Dirkfreemont's page

Critical feats. End of story if you are wondering which is better at high level. you must remember that using a falchion over falcata gives 15-20 crit range instead of 17-20. Doesn't crit as hard but it crits more often. This is a big deal. Also remember that when using a falchion over falcata you have the extra crit range from 15-16, and also an extra feat, (since you didn't waste one taking EWP). So from my perspective any class that isn't a fighter is really gimping themselves by taking EWP falcata, cause thats a feat you could spend elsewhere, and its really gimping you even if you are a fighter. I'd take Falchion even if falcata didn't cost an extra much needed feat.

...well, yeah. I mean that's what I just said, as written it goes off wisdom, and I'm thinking the intent may have been to tie it to the main casting stat - cha. I just want someone from paizo to say "nope, sorry bud, RAW is RAW", or "yes we meant for the sacred servant's domain powers to be based off of charisma but didn't feel the need to say so specifically since they cast spells based off of charisma and we didn't think this would even be questioned because our intent is obvious, oops." The reason is that I want my next society character to be a sacred servant, and I was sent here from the PFS faq. The domain (charm, love) that fits my character will be a terrible choice if this stays RAW with no other ruling, as would many of the domains. If it is written exactly how it was intended to be used, and domains are always tied to wisdom even if employed by a paladin, then I basically just want someone to say so, because I feel this is a valid question.

I asked this question a day or two ago and didn't get an answer locked down so I'll ask in more general terms. If a paladin picks up a domain through the sacred servant variant in the APG do his #of times per day for his domain powers now go off of charisma instead of wisdom since his spellcasting is tied to this stat? What about DC's of domain powers that require saves, Cha or Wis? I think there is a chance that the intent of the developers was to tie this to the sacred servants main casting stat (cha) but RAW this doesn't seem to be the case.

My apologies, as I think about it this would be answered for society if it were answered in the general forum. I'll post there.

Can't get a clear answer for this one and was hoping to get an official ruling for PFS play. Does a Sacred Servant Paladin use Charisma to determine the #of uses per day of any Domain Powers he gains through this class variant? (essentially switching whenever it says "usable a # of times per day equal to 3+ the cleric's Wis modifier" to say "3+ the paladin's Cha modifier".) Pretty much everyone I've talked to on the message boards has thought that this would be a reasonable interpretation for home games but that there has been no ruling for society play.

I found a loophole! If I stay in town all day, every day, and make dayjob rolls forever I can have infinite money at level 1. In KODT there was a pretty funny example kind of like this. Brian captures a couple of baby owlbears and raises them in captivity and then breeds them. He does this over and over until he has tons of owlbears in cages and then goes back through and stabs each one through the bars until they die and demands xp for the monsters killed. You can always sit in town and make money until the dm gets bored and tosses grudge monsters at you.

If there were a problem with having to take it at level one you could always go human and take the variant that lets you drop your extra human feat for a +2 to any one of your animal companion's stats. throw that on int for your first companion and you have 4 int, letting you take the feat. Later on, if this companion dies he could heirloom it to your next ape that puts his +2 on str and uses his 4th level ability bump on int. Just wanted to point out that there was a way around it anyways. As far as ranks in linguistics I think you should have to have a higher int than 3 to learn languages, and at the very least, you shouldnt know how to write on the chalkboard from this. There are ways around this too of course...

Recently my players and me discussed about exotic weapons.We took a look at the stats of the APG Falcata (d8, 19-20/x3 1H). The discussion raised after seeing a PC using it two-handed.

The weapon always felt "wrong" because of its stats, and we observed how progressively every PC at the table able to spend a feat on it will do it. It's clearly superior to every other sword.

Some of my player suggested to houserule it as "one handed only", mostly because the weapon is actually a big help for S&B and for two-weapon fighters (and because of the shape of the grip, so there is a fluff reason too).

Other players said that more weapons like falcata should exist because most exotics are lame. In the same book, take a look at the boomerang.

I'm somewhat in the middle (I think that the weapon is maybe too strong, but spend a feat to switch from a d8 to a d10 is weird - things like reach or bonus to maneuvers should be added to exotic weapons, when proper, to justify the feat).

What do you think?

It's pretty good, but I don't know about "every player should spend a feat to get it". I do agree that there should be better exotic weapons out there, seems to me that the only reason to spend a feat on a special weapon is roleplaying reasons right now.

Thks king, thats what I was hoping for.

