Caliban_'s page

Organized Play Member. 105 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 8 Organized Play characters.


1 to 50 of 105 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

PRD: Conditions wrote:


A pinned creature is tightly bound and can take few actions. A pinned creature cannot move and is denied its Dexterity bonus. A pinned character also takes an additional –4 penalty to his Armor Class. A pinned creature is limited in the actions that it can take. A pinned creature can always attempt to free itself, usually through a combat maneuver check or Escape Artist check. A pinned creature can take verbal and mental actions, but cannot cast any spells that require a somatic or material component. A pinned character who attempts to cast a spell or use a spell-like ability must make a concentration check (DC 10 + grappler's CMB + spell level) or lose the spell. Pinned is a more severe version of grappled, and their effects do not stack.

Pinned creatures can take some actions and therefore do not meet the "completely at their opponents mercy" clause.

Not helpless.

wraithstrike wrote:

With magic missiles you are correct. There is no other reasonable interpretation that I can think of.

edit: The scorching ray example is also correct.

You don't get the 2nd ray for Scorching Ray until you hit caster level 7, and you don't get the 3rd until you hit caster level 11.

The OP's example would have a 4th lvl caster getting two rays, for 8d6 damage. Way beyond the normal damage curve.

Naysander Sune wrote:
If an ally ahead of me has taken full cover,can I cast a CREATE PIT spell past his tower shield to the opponent adjacent.

Yes, just remember that if you place the Pit so that it is adjacent to your ally, they have to make a Reflex save or fall in as well.

DocShock wrote:
Imbicatus wrote:

Feel free to make a rules thread if you feel it should work differently.

No need for a rules thread. As per my original advice, I think Secret Wizard should ask his GM if the combo works. There have been multiple threads picking apart what obscuring mist does, and none of them came to a final conclusion on the matter or resulted in an FAQ, so there's no need to rehash the same argument here.

In your opinion the combo is invalid, in my opinion it works. I only commented on the Stardust thing because that was a point I hadn't seen brought up before, and I thought it was interesting.

My opinion - Faerie Fire would negate the 20% miss chance within 5 feet, but not the 50% miss chance for being farther away. However, due to the glowing spot in the mist, you would be able to pinpoint their square.

Just an opinion.

LazarX wrote:
xebeche wrote:

One question at the forefront of my mind when creating any new Pathfinder character is: "Why is this creature of Golarion a member of the Society?" Certain classes and archetypes are easier to explain than others. Take a rogue or wizard, for example. Both have class features and interests that are well suited for travel and discovery in civilized and uncivilized areas. Other classes, such as barbarian, druid, samurai, and warpriest present a challenge for my imagination. Why would the uncivilized or religious zealots want to join an eclectic band of adventurers pursuing a wide variety of objectives on a global scale?

I'd like to stir the pot and challenge my perceptions. Why is your class a Pathfinder agent?

The proper question is why is my character a Pathfinder? The answer to that question is that my character has dimension beyond his or her class, and in that area, is the answer to be found.

Exactly. Your character is (or should be) more than your class.

Of my characters:

Muq'tir "Muck" Al'Jabar - a gnomish merchant, he is a proud member of the Exchange, always looking to find a better deal or moneymaking opportunity. Unfortunately, despite his skills as a haggler and negotiator he has a poor track record of lost investments and failed get-rich-quick schemes, so most of his money comes from the missions the Society sends him on. He uses his adventuring wealth to convince his family that he is a successful merchant, always visiting exotic locations and bringing home wealth.

Drake Melkir - An Exchange enforcer, human. He doesn't make the deals, but he helps enforce their terms. They loan him out to the Society from time to time. He's just there to get the job done with as little fuss as possible. If it means sneaking around, opening locks, bypassing traps or introducing someone to the pointy bit of his rapier, so be it.

Raziel, Favored of Korada. An orphaned half-elf, he was taken in by a monastery dedicated to Korada, located outside the city of Icestair. While he is a devout follower of Korada, he left the monastery to see the world, and joined the Scarab Sages when it was discovered he had a talent for magic - and for tinkering with locks and arcane devices. He seeks to learn more about the world, and to display the serenity of Korada - whether it is in the chaos of battle, the deepest dungeon, or a hive of scum and villainy.

