Goblin Squad Member. Pathfinder Society GM. Starfinder Society GM. 5,344 posts (5,407 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. 1 wishlist. 24 Organized Play characters. 6 aliases.
I know in the past there was an attempt to make a Pathfinder MMO that was scrapped. Are there any possible future plans?
Could there be a future MMO? Possibly, but probably not in the way you are hoping. The budget required to make a huge MMO is, well, huge. Which rules out Pathfinder for business reasons. If the game designers have come up with an idea for something they think is truly revolutionary the publisher is going to want to use original IP in order to keep all the rights in house. If they have an idea that might be good enough to be profitable, they are going to look for an extremely well-known setting to put their game in. Because licensing that setting can bring in gamers on it's own. But, sadly, Pathfinder isn't big enough for that. Maybe D&D.
What kind of Pathfinder MMO could there be? There ave been attempts at small games that I would debate against applying the "MMO" label to. Ones that in many ways resemble grinding or live-service mobile games. Mostly single-player content with in-game scheduled multi-player events multiple times a day. The monetization is microtransactions. They're being made because they are cheap to make. But that means low-caliber art, limited locations, and everything else you would expect. Licensing IP is a way to bring in interest. Not to say it's all a cynical cash grab. Some developers have good ideas but don't have the resources to put together a large team. So, maybe? I personally doubt it. Mobile games are a dime-a-dozen and mostly fail quickly. I think Paizo is a lot more protective of their reputation after getting burned a couple of times.
That leaves the last category. Games that aren't AAA but manage to stay going because of a dedicated core of fans. Ones that don't mind that the world is mostly empty. Or that there is almost never new content. They're in the game for the community more than the gameplay. Unfortunately, that's what Pathfinder Online needed to be but never reached. It chugged along with extremely low player counts for years before shutting down.
They would not get any ability score bonuses since they are already class members. (Unless you give them 4HD - every creature gets +1 to a single ability score for every 4HD.) It sounds like you're going to be using the rules on Adding Racial Hit Dice from the Bestiary. Which, as the first sentence of that section says: "Adding racial Hit Dice to a monster is a similar process to building a monster from scratch."
I personally wouldn't bother. Class levels are going to be a better choice than what you get using just what's explicitly spelled out in that section of the Bestiary. Of course as the GM you do all kinds of additional things. Including giving new special abilities or other powers. (Which the section says you can do but with no "rules" for doing so.) So as Mysterious Stranger said, just give it what you want.
The whole section on creating and advancing Creatures advises over and over again "these are guidelines, the GM needs to both be creative and compare the power level to other creatures when using these sections."
Card Caster has a couple of "we didn't parse the language closely enough" problems.
1) You can only augment ranged weapons with your arcane pool, but some of the properties (returning) are designed for thrown weapons. You can definitely do a Harrowed Spellstrike with thrown weapons. Unfortunately the definition of a thrown weapon is a bit murky. The CRB says "Melee weapons are used for making melee attacks, though some of them can be thrown as well. Ranged weapons are thrown weapons or projectile weapons that are not effective in melee." A dagger is a melee weapon that can be thrown. Any weapon can be (poorly) thrown. So can you augment a dagger? Do the properties only apply when throwing it? How about a greatsword, if you throw it? Or can you do a Harrowed Spellstrike with both those, but not augment either?
(For what it's worth, my GM answer is that you can augment any weapon, but any bonuses only apply when you throw it.)
2) It doesn't change Spell Combat at all. That means you can only do Spell Combat while wielding a light or one-handed melee weapon in one hand and nothing in the other. And that Spell Combat still means making melee attacks (except for the Spellstrike). So if you do want to use Spell Combat, you have to make your normal melee attacks (with a -2 penalty), then cast your spell. If it's a Harrowed Spellstrike, you need Quick Draw to grab that card (or whatever) to throw.
Now, granted, this is what Gambit does all the time. But it's pretty dangerous to make thrown attacks while you are in melee combat in PF1.
You might get +4 from idealize, but make sure you clarify with your GM. You only count as half your arcanist levels for determining if you qualify for the discovery, but apparently full levels for determining the effects of the discovery.
I played a Brown-Fur Transmuter for a short time. It’s definitely a much better class if you discuss what you are capable of doing with your party before any of you build characters. My big “gimmick” was quickened enlarge person (thanks to Magical Lineage and Wayang Spellhunter.”
But there are plenty of useful spells: fey form, monstrous physique, and undead anatomy. They all give a whole bunch of abilities and, unlike beast shape or plant shape, you get to keep using your weapons and armor.
Others don’t give a stat bonus but are useful personal range transmutations:
Overland flight
long arm
gravity bow
transformation
Mage’s lucubration is good if you have other prep casters in your party.
Any ideas on how this should be handled, or how a DM has done it in their game?
