Duncan Forsyth's page

Hmm. Am I missing something here? Small ice elementals have a strength of 12, and the feat Power Attack has a prerequisite of strength 13. That's in order for the feat to be selected ... or used.

So ... why do small ice elementals have the Power Attack feat?

Aura Mastery Trick from Equipment Trick feat: http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/equipment-trick-combat

So ... immersive harmful mindscapes ... such as created by 'Create Mindscape' ... 4th level spell for a psychic ...

It's an illusion which allows for real damage to be done. So it makes me think of spells like Shadow Conjuration and Shadow Evocation. But those spells have very clear limits, and Create Mindscape, doesn't seem to.

Other than Rule 0, what's to stop my ever-ingenenious players declaring that:

... their target is immersed in lava (20d6/round), while the caster stands at the volcano's edge?
... their one believable creature is the tarrasque, who immediately attacks at (+37, 4d8+15) ?

I wondered if I should use the Psychic Manifestation rules to handle such attempts ... but they're very explicit about those being used only in a binary mindscape, not an immersive one.

What text am I missing that will give me a handle on this?

So ... immersive harmful mindscapes ... such as created by 'Create Mindscape' ... 4th level spell for a psychic ...

It's an illusion which allows for real damage to be done. So it makes me think of spells like Shadow Conjuration and Shadow Evocation. But those spells have very clear limits, and Create Mindscape, doesn't seem to.

Other than Rule 0, what's to stop my ever-ingenenious players declaring that:

... their target is immersed in lava (20d6/round), while the caster stands at the volcano's edge?
... their one believable creature is the tarrasque, who immediately attacks at (+37, 4d8+15) ?

I wondered if I should use the Psychic Manifestation rules to handle such attempts ... but they're very explicit about those being used only in a binary mindscape, not an immersive one.

What text am I missing that will give me a handle on this?

In case this turns up in anyone's search: Ultimate Combat has errata that addresses this now. They've substantially changed the ability and replaced the access further up the tree with one or more 'floating' feats that require the prequisites to be met.

"At 1st level, 2nd level, and every four levels thereafter, a master of many styles may select a bonus style feat or the Elemental Fist feat (Advanced Player’s Guide 158). He does not need to meet the prerequisites of that feat, except the Elemental Fist feat. Starting at 6th level, a master of many styles can choose to instead gain a wildcard style slot. Whenever he enters one or more styles, he can spend his wildcard style slots to gain feats in those styles’ feat paths (such as Earth Child Topple) as long as he meets the prerequisites. Each time he changes styles, he can also change these wildcard style slots. This ability replaces a monk’s standard bonus feats."

Is 'flame jet burst' a wordspell?

A wordspell containing 'burst' has a minimum level of 1. 'Flame jet' is a level 0 word.

Up to today, I have understood those rules to mean, "'flame jet burst' is a level 1 wordspell", but a friend's reading of the same rules is that 'flame jet burst' is not a wordspell.

Can anyone settle this one, or throw some light on it?

Link to the relevant but ambiguous rules for target words: http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/ultimateMagic/wordsOfPower/targetWords.h tml

It seems pretty clear from RAW that for many characters your effective dexterity when pinned is higher than when merely grappled.

This is because the grappled condition applies a -4 Dex modifier to both the controlling grappler and the controlled, but then the pinned condition removes the penalty from the controlled grappler. In place, it removes their Dex bonus.

I think this has some weird (but corner case) effects.

Someone with poor dexterity might prefer to pinned than grappled when there's an incoming fireball.
Someone with the feat agile maneuvers, and dexterity less than 14, and intending to escape or reverse a grapple, would prefer to be pinned rather than grappled.

(There's really a not of things you can do with your dexterity when pinned, so it really is corner-case stuff)

So my question is ... have I missed something foolish?

Or does this need (a very low priority) patch?
e.g. apply a -4 Dex penalty to the pinned condition in addition to the loss of the Dex bonus.