What class are they? Doesn't really matter.

My standard anti-caster tactic is to hammer their fort and reflex saves.

Blindness/Deafness - permanent blindness means they can't use targeted spells anymore. If you make them deaf as well, they get a 20% spell failure on spells with verbal components.

Glue Seal (reflex save) to entangle them and force a concentration check.

Create Pit - dump them in a hole to block their line of effect and give you some breathing room while they get out. (Make sure they aren't flying before you cast it.)

Haste - Buffing your martial damage dealers with extra speed and extra attacks is never a bad thing, and depending on party makeup may be the most efficient way of killing a caster.

Enervation - reduces their effective caster level, gives a penalty on saves and attack rolls, and reduces their max HP. What's not to love?

Or the oldschool method - Antimagic shell and have the barbarian give you a piggyback ride as he charges the enemy caster.

Persistent Spell metamagic to make the spells land more often, Daze metamagic feat to lock them down. (Use metamagic rods if you can get them.)

Make sure you have Resist Energy or some other way to reduce enemy blast spells (false life, etc).

Glue Seal from Advanced Class Guide is better in just about every way.

Same level, standard action to cast, Close Range, no attack roll needed (still a reflex save), and duration is 1 minute a level.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

You could try something crazy, like running the game in a fair and even handed manner.

Without more context, that's the best I got.

AisuRagnarok wrote:
I was having trouble determining how many 0th level spells and 1st level spells I have along with which spells are considered 1st level

As an arcanist, you have two basic spell lists - the number of spells in your spell book, and the number of spells you have prepared and available to cast.

The list of spells in your spell book is going to be much longer than the number you can actually prepare and cast.

Your starting spellbook has all the cantrips, plus 3 first level spells, plus additional 1st level spells equal to your Int modifier.

So lets say you have an Arcanist with an 18 Intelligence (+4 modifier) at 1st level, their spellbook will have all 0-level spells (cantrips), plus 7 of the 1st level spells from their class list.

They can prepare 4 of those 0 level spells and 2 of the first level spells.

They can cast any of the prepared cantrips an unlimited number of times, plus they can cast their two prepared 1st levels spells a total of 3 times in any combination (2 from the "spells per day" table, +1 more casting from their 18 int).

The arcanist may also have exploits that mimic spells or spell-like abilities, but they are tracked separately.

An Arcanist uses the Sorcerer/Wizard spell list, so any spell that say it is "Sorcerer/Wizard 1" is a 1st level Arcanist spell.

Diminuendo wrote:
Blade of mercy is a good one

That requires a slashing weapon, it won't work with a rapier. (It would work with a scimitar, if he chooses to use that instead. But he would need to go with Slashing Grace instead of Fencer's Grace.)

For arcane casters, good low level debuff/control spells I use are:

1) Glue Trap (single target entangle, movement reduction), Grease (AoE trip or single target disarm), Color Spray (AoE unconscious, blind, and/or stun)

2) Glitterdust (AoE blind, invis reveal, no SR, will save, affects things immune to fort saves), Blindness/Deafness (permanent blind, no save after initial failure), Ghoul Touch (paralyze and sicken everything around the target)

There are others, but those are the ones I tend to use a lot on my sorcerers.

On my human Swashbuckler, I went with the Inspired Blade archtype as well. Note: I was going for a high damage swashbuckler who could handle traps, more of a "scoundrel".

My stats were: Str: 13, Dex 19, Con 14, Int 13, Wis 10, Cha 7, using a 20 point buy.

Alternate Racial Trait: Focused Study - instead of a bonus feat you gain 3 Skill Focus feats, at lvl 1, lvl 8, and lvl 16.

Traits: Gold Finger (+1 Disable Device/Sleight of Hand, disable is a class skill) - can be replaced with vagabond child if you aren't using factions, or Reactionary if you don't care about disabling items.

Bruising Intellect: May use Int instead of Charisma for Intimidate.

1) (Class)Inspired Finesse (Dex to attack w/rapier)
1) (Class) Weapon Focus [Rapier] +1 att w/rapier
1) Fencing Grace (Dex to dam w/rapier, +2 cmd vs disarm)
1) (Human) Skill Focus: Perception (+3, +6 with 10 ranks) - this was part of my "Find and disable traps" secondary goal. At lvl 8 and 16 he would get another bonus Skill Focus feat, most likely for Disable Device, and Intimidate.