"Previous Ruler Coming Back to Life" is a plot point in some fantasy novels. I read a lot (of varying quality), so here are some of the ones I remember. Limiting myself to ones where the person comes back with memories, personality, and appearance intact.
1. From a fantasy setting where pretty much everyone was being continually reincarnated: Death triggers succession, old ruler is no longer a royal and has to go find something else to do. As I recall this was so ingrained that only the big bad of the series refused to go.
2. Ruler from a couple of hundred years ago comes back to life because of a mistake in a ritual done in his tomb. Decides to launch a rebellion to claim "his" throne.
3. One of my favorites was a very minor plot point: A king (who was a side character himself) went to the dungeons to consult his many-times-great-ancestor. This original king had managed to make himself effectively immortal (coming back a short while after he died every time). Thought of himself as the "wise, advice-giving elder" for all his heirs. After several generations, his descendants got fed up with his condescension and trying to pull all the strings. So they imprisoned him but still consulted him when necessary.
4. Old queen is continually recognized and gets completely fed up with everyone saying "how much better things were" while she was in charge (before she died). Really doesn't want to deal with the politics any more. Leaves the kingdom to go adventuring.
-A DC 10 Ride check (free action) means it will act as you want it to, including its movement and attacks. Failure means you cannot take actions and spend your round controlling it instead (though it still moves and attacks as you command).
-You also need to make a separate DC 5 Ride check to guide with knees. If you fail you have to use one hand controlling your mount for the round (but can otherwise act normally).
And once you put a couple of points into Ride, you take 10 and forget about those checks
CRB page 86 wrote:
Taking 10: When your character is not in immediate danger or distracted, you may choose to take 10.
Combat is pretty much the definition of "being in danger." But yeah, once you get up to a +9 Ride modifier it's a handwave.
Mounted Combat was quite confusing in 1E so be prepared for multiple steps to explain the process. Here are the key quotes.
Mounted Combat page 201 wrote:
Mounts that do not possess combat training (see the Handle Animal skill) are frightened by combat. If you don’t dismount, you must make a DC 20 Ride check each round as a move action to control such a mount.
Ride Skill page 104 wrote:
Fight with a Combat-Trained Mount: If you direct your wartrained mount to attack in battle, you can still make your own attack or attacks normally. This usage is a free action.
Mounted Combat Page 202 wrote:
With a DC 5 Ride check, you can guide your mount with your knees so as to use both hands to attack or defend yourself. This is a free action.
Ride Skill Page 104 wrote:
You can guide your mount with your knees so you can use both hands in combat. Make your Ride check at the start of your turn. If you fail, you can use only one hand this round because you need to use the other to control your mount. This does not take an action.
Distilling it down: If your mount is "combat-trained" (knows the attack, come, defend, down, guard, and heel tricks as detailed in the Handle Animal skill)
-A DC 10 Ride check (free action) means it will act as you want it to, including its movement and attacks. Failure means you cannot take actions and spend your round controlling it instead (though it still moves and attacks as you command).
-You also need to make a separate DC 5 Ride check to guide with knees. If you fail you have to use one hand controlling your mount for the round (but can otherwise act normally).
I'll admit I never really understood the Kineticist.
The idea of *ever* accepting burn, which is -1 hp / class level *for the rest of the day* per point of burn (and can't be healed or recovered without a full nights rest), seemed a bit much for me. And there are powers that want you to accept burn at the beginning of the day to get some sort of buff (Elemental Overflow), or powers with costs like '4 burn' which, is, like, all of your non-Con bonus hit points! Yes, I'd like to throw this big zap and then die in the very next round because I literally burned 40 of my 48 hit points *before the bad guys even attacked me!*
This is a completely valid reason not to want to play the class. Just like "I don't like memorizing spells" or "Fighters are boring" are valid reasons.
I personally like the way the kineticist was a new (to PF1) way of implementing risk/reward tradeoffs. Spellcasters have to decide whether to spend a spell or save it for later. Kineticists have to decide whether to trade HP for combat power. It is worth noting that burn is non-lethal damage so even if you have taken your full (3 + Con Modifier) burn, you aren't likely to *die* from one hit, but it is very possible to be unconscious and unhelpful to your party.
The kineticists I have played and played with tend to be conservative with burn. Go a little wild in the first encounter or two until you have maxed out your elemental overflow benefits. Then throttle back and only use blasts that have no burn cost once you count in your abilities (Gather Power, Infusion Specialization, etc.). Unless you're in an "ah, everyone is about to die!" fight.
I've said it many times - the kineticist class design is really, really tight and really, really well balanced. But extremely difficult to visualize when you are reading the class. Only play can make it obvious.
I have two general answers, but the specifics would depend on the particular class you want to play.
One: Fun race choices are those that let you do something that particular class can't normally do. Which usually comes down to Alternate Favored Class Bonuses. To use the oracle as an example:
Ganzi can add sorcerer/wizard enchantment spells to the oracle spell list.
