Diego Rossi's page

The crux of the problem is how you, the GM, interpret:

Hit Dice: For the purpose of effects related to number of Hit Dice, use the master's character level or the familiar's normal HD total, whichever is higher.

For me, as a GM, the number of skill points a creature has isn't an effect. An effect is what damage the familiar suffers from things like Holy Word.

So, when the master is level 12, the greensting scorpion familiar is still a 1 HD Vermin without the Mindless trait.

Its intelligence is 17 (the master class level +5), the base skill points are those a 1 HD vermin, i.e. 2, and it gets 2*11 (its master increases in class levels) as bonus skill points.

To sum it up:
2 (1 HD) + 3 (Int bonus for 1 HD) + 22 (master level increases) = 27 skill points.

If you read gaining skill as an effect, it instead has
24 (2 x the master levels)) + 36 (Int bonus x he master levels) + 22 (master level increases) = 82 skill points.

One interpretation gives it 2 maximized Knowledge skills; the other, 6.

Honestly Cause Fear is not practical unless you have 2-3 and are scraping the bottom of the spell barrel. There are many anti-fear buffs out there. Break, Color Spray, and others are more effective.

Fear effects are more useful for monsters. Except for Eyebite when the PCs are level 9 or lower, and the enemy is level 11+.

Azothath wrote:

seems theorhetical as it should have used spells to escape previously.

Well it says a frightened character can use spells and abilities to flee, not to fight.

So my interpretation is he can’t use spells and abilities to fight, only to flee.

That is to specify that while attempting to flee, the frightened creature can use spells or abilities if it make easier to flee. A panicked creature can't use them.

Shaken: A shaken character takes a –2 penalty on attack rolls, saving throws, skill checks, and ability checks. Shaken is a less severe state of fear than frightened or panicked.

No limitation about using spells or abilities. If the Frightened condition is caused by a spell, casting a spell would require a concentration check.

Affected by a non-damaging spell while casting DC of the spell + spell level

To put it another way: you are trying to apply the limitations of Panicked to a Frightened creature.

with perception -1/10 ft, -10 for battle, a 10 DC yields 200ft+. For most that's at least 3.5 full actions.

There are a lot of situational modifiers based on what/where is going on.

Absolutely. The terrain matters a lot. In an open field, you will run far, far away. In a typical maze, you would be unable to see the opponent after a single move action, and unable to hear it after a couple (a 1-foot-thick wall gives a -10 to the perception skill check). A maze probably will not have doors, but sound is still heavily attenuated when it travels through winding routes.

The Conditions aren't the only source of rules about fear and its different levels.

Fear

Fear

Source PRPG Core Rulebook pg. 564
Spells, magic items, and certain monsters can affect characters with fear. In most cases, the character makes a Will saving throw to resist this effect, and a failed roll means that the character is shaken, frightened, or panicked.

Shaken: Characters who are shaken take a –2 penalty on attack rolls, saving throws, skill checks, and ability checks.

Frightened: Characters who are frightened are shaken, and in addition they flee from the source of their fear as quickly as they can. They can choose the paths of their flight. Other than that stipulation, once they are out of sight (or hearing) of the source of their fear, they can act as they want. If the duration of their fear continues, however, characters can be forced to flee if the source of their fear presents itself again. Characters unable to flee can fight (though they are still shaken).

Panicked: Characters who are panicked are shaken, and they run away from the source of their fear as quickly as they can, dropping whatever they are holding. Other than running away from the source, their paths are random. They flee from all other dangers that confront them rather than facing those dangers. Once they are out of sight (or hearing) of any source of danger, they can act as they want. Panicked characters cower if they are prevented from fleeing.

Becoming Even More Fearful: Fear effects are cumulative. A shaken character who is made shaken again becomes frightened, and a shaken character who is made frightened becomes panicked instead. A frightened character who is made shaken or frightened becomes panicked instead.

So:

2) Bull rush and overrun: they can be used if you are Frightened (with the shaken penalty).
In my opinion, they can be used only if it is the only way to flee. The rules aren't meant to allow you to attack claiming that "you are running away in fear".

3)Taking normal actions after someone is out of the line of sight (or hearing) of the source of fear: Yes, you can take normal actions. You are still shaken.

The Conditions are a handy summary of the effect of fear, but the rules in the Combat section are more precise and complete.

Fear in Horror rules

We have the usual problem of imprecise terminology.
What is a creature native to X terrain?
I assume that what matters is what is listed under Environment in the creature entry in the Bestiary. Otherwise, we would have to speak of where the single creature was actually born, and a bear born into a zoo would be treated differently from one born into the wild.

Any is tricky, as it can be read as "has no favored terrain", but RAW, it means that the creature has all kinds of terrain as its favored terrain.
I would say that is how it works. If you fight a Human Skeleton, Environment any, you can apply your best favored terrain bonus.