3) Power Attack: -1 att/+2 dam to all attacks
4) (Class) Weapon Specialization: Rapier (+2 dam)
4) Stat Bump: +1 Dexterity
5) (Class) Rapier Training: +1 hit/+2 dam w/ rapier; Improved Crit (Rapier)
5) Combat Reflexes

With this build and a +1 rapier, at 5th lvl he has a +13 attack bonus, and does 1d6+15 damage, crits on 15-20 (Crit damage is 2d6+20+5). With power attack on, it's +11 attack, 1d6+19 damage, 2d6+28+5 on a crit).

And definitely go for Mithril shirt and a darkwood buckler.

Big downside to this build is the relatively low starting Panache (only 2). I took the human favored class bonus for swashbuckler (1/4 panache per level), so at lvl 4 he has 3 panache. You can spend a feat on extra panache, get a headband of intellect, or get the "Plume of Panache" feathers from the ACG - they are basically pearls of power for swashbucklers, each feather costs 1,000 gp and can be used once a day to pay 1 panache for a deed.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
deusvult wrote:
A few things I do as a GM to deal with extant scenarios that encourage what I perceive as skill specialization born of meta considerations (in other words, if I have players' characters possessing reasonably rounded skills, these managing techniques aren't necessary):

This sounds like you mean "I arbitrarily change the rules to punish players for investing character resources in skills I don't like players being good at."

Knowledge/Local in pre-adventuring legwork: Even though K/Local usually gives the info anyway, I ask for the other specified knowledge skills first. Only after those are resolved do I admit "ok, everyone with local roll.." to see if a better result pops up.

Meh, as long as you actually let them use the skill, even if you do make them jump through hoops first.


Perception (searches): I don't let the one guy with +23 to Perception "search the whole room" for the party. I encourage each player to pick an area or aspect of the room to search, and only the player(s) who picked the area for a hidden thing even get to roll a meaningful check. I even reward people who cleverly deduce where to search based on the box text to find without even having to roll. Way to go gamer, listen to the clues and don't rely on a skill bonus to do your thinking for you. You automatically succeed even if you had a +0 to Perception b/c you searched in the right place and there it was.

"Hahaha, you invested skill points in Perception, what a fool! I have arbitrarily decided that it has nothing to do with your character's abilities and everything to do with you the player guessing the correct square! The 7 wis barbarian found it because his player is better at guessing than your rogue! Screw the rules, I'm the GM!"

So much for actually trying to do something my character is good at (assuming I'm playing a high perception character). I find heavy handed crap like this seriously frustrating when I'm a player. Just ruins the whole game for me.

Diplomacy: I don't let the dice roll until the roleplay resolves a natural decision point for the NPC, and only people who have been roleplaying even get to touch a die for the test or assist. Sure, some players are naturally introverted and shouldn't be barred from playing faces.. that's a consideration on a case by case basis and is always (not usually, always) obvious right up front.

"You will play the game my way or not at all." Gotcha.

Do you tell players you like to ignore the rules before the game starts, or do you like to keep it as a fun surprise?

1 person marked this as a favorite.
DominusMegadeus wrote:
kestral287 wrote:
DominusMegadeus wrote:

Murdering people who slight you is not within societal boundaries. On the other hand, he was kind of a jerk for no reason.

Still, you deserve whatever you get.

"For no reason"? Asking for a favor (access to a spellbook-- pretty much the lifeblood of a Wizard) without offering fair exchange, and being rebuffed, is being a jerk for no reason?

"I offered to pay him for the spells he had and he said I wasn't worthy."

Saved the town twice (which the 16 LEVEL WIZARD could have but did not) and offered to pay anyway. Then got denied not for a lack of compensation, but for being 'unworthy'. Yes, the old wizard was a jerk for no reason. Still doesn't excuse OP, but I said exactly what I meant.

Apparently he subscribes to the "NPC's should know their places and kowtow to the PC's" school of thought.

I'm still at a loss as to how he managed to defeat the lvl 16 wizard in the first place.

Limp Lash specifically allows verbal only spells even while paralyzed, and the wizard would have had at least one action before the coup de grace.