Wayang: same, but wizard illusion spells.
Wyrwood: same, but evocation
Shabti adds spells from the psychic list.
Vine Leshys with certain mysteries can add druid spells to the oracle list.
Kobolds can get super-beefy AC bonuses from spells they cast on themselves.
Two: the other thing you can do is choose a race that thematically matches the rest of what you want to do. I really enjoyed my Sylph (elementalist) oracle with the Waves Mystery and the Blackened Curse. Took the Earth Elemental form at level 11 to be a "Master of all elements."
Unfortunately the physics of D&D & thus PF1 is totally borked.
Grumble, grumble, I hate the use of "Borked" as a general bowdlerization. It has a specific meaning.
Borked:
Refers to concerted (and often unexpected) character assassination of a person for political ends. Comes from the name of 1980's US Supreme Court nominee Robert Bork. Opposition Senators misrepresented views, cherry picked quotes, and made ridiculously hyperbolic claims about what America would look like if he was confirmed. Which isn't to say that there weren't legitimate concerns about his views. He was near a far end of the political spectrum (for the time), but the ruthless vilification by his opponents portrayed him as being so far beyond the extreme you would have to be crazy to support him. Which in turn meant Senators of both parties were reluctant to vote in favor of him lest they be tarred with the same brush, and led to his nomination being voted down.
Most of the reason physics "doesn't work" in Role-Playing Games (besides, you know, magic) is to prevent players from cheesing things up. With a modern knowledge of physics (or chemistry, or mechanical engineering) we can easily come up with things that "should" be more damaging than swinging a sword. But that upsets the balance. And of course to make it simpler. You shouldn't have to do physics to play the game.
I believe somewhere in the plethora of PF1 rules, there are generic rules for dropping objects onto someone and involved making a check-like attack roll, or maybe it was a reflex save from the target, and damage was based on fall distance but didn't factor in weight (aside from light objects did half damage I think).
...
Not sure if these rules are accurate, D20PFSRD sometimes does some interpretation of the rules.
Anyways, a 4000 lb granite boulder would be about a 5 x 5 ft boulder (so a medium object) and deal only 3d6 damage if dropped from 30ft or higher, with a reflex save for half.
d20pfsrd is accurate in this case. The rules are on pages 443-444 of the Core Rulebook.
In addition to the table laying out damage (which are based on size, not weight, and with a lower damage for "lighter" objects like a wooden cart vs. a solid boulder), it also specifies how to make a deliberate attack with such objects: Ranged Touch attack, with a 20' range increment, AND the target gets a reflex save for half.
So dropping a medium object from 30' (the minimum for full damage) requires a ranged touch attack (with a -2 penalty for range) for 3d6 damage, reflex half. Or the 4th-level kineticist with an energy blast could make a ranged touch attack with no penalty for 2d6 + 1/2 Con damage (no save).
If a player still wants to attempt the drop tactic, the GM needs to be clear that she is the arbiter of what size an object is, and what counts as light. And that "clever" attempts to cheese the rules aren't going to be allowed. (Player: "I have a balloon of colossal size. It's filled with regular air, not helium, so it will fall and here's the math showing it is within my weight limit. It's definitely light so that's 'only' 5d6 damage." GM: "Uh, no. I'm calling that 1d6 damage.")
As others have said, the kineticist is extremely well balanced. It's made that way by extremely tight language that relies on a deep understanding of the overall rules. Which makes it difficult to visualize how things are going to play out when you're reading the class entry. It's really only after you've seen kineticists in play for a while (and realized what part of their abilities you were reading wrong) that you see how balanced they are.
I assume that many contributors to the rules never read what that feat does and assumed it enables making more than one primary natural attack each round.
It's an attempt to prevent a "something-for-nothing" trade.
There are several animal companions - prominently Big Cats such as lions and tigers - that have three or more primary attacks but no secondary attacks. Since they have at least three natural attacks, they get Multiattack instead of the iterative attack. But since none are secondary attacks, Multiattack doesn't give them any benefit. So why wouldn't you take an archetype that gets rid of the useless feat for something useful?
It's a pretty widespread opinion that this rule change in Ultimate Wilderness was "fixing a problem" that didn't need fixing. Even Pathfinder Society decided to ignore the archetype limitation.
Ultimate Wilderness - Companion Archetypes: Animal companions can trade out the multiattack ability when qualifying for an archetype, even if multiattack does not benefit them; this is a campaign-specific decision that contradicts the details on page 186.
I know you're coming up with reasons why it could work (but also the hurdles in doing so), but what I'm saying is that as a GM I'm not going to come up with lots of reasons to shut it down, I'm just going to tell you no because at the end of the day, wealth is an important concern for game balance and I'm not going to let any sort of clever scheme override that.