Humans and elves don't have a Bestiary entry, and the race description doesn't have an Environment entry, so where have you found that they have an Environment of "any"?

When the only Environment listed has no corresponding favored terrain listing, you do the same thing you do if your available favored enemies do not apply to an opponent. You don't get any bonus.

Am I correct in reading the Varisian Tattoo feat only increases the caster level (which pertains to duration, range and damage) of the chosen school, and has no influence on the DC of those spells? To actually raise the DC, the player character would need Spell Focus, which is a separate feat.

You are correct; it doesn't increase DC and doesn't include the effect of Spell Focus.

The caster level of a spell affects a plethora of other things: concentration check, spell resistance, ability to resist counterpelling attempts made with Dispel Magic, and counterspelling attempts done with Dispel Magic (if the school of magic is Abjuration).
It even makes the spells in the selected school the first target for a dispelling attempt, as they have a higher caster level than the spells from different schools.

Probably I am forgetting some other interaction based on caster level that rarely happens. It is one of those things that need to be carefully tracked.

RAW, I think that a creature with 0 reach can't attack a grappler. But, again, RAW, a creature with 0 reach can't maintain a grapple, as the target is moved "to an adjacent open space", i.e., outside its reach.
As anyone who was owned by a cat can attest, a tiny creature is perfectly capable of grappling you and maintaining the grapple.

The rules are written for medium- or small-sized creatures that are humanoids, so they start to break when applied to monsters that fall outside those categories.

RAI, I think, is that creatures with 0 reach can attack.
RAW, they are capable of trying to reverse the grapple, and that is an attack, so I don't see any reason to limit their ability to attack the grappler.

I think that the reason for that FAQ is that Pathfinder tries to limit bookkeeping, so you aren't assumed to keep a note of when you acquired a feat.

I guess I'm trying to find the right wording, as a GM, to tell a player. Which I guess is something along the lines of "Your spell succeeded, but gives you no information," but that just sounds weird.

"You cast your spell at the man, but strangely are unable to divine anything."

I dunno.

"You don't get anything when trying to detect the person's thoughts/alignment/etc."

What do you say normally when a character uses Detect Evil, and there is no creature with a discernible Evil aura in the area of effect?

I generally say something like:
"You don't notice any evil aura."
There is no need to specify that the spell is working.

The Saving Throw rules section states the following:

PRPG Core Rulebook wrote:

Likewise, if a creature's saving throw succeeds against a targeted spell, you sense that the spell has failed. You do not sense when creatures succeed on saves against effect and area spells.

So that represents the norm. If a creature made its Will saving throw against, e.g., Detect Thoughts, you'd know it. Your character would know that creature was within the 60 ft. cone-shaped emanation of the spell, and would know what its Intelligence score was. Your character would know it made its saving throw, and that this was why he couldn't read its thoughts.

It is not a targeted spell; it is a cone-shaped emanation, so you don't know if some of the creatures have made the save, only that you are unable to read the surface thoughts of some of them.

The Ring of Mind Shielding says:
"The wearer is continually immune to detect thoughts, discern lies, and any attempt to magically discern her alignment."
I would interpret that as making you immune to all stages of the spells with multiple effects, like Detect Thoughts. The character casting the spell would not be able to detect the esistence of the shielded mind.

This seems obvious:

General Illusion rule:
"A character faced with proof that an illusion isn’t real needs no saving throw."

Also from the same rules section (indicating that shadow spells are an exception in that they are instead REAL):
"Shadow: A shadow spell creates something that is partially real from extradimensional energy. Such illusions can have real effects. Damage dealt by a shadow illusion is real."

Shadow spells produce real effects, unlike most illusion spells.

Mechanical Example: Simulacrums created by various Boss NPCs in the adventure paths cannot just be walked through/ignored because you know they are simulacrums.

And? You speak as if there was no difference between knowing if it is an illusion or not.

You know that the spell is an illusion, and you are subject to the effects that the illusion has when you make a save.

Simulacrum: Saving Throw none; Spell Resistance no nothing changge
Shadow Conjuration: Saving Throw Will disbelief (if interacted with); varies; see text; Spell Resistance yes; see text
A shadow creature has one-fifth the hit points of a normal creature of its kind (regardless of whether it's recognized as shadowy). It deals normal damage and has all normal abilities and weaknesses. Against a creature that recognizes it as a shadow creature, however, the shadow creature's damage is one-fifth (20%) normal, and all special abilities that do not deal lethal damage are only 20% likely to work. (Roll for each use and each affected character separately.) Furthermore, the shadow creature's AC bonuses are just one-fifth as large.

A creature that succeeds on its save sees the shadow conjurations as transparent images superimposed on vague, shadowy forms. Objects automatically succeed on their Will saves against this spell.
In this instance, when you know that the creature is an illusion, you suffer way less damage.

Polymorph Any Object is the name of the spell, not the description.