In the APG there is a replacement half orc trait that gives a bite attack in trade for the half orcs ferocity ability. It says It does a d4 and is primary. My question is do you apply strength to this roll? The razortusk feat lets you add half strength if used as a secondary attack with a full attack action. Seems to me this is the intent, to be treated as a secondary attack if used with a full attack and also it seems i should be getting full strength as a primary and half str as a secondary attack. Was thinking about a half orc paladin that gets an extra attack that adds paladin level to damage while smiting, but dont want to spend a feat picking up razortusk. Ferocity isnt needed it seems since I'll get the 1st level spell that allows you to use lay on hands if you drop below zero hp as an immediate action. Oh and I know half orc paladins are rare, but they do exist.

I am...are you? My OP has 2 parts. In one I address an issue wherein a player can triple die bump his weapon damage. In the second part I iterate my concern that a melee fighter using a shield as a weapon can also gain all the defensive benefits with the cost of one feat. These 2 items IMO makes Sword and Board the most viable melee class option. Shield Bash plus spikes makes that Shield both a weapon and a defensive device, something that NO other melee build can do.

I have more of a problem with the second part than I do the first part. I have 2 melee classes in my current campaign one sword and board and one is a 2 Hand wielder. Even thou I allow the 2H build player to take a Goliath and allowed him to monkey grip a Goliath great hammer his toon has dropped below 0 hp on 4 separate occasions whereas the Sword and Board player leaves most fights almost unscratched. SO far I haven't seen any major difference in damage output for either player, they are about the same.

IMO Shields should not be relegated to "just another weapon" that just happens to provide defense. I remember a great article in Dragon years ago from Len Lakofka wherein he created a simple system where fighters used their shields to parry attacks. Isn't that basically what they are for?

Shield Bash feat pound for pound the best single combat feat, it seems clear the focus for melee class builds is Sword and Board

Shields dont have a very good crit range for one thing. gimme a 18-20 weapon that has keen or the crit feat anyday. also there is a weapon magic ability called defending where you give up attack for a shield bonus to defense, kinda like the shield bash feat chain but without spending the actual feats. using a scimitar and holding a shield while using armor spikes as your off hand weapon also seems to me like a superior choice to what you are suggesting is the ultimate build for fighters. At any rate, you are complaining about an extra d6 of damage which I'm still not convinced he should even be getting, but a d6? really? If you think a d6 is going to break the game then I'd say just keep playing, with more perspective you'll see that it's nothing. Oh and use magic device can give you a +4 to shield via the shield spell. 50 charges for 750 gold, one minute each. Also keep playing, AC matters less the more levels you progress through, especially if you are spending your feats learning to shield bash instead of beefing more ac.

So the problem is that you don't want characters to do what they are supposed to, or at least you don't want them to do it well? I think I see the problem. You and your group don't see the danger in making crappy characters. Its fine at level 1, 2, even 6, 7, or 8, but when you hit level 11 or 12 and your barb started out with 14 strength, or your wizard started off with 13 int (because it somehow makes you a better roleplayer to have crumby stats, and a bad roleplayer to have good stats where it counts -this makes no sense to me-) you start hitting monsters that you just can't handle because your whole party sucks. In my opinion the only reason to play this game is for the roleplaying part of it, but the combat is vital to the fun factor for any reasonable dork. Good roleplayers play their characters well, and realize that not all PC's are created equal. Say it with me-- NOT ALL PC'S ARE CREATED EQUAL. Once everyone gets this idea, and they either decide to make effective combat characters and roleplay on top of it, or say "to each his own, I'm making a crappy character, its kinda my thing, and its ok that im going to be outshined in every combat, because i love my character" your game with run much more smoothly. If someone wants to make a character that can kill monsters and not die, that really needs to be ok. When the game devs make monsters they dont make them for poorly made characters, they make monsters that destroy average village folk. This is where the heros come in. In my eyes, you have to let folks make characters that can deal with monsters, cause well, they are after all monster hunters. The answer to your game problem seems to be tell them all to make commoners, and no stat can go above 12. All of them should be pretty even and die fairly quickly, since this is the objective it seems.

The continuation of this thread is a joke. Anyone thinking about actually justifying this spell into a magic item in any way shape or form is just asking far too much. If it was about making a wand of truestrike well ok, maybe- maybe not, carry on then. No offense to the OP, I'd ask too if it came up in a game I was running, plus I'm always asking questions that turn out to have the answer be a resounding "no!" on these messageboards. If Sean replies to my thread and answers my question though, I think I'll just trust him. It's happened before when I wanted the rules to grant me too much power. Lets kill the thread, we have our answer folks. (plus just think about it, Truestrike? really? Far too much power to the player here, that's why you all want it so badly.)

