Can I get an update on this?
Search Posts
Yes, please cancel that item. Thanks.
Hi Customer Service, Order 8236096 still shows as pending. The original email I received said expected to ship in 1 to 5 business days for one package and 5 to 23 business days for the second. It's now been ~27 business days and neither package has shipped. Can I get an update on this order? Thank you
Shouldn't Kishokish's manor be called Nine-Gables, not Nine-Eaves? Especially since Puzzle 3 says they are represented by triangles.
It does require keeping the cutout sheets they come with, but I've found the best storage solution to be File Cases and Letter Files. I store each collection in one Case (with the covers visible from the outside, including the pawn lists) with each sheet in an individual Letter File: What brand of File Cases and Letter Files do you use? I've looked at some options on Amazon but reviews said they were a pretty flimsy plastic.
Appendix Seven: New Rules on page 416 of the hardcover version lists these sins/virtues: Envy:Charity
Subtracting the DR directly from the average damage is going to throw off your numbers for crits. It should be something like this: "Full Attack":Without Power Attack: d8: 3.5 * (.75 + .50 + .25) + 8.5 * (.25 + .05 + .05) = 8.225 d12: 7.5 * (.75 + .50 + .25) + 12.5 * (.25 + .05 + .05) = 15.625 With Power Attack:
Move, and either two attacks or Power Attack:
With Power Attack:
It should be fixed now, also you should be able to edit which attack you're looking at now. For Power Attack, it looks like the bonus damage is only being added to the hit formula, not the crit formula. The values from C3-H3 should be included for Old Power Attack crits and the values for I3-J3 should be included for New Power Attack crits.
I believe your crit chance is 5% too low. If you hit on a 2 or higher (95%) you will crit on a 12 or higher (45%) but in this case you show C Crit Chance 40%. C2 should also be 20% instead of 15%.
With PF1e-style power attack: (8.5*.45 + 17*.20) + (8.5*.40 + 17*.05) + (8.5*.15 + 17*.05) = 13.6 First attack should be a hit on 7-16 and crit on 17-20, so (8.5*.50 + 17*.20) for 14.025 average damage with -1 hit/+2 damage PF1 power attack. -2/+4: 15.225
A natural 20 is still a critical hit. So your "hits on 11" should be 50% hit, 5% crit and "hits on 16" should be 25% hit, 5% crit. Without power attack: (13*.50 + 26*.25) + (13*.45 + 26*.05) + (13*.20 + 26*.05) = 24.05 With power attack: (20*.50 + 40*.25) + (13*.45 + 26*.05) = 27.15 It also looks like you used 4d6+6 instead of 2d6+6 for the "hits on 11" attack with power attack.
You are assuming this is a normally sized anvil. This may not be a valid assumption. Are you suggesting an extra large, less dense 100 lb. anvil? Or a smaller, unusually dense 100 lb. anvil?
It's not a teamwork feat, but there is a similar combat feat, Gang Up. Plus: Doesn't require a companion, allies don't need to be adjacent to you or in the same square, allies don't need the feat for you to get the bonus Minus: Need at least two other allies instead of one companion
Combined with the right mount classes or other combat routes, like sacred huntsmaster inquisitor with the chivalry domain, this can get downright nasty. What benefit would a Sacred Huntsmaster actually get from the Chivalry inquisition? They already have an animal companion, so Mount does nothing, and they don't get any judgments to share, so Faithful Steed doesn't help either.
The question I have, is why is it option 1 instead of option 2? Where is the rule stating the limit of one sneak attack per attack? If there weren't a limit of one sneak attack per attack, why aren't you asking about option 3: Spoiler:
Spellstrike = Weapon + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Spell + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack
Iterative 1 = Weapon + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Spell + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack Iterative 2 = Weapon + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Spell + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack + Sneak Attack But to answer your question: "The ninja’s attacks deal extra damage anytime her target would be denied a Dexterity bonus to AC (whether the target actually has a Dexterity bonus or not), or when the ninja flanks her target." So each attack deals extra damage. Three attacks means you get the extra damage three times, not six. Chill touch and sneak attack are both just adding damage to existing attacks, they are not attacks on their own.
Yes, I think it would be overpowered to have GunRadiance transform ammo into cold iron bullets, as the paladin is already going to be getting a ranged holy avenger they can use against touch AC. The bonus on it is going to get high enough eventually that it will be overcoming cold iron DR anyways.
An indeed, as written, the Skull & Shackles Adventure Path has already made be uncomfortable more times than any other AP published by Paizo (Shattered Star and Reign of Winter are the only ones I haven't read yet), and I'm just at the beginning of the second volume. You might need to read Rise of the Runelords again, especially The Skinsaw Murders and The Hook Mountain Massacre, to refresh your memory. Serial killers and backwoods rapists, for me at least, trump piracy.
