Captain Zoom's page

For normal sized PCs, the "Tumble Through" action assumes you will move through an enemy's space and exit out the other side. This is largely because you cannot share an enemy's space.

So what about a Sprite PC? It can share a space with a small or medium creature. I figure the Sprite could always step to avoid an AOO, or simply move into the space of most creatures since most creatures don't have an AOO, but the Tumble Through action suddenly sprang out to me as a possibility.

So in reading the Tumble Through action carefully it doesn't actually say you have to exit out the other side. Just says:

"You move through the enemy’s space, treating the squares in its space as difficult terrain (every 5 feet costs 10 feet of movement). If you don’t have enough Speed to move all the way through its space, you get the same effect as a failure."

As I read it, a sprite could Tumble Through, stop in the creature's space, and so long as the sprite still has sufficient movement to move all the way through, you don't get a failure.

So the rules question is: Is this correct?

Bonus question (which might be more akin to advice): If not correct, would this be a reasonable accommodation by a GM given that the rules were not written with tiny PCs in mind?

This is more of a discussion of use and effect, so what does this do exactly?

"Symphony of the Unfettered Heart

Your symphony lifts listeners from their worldly concerns. Attempt a Performance check to counteract one of the following conditions affecting the target: grabbed, immobilized, paralyzed, restrained, slowed, or stunned. If you fail, you can't target that effect on the target for 1 day. Use the condition's source to determine the counteract DC (for example, the Escape DC for grabbed)."

So, if someone were handcuffed to a railing, and thus "immobilized" (i.e. they cannot move from their square), if you used this spell, would they be freed from the handcuffs?

If grabbed, is the target now not grabbed as though they had successfully escaped?

If restrained (You're tied up and can barely move, or a creature has you pinned), do the target's bonds fall away and they're free to go?

Stage 3 Tetanus (paralyzed) or Stage 4 Bonechill - is the target cured if you successfully counteract the effect?

I note that this spell does not have language which you find in some other spells/abilities that say if the underlying reason for the condition is not removed, the condition comes back. It sounds like this spell literally and completely counteracts the condition.

I'm really interested in seeing how people interpret this spell.

Got a question.

If you cast Inspire Courage with Inspire Heroics, it's a metamagic + composition spell. It produces an "effect" (hopefully +2 or +3 due to the Inspire Heroics).

If you then use an action to invoke Call and Response, and assuming one of your allies does the response, since the "effect" is extended by one additional round, will that extend the effect of the metamagic'd Inspire Courage - i.e. the +2 or +3?

A nice bonus is that since you can re-do the Inspire Heroics until you either get a success or critically fail, you can wait on the Call and Response action to see if you succeed on the Inspire Heroics.

So, you'd be spending 1 focus point, one of your actions, and one of an ally's actions, to get two rounds of Inspire Heroics boost.

It sounds to me like it would work, but I thought I check to see if others thought the same.

Also, if it does work, then maybe others will appreciate finding a good tip on the boards!

And if it doesn't for some reason, I'll scuttle back under my rock...

I was gearing up to play a bard, so was doing a lot of reading.

Counter Performance seems like a great ability (focus spell), BUT as a practical matter, when could you ever actually use it?

Under Composition Spells, it says: "You can cast only one composition spell each turn, and you can have only one active at a time. If you cast a new composition spell, any ongoing effects from your previous composition spell end immediately."

There's no language in the Counter Performance spell that excepts it from the general rule.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I suspect your average bard will cast Inspire Courage (or another composition cantrip) each turn. That seems to preclude you using Counter Performance since you can't cast a second composition spell in the same turn.

Harmonize (Level 6) would work, but then you're using 2 actions every turn to cast Inspire Courage just in case you want to use Counter Performance, but it would work. Seems kind of expensive in terms of action economy. Could be useful if you truly anticipate needing counter performance (like you are fighting a banshee).

You could (if you have it) use Lingering Composition to cast your Inspire Courage, BUT unless you also Harmonize it, it will end as soon as you cast Counter Performance (also, you can't use Counter Performance in the first turn
unless it was Harmonized). Very focus point intensive and requires some planning (to say the least).