Can a rage power such as knockback be used if someone casts the rage spell on the barbarian and he doesn't use his actual rage? How about clarity of mind? I know the furious weapon enchant out of APG works with the spell but didn't see anything in the spell description indicating either way as far as rage feats/ powers. Anyone have a link to where this is covered on the messageboards?

Hmm, seems like an "oops" to me...

I take it back now that I think about it, re-read all the posts here and for regular play it seems like you should be able to find some wizard to enchant your specific magic item in question for *1.5 the cost, just like non-specific items.

Try thinking of it this way: Cleric of the war domain gets to use the Weapon Master (lets pretend the cleric has 19 dex just for the fun of it) ability and today he uses this ability to give him TWF for a # of rounds = to his cleric level. He also levels up today, hurray! He says "I'm taking Improved TWF". He has BAB of +6 because he's 9th level. I would suggest that in fact no, he cannot take this feat because he does not meet the prerequisite of TWF that you need to qualify for Imp. TWF, even though he has used TWF for 8 rounds today temporarily. I'm sorry to have to argue with such weak evidence here, I normally hold to the idea that convictions make convicts, but I'm just right on this one, and I'm not budging. You need a permanent bonus to qualify for a feat, not a temp one.

Whether I encounter an antimagic field or not, I like to know what would happen if I did, you know, just in case. I'm not saying I use rage to qualify, I qualify because I'm wearing the item normally, so I have the bonus for over 24 hours, so I can legally take it. When I enter an antimagic field I lose my enhancement bonus dropping me and disqualifying me. When I rage I now meet the prerequisite again and although I have not had this bonus for 24 hours I do not believe it matters. I now qualify for the feat again, right? since my score is above the requirements and I don't lose my feat when my score drops under prereqs, I just can't use the feat till my ability goes above the requirement, which it does while raging.

I was playing in a society game this past weekend. My greatsword-wielding half-orc barbarian attacked some undead that had DR/not slashing.

I asked if, since I had noticed that my attack wasnt as damaging as it normally was, if I could use the broadside of the sword to attack, and count it as bludgeoning dmg, instead of slashing.

His response was yes, but since I wasnt using the sword in its intended manner, Id take -4 att for it being an improvised weapon, and get to deal 1d6 dmg instead of 2d6.

Basically, it would become a club that I wasnt proficient with.

I know he is in the right to rule how he feels is correct, but Im curious as to how others might see this, or might rule it.

Thoughts?

I don't know what everyone is talking about that you said it wrong in the original post. You said "DR not slashing" because as a player you don't know what the dr is, but you did know it wasn't dr slashing. Seems to me that you worded it just fine. And yeah when you use a sword like that it's now an improvised weapon (although I'd give you strength and a half for damage since its still being used two handed). Good job to your DM.

I suppose I'd also like to know if I entered the antimagic field before i started raging dropping me to 14 (now i dont qualify for raging vitality) and then rage (bringing me to 18 con and possibly re-qualifying me for raging vitality?) what happens?

My cleric in PFS has the destruction/rage subdomain giving him rage at 8th level. I started out with 14 con, and now have an item bumping me up to 16 con. I'm considering taking raging vitality at 9th level which has a prerequisite of 15 con to use. Now since I have the +2 con item and rage is a class feature for me I qualify to take the feat, but what if I were to enter an antimagic field while already raging? I'd lose my +2 enhancement bonus and have a 14 base con, but my con would be at 20 total until I end my rage (4 con from rage and +2 from raging vitality). Would I still be able to take advantage of raging vitality since my con meets the prerequisites and I'm already raging, or would I not recieve the benefits of raging vitality since my BASE con has now dropped below the requirement? Sorry to put up such a nitpicky question, but its for a character that I'm actually playing right now and I want to know how this will be handled if it comes up. I may toss my extra ability point into con instead of wisdom since I just hit 8th level depending on the responses here.

Dirkfreemont wrote:

Well I for one am pretty sure that you don't get the skill that's hardwired to the headband AND additional retroactive skill points. Just the hardwired max ranks. Oh and thanks for helping me out folks.

Why would you say that? What in the description language leads you to believe that the "hardwired" skill is not an additional bonus on top of the normal bonus associated with a "permanent" ability boost?

Nothing, you are correct. However this is how I view RAI in this case. I think they were trying to limit the headband's extra skills to just the extra ranks that are hardwired in. Maybe not, but it seems like they would have been more clear if the intent was to give them retroactive skills to put anywhere AND the hardwired extra ones. Its just RAW vs RAI IMO, up to our little brains to figure out (it is for this reason I suggest I may be wrong, wouldn't even be close to the first time).

