Silver Dragon

Draco18s's page

Goblin Squad Member. Organized Play Member. 1,679 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 1 alias.


1 to 50 of 1,679 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

beowulf99 wrote:
Why can't you use them in combat? 3 actions to set up (one action with lightning snares) isn't bad.

Option A: 3 actions, create a snare in an adjacent square while an enemy watches you do it (if its triggered, it does 5d6 Ref 18 for half). Oh and spend 15 gold. Not silver, gold. Or about 11% of your character's total accumulated wealth by level 4.

Option B: Hunt Prey, Hunted Shot, Strike

Lightning Snares is a level 12 feat competing with Double Prey, Distracting Shot, Side By Side, and Second Sting. All of which are pretty good.

The wording on Ranger Snare feats is too ambiguous and needs to be addressed.

I don't disagree.

beowulf99 wrote:
This would leave me to believe that you cannot pick up your own Snare to deploy elsewhere.

And now you know why snares are terrible. You literally can't use them in combat and it's highly unlikely the PCs will have the time and knowledge to set an ambush.

Just because the first guy got stuck in it doesn't mean everyone else know where the edge is.

K1 wrote:
You died and friends who care about you try to bring you back. And for whoom you would have done exactly the same.

You remember the thing about the ghosts in Casper, where they only stick around because they had unfinished business, and once they accomplish it, they move on? The same is true for our characters. They are content with having lived their lives, ended up dead, and they see no reason to come back.

"Thanks guys, I appreciate it, I would've done the same. My job here is done and it's time for me to rest. Its been an honor."

Sorry guys but you have to go without me. I nailed it with the coolest sacrifice ever!

Was it really a sacrifice if you can come back, though?

It is not supposed to be a movie.

No, but its still a story, and every story has to end. Some ride off into the sunset, some enter Valhalla, and some end up in the gutter, bitter and alone.

Poignant, bitter-sweet, romantic, heroic, defeated or victorious, chapters need to end, the book needs to close. Why not go out in a blaze of glory, a shining star of epic tale that will be told and retold for decades?

Take this Shadowrun story, take the time to read at least a little of it, Jim was a fantastic person to play with (both GM and player, see prior post), and put our sessions down on paper in exquisite fashion. This was also the SR game where the group accepted a job to assassinate themselves (and got paid, too). So many amazing things happened (including the GM--Nate--setting Jim's character on fire, which I think was the third time in a long running sequence of Jim and Nate setting each other's characters on fire, mostly through sheer coincidence).

But I'll just quote this section. The narrator is Jim's character Stray, I played Jack.

I never quite figured out why Jack did that. The least I can figure, Jack knew his time was coming soon, so he wanted to shout out with his dying breath, so the whole world could hear, that he truly existed in this world. And everyone did. The Matrix was abuzz despite MCT’s immediate damage control. Most people believe MCT, but a few, like me, know the truth, and that’s the way it always was, is, and will be.

Shadowrun might not have Resurrection, so there was no coming back from what happened to me, but I wouldn't have done anything differently. Jack probably would have died regardless of what I did, but the choices I made were my own, the consequences...are also my own. They may have been narrated by the GM, but the ending is mine. Even if resurrection was on the table somehow I would still have turned it down. In fact, even if resurrection was on the table, I don't think anyone would have been able to bring themselves to cast it.

Weregeek had this sequence.

In terms of my own experiences, I think I've only had one character that accepted a resurrection (and the way in which it happened made things more awesome, though we figured that it probably really wouldn't have worked like that, rules-wise).

Never turned any down that I can think of. Though there was a game* where I told the GM that I wanted to leave the party because my character and one of the other PCs were sorta stepping on each other's toes in terms of niche. We were different classes, but both brought the same toolkit to the table. When the GM narrated it, one of the other players (who had been sitting far enough down the table to not catch the discussion I'd been having about changing characters) fought really really hard to keep my character around, it was pretty awesome. I eventually had to say, "Jim, its fine, I want to switch characters."

I had a friend who turned resurrection down once, though. Less dramatic than Weregeek's sequence, just table-talk. But he'd gone out in a pretty epic way and he was all, "Yeah, I'm going to make a new character." It was an X-Crawl game, so resurrection was already pretty rare, but it felt so...inappropriate to try and seek it after that fight.

