Goblin Squad Member. RPG Superstar 9 Season Star Voter. Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber. Pathfinder Society GM. 17 posts. No reviews. No lists. 1 wishlist. 18 Organized Play characters.
I don't have a problem with adding two weakness types. That seems like it was saving space writing it as one debilitation with choices rather than writing each of them out separately.
I don't think the +2d6 precision damage would (or should) stack. It does increase the damage that your sneak attack would already be doing. But I don't think that you should be able to choose the precision damage option twice and have it work.
And my question about the second point, would be, why not? Double debilitations is a lvl 15 ability. By level 15, a rogue's normal sneak attack would be 3d6 (+2d6 with the precise debilitation). At level 15, what's wrong with adding an additional 2d6 sneak attack damage?
Not being argumentative. Mostly just curious. Looking ahead as my rogue closes in on lvl 15 (we're almost lvl 13), and so want to plan out feats correctly if I can. If there's a great case for not being able to do it, I'll abandon the line of thought and find a better second debilitation.
Double Debilitation: Your opportunistic attacks are particularly detrimental. When you use Debilitating Strike, you can apply two debilitations simultaneously; removing one removes both.
It doesn't specify that the debilitations need to be different debilitations. Now, with most (such as "causes enfeebled 1") it wouldn't matter because they don't stack anyway. But for some they WOULD stack, so I'm wondering whether the chosen debilitations are allowed to be the same debilitation?
Examples of debilitations that would probably stack
- causes weakness slashing, piercing, or bludgeoning 5 (so you could cause two separate ones of those by choosing the same debilitation twice, but choosing a different option for each)
- add +2d6 sneak attack damage (so you could choose the same debilitation twice and get +4d6 sneak attack damage.
Yeah, the person arguing says that Eschew Materials DOES replace the need for the target specifically for spells like pyrotechnics and fire seeds. Claims it's written RAW in the feat that (in the case of pyrotechnics) the flame isn't needed for the component, so why would one still be needed to target. Thus claiming that with the component not needed, neither is the target. This person says that I'M the one adding extra limitations to the rules that aren't there. I argue that he's removing pre-existing limitations that shouldn't be being removed, because the feat doesn't specify that it allows such. He claims that I'm the one doing my own unique interpretation and that his is RAW.
I agree with you Voodist, it's crystal clear to me and you that it doesn't allow such shenanigan, but the guy says unless he sees it in an errata or FAQ or ruled by someone official, that he'll continue to *know* his way is right. I know it's completely irrelevant at this point since PF1e is done and unlikely to get a ruling (and rightfully so after 1e being done for almost 2 years), but all of my groups and those I interact with haven't yet switched to 2e.
I am so very, very sorry for necro'ing this post. Having a heated debate over the above exact issue and I'm looking for an official ruling on this? I'm in the school of thought like you all above that Eschew Materials does NOT remove the need of the target. The other person believes that Eschew Materials removes the need for the material and as such also removes the target needed for spells such as Pyrotechnics and Fire Seed. I'm quite aware that this is a 9 year old post, just looking to see if we can get this stamped. I felt it was unnecessary to create a new post.
I'm missing many tables, actually. 3 from GenCon50 alone. Plus another 5 that I've reported since then. I've got a tiny pile next to my computer here to enter once everything gets fixed, but I'd rather not enter them until I know they're actually doing to show up. I'm showing about 10-12 scenarios less than what I actually know I have. Have we seen an update on this yet?
Want (in order of preference):
Mounted Tradition boon
Aasimar race boon
Other potentially interesting race boon
Goblin race boon (hahaha)
Dhampir race boon (have one, would like another)
A big thank you to everyone and now for an update. The site has raised $3,858.00 and an outside organization got together after seeing the site shared from somewhere and wrote a check out for $6,500 and sent it directly to a family member of Randy's. So I lowered the goal by that much to $21,500. We're making great progress. Now to update the thank you's here. Thank you William D, Richard R, Idaho B, Jacob S, Steven L, Tuukka K, Jerusha L, Russell L, Brandon S, Robert H, James A, Stephen I, Eric M, James M, Matt M, Gino M, Philip C, Tim G, Louis Manko L, Jeremy C, Kieran E, Chris R, Simon G, Rob F, Carlos O, Steven S, and Chris M.