Relevant rules below -

From the glossary:

[...] Grappled creatures cannot move and take a –4 penalty to Dexterity. A grappled creature takes a –2 penalty on all attack rolls and combat maneuver checks, except those made to grapple or escape a grapple. [...]

http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/glossary.html

[...] A pinned creature cannot move and is denied its Dexterity bonus. A pinned character also takes an additional –4 penalty to his Armor Class. [...] Pinned is a more severe version of grappled, and their effects do not stack.

http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/glossary.html

From the FAQ:

When a creature is pinned, it gains this more severe version of the grappled condition, and the two conditions do not stack (as described in the pinned condition). While this means that you do not take both the penalties for both the grapple and the pin, this also means that pinned supersedes the grapple condition; it does not compound it. For this reason you only need to succeed one combat maneuver or Escape Artist check to escape either a grapple or a pin.

http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fm#v5748eaic9o3t

Thanks for that. I see the FAQ answer is just a month old :-)

Similar to the optional rule, the FAQ makes the origin point an origin entire square. I hummed and hawed over it, but that does completely answer the question.

I'm going to need some new templates ... :-)

Raising an old thread.

Adventure Path 91 (which involved giants) had an optional rule "The rules often assume that creatures are Medium or Small. In the case of a handful of spells or effects with areas that feature a “radius emanation centered on you” such as antimagic field, aura of doom, and zone of silence, as well as some of the spells presented in this section, this can result in an area that is effectively useless when coming from a Large or larger caster. As an optional rule, when a creature casts an emanation or burst spell with the text “centered on you,” treat the creature's entire space as the spell's point of origin, and measure the spell's area or effect from the edge of the creature's space. For instance, an antimagic field cast by a fire giant would extend 10 feet beyond his space (effectively increasing the emanation's radius by 5 feet)."

Magic Circle Against Evil. 10-ft.-radius emanation from touched creature. I'm fairly sure the intent of that spell wasn't that an evil creature could walk round the "back" of the circle and punch the (medium-sized) caster. Applying the optional rule fixes that too.

But it's not quite enough to answer a problem that's come up in my game.

Currently, I'm having to adjudicate on a cleric channelling in a small walled room with an open door in it. In the room beyond the door there are people that could be affected by the channeling.

Now, should I say that if they have line of effect to the cleric, then they are affected? It seems reasonable.... The cleric might well have preferred to bury the origin of the burst in the corner of the small room so that only the people in the small room were affected ...

Anyone have any thoughts on that?

It would be really nice if that was made explicit for spells (psychic or otherwise).

I can see some people building Mesmerists, particularly, and then being surprised and dismayed that the subtle manipulation of, for instance, sow thoughts, comes with an attending light show.

I'm not saying that's not how it should be - I'm just saying that clearing it up within the rules is desirable.

Because there are some who do argue, for instance, that if spell casting always provokes an attack of opportunity then the person reacting is clearly able to determine that a spell is being cast.

So it's not really an open and shut case, sadly. One can make a half-decent case either way, but it would be nice to know what the designer's would like to see happen.

The new spell components are interesting. As they are more internal, I just know my players are going to ask how this will affect the ability to cast a spell without anyone noticing.

I appreciate that it's not a new question as to how to cast charm person or sow thought without being noticed. But I haven't previously spotted any official advice. With a complete absense of the caster gesturing and muttering, I think it would be useful to have some official ruling.

I do very much like the fact that you're trying to tighten up the rules here.

Some things that I think you haven't yet specifically covered, are where Stealth and the sections on Light and Vision and Concealment and Invisibility overlap.

Has the Stealth play test been abandoned or did it already become integrated into the rules somewhere?

I just wanted to check your intent with this one: Skip, who would otherwise be in complete darkness is holding a hooded lantern, which provides normal light to 30 feet and increased illumination up to 60 feet (thus making it dim light at 35 feet). Chris, a human Rogue with base speed 30 feet is standing in the first dimly lit square having previously moved there and become hidden. There is no cover. This round Chris takes a 30 foot move action and makes a Stealth check at -5 to move adjacent to Skip and remain hidden (successfully), he then attacks and as Skip was denied his Dexterity bonus, Chris gains the benefit of his ability to sneak attack. Is this a reasonable interpretation?