Escape via Teleport, use Power Word: Stun (which would also end the Limplash spell ) and teach the lvl 5 wizard a lesson in manners.

Plus any number of other defenses or countermeasures a lvl 16 wizard would normally have available. (Like an Alarm spell or various other wards around his shop.)

I suspect the GM didn't decide he was lvl 16 until after the fight was over.

I've had characters who are pragmatic pacifists - they always look for the non-lethal, non-violent option, but recognize that they live in a violent world and they aren't always given the choice.

Well, what kind of resources do you have available? Can you buy/create magic items to help you?

If you want an "outside the box" strategy, you don't really need to kill the Tarrasque, just make it go away. It seems like the kind of target appropriate for the old-school "dimension bomb" tactic - drop a portable hole into a bag of holding while adjacent to it. Every creature within 10' is sucked into the Astral Plane.

Either figure a way to trigger the dimension bomb remotely, or have a planeshift scroll handy. :p

HSalgo wrote:
I'm just wondering if there's a definitive answer anywhere about whether arcanists are spontaneous casters, prepared casters, neither, or both. In particular, I'm worried about two things:

Both. They prepare spells and then cast them spontaneously.


1) Can an arcanist use a Runestone of Power, which is for spontaneous casters? There has been some discussion about using Runestones of Power but not for Consume Spells, and Jason Buhlman agreed, but there is no mention of the arcanist being a spontaneous caster, other than when it comes to metamagic, so my GM at home has ruled against this. However, since the item was re-released in the Advanced Class Guide, I have feel like the Runestone of Power is supposed to work with the arcanist. Does anyone have any text that suggests yes or no?

Runestone lets you regain expended spell slots, so I see no reason it wouldn't work for an Arcanist. (Pearl of Power let's you regain prepared spells, but an Arcanist never expends their prepared spells.


2) Does an arcanist suffer an increased casting time when using a metamagic rod? Prepared casters don't suffer from this increased casting time, while spontaneous casters do. The arcanist spell casting text states that an arcanist can spontaneously add metamagic feats to their spells with an increased casting time like a sorcerer, but can also prepare spells with metamagic beforehand and cast them at no penalty like a wizard. I couldn't find much text about it--again, does anyone have any text that suggests either argument?

He casts his spells spontaneously,and incurs the increased casting time of a spontaneous caster when applying metamagic feats on the fly.

I don't see anything to suggest this wouldn't apply to spontaneously added metamagic from Rods, but on the other hand I don't see anything that definitively says it would apply.

Until we get clarification from Paizo, I'd assume that the increased casting time applies when using a metamagic Rod.

Melkiador wrote:
As I said above, the elf FCB is pretty great for an elf. The elf arcanist with a low hit die and low constitution will need to use his FCB for hit points in his low levels. Also in the low levels you tend to have more than enough pool points. The elf FCB gives him what he needs when he needs it.

The character I'm working on is probably going to be a half-elf Arcanist(Occultist).

He doesn't have a Con problem, but having extra Arcane pool capacity that he can fill and then convert into a Summon Monster X is pretty great.

Between that and the Human FCB for Arcanist, I think it will work out pretty well.

Melkiador wrote:
Caliban_ wrote:
Is it supposed to be that the elf FCB only increases your total maximum points without adding to your initial starting points each day, while the gnome FCB increases your initial points without increasing your maximum possible point?

That is the generally agreed upon decision, though I haven't seen anything official.

I figured as much, was hoping something more definitive had come out.

Chess Pwn wrote:

You are correct in your assessment at the bottom. It increases your cap and not how much you start with. while the gnomes increases the starting amount but not the cap.

Had you done a search for "arcanist elf" you'd have found a few posts all asking the same question, with answers already there.

I did do a search, and found a single post from a year ago that didn't have a definitive answer one way or the other. I also checked the FAQ's and came up empty.

But thanks for making a (false) assumption and then being condescending, it was really helpful.

2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite.

It seems that the Elven favored class bonus for Arcanist is much better than the similar Gnome favored class bonus for Arcanist.

Elf - Arcanist: Increase total number of points in the arcanist's arcane reservoir by 1.
Gnome -Arcanist: Add 1/6 to the number of points the arcanist gains in her arcane reservoir each day.

It seems like they give a similar bonus, except that the gnome one is much weaker.

