination work?

We'll agree to disagree I guess. I feel your completely ignoring the "or effect" part of that description. Granted, it doesn't say 'effective level', but I feel that's what was intended.. otherwise why put the "or effect" in there at all, as all spells have levels?

Furthermore: Since it doesn't say 'effective level of the caster' on wand creation, it just says: 375 gp × the level of the spell × the level of the caster
Therefore, as you go up in levels, it becomes increasingly more expensive for you to create low level wands. However, we all interpret this correctly as 'effective level of the caster', As you couldn't obtain the Craft Wand feat until lvl 5. All lvl 1 wands would then cost 375x1x5 = 1875gp minimum. We all know this not to be the cost of a level 1 wand though, and use effective level, not actual level.

BTW = the Level 1 (actually lvl 5) wand of fireball would cost 375*3*5 = 5625gp.. but the level 10 would cost 11250gp.

So.. your claiming a

Level 1 wand of fireball. 5d6 fireball: DC 10+3+1 (13 int = +1) = DC14.
Level 10 wof: 5d6 fireball: DC 10+3+1 (13 int = +1) = DC14.
You couldn't even hit a lvl 10 rogue with this wand unless they rolled a 1. And does no extra damage.

Whereas.. I read it as EFFECT having changed from 5d6 to 10d6, therefore, it's being cast as a 10th lvl effect. Thus, it scales (which would explain more as to why it's so much more costly)
Level 10 wof. 10d6 fireball: DC 10+ 10 spell effect + 1 (min int required) = DC21.

You are continually ignoring the "or effect" part of that statement. The EFFECT is not level 1 anymore, it is level 5. (in the example)

*Staff-like Wand is a wonderful feat.. but using that, you could make a lvl 1 wand act as a much higher level wand. Making things much more affordable for the caster rather than making the wand at a higher level.

I'd go back and re-read that if I were you.
I actually copied that from the Pathfinder section.. It says "the level of spell or effect". Casting a spell at a higher level increases the 'effect', therefore increasing the DC as it's no longer a lvl 1, but a lvl 5 effect.

The only difference between casting it as a spell and putting that same spell in a wand is as a spell, you get your full INT bonus to the Save DC, whereas in a wand, you only get the minimum required to cast the spell.

Actually.. let me change that slightly, as to my chagrin, I used Magic Missile which doesn't have a saving throw. LOL. Lets use Color Spray instead. Same level, same modifiers.

However, Say the mage has a 18 INT. (+4)
Magic items produce spells or spell-like effects. For a saving throw against a spell or spell-like effect from a magic item, the DC is 10 + the level of the spell or effect + the ability modifier of the minimum ability score needed to cast that level of spell.

So.. A lvl 1 wand would be DC 10+1 (minimum) +1 (you need a minimum IQ of 1). So DC=12
However
But as the 5th lvl wand: 10+5 (level 5 effects) +1 (as 1 int is required to cast a first lvl spell). So DC=16

It is. The rules for creating magic items are here, look under wand:
http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/magicItems/magicItemCreation.html

But to sum it up: 375 gp × the level of the spell × the level of the caster

Pre-made/found wands are assumed to require the minimum caster level required to cast the spell. However, if you use a higher level to gain more effectiveness, then the price obviously becomes higher as it's factored into the equation. And wand save DC's are based on the spells casting level, which is whatever level used to make the wand.

A 5th lvl mage could make a wand of magic missiles as a 1st lvl caster and the cost would be 375gpx1x1 = 375gp. The wand would shoot 1 magic missile. However, if he created it as a 5th lvl mage, it would be 375x1x5 = 1875gp. And the wand would fire 3 missiles.

I disagree with the disagree. Total Concealment usually gives a 50% miss chance, and that's what the spell is referring to.. it never says it actually gives total concealment, in fact, it specifically says you can target the creature normally. Similar to how an Oracle with the sight curse can see 'as if they had darkvision'.. but they don't actually gain darkvision, so they don't qualify for feats were darkvision is a requirement.

Displacement
The subject of this spell appears to be about 2 feet away from its true location. The creature benefits from a 50% miss chance as if it had total concealment. Unlike actual total concealment, displacement does not prevent enemies from targeting the creature normally. True seeing reveals its true location and negates the miss chance.

Well, I was originally using it along with GangUp.. The two fighters were holding the line, I'd move up, attack (getting my sneak attack), and then teleport 2 spaces back out of their reach. A bit cowardly.. but I don't have the HP they do. heh. I was hoping to setup something for 'on my own'. Improved Feint is a wonderful thing for a rogue!

I thought under the perception rules, if we were in combat (ie. distracted) they would have to at least make a perception roll to notice me. Cause they were expecting an attack from the front not from behind. But I see what your saying about the facing rules. Oh well.. it was a nice idea while it lasted.

(note that in the case of obscuring mist, the opponent would have partial concealment from the rogue as well, which would mean that no sneak attack was possible).

Unless you have the Shadow Strike feat.. Which would allow you to deal precision damage (sneak attack) if someone has concealment.

Shadow Strike (Combat)
You accurately strike even those you cannot clearly see.
Prerequisite: Base attack bonus +1.
Benefit: You can deal precision damage, such as sneak attack damage, against targets with concealment (but not total concealment).