The description says:
"Target one creature, or one nonmagical object of up to 100 cu. ft./level"
giving separate permissions to target creatures and objects. It doesn't conflate them together.
Same thing for other parts of the description.

Diego Rossi wrote:

Theaitetos wrote:

...

It's a blatant category error.

By your logic, that rule applies only to Illusion without any subschool.

As zza ni pointed out, you need a specific rule that says that it doesn't apply to a subschool, and there isn't one.

I'm sorry that you're not able to comprehend what I said. Maybe I can give an easier example that allows you to grasp what is happening:

Suppose there is a game where you can win $100. In order to win you need to "prove that an apple is green".

Now somebody comes up to the game to participate and is handed a fruit. Then he manages to prove that this fruit is an apple.

Does he win the $100?

Action: Identifying a spell as it is being cast requires no action,

With a spellcraft check, you identify a spell. Do you agree?

It is a "no action" that you do when the spell is cast. Casting a spell is completed before it takes effect.

If you identify the spell, you know what it is.

School illusion (shadow) [shadow];

At this point, you know that the spell is Shadow Conjuration and is an Illusion. Irrefutable proof that the effect of the spell is an Illusion.

As already said:

A character faced with proof that an illusion isn’t real needs no saving throw.

So, what is your argument?

Companion Archetypes

Name: Precocious Companion
Replaces: Evasion; Improved Evasion; 4th or 7th-level Advancement

Summary: Precocious companions are able to learn far more tricks than other companions; this ability to learn allows their masters to use them for a wider variety of tasks.

4th-Level Advancement: Size Large; AC +2 natural armor; Attack bite (1d6), 2 claws (1d6); Ability Scores Str +8, Dex -2, Con +4.

With the table clarification (thanks, Azothath), you lose everything that is after "4th-Level Advancement:" and replace it with "+2 bonus to its Intelligence score and a +4 bonus to its Wisdom and Charisma scores."

Precocious Companion

Linkified.

It seems one of those pieces of the rules where someone has used the jargon spoken at his gaming table and used it for a general rule.

There is no "listed score advancement" in the rules. There is this:

Animal Choices
Each animal companion has different starting sizes, speed, attacks, ability scores, and special qualities. All animal attacks are made using the creature’s full base attack bonus unless otherwise noted. Animal attacks add the animal’s Strength modif ier to the damage roll, unless it is its only attack, in which case it adds 1-1/2 its Strength modifier. Some have special abilities, such as scent. See Appendix 1 for more information on these abilities.
As you gain levels, your animal companion improves as well, usually at 4th or 7th level, in addition to the standard bonuses noted on Table 3–8. Instead of taking the listed benefit at 4th or 7th level, you can instead choose to increase the companion’s Dexterity and Constitution by 2.
The animal companions listed here are by no means the only ones available—additional animal companion types can be found in the Pathfinder RPG Bestiary. Some of the special attacks and qualities possessed by animals are covered in more detail there as well.

and

4th 4 +3 +4 +4 +1 4 2 +2 +1 2 Ability score increase

The RAI seems to be that you replace the listed benefit you would normally get at level 4th or 7th with +2 bonus to its Intelligence score and a +4 bonus to its Wisdom and Charisma scores. That would replace all the listed benefit, as the ability replaces what it changes.

On the other hand, it says "This replaces the 4th- or 7th-level ability score advancement." The only thing called something similar is the Ability score increase at level 4th. But exchanging a +1 to a selected ability with a total of +10 to mental abilities is extremely questionable.

I would go with the supposed RAI.

Balance wise, consider that, in the CRB rules, when you take the alternate choice for the listed benefits, you replace all the benefits, not only the ability scores increases.

The Drow Sorcerer Favored class bonus has an effect: "Add one spell known from the sorcerer spell list. This spell must have the curse, evil, or pain descriptor, and be at least one level below the highest spell level the sorcerer can cast."
You argue that the effect is different.

A sorcerer has a specific number of spells known; those that she gets beyond that number are allowed under the rules that make them available.

You are arguing that a limitation that must be applied when you take an ability doesn't matter anymore after you have taken it.
Pathfinder rules don't work that way.
Power Attack is a classic example: if your strength is reduced (because of age, strength drain, or other effects), you lose access to the feat

The Drow Sorcerer racial FCB has a limitation: you get an extra known spell if it has the curse, evil, or pain descriptor.
If, after swapping a known spell, you don't have at least as many known spells of that level with the curse, evil, or pain descriptor as you have gained with the racial FCB you don't meet the condition for getting the extra spell slots. Consequently, your build is invalid, and you need to revert to the previous situation where your build was valid.

My only suggestion is to add the paragraph that was missed in the move from the SRD to Pathfinder.

A controlled creature can be commanded to perform a service for you. Such services fall into two categories: immediate tasks and contractual service. Fighting for you in a single battle or taking any other actions that can be accomplished within 1 round per caster level counts as an immediate task; you need not make any agreement or pay any reward for the creature’s help. The creature departs at the end of the spell.