Is it supposed to be that the elf FCB only increases your total maximum points without adding to your initial starting points each day, while the gnome FCB increases your initial points without increasing your maximum possible point?

In a home game I'd probably rule that using a Knowledge(Local) for localities you would not reasonably have knowledge of either increases the difficulty (it's no longer an "Easy" check because you have no direct knowledge of the locality) or the time to make the check (you have to spend some time becoming familiar with the locality in order to pick up the local gossip and trivia) - and once the PC has a chance to spend a few days/weeks in a new city it works normally.

In Pathfinder Society games I just assume you had an opportunity to learn it "off screen" and don't slow down the game worrying about it.

Strill wrote:

James Risner wrote:

_Ozy_ wrote:
Not only ability to be stolen or sundered, but inability to be distributed around the party for more optimal usage.
Different table, different RAW.
YOu must play at a table that allow a Pearl of Power to be shared between people and everyone get 1/day use of it.
I run tables (GM) and play at tables that do not allow that to work. The PoP has a 1/day use. Who ever uses it today, burns it for everyone else.
You're completely misunderstanding him. If a pearl of power is separate, I can give it to the Ranger so he can cast entangle twice. If the pearl of power is embedded in my staff, I can't do that without giving up my staff, and forcing the ranger to haul it around. I've incurred a tactical disadvantage because of the combination.

I wouldn't consider that a realistic example. "It's a tactical disadvantage if I deliberately create my equipment in a way that doesn't suit the tactics I want to use."

I submit that if loaning out a Pearl of Power is a standard tactic for you, then you wouldn't buy/create a staff with a Pearl imbedded in it in the first place.

alternatively, if you are of a level to create items like staves, then you can probably afford another 1,000 gp to 4,000 gp to buy a second pearl for loaning out for ranger spells (and why isn't the ranger chipping in? Don't adventure with cheapskates!).

RocMeAsmodeus wrote:

Hello Paizonians. In my time as a PFS GM I have run across a few questions about game mechanics and lore not matching up. Every time I bring them up in character I get flak for it, so I want to see if I am missing something. Here goes:

1. Players cannot craft items in PFS. One time I said in character, "We Pathfinders have no crafts of our own to sell because we're not allowed to make stuff," and one of the players said he would bombard me with dice. I don't think the GM was too keen on me saying this either, but if my character had tried to actually make an item, he would not have been able to do so. Is there ever an in-universe explanation for this rule?

Players can't. Character's (and NPC's) can - you can't select the feats for them for campaign reasons, but if you want to say your wizard crafted his own wand in stead of buying it, go ahead. Mechanic-wise you are still paying the PP or gold, but fluff-wise you can explain it however you want.


2. Oh no, not this again: evil Pathfinders. I hear that evil Pathfinder agents exist in-universe but cannot be played. Can my PFS character kill an evil Pathfinder NPC because the higher-ups in the Society would want that person "reported as dead" for going evil? I would be a whole lot less miffed about this whole thing if ALL evil were disallowed within the Society, not just for PCs.

Can you prove he's evil? (And saying "I detected evil" doesn't work - spells and abilities can be fooled, you need something that will stand up to an inquiry).

Does said evil NPC have higher rank and more political standing than your character? Good luck getting any proof you find accepted.

Or is this just another "I wanna play an evil PC" complaint disguised as a complaint about evil NPC's?


3. Players cannot PvP but can still be dominated to attack each other. Why can I not, as the BBEG, cast spells on Pathfinders to make them attack each other, leave the area, and write a letter to their Venture-Captain saying that they engaged in PvP and should be reported as dead? Some enemies of the Society have to be intelligent enough to think of that strategy.

You are confusing meta-campaign rules with in-character actions. There are no "PVP rules" in-game - other than the normal laws and mores of any society and organization. You might get rumors started by sending an anonymous letter to their Venture Captain, but this is a world where mind-control, charm, and dopplegangers all exist. Expect an inquiry (probably off-camera, and nothing will come of it).

Besides, assuming the any of the PC's survive to tell their side of things, this is also a world where truth detection spells exist.