And of course with a simple two feat investment AND reaching Level 20, you can take Symphony of the Muses which solves the problem.

All I can think of is that if you truly anticipate needing to cast Counter Performance, then you don't cast a composition cantrip that turn (or the whole combat) just to keep the option of casting Counter Performance open.

Can anyone pick a hole in my analysis? Something I'm missing that would allow use of Counter Performance in the ordinary course of events? Comments?

Actually, as I plan to play a bard, I'd prefer if someone finds a flaw and tells me that yes, you can readily use Counter Performance while doing what a bard usually does.

Or maybe my supposition that bards usually cast a composition cantrip every turn is wrong... others with actual experience running a bard might say there's no problem here since they usually don't cast a composition cantrip each turn.

Thanks in advance

PRE-POSTING EDIT: It suddenly occurred to me (before I posted the above) that the rules says "You can cast only one composition spell each turn"... "turn" not "round". It doesn't say "your turn", but I guess that could be implied as turns are defined in the rules.

So, could it be interpreted that you can only cast ONE composition spell during your "turn", but in most cases, since Counter Performance is a reaction that takes place outside your "turn", that you could cast Inspire Courage, then after your turn when an enemy hits the group with something applicable, you can use your reaction to cast Counter Performance - i.e. that this does not violate the one composition spell cast per turn rule.

However, even under this interpretation, the Inspire Courage would immediately cease working as you can't (unless we use Harmonize) have two composition spells active at the same time.

If this further analysis is correct, you can use Counter Performance outside your turn at the cost of ending whatever composition cantrip you had up - seems like a reasonable trade-off.

Thanks again...

Might be a stupid question, but thought I'd check.

"You take on the stance of the flowing winds, sending out waves of energy at a distance. You can make wind crash unarmed Strikes as ranged Strikes against targets within 30 feet. These deal 1d6 bludgeoning damage, use the brawling group, and have the agile, nonlethal, propulsive, and unarmed traits. Wind crash Strikes ignore concealment and all cover."

Wild Winds Stance lets you do an unarmed Strike at range. It doesn't have the finesse trait, BUT it is defined as a "ranged Strike". Ranged strikes normally use Dexterity to hit.

I'm thinking it uses Dexterity (as analyzed above), but wanted to see if anyone thinks it uses Strength to hit?

Polymorph rules say: "Your gear is absorbed into you; the constant abilities of your gear still function, but you can’t activate any items."

What if you have your familiar in a familiar satchel, then you get polymorphed (e.g., you take on a battleform)?

I couldn't find anything (rules or on the boards) that specifically addressed this, so....

My simple reading is that your satchel with the familiar inside it gets absorbed and your familiar ceases to function or exist as an independent entity during this period (except perhaps to the extent it provides you with a constant ability).

There are possible disagreements with the above:

Rules says "gear" is absorbed. If a familiar is not "gear", then does it pop out when you polymorph despite being inside gear?

If you decide that non-gear inside gear get absorbed with the gear, if a familiar is not "gear", does it continue to function (albeit trapped inside the satchel)? Can the familiar use abilities that require activation? Can the familiar use constant abilities? Will the familiar suffocate?

Mostly, I wanted to see if anyone knew of any rules, etc., that contradict my simple reading on what happens, or if anyone has any relevant thoughts.

Thanks in advance.

I had this big argument with my GM in FIRST EDITION. He was insisting that my summoned creatures wouldn't attack my enemies in a fog because they wouldn't know that the creature they encountered in the fog was my enemy (since I couldn't see them even if my summoned creature could).

Looking over SECOND EDITION I don't see that they clarified this in any way. It still basically just says the summoned creature attacks your enemies.

Do summoned creatures just somehow know who your enemies are?

Does the caster somehow impart to the summoned creatures who the caster's enemies are, even if they have no way to communicate? So, if your summoned creature appears at a wall corner next to an enemy orc that the caster can't see (because the orc is around the corner), the summoned creature will ignore the enemy orc?

Something else?