I suppose it is a typo that was never corrected because it would have changed the formatting of more than half of the Spell section of the rulebook, and few people reach the level where it becomes relevant.

I assume you mean using the sorcerer ability to swap spells when he gets a new level to swap a curse spell for a general one, not swapping the Drow FCB for the human FCB.

Upon reaching 4th level, and at every even-numbered sorcerer level after that (6th, 8th, and so on), a sorcerer can choose to learn a new spell in place of one she already knows. In effect, the sorcerer loses the old spell in exchange for the new one. The new spell's level must be the same as that of the spell being exchanged. A sorcerer may swap only a single spell at any given level, and must choose whether or not to swap the spell at the same time that she gains new spells known for the level.

Spells obtained from a racial favored class bonus are spells obtained from a racial favored class bonus, so they are always subject to the rules of that FCB. Swapping a spell received by a FCB will change that rule to:

Upon reaching 4th level, and at every even-numbered sorcerer level after that (6th, 8th, and so on), a sorcerer can choose to learn a new spell obtained through his racial FCB in place of one obtained through his racial FCB she already knows. In effect, the sorcerer loses the old spell obtained through his racial FCB in exchange for the new one. The new spell's level must be the same as that of the spell being exchanged and should be one that can be obtained through his racial FCB. A sorcerer may swap only a single spell at any given level, and must choose whether or not to swap the spell at the same time that she gains new spells known for the level.

Pleroma
Linkified.

it say:

By concentrating, the pleroma can control this sphere,

Concentrating is a standard action.

It is not spelled clearly when you need to concentrate to change what something does, but it is in the magical rules:

Concentration: The spell lasts as long as you concentrate on it. Concentrating to maintain a spell is a standard action that does not provoke attacks of opportunity. Anything that could break your concentration when casting a spell can also break your concentration while you’re maintaining one, causing the spell to end. See concentration on page 206.

You can’t cast a spell while concentrating on another one. Some spells last for a short time after you cease concentrating.

In this instance, you don't need to concentrate to maintain a spell, but you need to concentrate to control the sphere.

I don't think that the white Sphere of Creation is meant as an attack; it is more a story tool, with an effect that comes into play if a PC or NPC is dumb enough to poke his nose in the sphere to see what it does, or against helpless opponents.
It can still be fairly powerful if the Pleroma has opponents adjacent to them.
A DC 30 Fortitude check isn't generally that hard for melee combatants at the levels in which you normally fight CR 20 creatures, but can still be dangerous.

The spell: Gate

Maybe I am missing something, but from what I read:

1) Calling a creature is an Instantaneous effect; it doesn't have a duration.

2) The control doesn't have a duration; it seems to be "a reasonable service." There aren't rules about what you can ask, but there are rules for a "longer or more involved form of service".

The spell lacks D20 SRD/3.5 paragraph:

A controlled creature can be commanded to perform a service for you. Such services fall into two categories: immediate tasks and contractual service. Fighting for you in a single battle or taking any other actions that can be accomplished within 1 round per caster level counts as an immediate task; you need not make any agreement or pay any reward for the creature’s help. The creature departs at the end of the spell.

Without that paragraph, we don't know what a controlled creature will do.

Considering the above, including the missing paragraph, if you are asking for an "immediate task", the spell is an instantaneous effect and what matters is your caster level at the time of the casting.

If you ask for a "longer or more involved form of service", you need to offer a fair price, so your ability to control the creature doesn't matter anymore. What matters is agreeing on a fair payment (and paying it when the job is done).

Diego Rossi wrote:

Maybe you need to re-read the Illusion school rules: Illusion

Can you read properly though? If so, then spotting the difference in between your claim and the rules should be easy:

Actual Rules wrote:

A character faced with proof that an illusion isn’t real needs no saving throw.

Diego wrote:

Making a spellcasting skill check and recognizing the spell that was cast as Shadow Conjuration is clear proof that the spell is an illusion

It's a blatant category error.

By your logic, that rule applies only to Illusion without any subschool.

As zza ni pointed out, you need a specific rule that says that it doesn't apply to a subschool, and there isn't one.

Martials can happily dip. A fighter might have a level of cleric (will save, spells, scrolls, wands, +10 move for Travel domain), a level of barbarian (skills, reflex, +10 move, rage), a level of bloodrager (spells, scrolls, wands, +10 move) and be fast like a monk on the battlefield for the loss of 1 BAB, as well as much more versatile when not hitting things.

It can kinda work for 4- and 6-casters, but for 9-casters it's probably for character concept rather than utility. It depends on whether the campaign expects powergaming.

For your happy dip, maybe Inquisitor is better than cleric. You get fewer spells, but more skill points and more class skills.

@ Mysterious Stranger

I agree with you. But why do so many players swear by a one level dip into a martial class when playing a divine caster? They are attracted by the apparent benefits not realising it does not work as well as it appears?