Aside from being a dick move by the GM (which it is), it's simply not realistic as an ad-hoc tactic by an NPC in the game - a move like this is something that is done with carefully chosen and researched targets so you can plant additional incriminating evidence and hide traces of coercion and mind control as best you can. Basically, it's something that has to be written into module. Just won't realistically work otherwise.

Eh, it may be the same statistically, but I think it would make it easier to fudge die rolls simply due to it being a non-standard method that other people can't read at a glance.

If you can trust the guy, no problem. If you don't think the guy is trustworthy, then it would exacerbate the situation. (Of course, if you really can't trust him, then even rolling a d20 in front of everyone won't be enough.)

3 people marked this as a favorite.

As has been said before - Legacy. When the monk class was originally created (way back in AD&D 2nd edition) there wasn't the variety of character options and concepts that are available today.

All monks came from monastic orders, where they spent long days training and practicing self discipline. They all received exactly the same abilities in exactly the same progression. Very orderly and structured.

Even after character options opened up in 3rd edition, the basic concept of the Monk as someone who gained their abilities from a strict regimen of physical training and self discipline remained.

Later supplements and then Pathfinder opened up many other Monk character concepts and added non-lawful required classes and monk archetypes with similar abilities. Monasteries and monastic lifestyle now only represent a small segment of the total monk population. :p

I really think the Lawful requirement does more to limit the monk than add "required roleplaying flavor" to it these days.

Ganryu wrote:
I'll probably go for Greater Spell Focus Illusion then. What's your opinion on Spell Penetration?

Spell Penetration is one of those feats that are completely useless in most situations, but can really be a lifesaver in the situations where they apply.

I never take Spell Penetration, but I'm always regretting it when I end up as the lowest level caster a mod with high SR opponents.

Congrats Aaron! I really enjoyed the last table you ran (Temple of Empyreal Enlightenment - I had the monk/sorcerer worshiper of Korada) , looking forward to this weekend.

I remember one combat against shadows where half the party was huddled on one Floating Disc so they couldn't be attacked through floor, and my wizard with a second floating disk was using it to move the 3 str fighter around the battlefield so she still try to attack (because she too weak to move in her armor).

Thanis Kartaleon wrote:
Caliban_ wrote:
This isn't Skyrim.
Eh? Skyrim doesn't have durability either.

I've gone through hundreds of lockpicks in Skyrim. The Pathfinder equivalent would the Thieves Tools.

This isn't Skyrim.

Just like we don't track the spell components a wizard uses in their spell component pouch, or how often you need to repair, oil and polish your armor and weapons, we don't track the tools that need replacing through normal wear and tear.

RumpinRufus wrote:
Fiery Shuriken cannot work, as it is a swift action to fire one, and you can't use swift actions during an AoO.

Your right, I was going from memory and forgot that.

Produce Flame could maybe possibly work, but I don't know if you can take Weapon Focus (Produce Flame).

In 3.5 there was a ruling that you could take "Weapon Focus (ranged touch)" or "Weapon Focus (melee touch)", or even "Weapon Focus (Ray)".

Not sure if there is an equivalent Pathfinder ruling.

FrodoOf9Fingers wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:

Yeah I think we do agree that no AoO can allow you to cast spells, at least none that I know of anyway.

[troll]Of course there is! Ready an action to cast shocking grasp when you take an AoO![/troll]

Seriously though, AoO's do not let you cast spells.

That's the normal rule, yes.

But feats and other abilities change the rules, and the question was if a the feat Snapshot allows a you to use a spell as an ranged attack AoO.

I think it does under certain circumstances, when using weapon-like spells. Specifically, Fiery Shuriken and Produce Flame, both of which can give you ranged attacks that last from round to round (the spell has already been cast so you are side-stepping the issue of casting as an AoO).

I also think if you can somehow cast a spell as a free action, Snap Shot would allow you to cast it as an AoO. It's a theoretical point though - I don't know of any way to actually cast a spell as a free action. Quicken spell doesn't qualify.

Four feats is a lot for a spell caster to spend on something that would only come up occasionally. Even if you think it works, I don't think it would be worth it for most spell casters.

Much ado about nothing.

Diego Rossi wrote:

Caliban_ if you need to take any kind of action to threaten you can't take an AoO, so you can't threaten with a weapon you aren't wielding.