I've always rolled separately for condition durations, as have other GMs I've played with, but there is no clear rule as to which way is intended.
Yeah, sadly, I am often traveling with an assortment of good characters and priests, (PFS org play) and if I start throwing around desecrates, I am eventually going to raise their ire, (and they are more likely to stop me from exercising my rights to claim temples for Groetus. So far I have held off the lawful priests by maintaining that fallen temples are the rightful property of Groetus, and therefor their law forbids them from stopping me.) Groetus doesn't have a formal religion or organized church, so how does he have a rightful claim to any temple, fallen or otherwise? And "exercising rights" is the kind of thing those lawful priests would be doing, seems a bit odd for a mad prophet of a god of oblivion to be worrying about his legal rights. But as to your original question, there is no chaotic/lawful equivalent to consecrate/desecrate (or hallow/unhallow, which is probably what you want long term). You could try consecrating formerly evil temples and desecrating formerly good temples, to emphasize that they are truly abandoned and fallen.
You get to pick your destination, not pick an enemy and then travel past it the remaining distance. If you picked a location inside the mist or on the opposite side of it where you can't see, I'd say it's reasonable that you could miss your intended destination, since you don't actually know where it is. If you are picking a visible location outside the mist (maybe you're in a weird room filled with mirrors, so you can see the other side of the mist, just not what's inside it) you would damage anything in your path, but you can't see the enemy, so you still wouldn't know if he actually intersected your path. And like chaoseffect said, I would say that ride the lightning is not going to burn away any mist.
Yup, and it only works if you fail your saving throw - which you could easily do (even choose to do) if an ally cast a spell on you so you'd have access to it. Not saying it would come up often, but it could be useful.I still want to know why suffering knowledge only works on spells cast by enemies. I don't see much point in having Suffering Knowledge work with spells cast by allies. Even if it was allowed, the end result would be an ally with one less spell and the arcanist with one more spell. Instead of casting the spell on the arcanist, the ally could have just cast it on the enemy.
Could you clarify what your question is?
continuous effect item, costing 4 * 7 * 2000 = 56000 gp to buy, 28000 gp to craft.You missed the 2x multiplier I included above since it is 1 minute duration. My bad, I thought there was a rule to that effect but kept on missing the footnotes beneath the table. You are correct, 112,000 gp to buy, 56,000 gp to craft. There are probably a lot better ways to invest your money than to give your animal companion an item that costs more than a 12th level characters total wealth.
House rules are when you change existing rules or create new rules.House rules are also when you change existing items or create new items. Or are magic items not part of the rules? Magic items are not rules. Changing an existing magic item is not changing an existing rule. Creating a new item is not creating a new rule. Are magic items part of the rules? Sure, and changing the rules for magic item creation would be a house rule. Using the magic item creation rules to create a magic item? No, that's not a house rule.
The big problem with true strike is that it is a standard action casting time, range personal spell that affects only your next attack. Translating that into a continuous item that can be worn by anyone that affects all attacks breaks the limitations on it. On the other hand, strong jaw is a range touch spell that has a minutes/level duration (minimum 7 minutes), which is similar to other spell-in-a-can items that are permitted in the game (cape of the mountebank, lantern of revealing).
RAW, Improved Uncanny Dodge only cares about rogue levels vs. stacking levels from classes that grant Uncanny Dodge (barbarian 2+, assassin 2+, shadowdancer 2+, stalwart defender 3+, rogue 4+, ninja 4+). RAI, I would imagine that if a class stacks with (or substitutes for, like ninja) rogue levels for the purposes of sneak attack dice (vivisectionist alchemist, assassin, inner sea pirate, master spy, red mantis assassin, sleepless detective, arcane trickster 2+, halfling opportunist 2+, lion blade 2+, pain taster 2+, aspis agent 3+, bellflower tiller 3+, low templar 3+), it would also stack for the purposes of flanking an enemy that has Improved Uncanny Dodge. (Oddly, unlike other archetypes/PrCs that give Sneak Attack, sandman bard 5+ does not say the bonuses on damage stack.)
And custom items are not the same as house rules.His point is that they are house rules, because any custom item needs to be created, designed, and balanced by the GM. So it is a defacto house rule. There are also rules in Pathfinder for a GM to create, design, and balance encounters. Does that mean that every encounter is a de facto house rule? No, because using the rules of the game as intended is not the same thing as a house rule. House rules are when you change existing rules or create new rules.
James Risner and The Purity of Violence are correct, your animal intelligence, non-speaking dog won't be able to activate a command word item. If you want this item for your animal companion, you're looking at a continuous effect item, costing 4 * 7 * 2000 = 56000 gp to buy, 28000 gp to craft. There is a collar (not legal in PFS) that allows an animal to speak a language. IIRC. That would share the same slot as this proposed item, since they're both collars. The only collar I could find was the collar of beast-speech, from a 3PP.