One of the benefits is the +2 to the fortitude save, but that matters mostly for arcane casters, not divine ones.

For full spellcasters, a one-level dip generally is a disadvantage, unless you want to get some prestige class with specific benefits.

zza ni wrote:

truly fortunately they are still under illusion school rules, which I stated above, even if they can deal damage. they can be still be saved against, i never said: 'null the entire spell effect', i said they get auto save, which is per the illusion school rules. In some cases, shadow magic included, this might mean less damage in some it will mean total nullification. each spell has it's own rules as to how a save works, but ALL illusion magic have the rule that a target that has a proof that the spell is an illusion need no saving throw to save against it (unless specifically called out in a spell, as per general vs specific).

as for 'no proof what so ever', if you know the target is casting 'greater shadow conjuration' (as per a successful spellcraft check to identify a spell being cast), then you know he casts an illusion. what more proof do you need?

general illusion school magic rule: if you know it's an illusion, you don't need to roll to save , you automatically save.

No, this is absolutely against the rules.

Specific beats General.

Shadow is a subschool of the Illusion school, and thus more specific.

You use the rules of the Illusion school only up to the point where the Shadow subschool says something different.

You only get the saves that the spell says it does, usually a Will save and then any additional saves by the mimicked spell itself. You do not automatically save without a roll just because it is an illusion (shadow) spell.

Everything else is a flat out lie, and violates the rules both in letter and in spirit.

Maybe you need to re-read the Illusion school rules: Illusion

At the end of the paragraph, so it applies to all the subschools above:

Saving Throws and Illusions (Disbelief ): Creatures encountering an illusion usually do not receive saving throws to recognize it as illusory until they study it carefully or interact with it in some fashion.
A successful saving throw against an illusion reveals it to be false, but a figment or phantasm remains as a translucent outline.
A failed saving throw indicates that a character fails to notice something is amiss. A character faced with proof that an illusion isn’t real needs no saving throw.
If any viewer successfully disbelieves an illusion and communicates this fact to others, each such viewer gains a saving throw with a +4 bonus.

Making a spellcasting skill check and recognizing the spell that was cast as Shadow Conjuration is clear proof that the spell is an illusion, with no need for a save.

Commentary-

Diego, yes, I always read posts several times before responding to make sure I understand what triggered my leagalese "spidey sense" on the first read.
Unfortunately you left out the Prerequisite: Caster Level N for the Magic Item Crafting feats which are only available to casters and why Master Craftsman exists... I prefer links to RAW so I do not have to type out RAW and introduce a mistake.
The optional skill (for magic item crafting) gives casters AND non-casters via Master Craftsman an option (to let us say Craft(baskets)). Which is a Good Thing™.
Unfortunately your first paragraph did not say "magic sword", just sword which is a mundane item. Then you say "... you need an applicable skill" which is in fact optional unless you are crafting a mundane (masterwork) item, enforcing that you are mixing mundane and magic crafting. Adding "I fail to see how..." just draws my attention. So likely it is what you said and how I read it versus what you meant to say. That confusion in interpretation isn't uncommon.

Still, PCs only get so many feats and skill points. So it is about committing character development to magic item crafting and some leveraging of WBL.
I wanted to emphasize that RAW directs players to only need 1(Master Craftsman)+3(magic item crafting) feats rather than a pairing of of 3+3 which is feat overtaxing.

My last comment just shows that we view the game differently and different people enjoy different aspects.

1) I stand corrected; I should have used "enchanting a magic sword".

2) Jason Bulmahn about Master Craftsman.
A "story mechanism", not "more dakka".

3) To me, using Craft (Basket Weaving) to enchant a sword seems the opposite of thematic, unless you are using a rattan sword rattan carpet beater.

I want to add that the Master Craftsman with the magic item crafting feat just lets you make >MAGIC< items, not the masterwork item that you are magically enhancing. You are confusing the two.

Have you read my post and the citations?

Magic Item Creation

To create magic items, spellcasters use special feats which allow them to invest time and money in an item’s creation. At the end of this process, the spellcaster must make a single skill check (usually Spellcraft, but sometimes another skill) to finish the item. If an item type has multiple possible skills, you choose which skill to make the check with.

...

Creating Magic Armor
Item Creation Feat Required: Craft Magic Arms and Armor. Skill Used in Creation: Spellcraft or Craft (armor).

...

Creating Magic Weapons
Item Creation Feat Required: Craft Magic Arms and Armor.
Skill Used in Creation: Spellcraft, Craft (bows) (for magic bows and arrows), or Craft (weapons) (for all other weapons).

...

Creating Wondrous Items
Item Creation Feat Required: Craft Wondrous Item.
Skill Used in Creation: Spellcraft or an applicable Craft or Profession skill check.

I fail to see how someone can seriously argue that it is possible to use Master Craftsman and Craft Magic Arms and Armor together to Craft (basket weaving) to craft a sword. The rules explicitly say that you need Craft (weapons).

