Conall O'Kanis's page

I am considering variant multiclassing for a build, initially to get Trapfinding. Then I remembered that this VMC, and Sanctified Slayer both have Sneak Attack.

The build is Inquisitor (Sanctified Slayer + Reaper of Secrets) w/ Rogue VMC. Because of this, the Inquisitor gains 1d6 sneak attack @ 4th, at 7th it increases to 2d6. But at this level also, the Rogue VMC gives the Sneak Attack Class Feature (Which the Inquisitor already has now).

I've received different interpretations, and I'm just curious for the RAI. I'm hoping for a solid justification with rules citing. The interpretations I can imagine are:

1) Both Sneak Attack sources stack; therefore at level 7, the Inquisitor + VMC rogue has 3d6 sneak attack. This means the character qualifies for feats that require a certain degree of sneak attack, such as the 5d6 Sneak attack for Dastardly Finish (Whose prerequisites would be met at level 11)

2) The sneak attack sources do not stack, but since they trigger off the same attack, under the same conditions, the damage is effectively the same. Fr example, at level 7, the sneak attack results as 2d6 + 1d6, rather then 3d6. The notable difference between example 1 and 2 is that feat prerequisites are met at different levels; Dastardly Finish's prerequisites would only be met at level 16 for this character.

3) The Sneak attack sources do not stack; because having the same class feature twice should not happen. Therefore, only the higher of the two sneak attack pools triggers; effectively the VMC's sneak attack damage never occurs, because it will always lag behind the Sanctified Slayer.

Here's hoping for a clear result, and maybe even a Dev weigh in. Thanks to everyone in advance.

Hey all; I've seen this sort of question come up in the past with different examples, and after searching those sources I still haven't drawn a conclusion that I can confidently apply to the title's combination.

Do Sneak attack die from different sources stack as bonus dice, or do they overlap?

With the above example, a Sancified Slayer with Rogue VMC could have either 6d6 Sneak Attack, or 10d6 Sneak Attack.

If anyone could provide me a link, or quote to a section within the rules, or a Design team response, I'd greatly appreciate it. Me and my group don't accept speculation and opinion as sufficient evidence, so we really are stuck asking for a rules call on this one.

Thanks in advance to anyone who puts something down

I'm posting this in order to have a space to practice formats on the website, which I'm not well versed in. If you need practice too, feel free to use this space, and I can help tell if thinks like links work from my end.

Hey guys, I'm looking to make a Martial only character (No Su, SP or Spells) who is skilled at defeating magic users.

I've got my own build, centered around a Mounted Fury Barbarian w/ Boon Companion/Monstrous Mount (Griffon)/Monstrous Mount Mastery, and Greater Blind-Fight + Keen Scent. Add in all the expected Superstition, Witch Hunter, etcs.

But, I'm looking for any ideas people have to try and defeat spellcasters with some sense of reliability.

I imagine Flash Damage is one of the best, by attempting to have massive damage, and a huge initiative, but I'd like to see if we can generate ideas that work past round 1, after the mage has somehow survived the first hit.

So, any ideas for surviving: Touch spells (Melee or range), Invisibility, Flight, Teleportation, Save or Sucks, etc.

My barb turned out okay by the standard my group games at, but I'd like to hear other ideas, because I've always been so enamoured with the idea of a magic-less warrior against the magical. (Batman amongst the justice league is the best comparison)

Remember, my only additional request is: No magical abilities what so ever. I don't like to consider magical items as part of builds as well, so let's not assume a character automatically has and relies on an Agile weapon, for example.

Multiclassing is cool, of course.

At 2nd level, most Inquisitors (some archetypes swap it out) get Detect Alignment, where they can use Detect Evil, Detect Good, etc all at-will as SLAs.

However, Inquisitors cannot cast SPELLS of an alignment opposed to their own.

Looking up the Magic section's description of SLAs, they state:

Usually, a spell-like ability works just like the spell of that name. A spell-like ability has no verbal, somatic, or material component, nor does it require a focus. The user activates it mentally. Armor never affects a spell-like ability's use, even if the ability resembles an arcane spell with a somatic component.

A spell-like ability has a casting time of 1 standard action unless noted otherwise in the ability or spell description. In all other ways, a spell-like ability functions just like a spell.

Having a Spell-like ability already allows you to qualify for Prestige classes, so SLAs = Spells is not a new idea.