Arachnofiend is technically correct, you can't make an impact amulet of mighty fists. You can design a custom magic item with the same effect as a hypothetical impact amulet of mighty fists but you're creating a custom item, not an amulet of mighty fists. A custom item is not the same thing as a non-custom item that does something similar. Just because you create a similar item with an effect not normally allowed allowed by an amulet of mighty fists does not make the custom item you created an amulet of mighty fists. It's still its own separate custom item. And custom items are not the same as house rules. If I create a custom item that fills the neck slot, gives a +1 enhancement bonus to my unarmed/natural attacks, and increases the effective size of those unarmed/natural attacks, that's within the normal item creation guidelines for custom items. If I instead say impact can be applied to an amulet of mighty fists, despite the rules relating to light weapons, then I'm creating my own house rules.
You can't make an Impact AoMF. You can't apply the effects to light weapons, which unarmed strikes and natural attacks are.You also can't make a 3/day Strong Jaw item. Not without designing a custom item, that is. If we're designing custom items, you absolutely can have an Impact AoMF. Such an item wouldn't be hard to price, either. Amulet of Mighty Fists: Alternatively, this amulet can grant melee weapon special abilities, so long as they can be applied to unarmed attacks. Impact: This special ability can only be placed on melee weapons that are not light weapons. Unarmed Strike: An unarmed strike is always considered a light weapon. Arachnofiend is technically correct, you can't make an impact amulet of mighty fists. You can design a custom magic item with the same effect as a hypothetical impact amulet of mighty fists but you're creating a custom item, not an amulet of mighty fists.
Tomos was close, but to get the 10 minute duration the OP ask for it would be 4 * 10 * 1800 / (5/3) = 43200 gp to buy, 21600 gp to craft. If you're fine with a 7 minute duration, 3 times/day, the prices Tomos listed are 100% correct.
Inner Sea Combat from the Campaign Setting line is the Golarion themed companion to Ultimate Combat from the RPG line. Likewise, we have Inner Sea Magic for Ultimate Magic, Inner Sea NPC Codex for the NPC Codex, Inner Sea Bestiary for Bestiary 1/2/3/4. Inner Sea Gods is one of the few hardcovers from the Campaign Setting line and provides information on the deities that has been updated and expanded beyond what was in Gods and Magic and the articles in various APs.
What would be a reasonable means for PCs to restore the three corrupted statues, either reverting them to mundane statues of Torag or undefiled and non-hostile graven guardians? And what would be a reasonable check to discover such a means? The arcanist in our WotR party could theoretically have used erase on the demonic runes or perhaps stone shape or make whole... anyone else have some suggestions?
Have him take a level of Expert.
As it doesn't specify that you get to choose where they stumble, I would assume that either (a) the enemy gets to choose which square they fall prone in or (b) it was determined randomly, via d8. But assuming that they either chose to fall into the second one or randomly rolled that way, they would fall prone in the second one and nothing would happen. They're not stepping into it and likely to trip (again), they're just falling down on top of it. And likewise, when they stand up, they are not stepping into the square, so no Reflex save.
No, they do not stack. And you cannot change either the +1 enhancement bonus from the sword or the gloves to something else, such as flaming. But if you use gloves with a masterwork sword, it will deal +1 damage. And if you use it with a regular mundane sword, it will have +1 to hit and deal +1 damage.
Providing an armor bonus does not make it armor. Well, if we determine if something is armor by whether it provides an armor bonus, shouldn't we also determine whether armor is being worn by whether you are receiving the armor bonus it provides? Because that seems like exactly the method for determining if someone is wearing armor... So, monks should be penalized for wearing their mage armor. Either that or we can just be less pedantic and say that mage armor is not armor, nor is it a valid target for magic vestment
Your hypothetical bell curve is a bit off.
So you're not really going to see traps with a DC 5 Disable Device check, since a 10 Dex commoner with a single rank in Disable Device could succeed at that 85% of the time. And a trap with a Disable Device of 30 corresponds to something like a Symbol of Pain Trap, which is CR 6 and comes from an AP volume for level 7+ characters. Most mechanical traps for a level 3 rogue are going to be around DC 20 and will be pretty easy to bypass without much effort. But there might be a few DC 25 or 26 magical traps that the rogue will fail to disable if he takes a 10. And there may even be a DC 27+ magical trap that would be sprung if he took a 10 and failed. And that's why its a choice, whether to take 10 on an average/easy task or roll the dice for something more difficult.