Craft Wondrous Item is where the rules are at their vaguest, but it is still reasonably clear: you need to use an applicable skill.
So Craft (blacksmithing) can't be used to make a magic carpet, but Craft (basket weaving) can be used to make a pannier of holding (this kind of item: gerla).

Yes, you use two feats to make way less than a spellcaster, but you are making magical items without being a spellcaster.
No one forced you to go down that route.
If it is something you really want, the cost is acceptable.
If you want a way to be more powerful, this isn't the route, and trying to bend the rules will only harm your enjoyment of the game.

About the only time I really have issues with shadow conjuration is when its used to create a 'negative' or non-material thing. For instance, a shadow conjured create pit or something. A pit may be an 'object', but it's really a lack of something in the space. Despite being 20% real... it's likely (GM's call) not really only 20% as deep as a 'real' pit. And someone falling in shouldn't take 20% less damage... since falling isn't part of the spell... it's falling. Certainly two people falling into it wouldn't have one fail and fall 60 feet down and the other stop 20% down because they pass. So I find that use to be a bit overpowered than intended, but it's one spell (yes,create pit is a line of spells, but the other pits have actual, direct damaging effects that would be reduced by 20% on a save, but not the baseline falling part).

Interesting example.

To be able to cast greater shadow conjuration a sorcerer has to be at least 14th level. The material component is only 10 GP. At that level the cost is not even worth mentioning. Since it is not a matter of cost this is obviously an attempt by the GM to weaken the spell.

10 gp is more than what is allowed by Eskew materials, or for free by a spell pouch, so it is a component that should be tracked, as all costly components.

It is a vial, so an ounce of liquid (vial), 1/16 of a pound. You can't truck around an infinite number of them, and you must remember to replenish them after you use them.

That said, the consensus is that my ruling was wrong, and I agree.

If Diego Rossi does not like the spell, he should simply ban the spells, instead trying to twist the rules to nerf the spell.

Maybe in a future campaign.

You are ignoring pedantic RAW (rather uncharacteristic for you) and the existing Game Balance in the spell.

What I use in a home game and my answers on RAW in the Rule Forum are two very different beasts.

I asked because, in this instance, I am not convinced of the RAW of my interpretation of the rules.

There is the added problem that I don't like shadow conjuration, greater, in the hand of a sorcerer, so I am biased. A sorcerer gets something like access to sixty spells by learning one. Plenty aren't particularly useful, but it is a big injection of versatility.

The chance of making the will save is almost meaningless in this scenario; the targets were a bunch of Graveknights, and they would have saved only with a nat 20, or a roll of 18+ if aware it was an illusion, and still would have received 60% of the rolled damage (Undead aren't immune to Illusions unless they are mind-affecting).

During today's playing session, the Sorcerer did want to use Shadow Conjuration, Greater to cast Acidic Spray, which has a costly material component (a vial of acid worth 10 gp).

My ruling was that he needs to have the specific components, as the spells say that you are mimicking another spell.

Limited Wish has that requirement, but it is written in the text of the spell, while Shadow Conjuration doesn't have it.

What do you think?
I missed a relevant piece of the rules?

so there is no template for clockwork base then, its just the subtype?

I haven't found one in the Archive of Nethys, and that is the official online source for Pathfinder.

1) The Clocksmith wizard gets Craft Construct.

2)

Crafting and Bypassing Requirements: What crafting requirements can you bypass by adding +5 to the DC of your Spellcraft check?

As presented on page 549 of the Core Rulebook, there are no limitations other than (1) you have to have the item creation feat, and (2) you cannot create potions, spell-trigger, or spell-completion magic items without meeting their spell prerequisites. So racial requirements, specific spell requirements, math requirements (such as "caster level must be at least three times the enhancement bonus"), and so on, are all subject to the +5 DC rule.

Minimum caster level for the crator can be bypassed by increasing the DC.

3) Clockwork is a construct subtype from the Bestiaries; Steam-Powered Construct is a template from the Contuct Handbook. I doubt they were meant to work together.

4) I don't see "The caster level of the clockwork creature’s creator is 10th or the CR of the clockwork creature -1, whichever is higher (minimum 1st)." in either the template or the subtype, and a search in Archives of Nethys doesn't find a match. What is the source?

→ Carry Companion:T2

"transformed into a figurine of stone", aka object, so technically spells that don't target an object will end/expire. Other spell durations carry on as normal and likely expire if it stays in statue form for hours.

Spells don't expire because the nature of the target changes after they have been cast. The nature of the target matters only when the spell is cast.

The spell duration for all spells carries on normally, so they expire normally.

Fiery Shuriken:C2 {one of those mixed iterative attacks} it depends (LoL).

Fiery Shuriken isn't an iterative attack (one of those terms that isn't officially defined in the Core Rulebook, but that has been introduced in official replies, FAQs, and successive rulebooks). It is a specific number of attacks that can be spread over multiple rounds. There are several spells with that kind of mechanic.