Or do we just go RAW - its a summoned creature, it attacks the caster's enemies, that creature is an enemy of the caster, attack! and try not to rationalize it.

Just fishing for thoughts, both as to the "RULE" and otherwise.

Given all the "discussion" about how acid splash works, I thought I'd post Nefreet's discovery in its own thread so it's easy to see, easy to find:

The Secrets of Magic playtest document might answer this question?

Page 5, Ancillary Effects wrote:

It still has any non-targeted effects that might affect creatures other than the target, and any ongoing effects starting from the moment you hit with the Strike. For example, acid splash would still deal its splash damage to creatures other than the target, tanglefoot’s penalty would last for its normal duration, and vampiric touch still gives you temporary Hit Points. The spell takes effect after the Strike deals damage; if the Strike has other special effects, the GM determines whether they happen before or after the spell.

Although not a specific ruling or errata, it does appear the developers think the Acid Splash cantrip has the Splash trait.

I don't see any language saying you can't, but thought I'd see if anyone has a contrary opinion.

I guess more broadly, so long as the cantrip (or any spell, really) complies with the requirement that it require an attack roll and only take 1-2 actions to cast, does it matter what the source of the cantrip/spell is for Eldritch Shot?

Thanks!

Looking at the new Bard Feats that grant focus spells (aka non-cantrip composition spells), it looks like none of them have the language that you get a focus point added to your pool. I was wondering if this was intentional, or a mistake?

Hymn of Healing
Ode to Ouroboros
Symphony of the Unfettered Heart
Pied Piping

The older focus spell feats (pre-APG), like Soothing Ballad and Inspire Heroics and fatal aria and song of the fallen, tend to have the "Must Have A Focus Pool" Prerequisite (which shouldn't be a problem as all bards start with a focus pool of 1) and add 1 focus point to the pool (which is capped at 3 so I don't see taking a lot of these spells getting out of hand power-wise).

Actually, I could be wrong, but I think my quick perusal of the bard feats indicate that ALL of the old feats that grant composition (non-cantrip) spells have a prerequisite of having a focus pool AND grant a focus point while ALL of the new feats that grant composition (non-cantrip) spells do not have the prerequisite and do not say they grant a focus point.

So: MISTAKE or NOT A MISTAKE?

And I apologize in advance if I'm just flat out reading this wrong (in which case I am going to be very embarrassed!).

In relevant part, the spell says:

"As long as the target is taking persistent damage from this spell, creatures gain a +1 status bonus to attack rolls with metal weapons..."

Would your typical arrow, which presumably has a metal pointy thing on the front, be considered a metal weapon for the purposes of the spell?

My thought is that any weapon which uses metal in its striking "part" would be considered a metal weapon for this spell. Thus, a typical wooden club or staff would not work with this, nor would something like a magical force or fire blade.

Just wanted to gather thoughts from other people.

Any thoughts on the Share Lore Spell? An odd 1st Level Arcane/Occult spell that I'm having trouble wrapping my puny brain around...

Why would you use it or what would you use it for?

Can you share the Lore skill, then have the group put their heads together by using Aid to get a better recall knowledge result?

Maybe if your group is impersonating circus performers (Lore Circus), or soldiers (Lore Warfare) or evil cultists of the god BARRY (Lore Barry), this could help you pull off the impersonation?

At high level, the Duration is 8 hours - could you use it to let everyone make earn income checks using that Lore skill if you cast it everyday?

Any other uses you can come up with?

Hi,

My order included 3 PDFs. The two Paizo PF2 ones downloaded fine, but a third-party PDF has been stuck on "Personalizing" for days now:

Neverwhen 2nd Edition (PF2E)
Personalizing... Click link again in 60 seconds to download

It won't reset to let me try to download again, and it won't move forward with finishing the personalization and letting me complete the download.

If you can unstick it, great. If it's a huge problem, I'm fine with cancelling the Neverwhen 2nd Edition PDF from the order and getting either a refund or store credit.

BTW I sent an email to customer service on May 28 (just a note to let you know so you don't deal with this twice).