You don't threaten with a sheathed dagger, even if you have quickdraw and
you can draw it with a free action. Same thing for a uncast spell.
If it hasn't been already cast you can't threaten with it, even if you can cast it as a free action.

If you take weapon focus with Hurled produce flame you can threaten with it, but you should have already cast the spell, you can't cast the spell as part of the AoO.

For Snap shot to work with a bow the bow should be already in your hand, ready to be used.
For snap shot to work with a weapon like spell effect the spell should be already cast and the effect in your hand ready to be used.

- * -

Your whole argument is an attempt to say that casting a spell as a free action is the same thing as drawing ammunitions for a missile weapon and that is simply a false equivalence.

Disagreeing with my point is fine, but being insulting about it is not. I'm not debating this with you.

Cyrus Lanthier wrote:

Well, the "RAI" thing is more about the language in Slashing Grace not doing something that it may have been "intended" to do, I believe, as opposed to the language of the scarf.

RAW wise, the description of the item really leaves a lot to be interpreted about what is going on when you use it...

Not really.

Spend a panache or use the free activation and you extend your reach with a light or or one handed piercing weapon by 5 feet.

A slashing weapon isn't a one handed piercing weapon.

Slashing Grace says it only counts as a light or one handed for the purposes of feats or class feature.

The scarf isn't a feat and it isn't a class feature.

Black and white - the scarf doesn't work with Slashing Grace.

Just because you can use Panache to activate it doesn't make the scarf's ability a class feature of the Swashbuckler.

If the scarf language said something to the effect of "This effect counts as a Deed for the purposes of spending Panache" or something similar, then it could be considered a class feature of the Swashbuckler.

"Another way of gaining panache" is referring to characters with the Amateur Swashbuckler feat or an archtype that grants you panache.

And no, it's not granting a "quasi panache point". Lots of items have once a day abilities, that's nothing new. This item has a once a day activation for non-panache users, and once a day plus spending panache points for panache users.

Bellona - the item is pretty clear, it extends your reach by 5 feet. You now threaten at 5' and 10'. If you are under the effects of Enlarge Person you threaten at 5', 10', and 15'.

wraithstrike wrote:
Caliban_ wrote:

I say if you can cast a ranged touch spell as a free action, you can use it with snapshot.

Even this does not work because by the rules you can only speak as a free action outside of your turn. The only exception granted by snap shot is drawing ammunition.

And for the purpose of the Snapshot Feat, I would say the spell is both your ammunition and your weapon (kind a like a throwing dagger).

Just like a ranged touch spell is a weapon for the purpose of other ranged combat feats.

Hard part is actually being able to cast a ranged touch as a free action.

Only spell I can think of it working with off the top of my head is Fiery Shuriken.

I'm not so sure it's RAI. Seems to me that whoever came up with the magic item didn't consider the Slashing Grace feat at all.

RAW it's pretty clear - it doesn't work. The Blue Scarf is a magic item, not a feat or class feature.

An attack is not a standard action.

However, you can use a standard action to make an attack. You can also use a full attack action to make multiple attacks, and you can also make attacks when it's not your turn as an AoO (and potentially multiple AoO's with combat reflexes).

A single attack is something that takes a variable amount of time, but always less than a standard action.

But aside from that, the FAQ on the Snapshot feat states that you if you can reload your weapon as a free action you can make multiple AoO's with it, implying that you can make an AoO with a a ranged weapon even if you don't have an arrow or bolt loaded - as long as you can reload it as a free action.

I say if you can cast a ranged touch spell as a free action, you can use it with snapshot. Or if you somehow have it "readied" outside of your turn (such as with Fiery Shuriken, where you can have them floating around you waiting to be used).

Thanks for all the great suggestions, I'll definitely be using some of them.

Ashiel wrote:
Valandil Ancalime wrote:

Endure elements is handy to have around.

What spells are only 1 pal or 1 ran?

Resist energy is Ran 1 and provides 10 points of resistance for a decent duration. For a cost of 650 gp per charge you can get a CL 11th version for resist 30.

Unfortunately, it's not only a ranger 1 spell, it's also a Sorc/Wiz 2 spell (as well as lvl 2 cleric and druid), and you have to use their pricing over the rangers.

Only way you can use the ranger level for pricing is if it only appears on the ranger spell list.