*I always find conversation returning to that game, its weird. I think its just because Keith (as a person) was so unique and that the game he ran was so interesting on so many levels that any conversation of "what was the most X in a game you ever experienced?" just demands to be mentioned.Its a shame that he--

though a comedic series of events involving his own medical issues around "being able to talk," medical leave re-such, and a stint as Silent Pete the Repo-Man, among other things--meant that the game never had another session after about that point.

(I swear that character concept is cursed; as much fun as I know it would be to play, every time I've statted it out, the game has died)

I will point out the following definition

Merriam Webster wrote:

candle hour, noun:

a unit of light or luminous energy equal to the total luminous energy emitted in one hour by a source having a luminous intensity of one candle

And this candle burns for up to 2.5 hours and is 5.75 inches in length while this one will go for over 3 days.

Baarogue wrote:
1. ಠ_ಠ Have you even heard of a GM doing this, or is this a straw-man intended to illustrate a clearly "unacceptable" breach of RAW in a PFS game?

The latter, I believe. Things where the GM in question has stated some ruling with the qualifier " my table" when whatever it was that they said is in clear contradiction with what's actually written.

The example could just as easily have been "Battle Medic doesn't exist."

Claxon wrote:
Let's examine however a different example. Halfling Luck ability triggers when you fail a skill check or saving throw, this one would be a problem because failing a will save could likely be a secret check. And if you don't know you failed, you couldn't use the ability.

That's nothing new. If you're unware that you are the target of a spell and fail a save (say, some form of divination) it doesn't matter who rolls. If the player does, they could say "I'd like to halfling luck and reroll" and the GM might respond with, "you're not aware of anything untoward, so you can't choose to do that."

For abilities that fall into the second camp rather than the first there probably should be an official way of resolving that contention, though I don't know what it would be.

Declaring the desire to utilize your luck before hand. It gets spent, the GM rolls two dice, and computes based on the better roll.

Matthew Downie wrote:
You're not be taking away their character's agency, but you are taking away their actual real-life human agency, the freedom to do something they want to do: roll a dice while playing a game.

That's not the definition of "player agency."

Agency is defined thus:

The player has control over their own character's decisions.
Those decisions have consequences within the game world.
The player has enough information to anticipate what those consequences might be before making them.

"Phsyically picking up and rolling some plastic bits" does not fall into any of those definitions. If it was, may I introduce you to a wonderful game called Candy Land where you can pick up and roll all the plastic bits you want! Have fun! t-is-it-good-for

Temperans wrote:
The 4th level version effectively let's you skip all the math, and moving around for the highest level item.

Then why does the spell not say that you can "spend 10 minutes" (or however long) and get the same effect?

BellyBeard wrote:
You're just adding restrictions that aren't there.

You're adding abilities that aren't there.

thejeff wrote:

Not at all?

Like, even if there's one magic sword in an empty room, you can't be sure? It detects with it there, take it out, it might still detect magic, just to fool you?

You are also adding things that weren't said.

Obviously if its a blank, empty room with only a sword in it, the sword is probably magical. Cast Read Aura on it.

(But don't be surprised if the sword is mundane and there's an illusion in the corner hiding something once in a while)

The point is about what happens when you find a room full of swords, most of which aren't magical. Backing off 15 feet isn't going to give you any more information than "there's something magical in that pile of swords (thanks, we already knew that)." Its not the spell lying to you, its the world and the GM saying, "this is not how you perform the Search Activity."

BellyBeard wrote:
Draco18s wrote:
You understand how quantum states and the Heisenberg uncertainty principle work, yes?
You understand geometry and Venn's principles of laying one circle partially over another, yes?

Yes, I do.

And I'm saying that because the pinpoint is a feature of the 4th level spell effect MAGIC happens and it doesn't work.

Just like I can't go outside and shout FOS ROH DAH and actually knock over any cars, our physics doesn't apply to a gamified world.

Temperans wrote:
Except the spell does have 30 ft radius, so it would not react to any magic outside that area, and it would definitely mean you can at the very least narrow down the area where the magic is located.

You understand how quantum states and the Heisenberg uncertainty principle work, yes?

Magic, when deteced with Detect Magic, only tells you "it is somewhere in this 30 foot radius area." A second pulse cannot tell you more information if you overlap the areas because you're resolution on the spell is "30 feet." The spell explicitly says that you cannot pinpoint unless it is cast at a heightened level by the very fact that pinpointing is a 4th level feature.

Ergo all you can determine is a vague "somewhere in this 30 foot radius zone."

Maybe it didn't pick up the moment it entered the field, maybe you still pick it up for a moment after it leaves the field.