Thanks
Richard

I've been assuming you get get one more missile each time you heighten (+1 at level 3, +2 at level 5, etc.), BUT I just re-read the spell and now I'm wondering if I have been wrong about this (plus it wouldn't make sense given how the spell works).

The spell says:

Heightened (+2) You shoot one additional missile with each action you spend.

That sounds like you can fire up to 6 missiles when heightened to level 3 (2 per action spent), or up to 9 missiles when heightened to level 5 (3 per action spent). I.e. one additional missile per action (normally you get one per action spent casting).

So am I correct about getting 2 per action (1 + 1 additional) when heightened to level 3?

I just wanted to confirm with everyone that I'm not off-base here.

Thanks

A thought occurred to me and I thought I'd ask to make sure I'm not going to be doing something incorrect (I have an Animal Companion in a game and was thinking of doing this):

Do the increases to damage from Improved Natural Attack and Evolved Companion (taking the Improved Damage evolution) stack?

For example, Wolf Animal Companion has a bite attack.

Wolf takes the Improved Natural Attack feat for the bite.

Master takes the Evolved Companion feat and selects the Improved Damage 1-point evolution for his Wolf's bite attack.

Does the Wolf get the benefit of both feats? Or do they not stack?

Thanks

The Shaman archetype Spirit Warden has a supernatural ability called Restless Magic. It seems contradictory and I was wondering if others agree that there's a wording problem, or if someone thinks they have a resolution:

It says: "The spirit warden adds the following spells to the list of spells she can cast using spirit magic:".

Then it gives a list of spells.

Then it says: "This ability replaces the spirit magic spells gained from the shaman’s spirit."

So, are the spells on the list added to the spells you would get, or do the spells on the list replace the spells you would get? Is this a mistake/typo, a badly worded ability that slipped through editing, something else?

If it does replace the spells gained from the shaman's spirit, what does that mean? You get spells from your Spirit and your Wandering Spirit. Do you just lose the spells from your Spirit, but not those from your wandering spirit, or do you lose both sets of spells?

My personal guess is that it replaces the spells you would normally get from your Spirit, but not your Wandering Spirit, otherwise you would get something for nothing, which doesn't seem right. On the other hand, the text specifically says spirit, not "spirits", so I don't think you lose the spells from your wandering spirit. Also, losing both would be disproportionate, losing 2 spells for 1, which also doesn't seem right. Finally, this interpretation seems to fit the actual language the best insofar if correct, then the text is correct (thus, the editors did not miss anything).

But I thought it would be good to see what others think, or maybe the Devs or the guy who originally designed the Slayer might chime in (if we're lucky!).

You have a Large Ogre with the Undersized Mount feat riding a Large Wolf with the Narrow Frame feat. An opponent runs into a building using a standard 5' doorway and the Ogre pursues at the Wolf's full movement. The Wolf easily passes through the doorway without slowing as the Narrow Frame feat allows it to move in a 5' space without taking the half-movement restriction of squeezing. The Ogre does not have Narrow Frame or any other similar ability/feat to move at normal speed while squeezing, so would normally have to move at half speed while squeezing through the doorway, but the Ogre is not moving, the Wolf is.

What happens?

1. The Ogre's player argues that the Ogre is not "moving" so is not slowed while squeezing through the doorway - the Ogre and Wolf pass through the door.

2. The GM decides that the Ogre is moving even if the Wolf is using its action to move (as per the Mounted Combat rules), then describes a hilarious situation where the Ogre forcefully dismounts himself as his Wolf zooms through the doorway while the Ogre gets stuck (and everyone has a good laugh).

3. Something else?

Seems like a strange question as everyone I know has always assumed it does, but I happened to have reason to parse the language of Glitterdust and Faerie Fire, and now I'm not sure. So, let's see if anyone has any opinion, unofficial insights, or (heaven forbid a developer sees this and responds) official rulings:

Glitterdust (Conjuration/Creation): "A cloud of golden particles covers everyone and everything in the area, causing creatures to become blinded and visibly outlining invisible things for the duration of the spell. All within the area are covered by the dust, which cannot be removed and continues to sparkle until it fades. Each round at the end of their turn blinded creatures may attempt new saving throws to end the blindness effect.

