Emalea's page

Ok so I think the Background skills are an amazing idea.

Now however there's the bard. And while Perform being a Background skill seems ok for every other class, those get Versatile Performance, and use Perform for two other skills which are usually not Background ones.

Is that fair, or should I make an adjustment there?

I went through the Wizard spell list on the SRD, and went through all Enchantment spells there. 8 (eight) were (charm) spells, I've not counted all the others but it felt at least 10 times that.

Just feels weird to split the whole school into two sub schools and then basically give everything to one.

Am I missing something?

Is it a good thing to have 6+level or 11+level SR as a PC, or does it mess you up more often than it saves your bacon?

Hi

I'm trying to build a half-succubus character for an upcoming game, using the ARG rules. I'm not 100% positive yet on how many RP I have to play with, but assume either 10 or 20.

Class is going to be an Enchantress, so a Bard or Sorceress or something along those lines. Spellcaster definitely.

This is mostly to gather options for abilities, feats etc. that are fitting to the idea. Not necessarily make the full race yet. Though if you want to, I won't stop you of course.

For quick reference, full Succubus is here

The Abilities should either mimic those of a Succubus or be somehow related to one they have. They can be the same power level but should not be stronger.
Here's a few ideas I've been tossing around in my head for abilities to use:

• Limited Shapechange: Unlike the Succubus who can change into anyone, this one would have a fixed form she’d change to. So she could switch between “demon form” or “human form”, but it would be the same human every time. That would be the "lesser change shape" option. But it's not available to Outsiders, so my GM would have to allow it, or the character is a Monstrous Humanoid instead. I can live with that if necessary.
  
• Wings: Either for actual flight mode (30 ft. clumsy or poor – nothing fancy it’s mostly for fluff), or simply vestigial/gliding wings. Would only be available in “demon form” (ARG: Flight or Gliding/verstigial wings - depends how much RP are allowed)
  
• Tail: Fairly obvious. Most likely Prehensile, not the slapping tail. Only in “Demon form”
  
• Seduction/Temptation: This is what a Succubus does. (ARG options: This is where I'm not sure on. Bonus to Cha obviously. Seducer most likely. Maybe Object of Desire as well. Something that gives me bonus to Bluff or Diplomacy, like Silver Tongue. Any other ideas to do this?)
  
• Energy draining kiss: Another thing that’s pretty iconic for Succubi, though the full version is clearly way too overpowered for PCs. So here’s my idea. Basically a normal Bite Attack, following all the normal rules for it, like requiring an attack roll, damage dice etc. But instead of physical damage it does Negative Energy damage and does not add Str into the mix? This would clearly require the GM to make a houserule. Alternatively just a normal bite attack, that's called a Kiss. (I'm a spellcaster, so honestly how often am I going to bite people anyway?)
  

So, what do you think? Any ideas on other abilities that would make sense and I could use?

Ok, so my players are gonna attack an enemy village next turn. Their plan is to throw alchemists fire and other stuff on the houses to set them on fire (they'll burn easily being made out of wood, leaves, etc).

Now, most people will be inside being asleep. We all know fire is a major hazard, not because of fire but because the smoke might kill you before you even wake up.

I'm just not sure how to deal with it in game. Not looking for hard rules, since I don't think they exist (though they might), but more thoughts on how other GMs would deal with it. I don't want to make it too easy on them by saying "wonderful, everyone burns to death" and not deny them their success outright by going "Ha! They all make it out easy enough!" (unless the die say so, but then it's out of my hand).

There are rules for Smoke here, which is good, but for example what would it take for a person to actually wake up from smoke?

Also, said houses/huts, how fast would they burn, how many rounds before the roof crashes in, dealing bludgeoning damage and then fire damage? 1? 5? 10?

Hi

A few days ago I found out about Realm Works. I looked at their website, watched the video there but I'm still a bit confused as to what it does, and what it doesn't do.

A bit about my situation:
I'm the GM of a PF game that I run via Skype and Roll20.

Now, Realm Works seems to have things that overlap with Roll20 features. Like the Fog of War on maps. I've seen actual dungeon maps in the video too.
Is it a fully functional VTT, or can't you actually run encounters on it?

Also a lot of things like revealing info to players seem to require the players to have the Player Edition, or to be able to see a second screen during actual in-person games. Latter option doesn't work for me since I play online, and I don't think I can get all of my players to get the Player Edition, so I'm wondering, what would be my advantage using this?

What other things are there where Roll20 and Realm Works overlap?
What other things are there where they do not, but complement each other?

Don't just link me to the Website, I read the stuff there, I'm looking for actual first hand experience with this.

In my homebrew world, which is largely based on Golarion, considering countries and such things, but also changed in large parts. First it's an E6 game, so most NPCs won't be high level at all, most actually will have NPC classes.
Another thing that's changed is magic items. They're rare. There aren't any "Ye olde magic shoppe" at every corner in a Hamlet. Heck there probably won't be one in a Metropolis.
The only magic things more or less readily available are potions and wands of a few select low level spells.