1) Yes. It's a caster level check to overcome SR.
2) No - that's not determined by caster level.
3) Yes, that's determined by caster level, up to the maximum damage of the spell (max of 10d6 for fireball).
4) Yes to SR, no to save DC's. Save DC's are determined by the level of the spell and your casting stat, not your caster level.
5) It maxes out at 10d6, because that is the max damage for the spell.

+1 caster level increases everything affected by your caster level - spell range, spell damage, spell duration, overcoming SR, etc. But only up to any inherent limits in the spell itself (but there are other feats that let you change those.)

PC races don't have the magical internal bracing a Large or larger creature needs to support its own weight without crushing its internal organs.

They have the fantasy equivalent of a bad back as they have to use a lot of their internal muscles to support and protect their organs and joints, which restricts how much of their strength they can apply to other tasks (such as smashing opponents into red paste).

Nefreet wrote:

Enlarge Person isn't critical to the equation.

Whether you're Small/Medium/Large/Huge, your reach is only increased by 5 feet.

Well, since the question was specifically about Enlarge person and the Blue scarf, it kinda is critical. :p

Regardless, I agree that is the way it probably works. Just double-checking before I use it in a PFS scenario.

The plan is a potion of Enlarge Person in a spring loaded wrist sheathe, plus the Accelerated Drinker trait and the blue scarf to quickly get a 15' reach with a rapier. I'll have to pull the potion the round before I drink it, but this way allows me to do it while still making standard attack actions.

So an arcane caster could use an Armored Kilt (from Adventurer's Armory), which has +1AC, 0 armor check penalty and 0% Arcane Spell Failure, enchant it to +1 and then add all the non-AC armor enhancements he can afford to it, while still benefiting from the Mage Armor spell.

Same thing with a +1 mithril buckler, if they were so inclined.

Not bad.

What's your reach if you use the Blue Scarf and then are under the effects of Enlarge Person? (Assuming a medium size human with a rapier.)

Swordmaster's Flair wrote:

These garish tokens usually take the form of a colorful clothing accessories. So long as a token is grasped in the user's off hand, she can spend 1 panache point to gain the use of a specific ability associated with the token.

Once per day, the bearer can use the token to gain the full benefit of the token without spending panache. Non-swashbucklers can use the tokens, but unless they have another way of gaining panache, they can use the ability only once per day. A character can benefit from only one token at a time; holding a second token provides no additional benefit. There are four types of tokens, each offering a different benefit.

Blue Scarf: The user can spend 1 panache point as a swift action to increase her melee reach with light or one-handed piercing weapons by 5 feet for 1 minute.

Normally Enlarge Person + Reach 10' = Reach 20'

But since the item says "increase melee reach by 5 feet", in this case it might only be a total 15' reach.


Caliban_ wrote:

Spring loaded wrist sheath. Partially because of all the arguments abut it, but mainly because it wasn't included in Ultimate Equipment and I don't want to buy another PDF just for that one item.

If I can't use the cheesey items, no one should be able too. :p

Well, I broke down and bought the Adventurer's Armoury, so I don't want this to be illegal anymore.

Matt2VK wrote:
bigrig107 wrote:
Sorry, but wands default to wizard/sorcerer, then cleric, then the rest. In that order. Unless it's a ranger/paladin-only spell, then it's counted as on the wizard/sorcerer/cleric.
That's for PFS games. Home games can be different but are usually played the same way as PFS for simplistic sake. Why I put the qualifier in about if DM allow.

This is a PFS character, but thanks for the suggestion.

Jem'Nai wrote:
if he is a pyromaniac Gnome wand of produce flame

Naw, he's a standard model gnome. Thinking about it, a wand of "Recharge Innate Magic" would be a good idea.

He's been using a mage armor wand for awhile - I'm mainly checking to see if there are any good lvl 1 spells that aren't on the sorcerer/wizard list that he can pick up.

Enhance water sounds good, or I might go for a create water wand (even cheaper).

I will be buying a wand of Lesser Restoration at some point (too useful when you can't count on having a cleric or druid in the party).

So my lvl7 gnome sorcerer now has a UMD of +20.

He already has a wand of cure light wounds, and I'm going to pick up a wand of Faerie Fire for him next.

What are some other good lvl 1 spells to get in a wand?

1 to 50 of 105 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>