Oh no, I'm coming up with reasons why it wouldn't make sense to do it.
Amazingly, this is one of the cases where magic doesn't actually improve the outcome very much. Any such operation is going to rely in a large part on gravity and water flow, which together would be much more volume than what magic can manage.
"Craft magic items" was to point out that a wizard can make 500 gp a day just doing that. Which, let's not forget, is 10 pounds of gold. For a good open-pit mine or a marginal quality underground mine, that works out to around 20 MILLION pounds of ore that need to be processed. That's a lot of magic.
Make your money crafting items, then set up a company, buy land, and hire commoners to mine gold for you the mundane way.
Otherwise, smart wizards across the world would already be doing whatever you can come up with and extracted all the gold available....so there's some in game world reason why it doesn't work or doesn't work well.
Capital Costs and Opportunity Costs
Capital:
-You need to purchase/lease/control gold-rich land. Sure, there's the "take it by force" option but then you need to spend a lot of effort defending it.
-You need a workforce. This kind of mining requires moving a LOT of earth and rubble from place to place. Move earth could do the gross work (though it takes a while) but the sorting and cleaning need finer control. Undead are an option but have an onyx cost to create.
Opportunity Cost
-Take one feat and you can instead spend your days crafting magic items and making 500 gp a day (1000 gp if you can handle the +5 DC speedup). In a nice, comfortable shop with all the amenities of civilization around you.
The better method ("physics"-wise) would be to create water a whole bunch, then magic it into ice. The expansion of water to ice could fracture the rock.
Like Pizza Lord mentioned, transmute rock to mud does the job more directly than bothering with the whole fracturing process.
As for mercury (or similar metals) you could temporarily make it with major creation. If you picked mercury in particular because of it's use in gold mining (binding to gold in a slurry, then sinking while the non-gold rock and earth are sluiced off) then doing that process with major creation is quite clever. When the spell ends the mercury disappears leaving you with pure gold; no need to bother with heating the amalgam to remove the mercury. Plus it would be better for the environment if the mercury just magically disappears :)
You could also be a Divine Source yourself (a mythic path ability I absolutely love) if your GM will let you rearrange your mythic choices. You'd have to take it twice, since the first time would only allow you to grant the Evil and Law domains.
Any form of blindsight works. (Lifesense, echolocation, etc.)
Psigh wrote:
Belafon wrote:
deny (core) rogues sneak attack damage.
small edit, if you mean rogues not being able to sneak attack creatures with concealment, I just checked and unchained rogues also suffer from that limitation (didn't even know, I'll have to keep that in mind)
Unchained rogues can sneak attack creatures with concealment (20% miss chance) but not total concealment (50% miss). Core rogues can't sneak attack if the target has any level of concealment. Dim light provides 20% concealment.
The only benefit for mythic darkness is the inability (or reduced efficiency) of the See in Darkness power to negate it (and the lower spell level for casting, but the trade off is that it's easier for [light] spells to nullify).
Non-mythic light spells have no effect in the area of mythic darkness, which basically means the only thing that can stop it is mythic daylight.
Mythic darkness is really good for a creature that wants to be in darkness. Automatically darkness around the targeted object (like your clothes), even in full sun. Vampire's best friend! Even against creatures with darkvision or see in darkness anyone inside the mythic darkness has 20% concealment, so you can make stealth checks and deny (core) rogues sneak attack damage.
... it means that in dim light a non-mythic spell is stronger than a mythic one in some aspects...
Well, yes. But only because that's comparing two different spells, mythic darkness (2nd level spell) and non-mythic deeper darkness (3rd level spell).
There are edge cases in which deeper darkness is the better choice. For example when the prevailing condition is already dim light or darkness and your enemies have no magical light sources and do not have the see in darkness ability. For most other cases, mythic darkness is more powerful.
It's entirely reasonable that a higher-level non-mythic spell can be better than a lower-level mythic spell, especially when that's only true in specific conditions.
Well, it didn't actually do absolutely nothing: you could use it when readying an action to counterspell, which all other spellcasters with Arcane Armor Training/Mastery can't do.
Maybe? Depends on how your GM chooses to interpret the last bit of Arcane Armor Training.
Quote:
As a swift action, reduce the arcane spell failure chance due to the armor you are wearing by 10% for any spells you cast this round.
It's "this round" not "this turn" so I would read that as "for 1 round" (until the start of your next turn), but a particularly pedantic GM could decide to have it last only until the end of the current round's initiative order.
I guess an immediate action would let you use a swift action for something else on your turn, then ready to counter (or cast any readied spell, really) knowing you could use the immediate to lower ASF if you needed to. Very niche case though, and almost certainly not what was intended.
It likely happened in the Adventurer's Guide book.
Correct, it was when the prestige class was reprinted in Adventurer's Guide.