The mechanical effect is that you can locate a source of magic with a precision of 30 feet. You can't zoom in, you can't enhance, you can't triangulate.

That's a 4th level effect.


All simple and martial blades might work better. Or just drop the "make them common" part. You might be able to consider yourself trained with an elven blade, but its still uncommon in availability (ie you can't buy it in char gen).

Agree on INT instead of WIS, but definitely a CON penalty. If you want to do a WIS penalty, then give them a weakness to bludgeoning damage (5) to represent the hollow bones aspect instead. Birds really are owned hard by bashing; kick the goose attacking you, it'll either back off or be too injured to continue. If not, kick it again.

MaxAstro wrote:
Draco18s wrote:
Without that line, you can't find anything at all ever, as with restricted mobility options (a room that's only 15 feet by 15 feet and a single corridor leading to it; an arrangement of chasms/immovable 'furniture'; etc) and items placed in certain ways means you can never pin any of them down.
You seem to be either not getting or ignoring the idea that this is an intentional design decision to make players rely more on mundane ways of finding treasure, rather than solving the problem with a single spell.

That supports the "can't find it, never" with Detect Magic that I was getting at. The bolded part of my post was specifically in reference to what you can or cannot find with the spell. I did not say anything about mundane searching.

The point was "You cannot use this spell to search, no matter how you move about the room and add/remove squares from your effect." The "ping, there's magic" doesn't blink out the moment you remove the item from the area (or the area from the item). Its just a "oh, there's magic somewhere here-ish" sense not "there's magic within exactly 30 feet / there's no magic within exactly 30 feet."

thejeff wrote:
With that line though, you've nailed it down so that you can never find anything but the highest level magic. :)

Without that line, you can't find anything at all ever, as with restricted mobility options (a room that's only 15 feet by 15 feet and a single corridor leading to it; an arrangement of chasms/immovable 'furniture'; etc) and items placed in certain ways means you can never pin any of them down.

But sure, if you want to quibble over the wording, go ahead. All I was doing was giving the heightened 4th benefits as an activity instead of never. You want it more permissive, fine. The point is that one additional sentence lets the GM go "you CAN search the room this way." Without that line you can't search the room with detect magic at all (that functionality is in Read Aura).

Forcing things into encounter mode for this kind of nonsense is pointless. Either you have the time or you don't. It shouldn't rely on a player's metagaming shenanigans that waste everyone else's time.

Bandw2 wrote:
you must actual search for the room, figure out what is worth keeping and figure out what is magical later, or do a manual search while casting read aura. it's not impossible to find magical items like you seem to think it is, it's just not a flick of the wrist.

Watch this easy textual trick.

Nothing up my sleeves.


Detect Magic Cantrip

You send out a pulse that registers the presence of magic. You
receive no information beyond the presence or absence of magic.
You can choose to ignore magic you’re fully aware of, such as the
magic items and ongoing spells of you and your allies.
You detect illusion magic only if that magic’s effect has a lower
level than the level of your detect magic spell. However, items
that have an illusion aura but aren’t deceptive in appearance
(such as an invisibility potion) typically are detected normally.
If you spent 10 minutes (as an Exploration Activity) you can
pinpoint the source of the highest-level magic.

Heightened (4th) As 3rd level, but you also pinpoint the source
of the highest-level magic immediately.

Without that line you force the players to go into encounter mode and detail exactly how they position themselves to pinpoint. Or you CAN'T pinpoint even with positioning. Once you detect something you just have a general idea that it's in some 30 foot area. You back off ten feet and try again and you'll get in-determinant results (that is, assume precisely one magical source and you get the first result: if you move 15 feet east and ping and get a result, then move 30 feet west and ping and get a result, where's the magic?).

Garretmander wrote:
(the pesky leftover level 2 slot can be turned into two cantrips)

...of Create Fire?

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bandw2 wrote:
even taking your example seriously, you CAN just stow it all and go through it meticulously later. nothing about my second sentence was a straw man, even worst case scenario you will still be able to find out what is magical, just can't do it if you're under time pressure.

The problem though isn't actually the 30 scrolls in the book case (the 30 scrolls, for reference, was from the room description). Its the fact that Detect Magic can't even narrow the magic down to the 5 foot square the book case is in without meticulous triangulation tedium and why the +1 dagger in a desk drawer throws the whole process out the window.