Liquidsabre wrote:

Btw doesn't the Battle Rage (Su) ability in the War domain only work for other characters? I don't quite see how a cleric can use that on themselves.

Why wouldnt it? Is the cleric not a creature...?

ok sure, touch yourself as a standard action to give yourself the buff, (even though from my point of view this is clearly to be used on other characters) now with your move action you are going to ...? I'm wondering how using this on yourself will get you anywhere since you have no actions left to attack with.

By the logic being used to argue here, why would a Wizard get something like haste on their spell list? Its not like they usually melee-- and the intent of the haste spell is obviously to make the wizard a super fast moving fighting maching with an extra melee attack. Or could the haste spell in fact be intended for use as a party buff? I think we all know how wizards use things like haste that buff a party, and a cleric of the destruction domain doesn't even need to "cause" destruction to revel in the fact that through his god's power which is channeled through the cleric, (example the 8th level destruction power) more destruction is being done overall. The problem you are having here is thinking that if a cleric worships a god that reveres destruction, the god would only want the cleric to cause destruction by his own hand, and not just add to the destruction of things around him. It totally makes sense to me that this party buff takes a standard action to perform like most other party buffs.

Just throwing this out there even though it's not a society question, but there was a similar question asked about adding +2 dex to a belt of giant strength as far as pfs goes. It was either josh frost or sean reynolds that weighed in saying that yeah you can add abilities to items for 1.5 times the original cost of the item as stated on page 553 core. However at least as far as society is concerned it turned out that you could only do this to a belt of giant strength (add +2 dex to it) because that item already exists in the form of a belt of physical might. I believed this to mean that you couldnt take a belt of giant strength and toss +2 dex on it because there is no such thing as a belt of dwarven kind with dex added to it. So I'm not 100% sure on this one but I think that the specific items in the core rulebook cannot be added to like a flame tongue sword with keen thrown on it. Definately not in society play at any rate, but sean was referring to regular play when he commented on this if I remember correctly.

So I have a new group starting and for the first time I have a player that is using a summoner. I've never had to deal with animal companions or summons before so I'm not sure where in the phb it has the rules for turn actions available to that player. I really just need know if both he and his summon can act on his turn or if the actions are split up between them both.

Anyone know?

His summon monster ability? (Read summon monster spell, it tells you.) Or are you talking aobut the Eidelon? Eidelons take a miniute to summon. (10 rounds) page 55 advanced players guide.

ShadowcatX wrote:

I think temporary spells granting the ability to select feats comes down to one certain question. How long does it take to level up? To me that seems to be the crux of the matter, if its something that happens in between encounters when an xp total hits a magic number then temporary magic should work. If it is something that happens when everyone gets back to town and can rest and relax (or even train), then I don't see something covering a handful of minutes.

Let's say that it takes several days. In fact, let's say it takes a week to level up. How does that change the issue? Think about this: Before that week passes, Bob the Fighter does not have Power Attack, but afterwards (since he leveled up and took the feat), he does. Does that mean that the only reason he learned how to hit things better is because he learned it over that week? Does that mean it literally took him 24 hours a day for seven straight days to learn Power Attack? Was there any time during that week he was learning something else, like training his Athletics skill? Or did he, maybe, learn Power Attack gradually, over time, possibly over the last month that he was adventuring?

The reason I ask is because if you view him as a game mechanic, and he is functionally exactly the same at the end of a level as the beginning of a level, and he improves during the "level up" period (during which he is improving 100% of the time), then it would make no sense for him to meet the prerequisites of a higher ability score unless he has that higher ability score for 100% of the time he was improving. But if you view the level up process as less of a game mechanic and more of a thematic progress, then it makes more sense. Bob knows that if he was stronger, he could learn to focus his blows better. So, during the days they were traveling to and from the dungeon of ScaryDark, he uses his free time (whenever the wizard had a spare Bull's Strength spell) making use of this temporary strength increase to learn to focus his blows....

None of this matters. It says you can qualify for a feat if you meet the prerequisites. You don't qualify for feats with ability score requirements unless you have a permenant ability score at or above the required amount in said ability. You don't recieve a permenant bonus in an ability until you have had the ability score at that level for 24 hours. Not going to happen with buffs like bulls str, cats grace, fox's cunning. Items you wear for over 24 hours can qualify you, but you can't train feats based on temporary ability scores (like a spell buff from your party cleric or wizard) because it doesn't make sense, but most of all, because the rules specifically say what i'm repeating here.

