Ambrose

Bri74's page

33 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS


Pgs. 356-357 Khalib

In the DEFENSE section the Spell Resistance 18 (due to the evil robe of the archimagi) is missing


Page 363. Karzoug

In the Spell prepared section is reported CL 20th. However due to the robes of Xin-shalast his effective caster level should be 21st (for all spells)


Page 336. Mountain Roper

I'm not sure if it's intentional but the roper should have 6 strands attack not only one


Pg. 335 - Gamigin

The Aura of Ice Devil is not reported, shoudl be:

Aura fear (10 ft., DC 24)

I have modified the DC taking into account the higher charisma of Gamigin


Pg. 314 - Karivek Vekker

the frightful moan is reported in the tectics section but is missing in the Special Attacks section (also in this case DC should be 22)


Pg. 314 - Karivek Vekker

the corrupting touch entry is missing the DC for the fortitude save to halves the DMG. Based on Karivek HD and Charisma should be 22


My players now are trying to convince me that to "be in contact" with an ally they need only a move action.

I disagree with them but I would like to know which is the general opinion


The player have an hard time during a combat and all the party (4 PC including the sorcerer) are thinking to escape the meele thanks to the teleport spell of the sorcerer.

I'm not sure how to rules in combat the part of the teleport spell "All creatures to be transported must be in contact with one another, and at least one of those creatures must be in contact with you".

Can the sorcerer on his turn, if the other 3 PCs are all within reach of him, simply cast teleport and touch all of theme in the same round? In this I have to count this as a standard or a full round attack?

Or

Having the sorcerer only 2 hands he can only touch at the same time only 2 PCs and the other one must be already touching the sorcerer or another PC? In this case must the last PC have declared on his previous turn that he wanted to touch another PC (and what kind of action is it? standard? free?)?


Page 269 ORDIKON.

A quickened shield is reported, but Ordikon does not have the Quicken Spell feat.


On the description of Guards and Wards "A dispel magic cast on a specific effect, if successful, removes only that effect".

The question is what "specific effect" exatly means. Let say I cast dispel magic on one of the corridor with the fog (or on one of the arcane locked doors) and it is successful. Does it means that al the corridors (or all the doors) are dispelled or only that specific corridor (or door)?


Ignore my last post...


Pag. 241
The Scribbler
Also the Meele section is wrong. Having BAB +11 the scribbler could do only two iterative attacks


I have a question regarding the fanged falchion:

"...this horrific chewing deails 2 point of Constitution damage and stuns the victim for 1 round (Fort DC 15 negates)"

A successful save negates also the Con damage or only the stun?


Pag. 241
The Scribbler
in the Ranged section are reported iterative attacks but he does not have quickdraw feat and the returning property neither grants iterative attacks with the weapon


Strife2002 wrote:
-> Change the Strength score from "18" to "20" to account for the casting of bull's strength mentioned in the Before Combat tactics. The aforementioned changes to the Melee line already reflect this.

Actually the change is from "18" to "22"


Cavall wrote:
Not likely. But stabilize rules exist.

Stabilize happens only when the creature is already dying (and in my opinion does not stop bleeding either). I'm asking if a creature could stop bleeding in some way if it does not have access to any form of magical healing


I'm guessing if an intelligent monster without hands (e.g. a Sandpoint Devil or similar) could try a healing check to stop bleeding


Pg. 397 - Razmus
Damage for the earth breaker is reported as 2d6 so it an M-sized earth breaker. The damage modifier is correct only if he is wielding it one-handed (otherwise it is +13).
However is attack modifier will be +18/13 (10 BAB + 8 STR + 1 magic + 1 W focus -2 Inappropriately Sized Weapon)


Thank you!


I'm wondering what would be the right price of a dose of pixie dust. A pixie is going to offer to my PC some dust as reward.
I'm sure their first question will be the market price.


The sea singer, using still water performance, could reduce the DC 20 sailing check made during ship-to-ship combat (using the rules on the Skull & Shackles Player's Guide)?

I am not sure if the "calm rogue waters" is a desciptive part or not.

