Artful Dodger's page

Right, the magic seems to be tied mainly to a concept rather than the draining of life or blood. The idea is that he has a number of undead under his sway (via Command Undead/Animate Dead) that he releases from service and attacks after casting this spell. Alternatively, he could simply command them to slay him, after which point they are combatants, because they're definitely rolling to hit and hurt and kill him.

The rest of the undead are for killing interlopers.

Well, it does specify that you have to kill them with a melee attack. Presumably this means that, at fifth level, at best you're killing two with well-rolled TWF. Bound and helpless, they'd still have HP.

But anyway, I'm not thinking of just having him loaded up and ready to go. More like, if they spring any of his traps that alert him to intruders, or if they find him in his sanctum and surrounded by the undead, they'd have only so much time to take him out before he becomes this nightmare of a bruiser.

Relevant: They have a paladin. He'll be able to bypass that DR with Smite Evil. I'm totally okay with this.

Simple question: Can the recipient of Deadly Juggernaut harvest his minions to increase the bonuses provided by the spell, provided their hit dice fall within the appropriate range described by the spell?

We're level 11, but this has been a problem since I joined. I think I was level 4? Won't say any more because, again, spoilers. Anyway, I didn't mean for this to turn into a GM rant. I seriously wanted only to know if there was a misprint in a stat block somewhere.

1. Zombies have no will and are evil.
2. Retrievers are constructs with will (they have int, wis, and cha scores).
3. I'm fine with adjusting the challenge up. Four out of we five have openly discussed with our GM the ways that this could be made harder, from the ranger saying, "Don't let my ranger stand still," to the wizard explaining that he basically never ran low on slots, to me saying, "I can only smite a few times a day."
4. Arbitrariness is a recurring problem in this game. Buffs have been canceled after having run only a tenth to a quarter of their length because they were inconvenient to the GM, with nary a dispel trap for justification. Attempts to see enemies through doors via Detect Evil (which can penetrate doors) were shut down with, "There's a lot of evil in this place, you're getting static." Detect Magic would similarly get shut down as a scouting aide. I'm pretty sure I wouldn't get 'static' on Detect Evil even in the Abyss if I'm trying to distinguish an evil demon from a rock.
5. The wizard made the knowledge roll and relayed the information. Demon spider constructs from the abyss. We'd even made plans around my smite before the fight started because we spotted them a ways off.
6. I too have changed the stats for monsters in bestiaries. I'm fine with that. I'm fine with scaling the power of monsters to match the PCs. I was one of the people who suggested to the GM that things could stand to have more AC, HP, better attack bonuses, and more of them. I don't care about the power.

7. We have talked to the GM about our problems before, as mentioned above. I did not this time because the GM is not an impartial source on whether the GM is lying about the content of a module. I came here to ask if it was described otherwise in the module, or if we were being lied to about something so it wouldn't come off as arbitrary. We'd expressed great dissatisfaction with arbitrariness already.

Simple question: Does Wrath of the Righteous feature an entry for Retrievers where they are listed as something other than evil creatures?

Optional Background: My GM is frustrated by our party's competence. I'm a late arrival to the game, a replacement player for a bard who left, and playing a paladin by request. The frustration presented by my paladin is not entirely the damage he deals, as the ranger puts out more even against my smite. Also, I don't mind. I went Marshal for support abilities.

The frustration stems from his mythic ability to share the benefits of his smite with his party. As a paladin who poured into his charisma, those are exceptionally powerful bonuses.

I ask because it was decided right after I wanted to smite a Retriever that they're not evil and they don't detect as evil. I know that to be a lot of b%$*%++s in standard play, but it was said, "I'm looking at the description right now, and they're not evil."

Alternate interpretation of the simple question: Is my GM a bad liar, or did they print an unusual exception for normally-evil monsters in Wrath of the Righteous without any plot-based reason to do so?

It's worth noting that you cannot Intensify a spell more than once.

Quote:

Multiple Metamagic Feats on a Spell: A spellcaster can apply multiple metamagic feats to a single spell. Changes to its level are cumulative. You can't apply the same metamagic feat more than once to a single spell.

Didn't see anything calling out that part, so there's my two cents.

This is the kind of stuff I'm looking for, something lifted directly from the rules or, at worst, minimally interpreted from the rules. I looked from there and thought, "Is that a change from 3.5?" Nope, it isn't. My understanding of magic has just been wrong for a long time. No more multiple-heightened spells either.

Thank you kindly.

It's conventional to say the beef is to the right of the dice, but 6d6 is not trivial.

That level 12 brawler with a 20-point buy can reasonably expect to be wearing a +4 Str belt and an Amulet of Mighty Fists +3. Given Power Attack, Weapon Focus/Spec/Greater Focus/Spec, his attack looks like...

+21 to hit, 6d6 + 23 damage. He gets six swings on a full attack (five if you don't have Greater TWF from flexible feats/normal feats), about two or three of which can be reasonably expected to hit for 44 average damage each.

Compare to a greatsword fighter, same level: +24 to hit, 2d6 + 36 damage, three swings, of which one to two can be reasonably expected to hit for 43 average damage each. He's swinging a higher enhancement bonus because his weapon is cheaper, but all else is the same.

