Eknob's page

Thank you! You're the best!

I found a list on the d20PFSRD. There was no master list, but in the link I'm providing, there is a list of four subpages with alphabetical lists. They are the following:

Effect Words
Meta Words
Target Words
Words by Class

Link: Words of Power.

Yeah, I was able to find that as well. It would work for what I'm doing, but it would be tedious. I appreciate your help, though.

Does anyone have a link to an alphabetical list of Words of Power? I've tried searching to no avail.

http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/ultimateMagic/wordsOfPower/effectWords/w oundingWords.html

The page linked above shows Wounding Words for the Word Spell optional rules from Ultimate Magic. The page is called Weather Words, however.

Unimportant intro filled with backstory:

** spoiler omitted **

Does anyone have any already-made houserules that allow for accuracy/inaccuracy with AOE spells at a range?

Having put some thought into it, but no playtesting, the first thing that popped to mind was something like this:

* Caster makes a ranged attack roll (could possibly be an int-based roll instead of dex?) with all applicable modifiers to target a square or grid intersection at AC 5.
* When past [some number of feet], then,
* Caster applies a modifier to their roll of ...[I have no idea how much per some number of feet]
* If the caster misses, apply splash rules for direction, and go a number of squares equal to [some coefficient of how much they missed].

Any thoughts? Any better ideas?

Thanks in advance! :D

I've actually come up against this as a GM before. Players would say, "I cast fireball so its hits all the enemies but not my allies."

I would have them make a Spellcraft check. The DC's were written down somewhere, but I've since lost them. But it makes sense to me that aiming your AoE spells would be part of Spellcraft.

"Check: Spellcraft is used whenever your knowledge and skill of the technical art of casting a spell or crafting a magic item comes into question"

The magic school system definitely has some logic gaps. Personally, I think cure/inflict spells should be Evocation school, as they manipulate positive/negative energy, but everyone will have their own interpretation.

Would a character who was dazed before his/her turn in the initiative sequence (in the first round of combat) be considered flat-footed until the dazed condition wears off?

Dazed: The creature is unable to act normally. A dazed
creature can take no actions, but has no penalty to AC.
A dazed condition typically lasts 1 round.

Flat-Footed: A character who has not yet acted during
a combat is flat-footed, unable to react normally to the
situation. A flat-footed character loses his Dexterity bonus
to AC (if any) and cannot make attacks of opportunity.

Specifically, in the wording of the two conditions. ..."can take no actions"..., and ..."has not yet acted during combat is flat-footed..."

Thoughts, opinions, clarifications?

The penalty would not be doubled as a "heavy load" is not something one can be proficient in.

However, the character would not be in a heavy load from Strength damage because Strength damage is a temporary effect and thus does not affect carrying capacity.

Is there a rule I can point to that states that temporary penalties don't affect carrying capacity?

So, even though the Core book says that the check penalty from being encumbered "works like an armor check penalty," a character in who is encumbered wouldn't suffer any penalties to their attack rolls for not being able to move effectively?

This is a situation that came up recently while GMing the Pathfinder Module "Crypt of the Everflame."

A character's strength was reduced to the point where he was in his "heavy load," which imposes a "check penalty." The Core Rulebook says:

Like armor, a character’s load affects his maximum Dexterity
bonus to AC, carries a check penalty (which works like
an armor check penalty)...

(Additional Rules: Carrying Capacity, Page 169)

Now, a character who is not proficient with armor takes double the armors check penalty to their attack rolls. Does this mean that a character who is in their heavy load takes -12 (double the check penalty of -6) to their attack rolls?

Does this sound right, or is there an errata, or thread somewhere that addresses this?