Elven_Blades wrote:

Quote:

Permanent Bonuses: Ability bonuses with a duration greater than 1 day actually increase the relevant ability score after 24 hours. Modify all skills and statistics related to that ability. This might cause you to gain skill points, hit points, and other bonuses. These bonuses should be noted separately in case they are removed.

I don't see how Fox's Cunning could be used to qualify for a feat. The quote, provided by the above link and matched in the core rule book, says that bonuses have to last 24 hours to become permanent, and therefore, cause a change in associated stats, such as skill points. By extension, though I can find no rule specifically for or against, would be that those bonuses would also have to be 24 hours, and thus considered permanent, to qualify for feats.

I think this is further supported by Fox's Cunning specifically saying it doesn't grant skill ranks in the spell description.

Fox's Cunning is minutes per level duration. IMO, not long enough to be considered a prerequisite for a feat.

It's not a good idea to use a short duration spell to qualify for a feat but there is nothing in the rules to prohibit it. I think it would be a waste of a feat slot in the very high majority of cases. I can see some unusual cases where it might be an interesting idea, but they are few and far between.

You might notice that the section you quoted never says that you can't use temporary bonuses to qualify for feats. The reading through the section on feats, it merely stats that you must meet the prerequisites.

What if we don't look at Fox's Cunning but instead look at Bull's Strength? It grants everything from a boost in Strength. Permanent or Temporary, Bull's Strength adds +4 to your Strength score while it is in effect. Why should it not be allowed to also allow you to qualify for a feat? How often do you think it's going to be an issue? Is it game breaking regardless?

Just think about it for a second and you will understand. If I cast cat's grace on you (+4 dex) to qualify you for twf, it will last a few minutes, at most 40 mins if its a level 20 character casting it and its extended, (and why a level 20 character is hanging out with you if you still need cat's grace just to fight normally im not really sure), which doesn't give you the necessary 24 hr period of having the bonus to make it a permenant bonus and qualify you. Also are you imagining that your character just practices using the feat one day when someone cast cat's grace on you and you learned how to use the feat really quick in that period of time and now you are good to go whenever someone walks along and hits you with the dex buff? Feats represent a skill that was picked up through training, not just a skill that was picked up because your character sheet says so (even though that's how many players treat their character's abilities like twf.)

Well I for one am pretty sure that you don't get the skill that's hardwired to the headband AND additional retroactive skill points. Just the hardwired max ranks. Oh and thanks for helping me out folks.

No matter how you figure the math, +2 to int gives 1 skill point per level.

7+2=9 which gives 1 point a level more than he had originally.

That point would be in one skill that the headband came with. It would be any skill- but just one skill that the headband was created with and can't be changed.

Each level you gain one skill point in that one skill.

An Ioun stone grants a +2 bonus to Intelligence as an Enhancement bonus. This is the same type of bonus granted by the Headband and as such they overlap. They do not stack. Therefore, wearing both a headband and an Ioun stone gives you the power of the stronger one.

You get +1 to one skill not both- probably using the item you wore first over the one you wore second. I would not let the second one come into effect until you removed the first and wore the second for 24 hours after that, but the rules themselves are silent on it.

-S

Sorry about that, I know they are both enhancement bonuses and do not stack. That wasn't my intended question. I meant what the other folks are talking about, there is specific text that indicates on the headband that the fighter would get extra skill ranks even with a int this low since you get one skill no matter what and another from the headband. The text isn't there for the ioun stone, but I was wondering if there has been an official ruling on this one way or the other. I did post this in the rules section, and nothing definitive as of yet has been said, but I feel a reasonable conclusion has been drawn. Just trying to see if any of you folks know for sure how this works for society play. I read the text concerning this issue the same as Majuba, "I presume you are asking does a fighter with a 7 int (who would normallya get 1 skill point by sheer minimum) gain the skill from a headband +2, seven though a fighter with 9 int would *also* get just one skill point. The answer (for the headband) is yes - the text does not in any way reference the Int score of the person donning the headband. It even works for animal companions going from 2 to 4 int (assuming headbands are an allowed spot in your game).

It does not work for Ioun stones in any case, as noted by others, because it lacks the specific text. As the standard ioun stone is only +2, it doesn't make that large a difference." but was just wondering if anyone knew if josh had stated anything definitive about either of these issues in the thread. Guess I'll just have to start digging...

*in a skill that is tied to the item

Would a fighter in PFS with a 7 int receive extra bonus skill ranks equal to his level if he wore a headband of int +2 for 24 hours? How about if he stuck a +2 int ioun stone in his wayfinder?