THAT'S the problem and THAT'S the reason Read Aura isn't a solution and why your quip is a straw man. The rules don't offer an "out" that narrows down where the magic is and makes the players tediously manipulate their positioning and what objects are in range in order to get the effect that was built into the spell in PF1!

Bandw2 wrote:
oh no, you have to actually use detect magic, and then search the room manually and use a different spell to confirm your results... oh no.

Nice straw man you built up and tore down, there.

The Great Rinaldo! wrote:

I'm drawn to the indefinite article here:

You can cast any spell in your spell repertoire by using a spell slot of an appropriate spell level.
If the intent was to use only spells of the exactly level, the sentence should have said "the appropriate spell level". The fact that it says "an" leads me to believe that there is more than one appropriate level for a given spell, ie the spells actual level or higher.

"the" wouldn't work because of the heightening mechanic.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Squiggit wrote:
Draco18s wrote:

It does but you can't do anything to filter by book. You have to look at the spell name, decide if its cool or not, then check what book its in. Manually. For every spell. Its quite tedious.
aonprd has a sourcebook section that displays all rules content within that sourcebook.

OTOH, which is easier to read?

This or this?

Also, which one lists the book without having to navigate to a new page (even if the book abbrs are impossible to identify on occasion; quick, what's PZO1115? PZO9226? PZO1134?).

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bandw2 wrote:

I think the thing people need to realize is that Detect magic has had part of its utility put into read aura.



Targets 1 object

I think this is why Penthau suggested casting Read Aura thirty times. Once for each scroll.

Of course, there's still the entire contents of the rest of the room to deal with too. What if there's a +1 dagger inside a desk drawer?

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Play probably any other class.

No, really. Multiclass into alchemist as a barbarian if you really want to have a decent chance of making those mutagens worth it.

Temperans wrote:
Both d20pfsrd and aonprd list the source book with links.

It does but you can't do anything to filter by book. You have to look at the spell name, decide if its cool or not, then check what book its in. Manually. For every spell. Its quite tedious.

K1 wrote:
So if you hit with a piercing weapon and a slashing weapon, you will overcome both slashing and piercing resistances.

What if a creature has both resistance against slashing and resistance against piercing?

Anguish wrote:
Words that (apparently) have never been said at Paizo: "in my spare time".

To be fair I'm not sure I say those at my job either.

I spent an hour wresting with a tree view of every enum available in every assembly in a workspace.

Just doing fully-qualified-assembly-namespace -> enum works well enough

But if I want to have nested folders for each . in the namespace, I either got only the top level or ran out of memory.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Barnabas Eckleworth III wrote:
Thanks for the heads up on Shadowrun. I had been considering getting it. I haven't played Shadowrun in years, but thought it'd be cool to check out the latest edition for old time's sake.

This video goes into good detail about where the system is. The first 20 or so minutes is general feelings, then they dive into specifics.

4 people marked this as a favorite.
thenobledrake wrote:
or complaining to those that will listen that the game is "literally unplayable" or something (note: I haven't seen anyone declare PF2 unplayable... but I have seen it a lot with other games recently released).

PF2 is playable. It has some issues, sure, but its playable.

Its 6th edition Shadowrun which is unplayable. There's entire sections of the book that were copy-pasted word for word from 5th edition, despite several mechanics no longer being a Thing.

Then there's the wild die which you get "on some tests" which counts as 3 successes when it's a success, or when it rolls a 1 makes all your 2s count for glitches. There's 6 mentions of it in the entire book. 3 are in the mechanic's own description.

Its real bad.

But no, Pathfinder 2 is not that flawed. Right now PF2 players can work around the problems and have a decently functional system, even if there are subsystems that aren't working correctly.

But those missing/broken subsystems are important enough that anyone who wasn't on the preorder list for a book is going to wait for a second printing, with the errata included before they buy. And maybe will even wait for the errata before they play at all.

8 people marked this as a favorite.
Gorbacz wrote:
I, for one, don't care. FAQ/errata are pretty much solely the interest of super-invested forum denizens. And they'll never be happy with whatever you give them, anyway.

OTOH, Mutagenist does Actually Nothing.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Tender Tendrils wrote:

This. According to Wikipedia, in the 1920s hyperinflation caused the German mark to go from 4 paper marks to being equivalent to a us dollar to... *Inhales* 4 trillion paper marks being equivalent to a us dollar.

(Gold marks where less affected, but still far more dramatic then a 10x effect).

Germany want even the worst.