After all the reduction of the DC is could far more of what usually the "rough water" situation add (e.g. rough water add only +2 to the DC of an achrobatic check but still water could reduce)


jlighter wrote:


There is another way to do it. For doing Disable Device sneakily, treat is as an opposed check. Your Disable Device check against their Perception check, meaning they have a chance to notice it regardless of the success/failure chance.

I really like this way.


I think than resolving it with a stealth check is not the right way. Stealth is about "hiding and moving silently". I interpret moving=move action (so walk or also climb).
Making other specific actions without noise (like opening locks) should be covered with a penalty on the action check, not adding another check. I think if I'm quite good in disabling device I would have more chance of making it silently than a character having a lower disable device but an higher stealth check.


I suppose that opening a lock creates some noise. I'm wondering how to houserule a silent disable device check. My idea is imposing a -5 penalty to the check adding that if you fail by 5 or more you make noise instead. Due to the fail consequence you cannot take 20 and, assuming that, if you are trying to make no noise, you are also someway in danger/stress (to be discovered) you can not take 10.
Some suggestions comments?


I win and I change the rules!

New rule:
The next posts lose all


Weren Wu Jen wrote:


You can cast spells with a buckler (but give up the AC bonus). If you could cast spells using any other shield, it would list it in their description.

Ok you can not cast a spell with your shield arm, but: "Shield, Light; Wooden or Steel: You strap a shield to your forearm and grip it with your hand. A light shield's weight lets you carry other items in that hand, although you cannot use weapons with it."

So, if you are holding a weapon in the other hand, in the round you have to cast a spell you have to swap the weapon between hands (you can not use the weapon with the shield arm, but you can carry a weapon-actually an object-with the shield arm) and cast the spell with your not-shield (and now free) hand. I think that swap a weapon between hands is a free action.


Dennis Baker wrote:
Auxmaulous wrote:
Cheapy wrote:

Jim Groves tried to explain the difference between primary and secondary effects here.

So the haunt couldn't throw the paladin, but it could throw things at the paladin.

So in the Headless Horseman scenario, the Horseman can't use its Primary (Mage's Sword) attack on the pally, but it could cut a rope which is tied to a rock which is suspended over the pally's head? That sound about right?

From what I gather, rope is immune to mind affecting effects so no. It could pick up the parties gnome and throw him at the paladin (using telekinesis for example).

I'm not sure telekinesis could be regarded as a mind affecting effect


HangarFlying wrote:
Good catch. it would be worth it to mention it in the AE Errata thread.

done


In the tactics section is stated that Malfeshnekor will cast rage on the first round. The strange thing is that greater barghest does not have rage as spell-like ability

http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/monsters/barghest.html#_barghest


In the tactics section (anniversary edition) is stated that Malfeshnekor will cast rage on the first round. The strange thing is that greater barghest does not have rage as spell-like ability
http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/monsters/barghest.html#_barghest

maybe I missed something.


Cheapy wrote:

Combat section of the book, in the Actions in Combat subsection, in Standard Actions sub-subsection, right above the Move actions sub-subsection.

Page 186 or thereabouts in the 5th printing PDF.

Thanks, I was confused because it was not reported in Magic Chaprter (page 221) and in the appendix (page 554) (the only two paragraphs indexed in the index for the supernatural key)


Cheapy wrote:
Combat, Standard Actions,Supernatural Abilities (Su) wrote:
Using a supernatural ability is usually a standard action (unless defined otherwise by the ability's description). Its use cannot be disrupted, does not require concentration, and does not provoke attacks of opportunity.

If the (Su) needs to be activated, it's a standard action unless specified otherwise.

If it doesn't need to be activated, then it's always up.

I did't find this sentence in the Core Rulebook, where is reported?


Cheapy wrote:
And any other (Su).

Only (Sp) has casting time of 1 standard action. That is not true for (Su) and (Ex). I also think there is an error in the core rulebook stating that using all domains powers is a standard action. Take for example Acid Resistance or Leadership. I think almost all the (Sp) power domains are standard actions (as reported in all the descriptions, apart from few exceptions), but (Ex) and (Su) domain powers are free or swift actions