System is showing a post at about 9:10pm Eastern time from Dirk, but I don't see it. Repost if so.

oh I was just saying that I agree pretty much entirely with your above post. Headbands would use the rules imo as described in the item description, but ioun stones would follow the rules on page 555. Makes total sense to me, since ioun stones say nothing about giving a skill bonus based on the +2 they provide, so you would not get any bonus for a fighter going from 7 to 9, but would if you had an 8 int and went to 10. (talking only about ioun stones here, I still think that a +2 headband would grant the extra associated skills for going from 7 to 9). Still not sure about the pfs rules though, so I'll post over on the pfs board after I eat some of grandma's split pea soup. Yum!

To the above I agree, pretty much entirely. Not sure how this would work in pfs, I may just have to re-post over there for an official ruling. As far as the 24 hour int bump I see what you are saying totally, and all I can think of is that lets say you had an extended fox's cunning cast on you by a 15th level wiz. That's 30 hrs of bonus, making it permanent right? I'm just playing around with why I'd look at the item description as opposed to the permanent bonus rules. Overall I think the Ioun stone would work off page 555 but the headband would operate as stated in the item description. Still not sure, but thanks for helping me sort through this Howie, I'll probably post the ioun stone question over on pfs boards later tonight after I get some of grandma's split pea soup in my belly.

So if you agree with the above we can move on to ioun stones...

Okay Howie, I gotcha now. Was wondering why you were talking about spells in the middle of all this, hehe. At any rate here's what it says under Headband of Vast Intelligence: "A headband of vast intelligence has one skill associated with it per +2 bonus it grants. After being worn for 24 hours, the headband grants a number of skill ranks in those skills equal to the wearer's total Hit Dice." Please forgive me for not including a page number in the CRB, I'm on vacation visiting grandma right now, and didn't bring my books with me thinking I wouldn't need them (how dumb was that?!!??) but the quote is right out of the PFSRD. You can see how it doesn't say anything about it giving skill ranks based on how much your Int modifier goes up, but rather says that it provides additional ranks per +2 bonus that the headband provides. It is for this reason that I suggest that no matter how low a characters int score happens to be if he wears one of these babies for 24 hours it will grant additional ranks in the associated skill until the wearer takes off the item. It doesn't matter what it says on page 555 CRB because that has nothing to do with this from my point of view. All you have to do to understand what I'm saying is read the item description.

I think I do understand the question. I think we disagree on how the headband works. Following is how I understand the headband to function:

1. If you wear a headband of intellect for 24 hours, it provides a permanent bonus to intelligence. A permanent bonus to intelligence grants additional spell ranks. This can be found under Ability Save Bonuses, subtitle Permanent Bonus, on page 555 of the CRB. Those additional spell ranks can be used however you want.

2. In addition, a headband has another feature, which is the associated skill ranks in a specific skill. This is not up to the character to decide, it is a function of the item.

I understand your position to be that the item grants benefit #2 only, and that the headband user does not gain the benefit of benefit #1. If so, why do you think this? The item doesn't say that it grants this limited form of benefit instead of the general form of benefit. I see nothing in the item description that says that this is a specific exception to the general rule about permanent benefit.

Dirkfreemont wrote:

So with this in mind you'd have your 1 skill per level everyone gets, 1 more bonus skill per level for being human, and then another skill at max ranks that are tied to your item, not to your int.

In my view, your Int 7 fighter wearing a headband gains +2 Int, and now has Int 9. The Int 9 gives him no benefit on skill ranks; he still gets the 1 per level minimum....

None of this is what I was talking about or implying. My apologies for not being clear if this was the problem. Okay where to start...

Dirkfreemont wrote:

Hah! Nice, now I can bug you on here Syed. Thanks to all who weighed in on this for me, this is how I figured it should work. Now the big question is, Human fighter with 7 int gets two skills. (you always get one, humans always get one extra.) Now the human fighter gets a +2 int ioun stone. Under the int headband description it doesn't say that you get extra skills for every +1 modifier, but it does say that for every +2 your headband has on it you get an extra skill at max rank. So how about it? Will the ioun stone work the same way, giving a human fighter with 7 int the 2 skill he normally gets, plus another third skill at max rank that is tied to the stone?

The headband and the ioun stone grants a bonus to Int. If worn for 24 hours, that is a permanent bonus and adds to skill ranks (if any). This works the same for both items. The Headband of Vast Intellect (and the related mental stat items that include intelligence) also grant a bonus to a specific skill or skills. This bonus is an added feature of the headband; the ioun stone does not possess this additional feature.