You put the hat on, giving you a maximum 4/day and use one. You take the hat off, dropping you to a maximum 3/day. How many times have you used the power? Once. How many of the 3/day are left? Two. If you put the hat back on, you'll have 3/day, but if the hat stays off, you're stuck with only 2/day
You also know your disguise is a disguise. But my point is not that the scenarios are identical, just that I find them equally ridiculous.
Making up entirely new rules (you can take a 20, but only up to a maximum of you or your ally's perception+20) just for the Disguise skill alone seems unusually harsh, yes. To me, this seems as ridiculous as suggesting that you can only Bluff up to a maximum of your Sense Motive+20, otherwise you would start believing your own lies. While I think that would make for a hilarious house rule for my game full of deceitful illusionists, prevaricating bards, and lying-very-poorly fighters, I would never suggest that be a logical way to interpret the rules.
3-10 hours and 100 gp to basically get the results of a level 2 spell that can be cast as a standard action for free...yep, still seems pretty reasonable. And no, I don't see any reason to limit the disguise to 20+perception of yourself or an ally. Has the Disguise skill every really broken someone's game so badly that it needs to be restricted this harshly?
If someone spends 1d3x10x20 minutes, between 3 hours, 20 minutes and 10 hours, perfecting their disguise...yeah, I'm willing to let them take a 20. If the target they're trying to fool watches them while doing it, they'd absolutely get to see through when the disguiser "rolls a 1" but at that point, if you can't figure out that the person putting on a disguise for 10 hours isn't who he appears to be...you've got other problems. In-game, you're not trying to "reach a target" when you take 20, you're making sure that you take enough time to do the job to the best of your ability. There is no penalty for failing a disguise check, so you can take your time adjusting your disguise until it's just right. If you roll a 1 on your disguise check, the makeup doesn't melt off of your face, your wig doesn't fall apart, and your imitation clothes don't suddenly tear at the seams.
The cleric actually crafted this as a 'Necklace of Positive Channeling', specifically not to interfere with any future headbands he might find From Magic Item Creation: Altering Existing Items:
For the same reason a GM should be hesitant to allow granting mental ability score bonuses to be moved to a slot other than headbands, they should be hesitant to allow another headbands-slot ability to be moved to other slots (like neck) to avoid interfering with "any future headbands he might find." As a necklace, I'd suggest a 50% cost increases over the headband version: phylactery of positive channeling +2d6 = 16,500 gp phylactery of positive channeling +4d6 = 66,000 gp phylactery of positive channeling +6d6 = 148,500 gp Or, if you're not sold on the even numbered iterations, perhaps this: phylactery of positive channeling, lesser (+1d6) = 4,125 gp phylactery of positive channeling (+2d6) = 16,500 gp phylactery of positive channeling, greater (+3d6) = 24,750 gp phylactery of positive channeling, major (+4d6) = 66,000 gp he also made a good argument about it being a "cassock", so I allowed it. Not really relevant, but wouldn't that make more sense as a body slot item?
Your calculations seem pretty good and I agree with Bacon666, +2d6/+4d6/+6d6 seem the likely variations, so: phylactery of positive channeling +2d6 = 11,000 gp phylactery of positive channeling +4d6 = 44,000 gp phylactery of positive channeling +6d6 = 99,000 gp
Unfortunately, the rules for encumbrance and carrying capacity are concerned only with weight, not volume. So RAW, if it's not more than he has carrying capacity, it won't encumber him or otherwise affect his ability to fight. As the GM, you're more than welcome to make additional limitations to preserve verisimilitude. The point will become pretty moot once handy haversacks/bags of holding/portable holes entire the picture.
You'll want to take power attack and combat reflexes. Having those you can choose on the fly to get the improved & greater feats for any combat maneuver you wish to perform. I think you mean Combat Expertise, for Improved/Greater Trip, Improved/Greater Disarm, Improved/Greater Dirty Trick, Improved/Greater Reposition, and Improved/Greater Steal.
1. Yep, mythic tiers are separate from levels, you still get the +1 stat bump every 4 levels regardless of mythic or not. 2. I'd suggest leaving it as is. +15 to a stat is a lot but that's at level 20/tier 10, the highest you can reach in the game. Characters are just shy of demigods at that point, +15 to stat is the least of your concerns.
1. Other than Orlovsky potentially allying with Garess and Medvyed against Surtova if they get sick of the usurpers, what do the allegiances between Houses in Brevoy look like? 2. There's a lot of talk about being on the edge of civil war and friction between Issia and Rostland, but which Houses are Issian and which are Rostlander? 3. Are the rebellious folk in Restov tied to any Houses or are they on their own?
There is a jeweler in town, but more importantly, the Sandpoint Cathedral includes acolytes of Abadar. As the god of banking, his priests often provide banking and money changing services. I imagine once they acquire a bag of holding, it won't matter much anyways. |