Hey Eden, just FYI, I forgot to include the I BE GOBLIN in the comments section.
What would be really great was if Paizo decided to provide the Goblin boon (or another rare boon) for those who donated a certain amount to this charity. We'd jump up the donations pretty quickly!
If anyone has time, let me know what you think, please. Thanks!
-
-
Spoiler:
Windstrike Impaler Aura moderate evocation; CL 7th
Slot none; Price 33,610 gp; Weight 12 lbs.
Description
This +1 ranseur has a dark oak haft with ornately carved channels running toward a wicked twisting spike. Two serrated blades stem from the cross hilt and corkscrew around the spike.
Three times per day, as a standard action, you can use the weapon to move yourself to another location on the battlefield within 40 feet, taking whatever path you deem necessary. This movement provokes attacks of opportunity as normal, though you may evade these by moving yourself around or even flying over other units, obstacles, and terrain as long as you stay within the 40-foot range.
At the end of this movement, if you threaten an opponent, you may use an immediate action to make an attack. The same surge of wind that facilitates your movement also grants you a +2 circumstance bonus on the attack roll. If this attack hits, you may use a free action to make a bull rush maneuver against the target with a +2 circumstance bonus. This maneuver does not provoke an attack of opportunity.
If you are on a mount, the movement from this ability instead functions for your mount, but you must be the one who makes the attack.
Construction Requirements Craft Magic Arms and Armor, gentle breeze, telekinetic charge, Cost 17,960 gp
----------Be gentle. haha. Let me know what you think, please! Thanks in advance!
Windstrike Impaler Aura moderate evocation; CL 7th
Slot none; Price 33,610 gp; Weight 12 lbs
Description
This +1 ranseur has a dark oak haft with ornately carved channels running toward a wicked twisting spike. Two serrated blades stem from the cross hilt and corkscrew around the spike.
Three times per day, as a standard action, you can use the weapon to move yourself to another location on the battlefield within 40 feet, taking whatever path you deem necessary. This movement provokes attacks of opportunity as normal, though you may evade these by moving yourself around or even flying over other units, obstacles, and terrain as long as you stay within the 40-foot range.
At the end of this movement, if you threaten an opponent, you may use an immediate action to make an attack. The same surge of wind that facilitates your movement also grants you a +2 circumstance bonus on the attack roll. If this attack hits, you may use a free action to make a bull rush maneuver against the target with a +2 circumstance bonus. This maneuver does not provoke an attack of opportunity.
If you are on a mount, the movement from this ability instead functions for your mount, but you must be the one who makes the attack.
Construction Requirements Craft Magic Arms and Armor, gentle breeze, telekinetic charge, Cost 17,960 gp
Says my payment method has been declined. When I go to my subscriptions, it has no payment method selected - which is odd given that I've had this subscription for like 2 years. I get my subscription books every release as normal, but this time my payment method did not load into the process?
Additionally, when I select "Change Payment Method" in order to put the information back, it brings me to a page with "Cancel", "Select Payment Method", and "Cancel" buttons. It doesn't actually populate my payment method. Tried hitting the "Select Payment Method" button, no success. Checked in My Account under Payment Methods, and the information is all correctly inputted.
Is this a browser issue on my end since it doesn't populate my payment information in either the subscription or the "Change Payment Method"? Or is this something on your end that just needs a switch flipped?
Even if it weighs more than it's light load? For example, a human that weighs 300 pounds because it's overweight, and is weak due to inactivity, sure can walk, but slowly and with difficult. But can't jump. Or at least, not for long.
Can a creature that can fly, but is exhausted, fly?
"A flying creature cannot fly if it is at medium load or heavier."
I'm aware that body weight is not included in calculating carrying weight, but if your own body weight ends up being heavier than your light load, can you still fly?
Example: (recent campaign example) Against an ancient black dragon. I believe the ancient black dragon weighs like 2500-3000 pounds. Normally not an issue since they don't carry anything. However, spellcaster casts waves of exhaustion and bypasses the dragon's SR. Since there's no save, the dragon becomes exhausted. Str of 33. Thus, light load of 4800. Exhaustion gives a -6 str and dex putting it at 27 str, meaning it's new light load is 2076. If it's light load is 2076, but it weighs 2500-3000 pounds, would it still, realistically, be able to fly?