In the case of your Fighter with Int 7, The ioun stone would raise his Int to 9. Int of 9 would still be 2 skill ranks per level if he choses to put his human bonus into skill ranks.

Howie I'm not sure you understand the question, although I can see your point of view as you are reading the question. So I'll start over and use a different example and we can build from there. Lets forget about the ioun stone this time and just use the example of a headband. If it's a +2 Int headband it becomes a permanent bonus after 24 hours and grants skill ranks based on the skill its tied to. It doesn't say that you can put them wherever you want, but rather that the headband is already tied to a particular skill and grants max ranks in it. So with this in mind you'd have your 1 skill per level everyone gets, 1 more bonus skill per level for being human, and then another skill at max ranks that are tied to your item, not to your int. I think where we are disagreeing is that you are thinking you get bonus skill ranks based on the int bonus you get, and I see the item description as saying that the item has a skill associated with it that it gives you ranks even if you have a 4 int. If we agree on this point then it begs the question, what about ioun stones?

Hey, Dirk Freemont. This is Syed. I love when I run into people I know on these forums. I would agree with what the other have said above. I would treat it like a headband for purposes of the permanent bouns.

Hah! Nice, now I can bug you on here Syed. Thanks to all who weighed in on this for me, this is how I figured it should work. Now the big question is, Human fighter with 7 int gets two skills. (you always get one, humans always get one extra.) Now the human fighter gets a +2 int ioun stone. Under the int headband description it doesn't say that you get extra skills for every +1 modifier, but it does say that for every +2 your headband has on it you get an extra skill at max rank. So how about it? Will the ioun stone work the same way, giving a human fighter with 7 int the 2 skill he normally gets, plus another third skill at max rank that is tied to the stone?

In home games, yes at GM's discretion. In PFS, no. The resulting item is not an already listed stock item in the book, so it wouldn't be allowed for PFS. In the same tone, a +6STR belt, +2DEX, +4CON belt is not stock, so it wouldn't be legal in PFS, but a +4/+4/+4 is fine and legal. The source item to be upgraded, and the destination resulting item both have to be legal PFS items for you to do the direct upgrade at the cost difference between the two without taking a "sell the original for half" penalty.

The original debate about the upgrade was "they have different names and buckles, therefore they are too different" vs. "just look at the functionality". The second half won in Josh and Sean's postings, as long as it is to and from stock items. Otherwise, it would open up all the crafting rules, which neither of them (I think) would have intended.

So,
+2STR ==> +2STR, +2DEX == YES
+2STR, +2DEX ==> +2STR, +2DEX, +2CON == YES
+2STR, +2DEX ==> +4STR, +4DEX == YES
+2STR, +2DEX ==> +4STR, +2DEX == NO
+2STR, +2DEX ==> +2STR, +2DEX, +2CHA == NO

Works for me, can't blame a guy for trying though right?

So let's say my cleric has a +6 headband of inspired wisdom that cost him 36,000 gp. He wants to add the phylactery of positive channeling power (+2d6 to the amount your channel energy heals/deals to allies/undead. Cost: 11,000 gp) to this headband since they occupy the same slot. Can I pay 16,500 gp for this power making the total I would pay for a +6 headband of inspired wisdom and positive channeling 52,500 gp?

Todd Lower wrote:

I have a +2 belt of Giant Strength, can it be upgraded to a +2 belt of Physical Might (Str & Dex)?

Sure, why not?

Just notice how they are pricing those items. The primary (which is the one with the highest base price) costs normal price then you add on the secondaries (those with the same or lesser prices) at a 50% mark-up.

Thus the +2 belt of STR costs 4k.

A +2 belt of DEX would cost 4k.

Both are the same price so it doesn't matter which you consider primary.

The pricing for the +2 belt of physical might (STR & DEX) is 10k.

This breaks down to 4k+4k+50%(4k)=4k+4k+2k=10k.

-James

Oh yeah duh, it's right there I guess I was thinking it actually made a gold cost difference at the higher bonuses for some reason. Probably would have to upgrade the bonuses at the same rate then though I'm thinking, since that's how they have it modeled in the book right? Not sure on this one still but thanks James for helping me understand that they are already pricing them according to the page 553 rules.

Also at anytime in the belts life if you felt like putting a third stat on there like +2 con, you are good to go at no increase in cost. Very surprising to me that this is the case, but oh well, more power to the player makes me happy!

This isn't what i meant to say, I meant putting a 3rd stat like +2 con would be fine at any time, and you would only pay what it would normally cost to add it, not taking a belt of +2con and *1.5 to determine the price of adding the stat.