Any creature covered by the dust takes a –40 penalty on Stealth checks."

Faerie Fire (Evocation/Light): "A pale glow surrounds and outlines the subjects. Outlined subjects shed light as candles. Creatures outlined by faerie fire take a –20 penalty on all Stealth checks. Outlined creatures do not benefit from the concealment normally provided by darkness (though a 2nd-level or higher magical darkness effect functions normally), blur, displacement, invisibility, or similar effects. ..."

Faerie Fire specifically calls out that it negates the benefit from concealment provided by invisibility, BUT Glitterdust does not.

I think both spells basically say the targets are outlined, so everyone just assumed that Glitterdust negated invisibility like Faerie Fire.

What does this mean? Does it mean that we've been wrong all along?

Maybe an invisible target hit by Glitterdust doesn't have its invisibility negated, and just gets -40 to its stealth rolls (which means they become pretty easy to pinpoint, but still are invisible)?

Secondary item to discuss: Also, note that Faerie Fire specifically states that the targeted creature(s) glow (and it is a LIGHT SPELL) while Glitterdust doesn't mention glowing or emanation of any light (and it is a CREATION SPELL). Does this mean that Glitterdust (in regards to perception) does not help someone who cannot see the target because of darkness? For example, a Dwarf Wizard (who has Darkvision) and a human (who does not have Darkvision) are fighting 3 orcs in total darkness (and no light source is available). The Wizard hits the orcs with Glitterdust (possibly blinding them). Can the human see the orcs?

Before you reply, please read the two spell descriptions and think about it. This question goes against how everyone I've ever met plays Glitterdust, so most knee-jerk responses (mine included) would be that it does negate invisibility (and I'm now wondering if I was wrong all along!).

I'm going to bed now, so feel free to discuss this matter.

I just noticed that the FAQ allows the Eagle Shaman (and ONLY the Eagle Shaman) to fill holes in the size of totem animals available when wildshaping by applying the Giant Template to Eagles. I believe that some of the other Animal Shamans have similar holes in their size line-up, but according to the FAQ, the other Animal Shamans cannot fill those holes by using the Giant Template.

Shouldn't the rule be more even-handed, such as if there is any animal matching the Animal Shaman's Totem animal type available in a size category, then the Animal Shaman is limited to that animal(s), but if a particular size category has no animal matching the Animal Shaman's Totem, then the Giant Template can be applied to an animal of the appropriate type from the next smaller category? Or something along these lines.

If the Devs are worried about abuse (where someone might get to choose which of several animals to apply the Giant Template to), they could simply identify which Animal Shamans have holes in their available animals and specify which animals get the Giant Template.

For example, the Boar Shaman has small (Pit Boar), medium (Boar) and large (Dire Boar) sizes, but is missing any huge boar.

Similarly, the Bear Shaman has medium (Black Bear) and large (Grizzly, Polar and Dire Bear) sizes, but is missing any small or huge bear.

I've seen GMs, as a houserule, allow the Giant Template to be added to an appropriate animal, but a RAW option would be nice (for PFS if nothing else).

So if you think all Animal Shamans should get the same treatment as Eagle Shamans, please hit the FAQ button!

Thanks

Background - Our play group alternates between two GMs running two APs. One of them is Kingmaker in which the group is 10th level, and consists of:

Samsaran Wizard (Admixture) - my character
Small Tiefling Paladin of Saranae mounted on a Boar
Human 2-Handed Ranger
Human Mad Dog with Badger Companion
Rogue Swashbuckler using a 2-handed Elven Curve Blade

As you can see we have 4 melee characters and 1 arcane spell caster. Samsaran wouldn't be my first choice for a Wizard, but I went Samsaran to get Cure Spells and was the party "healer" until I hit 7th level and took leadership to get an Oracle of Life Cohort.

So the playtest comes out and I ask the GM if I can re-build my character (the Wizard) as an Arcanist, and she says OK. In rebuilding the character, I keep the same stats and spell books, but changed my class and equipment (e.g. my pearls of power don't work with Arcanist). The character remains the same person, same name, same place within the campaign, just a new class. Also, the intent is the finish the AP with the Arcanist.