4th lvl Teleportation School Wizard/1st lvl Rogue

Move action: moves up to target
Swift action: teleport 2 spaces forward to be right behind target
Standard action: attack

The Swift action teleport doesn't provoke an AOO, however, would this count as a sneak attack as the target wouldn't know where I was as I disappeared right in front of him? Or would a perception check be needed to realize I teleported right behind him? If so, not exactly sure what parameters would be needed for the perception check.

During our gaming session today, we had an issue where one of our party didn't want to stop attacking the enemy, and one of the casters took away his ability to move in to attack them using "Forbid Action". The forbidden action in this case was the MOVE action, the targetted PC failed his will save, couldn't move, then drew his bow and fired on the other PC, rather than his original target. The target of Forbid Action was a barbarian who was raging, if this matters.

FORBID ACTION

School enchantment (compulsion) [language-dependent, mind-affecting]

Move: The target can take no act that would cause it to end up in a different location. The target does not resist being moved by others (and thus can be picked up or dragged, or can float along on a raft), but does not consciously attempt to move (including not directing a mount to move).

The target is free to take any actions not forbidden by the caster. For example, a target affected by this spell's demand to not move is still free to cast spells, make attacks, or shout for help.

Needless to say: Some questions were raised during this.

First: Is it an attack on the character?
We believe so because under spells there is a line about "All spells that opponents resist with saving throws, that deal damage, or that otherwise harm or hamper subjects are attacks."

Secondly: Does the target know a spell was cast on them?
We found reference to someone knowing if they were the target of a hostile spell that was cast on them if they succeeded at their saving throw; but in this instance, the PC failed his Will save.

Third: Since this was a language dependent spell: Does the target know WHO cast the spell on them?
Since someone has to give language specific orders, and the effect happens that you obey this person when you normally wouldn't, we assumed for the moment that you did know who cast it.

Fourth: This is just a clarification: If the spell wasn't language dependent, would this have changed the answers to the above questions at all?

You might be holding a 2H weapon in 1H, however, the weapon is completely unusable in that fashion unless your of Large size or better. For a medium creature, you HAVE to have your second hand on it in order to use it properly. So in effect, your just carrying the weapon in 1H, much like your scabbard is carrying your weapon. Draw is the closest thing that effectively works for 'readying' the weapon for use in combat, therefore, a move action.

Personally, it sounds like your trying to abuse the system and get the benefits of x1.5 STR modifier AND qualify for your feats by having 1 hand free at the exact same time.

At the very least I'd impose an entangled penalty to you as your now off-balanced holding a greatsword in 1 hand while trying to perform martial arts maneuvers.

Can we can an OFFICIAL ruling on this? We are constantly discussing/arguing about this very thing in my group. As we have multiple GM's and rotate through games, the rules keep changing depending on whose game we're running.. which gets annoying/confusing.

Our basic question boils down to: When do you apply the range penalties of 1/10' to perception checks?
Person A argues for FINE DETAIL and opposing stealth.
Person B argues for all perception checks.

Lets also assume an open field (no obstructions).
You have a lookout on a tower, whose only job is to watch.
Someone is 250' away, and approaching.

Person A says:
To see a figure coming:
. Notice a visable creature +0
. Favorable conditions -2
. Total: -2 to Perception. Automatic success.
To tell WHO that figure is:
. Notice a visable creature +0
. Favorable conditions -2
. Distance to creature: 25
. Total: 23

Person B says:
To see a figure coming:
. Notice a visable creature +0
. Favorable conditions -2
. Distance to creature: 25
. Total: 23
To tell WHO that figure is:
. same. Total: 23

------------------
We tried using examples like the longbow only being -4 to hit at that distance, but then the discussion just goes right back to how can you hit something you didn't see due to range penalties on sight.

Person A has also argued that human vision, conservatively, has a 3 miles range. But at 1 mile, the range penalties would be -528 by person B's way of doing it.

PLEASE HELP! Who's interpretation is correct: A or B?

I completely disagree. There is no "feat action". As referenced in the combat section: THESE are the acceptable "standard actions", and not once is 'feat action' mentioned; a feat might make you use a standard action, but that standard action your using will be 'attack'.
------------------------
Attack (melee) No
Attack (ranged) Yes
Attack (unarmed) Yes
Activate a magic item other than a potion or oil No
Aid another Maybe2
Cast a spell (1 standard action casting time) Yes
Channel energy No
Concentrate to maintain an active spell No
Dismiss a spell No
Draw a hidden weapon (see Sleight of Hand skill) No
Drink a potion or apply an oil Yes
Escape a grapple No
Feint No
Light a torch with a tindertwig Yes
Lower spell resistance No
Read a scroll Yes
Ready (triggers a standard action) No
Stabilize a dying friend (see Heal skill) Yes
Total defense No
Use extraordinary ability No
Use skill that takes 1 action Usually
Use spell-like ability Yes
Use supernatural ability No

I didn't see anywhere where it says spell level * 1.. It says 'PER LEVEL' lvl 0 *IS* a lvl. So Orisons should do 1 pt.