An iterative attack happens when your BAB is high enough to allow subsequent attacks at -5/-10/-15 to hit in the same round.
When a spell allows you to make iterative attacks (as an example Spiritual Weapon), the applicable damage bonus is applied to each attack, not only to one of them.

N.B.: as Pizza Lord pointed out, Spiritual Weapon attack as a spell, not as a weapon, so it will benefit from effects that affect spells, not weapons.

ARG did get a second printing, in August 2015.

Thanks, I hadn't downloaded the updated version.

Something I have never quite understood about the ARG:

A species is X RP (35 for the Drider, in the OP's example). Great, but what does that actual do? Is it a cost to be paid somewhow? If so, how? If not, what earthly use is it?

The ARG is a tool for the GM, not for the player.

You need to factor the race-based HD too, something that the ARG doesn't consider.

The core races are worth 9-10 RP, but I would take a member of a core race with 5 or 9 levels in a class instead of a Bestiary gargoyle (5 HD) or drider (9 HD) any day of the week, unless we are playing some special one-shot.

If you are GMing a "monstrous" campaign, you can use the RP value of races as an indication of the adjustments that could be appropriate to apply to characters from different races.

*Bracers of Armor +4 costs about the same as 1,000 hours of CL 1 Wand castings, which sounds like a lot to an adventurer who might only use two hours per dungeon session but it's only 125 '8 hour work shifts' when you might or might not need the protection.

That is a common problem with the pricing of magic items.

The Staff of Power shows the same kind of trend, with an inflated price.
On the other hand, it can cast Continual flame without consuming a costly component (but recharging the staff requires a 5th-level spell).
"Technically", the staff can pay itself in 12 years, 6 months, and 20 days of constant use simply by replacing the need for the component. ;-)
A level 9 wizard has better ways to make money, but it shows some of the absurdities of the game economy. All is calculated around the adventuring party's interests, not as some kind of semi-realistic economy.

BTW, a custom magic item that casts Continual Flame 5 times a day would cost 4.300 gp and repay itself in less than 18 days. Everburning Torches would cover practically all streets of even medium cities.

As I recall, one of the Spelljammer adventures featured a massive star empire where the Staff of Power was (literally) standard issue for their mages, who would typically be drained of their prepared spells by their spelljamming helms and would therefore have to rely on their staffs when fighting. Obviously, this was before magic items had prices.

Considering that a pelljamming helm was a lesser artifact, the pilot having another lesser artifact for fighting isn't that surprising.

The staves' utility increases if you are a spontaneous spellcaster, but the price is still problematic. It is a problem several items share: who will buy Bracers of Armor from +1 to +4 when a wand or a firsa-level Pearl of Power does the same job at a lower cost or with better utility?

I'll admit raising the DC is good, but we find that most things pass saving throws far too often as is, and we've already experimented with raising all DCs to the highest DC a character has - and so far it hasn't seemed to increase the fail rate enough. We're beginning to think that DC's need to be increased even more to have a failure rate over 10-20%

Are your targets NPCs with character levels or monsters?

As with all these kinds of modular systems, it has a serious problem if the player wants to make an unbalanced creature. As long as the GM is in control and there is a gentleman's agreement about what people want to make, it is workable.

Considering that they were introduced with the specific archetypes and not as a separate list, I don't think so, unless your character has the required archetype.

If the question is from a home game, I think that the creatures that are actually animals, as defined by the game (so, no Aboleth or Fly, and so on), could be allowed without problems.

Note how you can get access to some of them from different archetypes (crab, octopus, turtle, shark).
The octopus has different bonuses depending on the archetype:

Octopus (Blood of the Sea pg. 22) [Aquatic Beastmaster]: The creature gains a +4 competence bonus on Swim checks and a +2 competence bonus on grapple combat maneuver checks. These bonuses increase to +6 and +4, respectively, at 8th level and to +8 and +6 at 15th level.

Octopus (Ultimate Intrigue pg. 64) [Courtly Hunter]: The creature gains a +4 competence bonus on Escape Artist checks. This bonus increases to +6 at 8th level and +8 at 15th level.

I see that as an indirect confirmation that the archetype is what determines if you have access to a specific totem beast in the "Specific Archetypes Only" section on AoN.

Threatened Squares: You threaten all squares into which you can make a melee attack, even when it is not your turn.

As usual, it is not technical language, so, for this question, it can be read two ways:

Personally, I use the first interpretation. If you are prevented from potentially making attacks during your turn, you can't make attacks of opportunity (unless whatever stopped your ability to attack says something different).

Benefit: If you are able to use your rend ability on the same turn that you also succeed at a bite attack,

As written, it is not applied after bite damage; it is applied after a successful bite attack, i.e. after the attack hits.

Mighty Bite requires that the rend deal damage, but Great Rend doesn't have that requirement.