Die-size category increases put what is effectively a TWF build (monks do the same) ahead per hit compared to a 2h build. The extra dice also means it loses less when forced to make only one standard action attack per round by way of much heavier Vital Strikes, be they standard, improved, or greater.

Crit ranges may tip that, but that's for smarter theorycraft guys than I am. Incidentally, thank you guys for the discussion so far.

This is a non-issue. See the bolded portion below:

PFSRD wrote:

Ranged Touch Spells in Combat: Some spells allow you to make a ranged touch attack as part of the casting of the spell. These attacks are made as part of the spell and do not require a separate action. Ranged touch attacks provoke an attack of opportunity, even if the spell that causes the attacks was cast defensively. Unless otherwise noted, ranged touch attacks cannot be held until a later turn (see FAQ below for more information.)

You can't hold the charge on ranged touch spells, so you can't hold on to the ray until next round to Vital Strike with. Shroud already covered why you can't Vital Strike as part of casting the spell.

"In the same round that you cast the spell, you may also touch (or attempt to touch) as a free action." If an attack action must be a standard action, then no, vital strike is not possible with the any spell cast in that round.

As for the rays quote, I found it since you showed me what to look for. Thank you kindly. That puts one ugly leper lizard to bed. I won't worry about ray vital strikes anymore. Now there's only the issue of Touch spells.

"Touch Attacks: Touching an opponent with a touch spell is considered to be an armed attack and therefore does not provoke attacks of opportunity."

This, with holding the charge, still opens the door for Shocking Grasp to repeat the shenanigans, if you'd like to make your attack action the round after casting. Unless there's something else I'm missing. (Do educate me!)

Rays are considered weapons, as they are legal for Weapon Specialization, from the FAQ. A weapon (even an unarmed strike) of some kind is needed to perform an attack. This is how they qualify for Weapon Focus, Specialization, Improved Critical, etc.

Vital Strike does not specify a melee or ranged attack. RAW, it can be used along with bows, crossbows, thrown daggers, rocks, etc. Unfortunately this also means (so far) that it can be used with rays.

Enter the Dread Snowball of Doom, or just Snowball. Close range, ranged touch, 1d6/level cold damage, capped at 5d6 cold damage. That goes up to 10d6 with a Vital Strike, 15d6 with Improved, 20d6 with Greater. Few casting classes will get the BAB and the CL for it, but it's there. The Magus will get CL 20 and enough BAB for Improved Vital Strike.

But that's not all. Intensify Spell raises the cap by 5d6, though the spell continues to grow at the original rate. That Snowball now does 10d6, 20d6 on a Vital Strike, 30d6 on an Improved Vital Strike, on a second-level slot. I've found nothing yet that forbids multiple applications of Intensify Spell. Note that this does not add extra damage, but lets the spell's basic damage continue to grow. Let's keep with the Magus for a bit.

At 9th level he'll have enough BAB and have an available feat to take Vital Strike. His Snowball is Intensified once and deals 18d6 on a Vital Strike. It'll go up by 2d6 each level until he hits level 17. That's when he takes Improved Vital Strike. His Snowball has been Intensified three times and deals 51d6 on a Vital Strike. That's ridiculous for a 4th-level slot, on a spell that has yet to be Empowered or Maximized to boot.

Precedent already exists for a Vital Strike delivered as part of another standard action's attack (Felling Smash), though I suspect that it's more the case that the Felling Smash can trigger from a Vital Strike. The attack roll is part of the standard action used to cast the spell, but if that is not enough to qualify it as an attack action then the charge can also be held and delivered next round as a standard action (or the same round as a standard action if it was Quickened), thus making it an attack action.

Yes, I suppose I am a spoilsport, blowing the whistle like this, but something should probably get set in motion for the official games, while the individual GMs can just say, "No, I'm not allowing that".

So far we have the agreement that Lead Blades/Impact do not stack because it's explicitly stated in the FAQ, and the agreement that spiked and bashing are isolated to the shield and therefore are only held up to the unarmed damage after they're applied to the shield. That leaves us just with...

The bonuses available to a monk. This still isn't preventing a 6d6 bash at level 12, or a 8d8 bash at level 20.

Artful Dodger wrote:

So, assuming we can throw out spiked and bashing (three size categories) and cite the rule that Lead Blades and Impact overlap instead of stack, that leaves us four increments short. The Shield Champion is now only bashing for 8d6 at level 12 (4d6 without that druid magic), and 12d8 (6d8 without druid magic) at level 20. Are there any other interactions we can rule out? I'm hoping for more RAW than RAI here, but I'll take what I can get which is well-supported.

Edit: I would also really appreciate some official address to the language to get rid of the ambiguity.

Its not really ambiguous. Shield spikes and bashing modify the damage of the sheild. The ability says to compare the damage done by the sheild against the brawlers unarmed damage, if the sheild does more damage, this ability has no affect. Its just a matter of not intentionally misreading the rules in order to rack up more d6's.