Note 1: The Paladin also elected to re-do his character, but unlike me, he chose to essentially retire his existing character and build a new one. So, for the playtest, we lost the Paladin and gained a Swashbuckler.

Note 2: I was playing the "Revised" Arcanist as posted to the web by Jason, not the version from the 2nd playtest document. So I didn't have access to all the exploits. Now that I've seen the 2nd playrest document, I'll probably re-select my exploits for the next time we play. It also appears that there were some small changes I'll have to incorporate.

SPOILER ALERT - I forgot to ask our GM what book we're in, but our group had just snuck into a castle in a fortified city looking to depose the Duke who ruled the city. I hope that didn't spoil anything for anyone, but if you're familiar with the AP that should let you know where we were in the AP.

Here's the basics of my character build (we use 25 point buy):

Samsaran
STR 10
DEX 12
CON 14
INT 25 (after +4 Headband)
WIS 10
CHA 16 (after +4 Headband)
Note: These are the same stats my Wizard had, except I swapped out my +6 INT headband for a +4 INT/CHA Headband when I rearranged my equipment.

Traits: Valashmai Veteran, Magical Lineage (Fireball)

72 hit points

AC 11 (15 with Mage Armor)

+10 Fortitude, +9 Reflex, +12 Will (+5 Cloak of Resistance)

Craft/Alchemy 20, Craft/Cooking 11, Diplomacy 13, Fly 14, K/Arcana 20, K/Nature 18, All other knowledges at 11, Linguistics 11, Perception 14, Profession/Ruler 13 (I'm the King), Spellcraft 20, Perform/Stringed 5

I chose the following Exploits:
Potent Magic
Spell Tinkerer
Metamixing
Force Strike
Metamagic Knowledge

Feats: Spell Focus (Evocation), Mage's Tattoo (Evocation), Craft Wondrous Item, Leadership, Spell Specialization (Fireball), Intensified Spell

Prepared Spells: 0-bunch of cantrips; 1-Burning Hands, Cure Light Wounds, Mage Armor, Magic Missile, Shield; 2-Burning Arc, Create Pit, Knock, See Invisibility; 3-Dispel Magic, Intensified Fireball, Fly; 4-Dimension Door, Greater Invisibility; 5-Animal Growth

Magic Equipment includes: Headband of Mental Prowess +4 INT/CHA, Ring of Freedom of Movement, Ring Of Sustenance, Cloak of Resistance +5, Blazing Robe, Quick Runner's Shirt, Handy Haversack, Bunch of Scrolls & a couple potions, Metamagic Rod Lesser Rime, Metamagic Rod Selective, Metamagic Rod Extend, A couple of minor wands (Magic Missile, Burning Hands). I also carry around some group magic items like a Wand of Cure Light Wounds, some more scrolls and more potions.

We had several combats. Most were against non-spellcasters - basically soldiers and melee characters, some hill giants. One with a high level Wizard (I'm going to guess 11+ level as he cast several 6th level spells).

My Arcanist performed well. I let the 4 melee guys do most of the fighting (so they had fun), but when I saw an opportunity to hit a lot of opponents, I did toss in a 14d6 fireball or two (10th Level + Intensified + Specialization + Mage's Tattoo + Blazing Robe). As I did with my Wizard, I cast Mage Armor (Extended) at the beginning of the day. During the typical melee combat, I cast Greater Invisibility on myself and the Oracle, and See Invisibility on myself.

In the combat against the enemy Spell-Caster, I used Dispel Magic to good effect a couple of times. The enemy Wizard ended up teleporting away and that was the last we saw of him (at least that night, but who knows?).