Paizo's policy was that when an item from a softcover book became a "pick-up" (reprint) in a later hardcover, the later hardcover version was the one that should be used. Whether that was a power decrease, increase, or rules cleanup.
In this particular case, it was a rules cleanup. In Paths of Prestige the Arcane Armor Expertise ability changed the action to use Arcane Armor Training from a swift action to an immediate action at 5th level. Which... did nothing. If you use an immediate action on your turn it still counts as your swift. And if you use an immediate action when it's not your turn it eats up your swift for your next turn and you can't use another out-of-turn action (like casting a spell) and have to wait for your turn anyway. So when Adventurer's Guide changed it to a free action, it actually worked.
I do mean brain rot (there are poisons in d20pfsrd not listed in Archives of Nethys: https://www.d20pfsrd.com/gamemastering/afflictions/poison/).
OK, did a bunch of digging. According to d20pfsrd, "Brain Rot" is from Adventure Path #37, Souls for Smuggler's Shiv. However, I went through the AP book, and there's no "Brain Rot" in the book.
As near as I can figure, this is actually the Poison Flesh ability of the Ningyo. Statistics match, including the typo of "frequency 1 minutes" (should have a duration).
1) As Azothath said, d20pfrsd can't use Paizo's Intellectual Property (such as the monster name "Ningyo") which makes it really hard to figure out what's what sometimes. Archives of Nethys is generally a better source for this reason.
2) As Mysterious Stranger said, there are poisons that appear in tables that simply can't be crafted. Usually these are poisons naturally secreted by a monster, and occasionally by a spell. It doesn't mean the tables are perfect so if you see a poison you want to use that doesn't appear to have a price you should check the referenced sourcebook and see what the origin is.
What do you mean “no set price?” Not printed in the book?
As for where to find those two in particular, Archives of Nethys has a complete list of all poisons. (Took me a while to figure out you probably meant brain blot, though I haven’t double-checked Champions of Corruption yet to make sure AoN is correct.)
You misread what I wrote. Nobody is arguing with you about your math. "Check with your GM" was about increasing the splash damage. (It's easy to not make the connection that Fickle Attack raises the minimum bomb damage, which would in turn would raise the splash damage.)
I think you're underestimating the power of Fickle Attack for an alchemist. There are very few ways for an alchemist to increase the damage of their bombs, even in Mythic games. Deadly Aim can't be used on bombs and alchemists aren't eligible for Weapon Specialization.
And you're definitely undervaluing increasing splash damage.
Spoiler:
Even an alchemist that's not built for splashing is going to be able to catch an extra enemy or two in the area most fights. And once they can make multiple attacks a round it's often a good idea to split your attacks to hit more enemies with bomb primary target rider effects. (Like frost bomb, which staggers, or force bombs, which knocks down.)
With even a little bit of discovery investment, like directed bomb, you can usually get 2 or 3 enemies in a splash.
Sticky bombs as a 10th level discovery are just great. Fickle Attack increases that damage too.
Add it all up and Fickle Attack can easily be adding 12-24 damage per round total to the enemies at level 8. 36-54 or more by level 11. Way more if the alchemist is really focused on splashing.
That isn't to say "Fickle Attack is the greatest thing since sliced bread!" Sure, I can easily make a Mythic Vital Strike barbarian that does WAY more damage per hit. But there are plenty of reasons to play an alchemist, and Fickle Attack is one of their best options.
AFAIK(Wall of Fire, permanent in a bag of holding) is a 'no' due to Line of Effect being cut at the bag's opening.
Ah, but what if you got in the bag first, then cast the spell, made it permanent, and got back out?
Beyond that, this is what I was referring to as "the normal extradimensional space arguments." These items are really intended for storage only and using them in clever ways requires a whole lot of GM adjudication. I don't know of anywhere it is stated that planar boundaries end line of effect, but it's totally reasonable. But the bag mouth is a portal into that extradimensional space so should a spell pass through the portal. . . ?
Spoiler:
-Can physical things pass through but not spells? If so, fire arrows out of the bag mouth and be immune to spells.
-Can you see through the planar barrier? Both ways?
-If the opening cuts line of effect, what happens when I reach into my bag of holding with the hand that is wearing my Ring of Protection? Do I lose my deflection bonus while I'm fishing around for an item?
-Ridiculous number of other ridiculous situations
Does someone know if there is a Pathfinder Society ruling on the Phoenix bloodline?
A post makes me wonder if there is a ruling that the bloodline effect works only on instantaneous effects.
It would be logical, but there is no FAQ, as it was published in a softbound.
Yup, that was the PFS ruling. (Side note: there were a lot of clarifications for Heroes of Golarion.)
Campaign Clarifications wrote:
Page 24 — A phoenix sorcerer’s bloodline arcana only affects instantaneous spells whose spell level is 1 or higher.
