B.O.B.Johnson's page

This document has grown to an extreme length (and it is only going to keep growing).

Here's my wishlist for this document and how to improve the usability:

1. On main page for Additional Resources, instead of all the entries, have it be a simple table with 2 columns: Book Name / Last Updated
Book name would be the rule book name and a link to a sub-document. Last updated would be when the entry was last updated.

2. If the user is logged in, it checks when the user last visited the main page, and compares that to the 'Last Updated' entries. If an item is newer than the last time the user visited the page, it will be highlighted in red.

3. The sub-document page for each rulebook would have whatever last change in red, followed by a dated change log which dictates what was changed and when.

That's just my wishlist for making that document more user friendly and manageable.

Page 96 of the NPC Codex.

The Careful Initiate is a level 1 Monk. In its gear it lists two potions of magic weapon.

I'm wondering if these are meant to be oils instead of potions, as oils would be more logical:

1) You can't drink the potion and make all the weapons you are carrying become temporary +1 weapons.
2) The spell description of Magic Weapon has a target of 'weapon touched'.

However, further reading the spell description states:

You can’t cast this spell on a natural weapon, such as an unarmed strike (instead, see magic fang). A monk’s unarmed strike is considered a weapon, and thus it can be enhanced by this spell.

^ So now I'm not sure if the potion thing was intentional or not, as the way I'm reading it, a monk could drink this potion (instead of using an oil) to give his unarmed strikes +1 enhancement.

The monk in question has other weapons, so if it was an oil it could be applied to any of the NPC's weapons.

So my question is, is meant to be an oil of magic weapon or was the potion not an oversight and was intentional to limit it to the monk's unarmed strikes?

Link to the PRD: Shadow Conjuration

My question is on the AC of the summoned shadow monster: is the AC only nerfed if the enemy makes their will save? Or is always nerfed?

Here's some relevant bits of text:

Regardless of the result of the save to disbelieve, an affected creature is also allowed any save that the spell being simulated allows, but the save DC is set according to shadow conjuration's level (4th) rather than the spell's normal level.

^ That's in the 3rd paragraph and it is explicit about saving throws - I've read elsewhere that this applies to the summoned monster's special abilities/spells/SLAs. Not sure if that is correct via RAW - I would think the text applies to any saving throws the monster can make the enemy make.

The 4th paragraph covers HP, attacks, and AC bonuses:

A shadow creature has one-fifth the hit points of a normal creature of its kind (regardless of whether it's recognized as shadowy). It deals normal damage and has all normal abilities and weaknesses. Against a creature that recognizes it as a shadow creature, however, the shadow creature's damage is one-fifth (20%) normal, and all special abilities that do not deal lethal damage are only 20% likely to work. (Roll for each use and each affected character separately.) Furthermore, the shadow creature's AC bonuses are just one-fifth as large.

^ again, HP is explicit that it doesn't matter if the enemy made their save. Damage is explicit on that it does full damage if they haven't made their save, and only 20% if they have. But AC is not explicit in either direction.

So is the summoned monster have it's full AC against creatures that have not made the save? Or is it nerfed regardless of whether the enemy made the save?

I got a new button on my Society page recently called "Download Your Venture-Agent Card" (links to: https://secure.paizo.com/cgi-bin/WebObjects/Store.woa/wa/downloadPathfinder SocietyCoordinatorCard?file=PathfinderSocietyCoordinatorCard.pdf)

The button/link just takes me to an error page with:

Sorry, there was a problem handling your request. The system administrator has been notified.

Please contact webmaster@paizo.com if you continue to have difficulties.

In my downloads, in the list of available downloads it always lists 'Date Last Downloaded' (column A) and 'Date Download Last Updated' (column B).

It would be nice:
if (column A != never) and (column A < column B) then
that row is highlighted in a special color.

For instance, I was going through my downloads today and noticed that I had downloaded the Advanced Class Guide in August 2014 (column A) and the download had been updated by Paizo on September 30th, 2015 (column B).

Column A did not equal 'never' and column A's value was less than column B's value. Therefore, I needed to download a new version of the Advanced Class Guide.

Basically it's just so when I have an out-dated download it is easily noticeable (as I don't always notice the date mismatch).

In theory it shouldn't take too much code to do this - you are already retrieving the date I downloaded and the date the product was updated, it should be a simple matter to switch row styles based on these 2 values.

I have a scenario I am prepping and it has a Derro in it. The bestiary has that it has 10 pre-poisoned bolts, but doesn't list the poison. I'm guessing it is up to GM discretion.

The scenario I am prepping for does not list the poison. It also does not indicate that the Derro doesn't have it either.

I don't want to give away any spoilers to what scenario they are in - however it is an older scenario, so it has 3 tiers: 1-2, 3-4, and 6-7. I am looking for 3 recommendations of what would be an appropriate poison for each of those tiers.

Any advice on this would be greatly appreciated.

I created a reoccurring event, and I need to add a couple of event reporters. Apparently I can't do this cause I'm not a VO or something (based on what I found on my websearch). I asked my VL if he could himself to the event (and gave him the event number) and he was unable to add himself either.

Should I contact customer service? Or is there a website feedback email (other then this forum) that I can email who can edit my event and add the reporters I need?

I tried searching the forum and doing a web search but I can't seem to find an answer.

My question on the Flank trick for animal companions is simple: is it a passive trick. IE, if I give the animal companion the command to attack a target, does it automatically try to move into a flank if there is one available (passive) - or for it to flank require me to give it the command directly?

The reason I ask is because I have this one GM that insists that if it is attacking an opponent, and ally comes up next to my animal companion (and is adjacent to the enemy), my animal companion will circle the enemy taking any number of attacks of opportunity to get to the opposing side of the ally - even though I only told the animal companion to attack (and not the direct flank command).

I would prefer that it be an active command. Meaning without me commanding it to flank, it just goes straight at the opponent it was directed at and attacks. It also does not sit there and 5 ft step around the enemy each turn to get into a flank. If the opponent moves it just moves in a straight line towards its target - again not auto-flanking.

Based on what I've read about animal companion's intelligence, tactics, and tricks, it doesn't auto-flank even it knows the trick - it only flanks when you order it do so.