Booksy's page

An official ruling seems to be necessary, as RAI vs RAW is again in question. But honestly I feel common sense can be applied here.

Another way to look at this rule is to compare it to the known abilities of Bo Duke, of Dukes of Hazard Fame.

True, he's not a paladin, but the Detect Evil ability works much like the Dukes 'Get in the Car' ability works.

First:
At will, a paladin can use detect evil, as the spell.
vs
At will, Bo Duke can open a car door and sit on the seat, as the action.

Then:
A paladin can, as a move action, concentrate on a single item or individual within 60 feet and determine if it is evil, learning the strength of its aura as if having studied it for 3 rounds. While focusing on one individual or object, the paladin does not detect evil in any other object or individual within range.
vs
Bo Duke can jump through the window of the car door(which will be conveniently open) and land on the seat.

You do one or the other. One is not a prerequisite for the other.

A Hospitaler doesn't fuel her Channel Energy with her LoH. You get the straight 2 extra uses of CE. The exception in the feat's special note gives a pally 4 extra LoH uses, but only for channeling energy - and a regular pally expends 2 uses of LoH to CE - because not having a CE pool would make the feat useless otherwise.

Now, if you had a seperate class that also contained the Channel Energy class feature you would have a floating '2 uses' to be applied to either feature.Source

A friend of mine once played a wizard, who was the groups cook, who early on were ambushed by goblins during dinner prep. Said wizard, not having any spells prepared yet, did the only thing he could. He attacked them with his frying pan. After 2 critical hits in a row he vowed to enchant it, if he lived - it was a lot of goblins.

Over the course of the campaign it became a +3 flaming, goblinbane frying pan; it also granted skill focus(profession:chef). Our bacon was always delicious XD

For the optimizer, a study was done comparing all the animal companions, this was the result.

Obviously its not the begin all/end all of animal companions.

My favorite I ever had was a Nordic Druid and the DM let me have a pygmy polar bear (we used the stats for cat, small). He was named Snowball.

The party entered a wine cellar that contained a wererat (and unknown to the group it's still human child.)

The paladin sensed evil and yes the wererat was lawful evil, but the wererat asked the group to leave its den multiple times as the party moved up to it.

The paladin moved up to the wererat and started attacking.

After the first round, the wererat asked the party to leave again and the paladin attacked a final time and killed the wererat.

Information gained:

We were in the upper reaches of the dungeon, killed an Ogre...we were all level 4...We were in a monastery up on a cliff that was run by evil monks. We cleared out most of it, killed a ton of zombies and skeletons and freed the..prisoners and escorted them out after killing an Ogre for the key to their cage. Then we went down deeper into the dungeon and searched a few rooms, until we found the wererats "nest". It was in the bottom of a dungeon...we are at least 10 miles from any town...Instead of attacking, the creature simply asked again to be left alone. It didn't lift a paw.

Further information gained:

So we know the Wererat was easily identifiable, as it had paws and was in Hybrid form. Thus, it was armed (natural attacks) and not defenseless. If a typical wererat, it is CR2
Lycanthrope & Lycanthropy specifically tell us the wererat is afflicted as its child is a normal human. Also it has changed shape and is past the 3 day grace period when a 12th level cleric could save it with Remove Disease or Heal. This is a specific rule of Lycanthropy, and thus takes precedence over the general ruling of other removal methods.
Detect Evil which tells us the wererat is not normal, as a 2HD creature would not registrar. Therefore, it is either 5HD or greater, or has levels as a paladin or cleric serving an evil deity to be noticed by this ability. Without knowing the strength of the 'ping' we can't narrow it any further.
Paladin Code did the GM offer the chance for a 'sense motive' check? There is no indication the player took one. Is being an evil curse bearing creature in an evil monestary - not far from an innocent population - where evil deeds have taken place, in a room with built up defenses enough evidence to be 'punished' and prevent a plague? Its only 'non-evil' sign in this situation was to not attack the paladin. Every other sign pointed to 'Smite Me'.

If there was something else going on here, I don't see anyway the player could've known about it - short of the GM intervening with a comment or pointed observation - or as previously pointed out by fellow posters, his own companions interfering and insisting they question said wererat. Does the player deserve to fall? By RAW, no, as he has not knowingly committed any transgressions. Is there an opportunity for RPing a characters internal reflections when his actions are questioned by his companions, and possibly fellow clergymen? You betcha.

this amulet can grant melee weapon special abilities, so long as they can be applied to unarmed attacks.

Because the english language is the beast it is you can read this rule one of two ways, which is the reason the RAW in this case is so confudled.

1) this amulet can grant melee weapon special abilities, as long as an unarmed strike is a legal recipient of the effect - example, you cannot gain the benefit of Vorpal unless your unarmed strikes can deal slashing damage OR you cannot enchant it with ranged enchants, because unarmed strikes are not ranged attacks.

2) this amulet can grant melee weapon special abilities, as long as they could normally be enchanted to an unarmed strike, but since unarmed strikes cannot be enchanted like normal melee weapons, you can't use any of them.