Impressions:

I found the Arcanist to be fairly well-balanced. I know some predict the doom of the Wizard or Sorceror, but I think I can honestly say that I rate all three classes about the same. Wizards are my long-time favorite, and I still see myself running Wizards. I sometimes run Sorcerors because, after 30 years of playing, I sometimes get lazy and don't want to manage spells - the bloodlines are nice, but usually not the reason I go Sorceror. Arcanist blends the spellcasting of Wizard and Sorceror, but in a way that makes it different. Sorcerors still have the most spells per day and Wizards, in their way, still have the most flexibility in spell selection. Some might find that a bit odd for me to say, but what I experienced in switching the character from a 10th level Wizard to a 10th level Arcanist, is that my spell selection for the day was more restricted in terms of variety, but what spells I did prepare I could use alot. For example, here is my Wizard's typical prepped spells:

0-bunch of cantrips; 1-Burning Hands, Cure Light Wounds, Mage Armor, Magic Missile x2, Shield, Snowball (Note that I had 4 1st level Pearls of Power); 2-Burning Arc x2, Create Pit, Knock, Mirror Image, Resist Energy, See Invisibility (I also had 1 2nd level Pearl of Power); 3-Blacklight, Dispel Magic, Fly x2, Mass Feather Step, Pellet Blast (no Fireball prepared as my Wizard could spontaneously cast them using Spell Prodigy); 4-Ball Lightning x2, Black Tentacles, Dimension Door, Greater Invisibility x2; 5-Animal Growth, Icy Prison, Overland Flight, Wall of Force

So I had more spells to select from as a Wizard, but I wouldn't be able to cast multiples of these spells. For example, when we faced the enemy spellcaster, I used two Dispel Magics, which I could not have done with my Wizard (who normally only memorized one). But as a Wizard, I'd have (at 5th level) 4 different spells available versus 1 spell as an Arcanist (but the Arcanist could cast that 1 spell 3 times). This can make for some hard choices. It also tends to make you focus on spells you know you will use versus spells that are good to have in case you need them (e.g. Fireball must have, but Mass Feather Step too situational to select as one of my 3 prepared spells. Now I am NOT saying this is bad, just that it's different.

As to the specific exploits...

Potent Magic is very nice. Combined with Spell Focus and Greater Spell Focus, you can get a very high DC. I used this with my Fireballs.

Spell Tinkerer. I like the concept, BUT actually never got to use it during the session. I guess I could have used it to extend my Mage Armor from 20 hours to 30 hours, but I'd still have to cast Mage Armor once per day. As for tinkering with other people's spells, I tend not to like to get within melee touch range with my arcane casters, so that's kind of scary! I'll have to read the new rules as I think they changed this exploit a bit, but we'll see. Actually, Spell Tinker was taken as I couldn't find anything else I liked. With the new exploits, I'll probably swap it out for our next session, not because it's bad, but more because it doesn't fit my character and play-style too well.

Metamixing is good for my character as he uses metamagic feats.

Metamagic Knowledge is also good because I've built this character around Metamagic feats, and could use another.

Force Strike and the other "Attack" exploits are ok. I don't see them as necessary, but if you look at them as super-cantrips they are ok. In the action-economy, however, I would usually just fireball or magic missile an opponent. I found the other Attack exploits a bit weak due to the saving throws, which is why I took Force Strike. Now that more exploits have been introduced, I'll probably drop Force Strike and select one of the new exploits for the next playtest session. But if I had to select one, I'd personally go with Force Strike.

Overall I was happy with the Arcanist. I'd readily run one again. In fact, our Kingmaker GM is planning to run an Arcanist in Reign of Winter (which the Shattered Star GM plans to start running in January).

Power-level I think the Arcanist avoids over-powering the other full arcane classes, so power creep is minimal. The Arcanist can exist side by side with Sorcerors and Wizards (and Witches and the Summoner).

I hope I covered everything. I kind of feel like I didn't do a good job because I can't think if anything particularly problematic with the Arcanist, or identify any problems I had with the class. It just worked great as far as I was concerned.

I'll post again after our next session, which will probably be the last before the end of the playtest.

Maybe I'm missing something, but...

The Mad Dog Archetype is built around the concept of a barbarian who has an animal companion which he uses in combat.

Barbarians often RAGE in combat, and the Mad Dog does get the Rage ability.