Hungary, 1945-46. Highest monthly inflation rate: 13,600,000,000,000,000%. Highest currency denomination: One trillion. Time it took prices to double: 15.6 hours

Zimbabwe, 2007-8. Highest monthly inflation rate: 79,600,000,000%. Highest currency denomination: 100 trillion. Time it took prices to double: 24.7 hours

Germany is 4th on that list with an inflation rate of 29,500%

K1 wrote:


As you see, you would have a fair chance of success on creatures 3/4 lvl under the item level.

In other words, on creatures so far below your own level you don't even get experience for fighting it (and oh yeah, the talisman still does buggerall about half the time).

I could consider using it if we were able to get it at lower level as showed.

If it was a level 10 item with all the same stats (but cost to reflect the lower level) I still might not buy it. I'd have to be fighting a level 8 creature which is going to have a save of about +16, or a 30% chance for the item to get wasted

No thanks.

And oh yeah. This isn't even the worst thing printed.

Compare Grisley Tooth vs. Jade Stone, they both cost about the same (100gp; one of them's actually 90, but whatever)

Option a: a trinket that makes the enemy you've already attacked flat footed until the end of your turn
Option b: a trinket that makes all enemies within your reach flat footed until the start of your next turn

Or how about the invisibility coin (can't recall its actual name off hand). 160gp to be invisible until the end of your turn. It explicitly lists it as "2nd level invisibility" which, as a scroll, is 12gp (and lasts about a minute). Sure, its a cross-class effect, but wow, that cost differential.

ofMars wrote:
So that's sort of unclear in the actual description of the fatal trait. In the deadly trait description, it explicitly says that it doesn't double, whereas the description of fatal has no such clause.

Its certainly not helpful that it's not listed there in the Fatal trait description, but at least the rules for crits calls it out specifically (it mentions "deadly and fatal").

Loreguard wrote:
I acknowledge Draco18s statement, but will admit I didn't find that a necessarily ideal past state, with the degree of nova it enabled.

Note that I did not say that I agreed with the PF1 mechanic either. I simply stated that that is where the overcharge comes from. People didn't like the once-a-day-that's-it mechanic and the risk for a second go was the result.

K1 wrote:
Why this need for extra free casts?

Because in Pathfinder 1 a wand got you 50 casts that you could blow through in 10 minutes if you really wanted to.

bobrossw wrote:
Sorry to resurrect this post. My GM seems to still believe it's -0,-0,-5,-10 despite multiple posts to the contrary. Wouldn't bother me much except it's the reason he's houseruling in a fairly punitive fumble system on attacks, arguing that two attacks per round for monks/rangers is plenty. I'm wondering if someone can direct me to an official ruling somewhere?


p156 wrote:

FLURRY OF BLOWS [one-action]

Make two unarmed Strikes. If both hit the same creature,
combine their damage for the purpose of resistances and
weaknesses. Apply your multiple attack penalty to the Strikes
As it has the flourish trait, you can use Flurry of
Blows only once per turn.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

If you missed that I would be willing to bet you also missed the free boost for taking your class as well.

p20 wrote:

Class: Your character’s class provides an ability boost to

the ability score most important to your class, called your
key ability score.

Captain Morgan wrote:
Fatal is better than Deadly. But the rapier has other traits that the pick lacks.

I'd amend that to "Fatal is a better trait than Deadly, but takes a reduced die size to compensate, which is flat worse in most situations."

There are no Deadly weapons with the same base damage die as any Fatal weapon (IIRC) and (IIRC) taking a -1 die size is equivalent to taking a -2 on your attack roll: that is, you miss out on 10% of your expected DPR.

The only time Fatal makes up for this...fatal flaw is when you're attacking creatures significantly below your own level. As in you crit on a 12 on your first attack, giving your second attack a decent crit chance. Any higher and Fatal won't trigger often enough to make up for the reduced die size.

I tried really really hard to justify a Fatal build during the playtest.

BishopMcQ wrote:
Otherwise, I'd be curious what rules you used for breaking specific bones, how it related to the healing rules, and what it takes to put someone in armor either with them unconscious or resisting.

Probably narratively.

Player: "We break every finger on both hands"
GM: "Done, he won't be using somatic components for a few weeks at least"

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ellias Aubec wrote:
No, +1damage per creature for a total of +3.

...For a level 1 MM. A level 3 does +3 per creature, just like a level 3 fireball does +3 per creature.