In this case I think its quite obvious which of these interpretations is RAW. The amulet is specifically designed to bypass the issue of 'but you can't enchant your body with Icy Burst' by putting it into the amulet and gaining its benefits.

To answer the OP - Agile can only be applied to a weapon that can gain benefit from Weapon Finesse. Unarmed strikes are light weapons, thus they qualify, thus in can be gained as a benefit from an Amulet of Mighty Fists.

Kobold Mounted on Spider Fury Barbarian!!! This must be done!!!

I once played a Lawful Evil fighter, who could never understand why he'd been rejected from Paladin training. He followed all of the rules, and even 'enforced' them when he saw others slacking. He was always top of his class, and he made sure everyone knew it, even if they could never see the true intent of the rules as he did.

Travelled as a very honorable mercanary, but never break a contract with him, cause then you had no rules to hide behind when he unleashed 'righteous vengance upon thee'.

And please, lets not derail this thread with alignment debates, the OP has requested shared ideas, not asked for a morals vs ethics debate =D

This is an old argument. RAW, yes, you can make 'off-hand' attacks with a 'no-handed' weapon, while all your hands are full - under the condition that you have NOT made any other off hand attacks.

Will this signifcantly raise your damage? Maybe. Long term, you have higher base damage in your primary attack (Khopesh, Greatsword, etc) but most likely have lower base damage in your off-hand (unarmed strike, armor spike, etc). In an optimized TWF build you're looking atleast 5 feats to pump your damage (TWF, Imp TWF, Gr TWF, Power Attack and Double Slice). These and your Str bonus are supplying your real damage. But unlike the optimized TWF build, your MH and OH weapon are not the same, you have to either double invest Weapon Focus, Weapon Spec, Improved Critical, etc or else lose out with either ALL your OH attacks or ALL your MH attacks. Neither result is optimal. Having to enchant 2 weapons is the same for either style, although enchanting unarmed attacks is significantly more expensive then enchanting regular weapons as far as I understand.

What does a THF need? One big weapon, Power Attack, Furious Focus everything after that is style and heavily depends on the campaign, party, class and role the character is attempting to fill (battlefield control, dpr, etc)

If someone wants to invest that heavily into the Big Smash/Little Smash combat style, I say let'em. Its a big investment, its easier to do with a pair of 1h weapons (Sunblade ftw) and if they're doing it for style, its probably not optimized anyway - so why sweat it, let the raging dwarf with the greataxe kick the goblin.

edit: fixed the link XD

I love this as a concept, highly likely though that the scale colouring might be more subtle, highly noticeable by dragons, but less so by the 'mortal' races. Possibly a high perception roll, followed by a knowledge: Arcana or such to understand its significance by any non-dragon. Plus, there is so many illusion spells a dragon could use to disguise themselves. In the case of an undercover villian it'd be a very poor 'yellow' dragon that slipped up enough that the Paladin bothered to detect evil.

Mechanically, its a disease, not a curse or an enchantment, although it does - obviously - have magical properties. To answer your question, no, this is definitely not the only way to cure a were creature, but is probably the most common short of death. A Wish spell, or maybe Limited Wish, carefully worded could cure lycanthropy. And of course a GM can create any method they wish - I'm a big fan of side quests making the party gather rare/dangerous objects for a ritual.
Technically, I player could take levels in Paladin until they became immune to disease, but as a GM I'd have a hard time letting a Lawful Good player knowingly endanger others with a condition like lycanthropy.

Ah, but the secret to a good villain is that they think they're the good guy. Everything they're doing is justified, and for the better, however they choose to see it. Sometimes its simply a 'the ends justify the means' mentality, sometimes its a very warped sense of honor, and the scariest is when they think they're purging reality as we know it from the 'true evil'.

The exceptions to this are Sidley Whiplash and Dr. Evil.

@ Hawkson - It does not add to your class level. Read the feat again. Also, this is a Rules question, not a Homebrew forum. Continuing to bring up content from previous editions of the game - not even published by the current distributer - can only muddy the waters. Please keep insights from other rules systems where they belong.

I think the confusion is occuring here because its an 'order of operations' issue. To a single class Druid with a single animal companion, I agree, Boon Companion is useless. If you took it, it would be applied and have no effect because the Animal Companion calculates its abilities by the effective Druid level assigned to it, and in this case a Druids effective druid level is his Character level, thus the plus 4 cannot exceed the amount it has already achieved. This is why it works for Rangers, whose effective Druid level is Ranger-3, the Animal companion is now calculated as Ranger-3+4, max Charactere Level. Great if you were planing on dipping a single level anywhere else.

The Boon Companion bonus does not apply to your character level. It is not added to your effective druid level, it specifically states in the feat that you calculate the animal companion's abilities as if your effective druid level is up to 4 levels higher. It goes on to state a special rule, which is that if you take this feat multiple times, it does not stack, and it applies individually to each animal companion.