Mighty Bite has several problems:
- as written, the increased critical threat range applies to the bite, regardless of who or what is the target of the attack, not only against the creature that was damaged by the rend attack.
The "fluff" implies the opposite: "Your rending claws expose your opponent’s vital organs to your teeth." but the actual rule doesn't apply any limitation;
- normally, people don't roll the claw attacks, then the rend damage, see if it deals damage (that guy is an invulnerable rager, has DR X/magic, has Stoneskin?), and then roll the bite damage. It is a "great way" to spend 10 minutes on the attack routine of a single troll;
- it triples the threat range of the bite. That is on par with Weapon Mastery, the capstone ability of a Fighter. At the cost of a single feat.

.

For instance, you can grapple a fire elemental without getting burned.

Creatures that hit a burning creature with natural weapons or unarmed attacks take fire damage as though hit by the burning creature and must succeed at a Reflex save to avoid catching on fire.

While it is not RAW, I would say that burn affects those grappling with a fire elemental.

Same thing for the light. RAW, a fire elemental has no ability that makes it give off any light.
It can even benefit from invisibility or use stealth in a dark room ...

Rule of Logic implies that most combat maneuvers are equivalent to an unarmed attack and that a burning creature emits light, simply those things have never been codified in the rules because they seem self-evident.

Still RAW, a creature with the Burn ability cannot start a fire because Burn affects creatures, not items.

So, I would go with touch AC of wielder + size bonus of object targeted + cover bonus, if appropriate. Of course, trying to remember any penalties the ranged attack may have (e.g. -4 into melee without precise shot).

That is, more or less, what I was thinking of using.

in basic PF1 there is no mechanic for "called shots". With touch spells if you hit the shield you hit the person, there's no differentiation.

True, but it starts to break down when you have a spell that targets objects and has no official rules of what happens when you target an attended object.

I am thinking of adding a save for magical objects, with the object base values, not those of the character wearing/using it, plus the magical bonuses active on the character.

The question was born by a PC using an empowered Eroding ray on an altar of Urghatoa while a lich was empowering the weapons of a group of gravewknigths and us thinking what would have happened if he had targeted the graveknights armor.

Thanks for the answers.

Eroding Ray

Source Plane-Hopper's Handbook pg. 30
School transmutation; Level arcanist 2, cleric 2, druid 2, hunter 2, oracle 2, sorcerer 2, warpriest 2, wizard 2
Casting
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S
Effect
Range close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels)
Effect ray
Duration instantaneous
Saving Throw none; Spell Resistance no
Description
You channel a fraction of the tumultuous ecosystem of the Hao Jin Tapestry and redirect it through your hands as a beam of deteriorating energy. You can fire one ray, plus one additional ray for every 4 levels beyond 3rd (to a maximum of three rays at 11th level). Each ray requires a ranged touch attack to hit and can target only a construct or an object. If a ray hits, the target begins to crumble, taking 2d6 points of damage. This damage ignores hardness and damage reduction.

If the caster targets an attended item, like a wielded weapon, what is the target AC?

As the attack has no save and no limitation on what can be damaged, destroying magical items with few hit points (like cloaks, belts, etc.) would be easy.
With the Maximize or Empower metamagic and a few rays, even metallic weapons and armors would be at risk.

Their DM here. How the player had been running it was doing an active Raging Song as a standard(now a move thanks to levelling) then stopping immediately to let Lingering song carry it while only using 1 round of rage song.

There is no need to "stop" a song to benefit from Lingering song. The bard simply chose not to maintain it at the start of his next round.

Lingering Performance

Source Advanced Player's Guide pg. 164
The effects of your bardic performance carry on, even after you have stopped performing.

Prerequisites: Bardic performance class feature.

Benefit: The bonuses and penalties from your bardic performance continue for 2 rounds after you cease performing. Any other requirement, such as range or specific conditions, must still be met for the effect to continue. If you begin a new bardic performance during this time, the effects of the previous performance immediately cease.

RAW, Lingering performance trumps the limitation on the Skald Rage song, as it is a specific ability granted by a feat. Those can go against the general rule of the ability they modify.

There is the awkward part where it affects the character choice, too. If he accepts the Rage song buff, it lasts 3 rounds, without the chance to change his choice.

The best option seems to be to consider the intent of the feat, not the wording. The performance linger, not its effect on people. If we do that, the effect ends at the end of a character's turn, and the next turn, if the skald is still performing or Lingering performance is in effect, he gets to choose again.

Personally, I think it is better to allow Weapon Song effect to last till the next round of the affected character (unless the Skald switches songs), as changing weapon abilities and properties every time a character stat and end a turn is a bit of a hassle.

but for paralyzed and pinned we have explicit permission of mental actions.

And that is my problem. We have explicit permission for some of the conditions that make someone helpless, not for all.

In this particular situation, the witch should be able to take mental actions, but I was wondering whether you knew of a blanket permission to do so.