Perpdepog wrote:
If Draco's comment is correct, then yes, and I recall reading a similar comment myself, though sadly I can't find a source now to back that up.

Found it. Thanks Reddit. c

Magic Missile was commented on during the playtest. It's once per creature, even if you use all the missiles against a single target.

Tender Tendrils wrote:
The problem here being that a kobold without the option of bonuses to laying devious traps just feels wrong

For the record, I don't disagree.

I just can't fix the fact that snares are bad.

Retributive Strike specifically says "damages your ally" so the damage is already done. I don't know of another ability that would interrupt in a similar manner, though.

If there is, I'd have to examine its wording.

I approve of this mad hatter-dashery.

BellyBeard wrote:
Then, do you have ideas for trap-related kobold feats? I suppose some Thievery bonus could work, but I'd rather have something that isn't just a straight numbers upgrade to a narrow playstyle.

Sadly I do not. :(

I think what I'd rather have is snares that are actually usable. A bunch of ideas came up during the playtest, but I didn't really like any of them.

I just came to accept that snares, as a feature, are just not meant for PCs (in the vast, vast majority of situations; as rules for creating improvised traps when you have time to set an ambush, they're great, but 99.9% of scenarios are going to be written with the assumption that that time won't exist).

Bandw2 wrote:

and some times they'll just cover their arms and legs in dragon details, so that their scales end at their elbows and/or knees.

something like this

it just looks like a human with prosthetics added or like a crown, etc.

That's a little higher on the scale of anthropomorphism. One step away from "cat ears and a tail" but still not "animal, but biped."

Its actually that level of mixing that I don't find attractive, personally (well, ok, I like the "cat ears" level even less, but then again I don't find particular beauty in the human form, soooo...but at least humans I can classify as humans and neko I can box with them for the most part). There's obviously a group that likes and wants that, but its not me. If I'm going to play a non-human I want to be as far away from the humanoid bodyform as I can get.

BellyBeard wrote:
I've just realized one can't "buy" Snares as such, you can only craft them on-the-spot. So I'll need to rethink the trapper feat.

Snares are as useful to a Kobold as they are to any other PF2 PC: literally nothing. Even at 20th when you can have all the super awesome skill and Ranger feats that exist dealing with snares.

So I'm not overly concerned.

Frogliacci wrote:
I don't watch a lot of anime, so I'm not sure what you mean by anime half-dragons.

"Ears and tail." Or I guess for dragons, its "horns and tail."

Check out the main dragon character in Miss Kobayashi's Dragon Maid for instance (Miss Kobayashi is the one in the background, drinking some tea).

Its the same difference between "neko" (catgirl) and an anthropomorphized cat. The latter actually looks like a cat.

Unicore wrote:
...and am not rolling any 20s on my academic lore checks.

You didn't take Assurance for it?!

Donovan Du Bois wrote:
The description for tremor-sense should tell you! That's where it should be.

Lets look, shall we?

CRB p464: Precise Senses wrote:

You can usually detect a creature

automatically with a precise sense unless that creature is
hiding or obscured by the environment
CRB p465 wrote:


Tremorsense allows a creature to feel the vibrations
through a solid surface caused by movement. It is usually
an imprecise sense with a limited range (listed in the ability).
Tremorsense functions only if the detecting creature is on
the same surface as the subject, and only if the subject is
moving along (or burrowing through) the surface.

No current creatures have tremorsense as a precise sense.

Only giant bats and vampire bat swarms have a "precise" sense other than vision, here's what's listed.
Bestiary p39 wrote:

echolocation (precise)

Echolocation A bat swarm can use its hearing as a precise sense at the listed range

That's it. Who knows what forms of concealment work against it.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Donovan Du Bois wrote:
Draco18s wrote:


If a creature has a precise sense, other than sight, and we assume that "see" for Magic Missile is intended to be replaced with any precise sense (say, tremor-sense, echolocation, magical thaum-"sight"), then:

Does smoke (fog, invisibility), which conceals a creature only visually, affect the above caster?

Can you site a rule one way or the other?

No, but that rule should be covered by whatever rules gives you a different precise sense. It might say "X and Y give creatures concealment from you, but not A or B."

Ah, but you're wrong, because it isn't in the description of the precise sense. We already know that invisibility doesn't work on precise senses other than sight because of the rules written into that of invisibility! And all other precise senses that do exist do not specify such things and it is left to GM discretion.

Does tremor-sense work through walls? Who knows!

1 to 50 of 1,679 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>