Even without permanency (not allowed in PFS) any non-instantaneous spell could result in a ridiculous amount of healing. Spend 30' of movement walking back and forth through the healing wall of fire 6 times, then your standard to cast a spell...
It would be a good conversation at a con why authors (even of lowly splatbooks) choose to say words like 'targets' and mean 'targets of only pick-your-targets spells'. . .
I've talked to many authors at cons (and even did a tiny bit of PF1 writing for Paizo myself) and the simplest explanation is almost always correct: they didn't think of it.
When you write something, you know how it works. If you use it in your home game and a player has a question, you clarify it and you're done. If you're submitting it to Paizo you try to come at it from different angles and "break" it to make sure it works. But sometimes you miss an angle. It's when thousands of players start fiddling with things and saying "how about this variation, or this combination?" that you realize that there is ambiguity.
It's not unique to "authors in lowly splatbooks." The PF1 Core Rulebook was the most picked-over, edited, closest designer intervention book in the entire line. And it had 6 printings, each with new errata.
For the Phoenix bloodline, the errata is actually very simple. Two variations, depending on how it is actually supposed to work.
Quote:
When casting any spell that deals fire damage and targets one or more creatures, you can instead heal your targets. The spell deals no damage, and living creatures affected by the spell instead regain a number of hit points equal to half the fire damage the spell would normally deal.
Quote:
When casting any spell that deals fire damage, you can instead heal your targetsthose affected. The spell deals no damage, and living creatures affected by the spell instead regain a number of hit points equal to half the fire damage the spell would normally deal.
I'm going to basically go the opposite way from Diego and say while I think this might be rules legal I would probably not allow it as a GM.
Yes, the arcana says "heal your targets" but it also says "when casting any spell that does fire damage." We won't get an official answer on this but the intention certainly seems to be that you could fireball an area to heal the creatures in the radius.
I don't see any reason you couldn't put the wall in the bag. The bloodline power makes it so the spell does no damage, so the bag wouldn't be harmed.
But... it's exploitable. Your siege idea, or a temple in a town, is an extremely powerful effect. A site that provides unlimited healing forever just by visiting is mythic-level magic. A portable version? Even better. Even heal mid-combat if you need to! It's just too good. Not to mention all the normal extradimensional space arguments about line of effect (can you be in the bag and shoot an arrow at someone outside it?), line of sense (if not, can you tell what's going on outside of the bag?), and metagaming (if neither, do you have to send the player out of the room?)
My guess is that the author of the bloodline just didn't think of permanency at all.
There's no use in the rest of us engaging further in this thread. This is the Original Poster's argument:
The item creation rules tell you how to price an item when you are creating a brand new item, but nowhere in those rules does it explicitly and exactingly say "if you raise the caster level of an existing item, the price should raise accordingly." Therefore costing rules don't apply to published items! Therefore I can make an existing item at any caster level without changing the price, and get the benefits of that higher level for free.
We all know this is wrong, but the OP desperately wants it to be true so he's not going to be swayed by reason.
The Weapon Shift feat does not address special materials. PPC: Wilderness Origins 2018 was a late addition so it was clearly ignored and following RAW it is not allowed (as it doesn't say it does).
See the Weapon description chart on AoN.
Damage type is the column for BPS.
Weapon Properties allude to the various Special column entries.
Weapon enhancement and magical abilities(qualities) do not transfer.
So it is going to be a GM caveat allowance.
Is it a big deal? No. It does broach the total enhancement bonus vs various DRs but enhancements are not allowed. You'll also have to address Weapon Blanch, blood crystal(user taking damage then suffering bleed), the disease one, etc...
Magical Abilities and Weapon Enhancement transfer with the later versions of the feat (Improved Weapon Shift and Greater Weapon Shift, respectively).
The question is whether "adamantine," "silver," or "cold iron" is a damage type.
Weapon Shift wrote:
...Select one of these weapons; while in your new form, your natural attacks deal the same damage type as that weapon. Your natural attacks also gain all of the weapon’s properties (such as disarm), other than the double weapon property and the fragile weapon property
As far as I have found "damage type" isn't a strictly defined game term. However, looking at the special materials section in Ultimate Equipment (page 48) it defines some types of damage. Evil-aligned weapons, bludgeoning, and energy (such as fire) are all defined as damage types. So I'd have to say that if "evil-aligned" is a damage type then special materials are also a damage type, so yes they would apply.
That is a puzzler. My first instinct was to say "no" because that's not a special feature like blocking or brace. How would the fact that your dagger is adamantine let your slams do adamantine damage. But on second thought - there's clearly something supernatural going on. That dagger lets your slams do piercing damage. So, yeah. I'd say they count as the special material.