I'm on board with isolating the spikes and the bashing to the shield, away from the unarmed damage, but it does take a little wiggling to extract, like a tooth that needs pulling.

Since Strong Jaw specifies it only works on natural attacks (which a unarmed strike is NOT) then you can remove those size increases as well.

It's also flagged as a size increase so doesn't stack either.

"A brawler's unarmed strike is treated as both a manufactured weapon and a natural weapon for the purpose of spells and effects that modify either manufactured weapons or natural weapons." And is therefore subject to augmentation by spells like Magic Fang and Strong Jaw.

Additionally, the only place where it's even suggested that magical size increases do not stack is in Enlarge Person (Or Animal Growth, but that's not being used here), but it only specifies a creature's size.

Strong Jaw will say, "Each natural attack that creature makes deals damage as if the creature were two sizes larger than it actually is," while Enlarge Person actually increases your size. If we lumped all effects that say "as if the creature were X sizes larger," that gives us...

--2d6 unarmed damage.
--Enlarge to 3d6 because it increases your size.
--Strong Jaw to 6d6 because it lets you hit as though you are even bigger than you really are (which is your enlarged self at this point).

Lead Blades could normally be isolated to the damage of the shield, but a Brawler's unarmed strike is considered a natural or manufactured weapon, whichever is beneficial for buffs, and still (possibly) would apply. Arguably. Because it specifies the weapon's die (the shield/unarmed strike) and not the creature (as with Strong Jaw). It would give us 8d6 if this was the case.

So, assuming we can throw out spiked and bashing (three size categories) and cite the rule that Lead Blades and Impact overlap instead of stack, that leaves us four increments short. The Shield Champion is now only bashing for 8d6 at level 12 (4d6 without that druid magic), and 12d8 (6d8 without druid magic) at level 20. Are there any other interactions we can rule out? I'm hoping for more RAW than RAI here, but I'll take what I can get which is well-supported.

Edit: I would also really appreciate some official address to the language to get rid of the ambiguity.

I recently was made aware of the new hybrid classes and decided to give them a look, as my players had expressed some interest in playing them. I was promptly gobsmacked at what I saw as a nightmarish oversight in handling die size scaling thanks to Close Weapon Mastery in the brawler, and in the Shield Champion in particular. Those who wish to ignore the numbers and just quote me the rules that say this is not possible, if such rules exist, skip or skim the following:

1. "At 12th level, a shield champion can use her unarmed strike damage when dealing damage with a shield (whether in melee or thrown) or the shield's damage, whichever is greater." At this level, that's 2d6. A non-shield champion brawler will be dealing 1d8 instead, as the shield bash is in the Close weapon group.

2. Shield spikes increase the size rating of the shield by one category. For the SC that means a 3d6 shield. For the standard brawler that's a 2d6 shield.

3. Bashing property increases the size rating of the shield by two categories. That means the SC goes from 3d6 to 6d6. Standard brawler goes from 2d6 to 4d6.

4. Using a heavy shield means it's not a light weapon, and thus qualifies for the Impact enhancement, increasing its die by another category. SC goes from 6d6 to 8d6, standard from 4d6 to 6d6.

5. Enlarge Person and Lead Blades (external augmentation), both of which are found cheaply in wand and potion form. These are worth a size category each. Enlarge Person does have a caveat stating that multiple magic effects increasing SIZE do not stack, but says nothing for size categories. It is the only effect listed that actually increases your size. RAW, both work. That's two more increases, taking the SC to 16d6, the standard to 12d6. Per bash. At 12th level.

6. Strong Jaw, contingent on having a druid or ranger in the party, or access to significantly more expensive wands or potions. Two size increases. 16d6 goes to 32d6, 12d6 goes to 24d6. This one works on the base damage that the shield is set to (that of the unarmed strike), but these can generally be added sequentially for the sake of figuring out the die size.

With all of these shenanigans in play and available to, say, a fighter, the shield bash would only be a 6d6 weapon. That's still nothing to sneeze at in standard play, but 12d6, 16d6, or even 24d6 or 32d6 are just absurd at any level of play. Carrying my scaremongering on from here, at 20th level that Shield Champion would be doing 48d8 + Str mod, per bash, getting seven bashes per round on a full attack.

So! This is me seeking clarification on rules, an official statement addressing possible errata if errata is missing, or some other form of encouragement.

From the paizo.com listing:

Hand of the Apprentice (Su): You cause your melee weapon to fly from your grasp and strike a foe before instantly returning to you. As a standard action, you can make a single attack using a melee weapon at a range of 30 feet. This attack is treated as a ranged attack with a thrown weapon, except that you add your Intelligence modifier on the attack roll instead of your Dexterity modifier (damage still relies on Strength). This ability cannot be used to perform a combat maneuver. You can use this ability a number of times per day equal to 3 + your Intelligence modifier.

I'm concerned specifically with the phrasing, "This attack is treated as a ranged attack with a thrown weapon," and what it might imply. When my BAB reaches +6, will I be able to make a second Hand of the Apprentice attack if I choose to take the Full Attack action, or will I always be limited to one use of this ability per round?