Nice! Yep exactly what I was hoping for thanks for posting the links so it would be easily found for anyone looking. They should probably put something in the rules so that it reads that these aren't specific belts, and the "belt of physical might" means nothing, and really shouldn't even have a name. It's just a fun thing they tacked on to the end of an item to make it seem unique apparently, even though the name of the item does not make it unique at all. All belts that give stats are interchangeable according to this, have no restrictions on making them, and can be added to in all kinds of creative ways. I would wonder if this means you could have a +6 belt and toss on a +2 dex to it without having to pay *1.5 of the +2 dex belt's cost? When using these rulings it would seem that you could, since now the belt of physical might isn't really an item, and in reality it's just the properties of two belts thrown together and given a name that doesn't make it a unique magic item. I'd say if this is the case you should probably be able to ignore the examples of belts with multiple stat boosts entirely and just make a +6 str / +2 dex belt for no additional cost, instead of having to upgrade the stats evenly (+2str/+2dex then +4str/+4dex then +6str/+6dex). Also at anytime in the belts life if you felt like putting a third stat on there like +2 con, you are good to go at no increase in cost. Very surprising to me that this is the case, but oh well, more power to the player makes me happy!

They knew what they were doing when they put "standard action" on that ability, and they knew what they were doing when they made it so you can only cast it on others. It really is supposed to work the way it reads, and if it doesn't seem like a power you'd want to take then you probably shouldn't take it. Whenever I've taken an ability on a character that I didn't end up liking it has been irritating, however it has never been the game developer's fault when I made a character that didn't work the way I had imagined it would.

Oh by the way I do think its silly for a belt or headband of stats to have to follow this ruling, and I'd interpret it for a game i ran the same way as you guys, but I'd also have to admit i was homebrewing it when i did unfortunately.

Dirkfreemont wrote:

Ok, once again, PATHFINDER SOCIETY QUESTION. I'm using caps to emphasize that although I definately support the use of homebrew rules in homegames if it is going to make everyone have a better time, whether or not you feel like rules should be interpreted a certain way in your game is irrelevant. Sorry to sound mean I'm definately not trying to be, I love homegames and the very fact that you can throw out rules you think are silly. We do it all the time in homegames I've been in, makes it a little more YOUR game, and I love it. But really the OP plays in my pathfinder society group and his question is pertaining to that only, sry to butt in on a good conversation, but if you want to talk homebrew rules you like to use we should make a seperate thread in my opinion. I'd like to get to the bottom of this as a pfs question, so if anyone knows please stick a link in here to a Josh Frost ruling or something so we can kill this one.

We are discussing the rules of the game. Seeing as how this thread was posted in the RULES QUESTIONS section of the forums rather than the PATHFINDER SOCIETY section, and we are all discussing which interpretation of magic item upgrades the RAW supports, we are all very much on topic.

If that isn't what you and/or your player wanted, you should report the thread as being in the wrong forum section so as to get it moved to the right place.

Either way I do believe the above arguments were not supported by RAW or RAI in a homegame for the reasons I listed.

Also anything said above that didn't follow the rule that a belt of giant strength will always be a belt of giant strength is in my understanding false (no matter what other enhancements you put on it at *1.5 the cost of adding the enhancement normally, its still a belt of giant strength with other things added to it at an increased price). You just can't do it in pfs play tmk. Also in my opinion any homegame that doesn't follow the rules as written or at least intended is following a homebrew ruling,and should at least be identified as such, nothing wrong with it, more power to it, but call it what it is. This again is as i read page 553 "adding new abilities" of core, I'd love to talk about why in a new thread if you want.

Ok, once again, PATHFINDER SOCIETY QUESTION. I'm using caps to emphasize that although I definately support the use of homebrew rules in homegames if it is going to make everyone have a better time, whether or not you feel like rules should be interpreted a certain way in your game is irrelevant. Sorry to sound mean I'm definately not trying to be, I love homegames and the very fact that you can throw out rules you think are silly. We do it all the time in homegames I've been in, makes it a little more YOUR game, and I love it. But really the OP plays in my pathfinder society group and his question is pertaining to that only, sry to butt in on a good conversation, but if you want to talk homebrew rules you like to use we should make a seperate thread in my opinion. I'd like to get to the bottom of this as a pfs question, so if anyone knows please stick a link in here to a Josh Frost ruling or something so we can kill this one.

If I use a +2 int ioun stone will it grant skills exactly as a +2 headband of int? Doesn't say so in my core rulebook, my apologies if this is in some errata somewhere or some thread I haven't gotten around to reading yet.