I posted this in the other thread, not realizing this one had been created:
Ultimate Campaign Page 140, under Controlling Companions wrote:
Some companions are exceptions, such as an intelligent companion who doesn’t bear exceptional loyalty toward you (for example, a hired guard), a weaker minion who is loyal to you but lacks the abilities or resources to assist in adventuring tasks, and a called outsider (such as from planar ally) who agrees to a specific service but still has a sense of self-preservation. You can use Bluff, Diplomacy, and Intimidate to influence such companions, but the GM is the final arbiter of their actions. For example, a PC might use threats to convince a caravan guard to hold back an ogre for a few rounds or to prevent her zealous followers from attacking a rival adventurer, but the GM makes the decision whether the guard runs away after getting hit once or the followers attack when provoked.
Surprising no one, the final answer is "it's up to the GM."
Here's another quote, this one from that classic text on kingdoms "Ultimate Campaign." (Page 140, under Controlling Companions)
Quote:
Some companions are exceptions, such as an intelligent companion who doesn’t bear exceptional loyalty toward you (for example, a hired guard), a weaker minion who is loyal to you but lacks the abilities or resources to assist in adventuring tasks, and a called outsider (such as from planar ally) who agrees to a specific service but still has a sense of self-preservation. You can use Bluff, Diplomacy, and Intimidate to influence such companions, but the GM is the final arbiter of their actions. For example, a PC might use threats to convince a caravan guard to hold back an ogre for a few rounds or to prevent her zealous followers from attacking a rival adventurer, but the GM makes the decision whether the guard runs away after getting hit once or the followers attack when provoked.
Surprising no one, the final answer is "it's up to the GM."
There are a few that are race specific like Child of Two Peoples (for humans and elves).
Speech of the Wilds gives you any language, but you do have to be adopted by Aasimars.
As always, ask your GM. I think it's perfectly reasonable to have "knows the racial language" as your race trait. Not the least bit overpowered and I would definitely let a player who asked do so.
Alternatively, you can just put a point into Linguistics at first level and choose the racial language.
As for why:
Honestly it's probably an oversight.
I'm trying to think of a real-life situation where it might make sense but I'm drawing a blank. I know a couple who (if you go back far enough) are ethnically Chinese, adopted a Chinese baby, and spoke Chinese to the child in the home. But the kid also speaks English just as well as the parents do (English is the parents' first language).
You're right. Even if the child is older, they are going to pick up the language if they can pick up the trait.
Sneak attack damage isn't weapon damage, so Fickle Attack shouldn't work on it. Bombs' damage is weapon damage, so it will work with bombs.
Start by acknowledging the language is messy, and that there were multiple FAQ requests for Fickle Attack/Sneak Attack interaction.
There’s no game definition of “weapon damage” as being only the base damage of the weapon. Even if there were, Fickle Attack doesn’t limit you to the base damage of the weapon.
Fickle Attack wrote:
Whenever you roll damage for a melee or ranged attack with a weapon or alchemical item, you can treat any natural 1s on the damage dice as if they were the highest possible number on those dice.
It just says “the damage dice.” That would apply to sneak attack, critical hits, even flaming or shocking weapon properties.
Fickle Attack may seem good but it does not really increase the damage that much. It increases the average damage from 3.5 to 4.3333 which is less than a full point per die. Considering it is a 3rd tier ability that is not much.
Check with your GM to be sure they interpret it this way. . . Fickle Attack is much better for alchemists than (for example) rogues. Let's say your bomb damage is 4d6+6. Fickle attack raises the average from 20 damage to ~23. Eh, that's OK. But your minimum damage also goes from 10 points to 14 points. Oh, that's pretty nice when you are talking about splash damage. Especially as your number of dice increases.
If you have access to the Mythic Hero’s Handbook the Genius path has much better abilities for bombs. Dirty Bombs Increases the damage from d6 to d8 and if you spend a mythic point it boost the damage to d10.
3rd party book, so a lot of groups don't allow it.
Quote:
Path Dabbling will allow you to pick up enduring blessing from the Hierophant path, which makes your extracts with a duration of 10 minute per level last for 24 hours. Path Dabbling is also available to the trickster.
I love Path Dabbling (or Dual Path), and Enduring Blessing, but make sure your GM is going to allow this.
Enduring blessing wrote:
Whenever you cast a spell with a duration of 10 minutes per level or longer upon one willing target. . .
Alchemist wrote:
Although the alchemist doesn’t actually cast spells, he does have a formulae list that determines what extracts he can create...
OK, I completely missed that you were taking Enduring Blessing twice. Ignore my comments about "utility fading."
-If your party has any non-mythic animal companions, eidolons, familiars, cohorts, etc., then share glory is their spell.
Assuming no spells from outside the usual cleric spell list (domains, multiclassing, etc.) and no shenanigans to cast personal spells on allies, the best choices may be some of the lower-level, defensive spells that simply save you an action when combat starts.
-Shield of faith is always useful, especially the mythic version.
-Guardian of faith doesn't have a mythic version but does count as both shield of faith and protection from evil.