As a Pack Lord divides his available effective druid levels up as he sees fit amongst as many or as few animal companions as he sees fit, each of these Animal Companions is operating under a seperate effective druid level, even though they all come from the same pool (his total effective druid level, ie his character level). If these are treated as one unit (example Voltron) or individual pieces that are part of a greater whole (example Lions of Voltron Force) is immaterial, as the feat effects the individual calculation of the animal companion, not the direct effective or character levels of the individual.

All the quotes I made previously, and in this post are from the Pathfinder OGC. In this specific rules question I am not quoting anything from 3.5, nor referencing to it, nor implying that Pathfinder rules have failed to 'catch the debree' as it were.

Pack Lord: Pack Bond (Ex)

...The pack lord may have more than one animal companion, but she must divide up her effective druid level between her companions to determine the abilities of each companion. For example, a 4th-level pack lord can have one 4th-level companion, two 2nd-level companions, or one 1st-level and one 3rd-level companion...

Boon Companion

Your bond with your animal companion or familiar is unusually close.

Prerequisites: Animal companion or familiar class ability.

Benefit: The abilities of your animal companion or familiar are calculated as though your class were four levels higher, to a maximum effective druid level of equal to your character level. If you have more than one animal companion or familiar, choose one to receive this benefit. If you lose or dismiss an animal companion or familiar, you may apply this feat to the replacement creature.

Special: You may select this feat more than once. The effects do not stack. Each time you take the feat, it applies to a different animal companion or familiar.

The Pack Lords Pack Bond is different then a normal Nature Bond. It has specific rules which overrule the general. His effective druid level is divided amongst his companions.

Boon Companion does not state 'add 4 to your character level in regards to your animal companion'. Nor does it state 'add 4 to your effective druid level to a maximum of your character level'. It clearly states you apply the benefits of the feat when you're calculating the Animal Companions level. This is not when a Pack Lord is dividing his effective levels, and it is not a bonus that blinks on and off under certain conditions.

So a Pack Lord who wanted to build himself as the OP described could do as follows:

First level, take Boon Companion, it applies automatically to his only Animal - we'll call him Alpha - and doesn't raise him up because his effective Druid level and his character level are the same.
Second level, gains a second Animal(Beta), they are now both using 1 effective Druid level, but Alpha is now effectively level 2, as Boon Companion calculates the Animal Companions Abilities as though your effective class is 4 higher, to a maximum of your character level.
Third level, gain a third Animal(Gamma) and take Boon Companion again, as per special, applying it to Beta. Each Animal has a base 1 effective Druid level, Alpha is now effectively level 3, as is Beta(having the second Boon Companion applied to him/her) and Gamma is level 1.
At this point he could merely divide his gained effective Druid level amongst Alpha and Beta until Character Level 8, where Alpha is level 8 (base 4 + Boon 4), Beta is level 7 (base 3 + Boon 4) and Gamma is still just level 1.
If your friend continues to build as originally planned he would have Alpha level 20 (base 16 + Boon 4), Beta level 7 and Gamma level 1.

My personal recommendation would be to take Boon Companion once more and have Alpha level 20 and both Beta and Gamma level 6 (base 2 + Boon 4). This strategy would benefit most until level 6, where all 3 Animals would be same level as the character.

Their is no need to 'build' a scorpion familiar, the stats are available in UM or PFSRD

Here's a link. Scorpion, Greensting

A familiar has an intelligence score, regardless of base creature, so in this case the scorpion is no longer 'mindless' and will aquire Skill points and feats (and can be trained via Handle Animal) as per normal familiar rules.

These guys are one of my favorite familiars, thier size and stealth skill make them fabulous scouts, they produce usable poison (with apporpriate skill ranks) and la crème de la crème, they give you +4 initiative.

Now, one of the above examples may be a good example of an 'Improved Familiar' choice - if you wanted to keep your scorpion and just buff him up with the feat, but thats more a Homebrew discussion.

This doesn't sound like a PFS game (since you've mentioned rulings on Greater Elderitch Heritage) so I'd run an idea past your GM.

Elderitch Arcana Heritage:
Prerequisites: Cha 15, Eldritch Heritage, character level 11th.

Benefit: You gain an arcana from a Bloodline in which you already have Eldritch Heritage. For purposes of using that power, treat your sorcerer level as equal to your character level – 2, even if you have levels in sorcerer.

Special: You may select this feat multiple times. Its effects do not stack. Each time you select the feat, it must apply to a different bloodline arcana.

The GM designed an entire campain. Lets assume this was started 'before' the newest player joined, and it was not built specifically to exclude her.

The GM does NOT dictate what game is played. The group decides. If happiness is not found, a new GM has to step up or an new group has to be formed.

The attitude of the player, and how they interact with the group, means everything. Is she fun? Boring? As-dumn-as-a-stump? If she's included in the discussion for the new campaign and wants to try anyway, and her lack of game mechanics mastery leads to constant death (as described) she may remove herself from the game, or strive for greater mastery. Ultimately, unless what she's doing is disruptive to the group as a whole, its her choice to leave or stay.