So most Magic Items have a history, and most likely a name.

I just have a hard time coming up with any names or history for them at all, and those that I do sound so cheesy that I can't even repeat them here.
So how do you come up with those things?

Also any advice on how to play up the rarity of magic items would be great.

Ok, this is a bit complicated.

Bloodrager Kyton Bloodline gives this ability at level 8:

Now I know that armor bonus to AC does not stack with normal armor worn, just the highest applies.

But what if I went and wear a Haramaki to it, and enchant it with +3?

Obviously the +1 normal AC of the Haramaki doesn't count, but does the +3 enhancement bonus? AKA do I have 4 AC or 7 AC?

Assume you can pick one, which do you like better, and why?

Is it possible?

I've lately been listening to a lot of Shadowrun podcasts, and in one of them the following theory was brought up:

When using a map and miniatures, this becomes the "reality" in the heads of the players. They watch a battle from a bird's eyes view, with miniatures acting out the combat on a battlemat, or a computer screen. They don't actually "see" the battle.
Whereas when you simply describe the scene, with no map or anything at all, your mind fills in the blanks. It might not be the exact same scene for every player, but it comes more too life and immerses you more into the action. They are also more invested in it maybe, because they're part of shaping the scene, by asking questions about the environment.

I've thought about it, and have to admit, when I think about recent PF combat encounters and how I envision and remember them, then I see the map, and tokens moving about, not so much "the characters doing stuff". That too, but not nearly as much as the other.
So maybe there's something to it, I thought.

Earlier this week, I listened to another Shadowrun podcast, this time an Actual Play one, and the GM there was using mapless combat (I wouldn't have been able to see the map anyway, being a podcast, but still). He decribed the scene, he never went into terrible details on anything. Just something like "You follow the van through the dimly lit street in the Barrens (basically the worst part of town) and it crashes into a parked car, just as the troll street samurai jumps out and dives behind a mailbox for cover".
Still it brought the scene to life for me, I saw that troll jump out of the car, not a token of a car moving on the street colliding with another parked car token and then a token of a troll moving away from it. But more like a movie or a book, seeing the actual scene.

Now, I realize Shadowrun is not Pathfinder, but I was wondering... does it work with Pathfinder as well?

PF seems a lot more focused on combat, a lot more rules on movement, distances, angles of attacks and god knows what else. All those rules assume a battlemap is used.

Has anyone tried playing the game without maps?
How well does it work?
What doesn't work the same, and what doesn't work at all?
Do your players like it better? Or if you're a player, do you?
Does it change the way you prepare your sessions? (for GMs)

Let's say a necromancer has a couple of Skeletons and Zombies.
Now some mean adventurers come around and kill most of his undead buddies before leaving again, but leave the remains lying around.

Can he reanimate those again?

I'm almost sure I saw something like that a while ago.

A cleric disguising himself as a different faith. Using (or pretending to use) a holy symbol of that faith, etc.

PCs got the unhealthy notion that whatever encounter the GM sets before them will somehow be level appropriate. So the question of "Can we really do this?" usually never occurs to them, instead it's "How can we best kill them all?"

But what if they stumble into something that is truly beyond them (for the time being at least)?

Just tell them straight "Guys, I don't think you'll survive this, find another way"?

I'm currently building a Summoner for a Wrath of the Rightious game, and I'm pondering if I should give my Eidolon (biped, sorta humanoid) a big twohanded weapon or focus on natural attacks instead.

I know at low level it's pretty amazing to have 3 or 4 attacks at full BAB when everyone else has 1 or maybe 2 attacks.

But how do natural attacks fare at higher levels? I rarely play there so I don't have too much experience with it.

- I suppose NA Eidolon is more dependent on getting full attacks as often as possible, while the Weapon Eidolon can do lots of damage with a single attack. How often (aproximately) would you say you get a full attack, over not (assume I won't get pounce).
- Does DR really mess that badly with you?
- Does the higher attack bonus (6 attacks at full BAB at 14 vs. 3 weapon attacks + a few natural weapons at -5 [possibly more as I won't get a AoMF and magic weapons]) make up for the lower damage per hit?
- Is the difference (one way or the other) actually really noticable in game, or is it mostly a theoretical debate, because both can easily kill level-appropriate enemies? If the enemy has 100 HPs and I do either 150 or 200 per round, it really doesn't matter.

I'm looking at the Eidolon page, and noticed something I just can't picture.

I'm allowed to trade out the default claws for hooves. Since bipeds are the only base form that comes with claws, that obviously means biped eidolons with hooves are ok.
Similarly, it says claws can be put on feet (only one pair, but you can do it). It doesn't give a limitation to "only quadrupeds" as other things do, and considering the hooves I'd say bipeds are viable targets for this evolution.

But... how? With a quadruped it's relatively easy to figure out how they use it, pretty much like any animal would. But a biped? It just says "you get 2 hoof attacks".