-Death ward.
I've always felt that Enduring Blessing was at it's most useful when taken by an inquisitor or by an arcane class dual-pathing into Hierophant. (Hello, brown-fur transmuter!)
I've played a couple of arcanists and it can be painful for the first three levels as you desperately hoard your precious spell slots. Wizards and sorcerers aren't much better (though a lot of them will have a school or bloodline power usable 3 + casting stat times a day). Here's what I do once I run out:
-Get a wand of magic missile ASAP.
-Flank while fighting defensively. (If I'm at least 2nd level. 1st level is almost guaranteed unconscious if hit.)
-That attack while fighting defensively? Might as well make it an Aid Another attempt.
-Did the bad guy hit you? Don't let that happen again! Withdraw and start using acid splash.
Honestly once you get the magic missile wand that's almost always your best choice of action.
I really like Enduring Blessing however its utility does start to fade as you get to the higher teen levels, much earlier if your party is built to take advantage of cooperative buffing. A 10 min/lvl, CL24 (not hard to do by level 18, even without Mythic rules), extended spell lasts 8 hours. Which is the length of a typical adventuring day. Enduring Blessing doesn't ever become useless, but unless your GM loves night surprises days can pass without it mattering.
The other reason for going with the monk untyped bonus is... the word "dodge" in the Sacred Fist ability is probably an error.
In the original printing of ACG the sacred fist level-based AC bonus was a deflection bonus and it didn't have the "stacks with monk abilty" language. Second printing added "stacks with monk." OK, they needed to change the bonus type from deflection to make it clear that they stacked but for some reason changed the bonus type to dodge instead of untyped.
And there's no reason why it should be a dodge bonus. The Sacred Fist is explicit that the entire bonus, including the additional bonuses from higher levels, applies when flat-footed. Just like the monk. But you lose dodge bonuses when flat-footed. Why should this be the one dodge bonus that breaks that rule?
Has anyone else read the article about the incutilis in Skull & Shackles? It's multiple paragraphs talking about how they take over corpses and never mentions taking over living beings. But then the stat block has the Puppetmaster ability, which works on helpless living creatures and doesn't work on corpses.
I'm guessing they changed the ability in the stat block sometime during development so that the incutilis would actually be at least a possible threat to PCs instead of it being almost entirely a lore creature.
That's also probably why they didn't bother to stat out the zombie. If it's a random corpse that's animated, no one is going to make the mistake partyrico did (12 years ago) of assuming it uses the original creature's stats.
At any rate, I did apparently miss a crucial thing: regular Incutilises can attack a helpless Small or Medium creature...but still with no saving throw. :-/
A coup de grace is usually effectively "Roll a 20 or die."
Quote:
As a full-round action, you can use a melee weapon to deliver a coup de grace (pronounced “coo day grahs”) to a helpless opponent. You can also use a bow or crossbow, provided you are adjacent to the target. You automatically hit and score a critical hit. If the defender survives the damage, he must make a Fortitude save (DC 10 + damage dealt) or die.
Lady Bluehawk wrote:
Also, killing the Incutilis "destroys the zombie," which means you can't just raise dead your buddy; you'd need to reincarnate (I'd read that as still having some poofed ash residue or whatever left) or resurrect them. :-/
You can raise dead.
Quote:
The victim is killed instantly, and becomes a zombie-like creature under the incutilis’s control. This zombie isn’t treated as being undead. . . It can also retract its tendrils as a move action, but doing so causes the zombie to collapse and revert to a normal corpse. . . Killing the incutilis destroys the zombie.
So if I am a 4 armed fat folk with two pistols as well as the two weapon fighting style and improve to weapon fighting style as well plus my fast ordinance I could theoretically use 4 ordinance? Five if I was hasted?
Assuming you've got your reload time down to a free action? Sure.
You have the same problem as a regular TWF, hasted, Fast Bombs alchemist. You can go nova for a few rounds a day (3 or so at level 8) but after that you run out of uses.
Ordinarily a Gun Chemist can only fire one piece of alchemical ordnance per round.
Alchemical Ordnance wrote:
...and he can fire no more than one piece per round.
Fast Ordnance just means that you can use alchemical ordnance on more than one shot per round
Fast Ordnance wrote:
A gun chemist with this discovery can fire more than one piece of alchemical ordnance as part of a full attack...
If, for example, you are using a pistol with paper cartridges and have Rapid Reload then reloading becomes a free action and you can make as many attacks as your BAB allows. But the normal limit is "only one piece of alchemical ordinance per round" so the rest of the shots would just be normal firearm attacks. With Fast Ordnance, you can use Alchemical Ordnance on all your attacks in a round (if you want to).
Pathfinder Society GM. Starfinder Society GM. 5,344 posts (5,407 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. 1 wishlist. 24 Organized Play characters. 6 aliases. 