Therefore, is a Lawful Good Inquisitor only able to use Detect Chaos, and Detect good, while a Neutral Good Inquisitor could cast any except Detect Evil, and a True Neutral could cast all four?

I'm in the camp that Oracles of Life gain Mass Heal as an 8th level spell.

However, I wanted to know if I can still choose to learn Mass Heal as a 9th level spell. The only real benefit I can see from it is that when used to hurt undead, the DC to resist is 1 higher.

I am trying to fill up my higher level spell slots to match my concept for my character, but only 9th level is stopping me from wanting to go Oracle 20. (Hence my willingness to take a redundant spell known.)

Is it legal to have Mass Heal as both an 8th level spell, and a 9th level spell, when it originates from the same class?

How would both instances of Martial Flexibility interaction?

1) Two pools of 3 + 1/2 lvl. Neither interacts at all, allowing 2 feat gains with 2 move actions?

2) The two pools, and levels stack, so a Brawler 10/War sighted 10 would be as effective as a Warsighted 20, no more, no less.

3) They are redundant, and only the highest level one continues to benefit you.

4) Other (Some combination I haven't thought of)

Alright, so I'm trying to get the RAW clarification on this element of Planar Ally.

"If you serve no particular deity, the spell is a general plea answered by a creature sharing your philosophical alignment. If you know an individual creature's name, you may request that individual by speaking the name during the spell (though you might get a different creature anyway)."

I am playing a Neutral Good Oracle. This means that I do not have the Cleric's restrictions on casting of non-matching alignment.
However; the line above states a creature sharing your philosophical alignment (IE Neutral Good???)

I am trying to make a character who only casts Alignment Spells of Good alignment, because of being NG, and his will towards other alignments not being strong enough.

From a STORY point of view, I can just choose to only Call Good outsiders. However, I am concerned of an occasion coming up where Calling another type of Outsider (Inevitable, Protean, etc) will be helpful, and I can see my party trying to force me (as players to a player) to summon one, if I legally can. I don't want it to be a choice that the character chooses to never perform; I want it to be something he CANNOT perform, even if it leads to his death.

I'm looking for a RAW justification for why I can't, so that I can quickly shut down that train of thought. Any help available?

So; select members of our gaming group would like to assemble a campaign where the groups are Bandits, pillaging and robbing and such.
A few of the key elements are to be:

15 point build, core races only.
Team of 3 players, with one GM. The GM rotates in his own planned events after the one before him finishes. Kind of like Episodes in our bandit group's life.

No PC Magic; No casters, or SU/SP abilities for any players, and access to magic items is limited to rare finds, with each any every magic item being a significant piece of an era past.

We're also grappling with the idea of No Magic WORLD, as though all non-itemized magic was removed (Though I keep arguing that monsters with Supernatural/SP or spellcasting ought to stay, otherwise our game is pretty boring...)
However, this game would be occuring in Golarion. I'm concerned about the ripples that go through the world if we say; Magic is gone.

Which is why I ask you fans of Golarion, what do you think the world would be like with no more magic; I'll consider your responses as either fuel for or against the idea, depending on how it turns out.

In addition; we're concerned about the game getting stale, being just bandits. Any ideas for our game to go from thugs to Princes of Crime? I'd love to hear them.

So, I was just wondering;

With the Enlightened Paladin archetype stating that Enlightened paladins follow no universal code, is this to say they don't need to be Lawful Good.

The first term of the typical code is "A Paladin must be lawful good.."

Just curious.

I'm late to the game with the advanced multiclass stuff, and I'm normally a lot better at figuring out wording.

However, for some reason I need to ask; How exactly does Arcanist handle it's spells per day, and spells prepared?

The conclusion I'm getting is that you prepare 1 version of each spell you will be casting for that day until your spells prepared are full, drawn from the spell book, and then you can cast from those any combination, until you run out of spell slots.

Otherwise, I'm out of understanding. Come someone clarify for me?

When I was attempting to pay for Fire Mountain's Way of the Wicked Book 6: Wages of Sin, the site would tell me after every attempt that my payment method (my credit card), was unsuccessful. I believed it was a problem with my company (RBC), who was having difficulties relating to Credit card info at the same time.

However, upon calling my credit card company, they said that the transaction for Wages of Sin had been accepted 7 or so times. I naturally only want to purchase it ONCE.

Please message back; I'm not sure how to resolve this; I'd hope for a refund on the extra downloads of Wages of Sin, given how the Paizo website was misinforming me, saying that it WASN'T accepting my payment methods.

Thank you