But the Rage ability says: "While in rage, a barbarian cannot use any Charisma-, Dexterity-, or Intelligence-based skills (except Acrobatics, Fly, Intimidate, and Ride) or any ability that requires patience or concentration."

Handle Animal is a Charisma-based skill and I don't see anything anywhere which says a Mad Dog can use Handle Animal while raging. It just somehow doesn't seem right.

1. I know a lot of GMs don't make PCs use Handle Animal with their animal companions, but RAW purists exist and they do require the checks.

2. I know you can probably get around this by giving your animal companion an INT of 3, so you arguably don't need Handle Animal checks.

That aside, I was wondering if this was an error in the Archetype (something to errata?), or was it intended to work that way?

Unfortunately, I suspect the only way to answer this question is if the designer of the Archetype chimes in, or if the Paizo staff comments.

Me, personally, I'd let a Mad Dog make Handle Animal checks while raging, but only as to his/her animal companion, but that's just me.

Anyone out there see something I'm missing? Or can I attract the attention of someone who can comment authoritatively?

Thanks!

Are there any official rules or setting material in Pathfinder that talks about the spellbooks of true aquatic spellcasters?

A sahuagin wizard isn't likely to have your standard paper-bound spellbook. I'd assume an aquatic spellcaster's spellbook will at the least be waterproof. On the other hand, I'd assume it'd be (for game balance purposes) roughly as cumbersome as a land-dweller's spellbook.

If there truly is nothing official, rules-wise or setting-wise, then I guess this post might get itself moved to general discussion or advice, but I'm mostly interested if anyone has seen any official rules, or any mentions in the official setting.

Thanks!

Hi, I originally posted this elsewhere, but just located this sub-forum and it seems more appropriate here...

Our group is looking for 2-3 new Players. Also open to people who want to GM.

The group has been in continuous play for about 20+ years.
Plays most Friday Evenings (about 6 pm to 12 midnight, give or take).
Plays in Downtown Honolulu Office Building (Parking available). As we play at a business, players do need to accept some limits on their behavior - no smoking, stay in the designated areas (no wandering about), keep the area clean, etc. Frig and Microwave available on site.

On the Roleplay <---> Hack'n'Slash scale, the group trends more to Hack'n'Slash. That might change a bit with new players, but don't expect high drama or intense roleplaying.

The group tends to favor the ides that PCs are heroes/extraordinary, not ordinary people. For example, using 25 point buy for non-PFS Pathfinder.

The group plays a variety of RPGs which vary from time to time depending on who wants to GM and what they want to GM. In the last couple of years, in addition to Pathfinder, we've played Star Wars Saga a couple of times, Savage Deadlands, Classic Deadlands, Dresden Files, and Deathwatch.

Even if playing other RPGs the group generally plays Pathfinder 50+% of the time. There is always one Pathfinder Adventure Path being run, and one other game. Currently, the group is ONLY playing Pathfinder as we have finished playing Serpent's Skull and will be starting Skull & Shackles (making characters right now), and our current "alternate" game consists of playing PFS home games.

So this is a good time to join if you want to play Skull & Shackles, as we'll be starting that next. Also, we've just reached Level 2 in PFS play, so it's also a good time to join in on that.

Please either PM me if you have questions or are interested, or post below if you prefer.

Thanks!

The PFS Additional Resources states that for the Racial Spells in the ARG, that you must be a member of the race to take that race's Racial Spells.

There is no similar restriction stated anywhere in the PFS Additional Resources for the various Pathfinder Companion books, like Halflings/Gnomes/Humans/Elves/Dwarves of Golarion. The books themselves don't seem to say the spells are restricted to the race in question (e.g. Gnomes of Golarion specifically states that the spells can be learned by other races). Is there a restriction in PFS? Or are the spells found in those books "associated" with the races, but not "exclusive" (so anyone can take them)?

If it is currently allowed to take the spells from these books even if you are not the race covered by the book, what happens if PFS changes the rules to disallow such a selection later?

Mostly I'm interested in finding out if there's any official answers as this is not an issue in our home games, just when playing PFS.

Thanks!