Should we typically also take into account that Skip may be at a further disadvantage if he was, say, an archer a little back from the fray but being distracted by the nearby combat that Chris's allies are having with Skip's allies? +5 for being distracted, +2 for unfavourable conditions?

I do very much like the fact that you're trying to tighten up the rules here.

Some things that I think you haven't yet specifically covered, are where Stealth and the sections on Light and Vision and Concealment and Invisibility overlap.

A really silly one that has just never been specifically stated - if a character is in darkness (and thereby normally considered blinded) but his opponent is in a well lit area and has line of effect, does the character have line of sight to the opponent? Imagine standing in the dark and watching the opponent creeping by with a candle.

When in darkness a character has total concealment, not just regular concealment; Skip Williams clarified in the article All About Sneak Attacks back in 3.5e that the character should be treated as invisible. It would be nice to see something like that in these rules too.

As sniping from darkness is such a sane and regular thing for even low level monsters to be doing, I'd like to see it clarified what the intended ruling is for detecting sniping from invisible opponents. Even if sniping from darkness gets ruled as being hidden rather than invisible, I'd still like to see it clarified what the intended ruling is for detecting sniping from invisible opponents because of the spell Greater Invisibility.

I believe under current rulings a character firing from the darkness cannot be targeted - but the square that they're in can be targeted if you can determine it.

Elsewhere: "If a character tries to attack an invisible creature whose location he has not pinpointed, have the player choose the space where the character will direct the attack." - This makes perfect sense if the character is making a melee attack but it seems off for a ranged attack. What does seem like a good idea for a ranged attack, treat it as attacking every square in a line?

Finally, some words upon the subject of whether degree of cover should modify the sniping check would be much appreciated.

Good work so far, guys.

PS Is there a way to subscribe to all play test announcements?

"At 1st level, 2nd level, and every four levels thereafter, a master of many styles may select a bonus style feat or the Elemental Fist feat. He does not have to meet the prerequisites of that feat, except the Elemental Fist feat. Alternatively, a master of many styles may choose a feat in that style’s feat path (such as Earth Child Topple) as one of these bonus feats if he already has the appropriate style feat (such as Earth Child Style). The master of many styles does not need to meet any other prerequisite of the feat in the style’s feat path.

This ability replaces a monk’s standard bonus feats."

As I understand it, I think that the example of Earth Child Topple isn't as helpful as it could be as that's the second of the feat tree. I think the intent was to give access further up the feat tree, for example to Earth Child Binder.

So, can a Master of Many Styles with Earth Child Style take Earth Child Binder without first taking Earth Child Topple?

Please vote for this to be included in the FAQ.

The lovely people at Hero Lab have developed a very good character generator, however they read the answer as "no" and, quite reasonably, will only be convinced by an official response.

Many thanks to anyone who has time to comment on:

Boots of the Unexpected
Aura faint transmutation; CL 3rd
Slot feet; Price 7,000 gp; Weight 1 lb.
Description

These ordinary looking black boots are used by athletes who turn every surface into their playground. 

The boots activate if the wearer moves 10 feet or more along horizontal surface or a surface whose slope is less than 45 degrees. 

Once activated, the boots allow him to continue his move this round as if he was the subject of spider climb except that the wearer does not require his hands to be free, and cannot traverse ceilings; rather he performs impressive feats of vaulting and wall running. 

Once activated, the boots allow rapid changes of momentum such that the wearer may perform a charge despite this usually requiring the charging character to move directly toward the designated opponent. 

If the wearer uses the boots to reach an opponent, at the GMs discretion he may attempt a feint as a free action. 

Examples of maneuvers that may qualify for the feint check include the wearer:

• running up a tree and leaping backwards over his pursuer
• running up the wall of a fort to drag a sentry from his post
• vaulting onto and off a table

Construction
Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, cat’s grace; Cost 3,500 gp