By RAW nothing seems to stop me from equiping my Eidolon with a huge two-handed weapon in it's hands, taking hooves and get 2 secondary attacks (doesn't matter, would be secondary anyway since I use a sword) and a bite as well, for 4 attacks right at level 1.

Are there any rules I'm missing about Natural Attacks on feet, or how am I to picture this?

I'm searching for a mini-boss kind of creature for my low level party (They're level 1, might be 2 or 3 by the time the encounter this though)
It's supposed to be an undead pirate captain "in command" of a whole bunch of lesser undead. By "in command" I don't necessarily mean it needs the supernatural "control undead" ability. It's just the one organizing the mindless ones.

- Undead
- Made from human
- Intelligent, aka able to work on it's own without constant orders
- Even better if it regains class levels and memories of it's living days
- Doesn't need a lot (or any) super special powers
- Should be created by a necromancer/ritual/etc. (though I can houserule this part if it's not)
- Able to serve as enemy to a party around level 2

Ok, so we all know about the 15-minute adventuring day and why it's bad.

On the other hand I don't want to chase my party through a dungeon full of monsters and not give them a chance to rest. If they have to go through 20 fights they'll not use any of their resources and just save them for the end. That's stupid too.

So, how many is a good number?

I'm pondering getting either a Kindle or a full Tablet PC at the moment, and one of the things I want to do is read some of the Paizo PDFs on them.

I know that most eBook Readers can read PDFs, but they're usually black/white too. So I'm sure a few people tried it out already, how do the Paizo PDFs look on a Kindle or one of the other readers like the Sony or Kobo?

I'm planning to make a ship-campaign, inspired by Skull and Shackles.

So I'm looking for decent ship-combat rules.

Of course Skull & Shackles Player Guide has some in them, but I heard they're not as good, even though I haven't playtested them yet.
But I heard comparisons to the Jade Regent Caravan rules, where it's usually 1 roll of the GM vs 1 roll of the party, till one side has no HPs anymore. It was horribly boring and none of us had fun with it.
Is that true?

UC has Vehicle rules, but the way I understand it, S&S just uses them in a slightly modified form, so not sure they're really any better.

So is there anything out there that makes ship combat work. My criterias on that are:
a) It's fun for everyone (I know fun is relative...)
b) Everyone got something to do each round and has a chance to affect the outcome.
c) They're relatively easy. Sure some new rules have to be learned, obviously, but the more intuitive they are, the better.

No idea if such a thing exist...

Hi

I think I read this a while ago, and thought it was an interesting idea, but I have no idea how it plays out and if it's fun.

Basically it goes like this:
Player start at -1000 XP
They only have access to the NPC classes at the start. There's also a Sage class, which is pretty much an arcane Adept.
They'd only start with average HPs for their NPC class (rounded up, PFS style). So yes, a Commoner has 4 HPs + Con mod.

Once they reach 0 XP they trade the NPC class for their real class and get max HPs. After that it continues as normal.

I dunno. It sounds interesting, but has anyone ever tried something like that? It would make the first few encounters more dangerous as they lack important abilities and have less HPs, but possibly also more memorable.

I think it might make "random people thrust into a dangerous adventure" more real, instead of when everyone just starts with a PC class already.

Spoilering just in case players are reading this:

Ok, so comparing pure damage is easy. Take 1d12+6 to 2d8+8, it's 12.5 vs 17 average damage and the 2d8+8 wins.

But what if the 1d12+6 is a single attack at an attack bonus of +10, while the 2d8+8 is actually two separate attacks (TWF) at +7 with 1d8+4 each ?

I'm fairly sure the 1d12+6 wins in that case.

What if the 1d12 is a 20/x3 crit weapon and the 1d8 is a 19-20/x2 weapon?

I'm also sure you people here have already developed a formula to calculate all these things fairly easily and compare them to each other.

So my question: Can someone of you tell me that formula (and maybe explain it too)? Would be great.

Hi

I'm considering a TWF Barbarian type character. (Barbarian as the concept not necessarily the class).

I know that it's probably worse than a THW barbarian, but I'm ok with that, I don't think the difference is too huge.

Now obviously I want high Strength for damage and high Con for not getting killed, which means I don't really have too many points left for Dex.

Now, are there ways to get TWF without the insane Dex requirements?

- I know Rangers can pick it as a fighting style.
- I know I can start with 13 Dex and eventually get a +6 Dex belt and have enough for Greater TWF. Of course that means I won't have as much +Str or +Con which may be bad too.

Are there any other ways. Obscure classes/archetypes/feats/races? Paizo only though, nothing 3rd party.

Ok, so I'm looking at the Sawtooth Sabre right now and how it works.

First part seems clear, if I have the EWP for it, it counts as a light weapon for TWF, so I only take a -2 to attacks.

So far so clear.

Now, for all other purposes it counts as a one handed weapon. Does that mean, I do still add my full Strength bonus to the damage, or my normal Power Attack bonus?

Or is the only advantage of using it that you can use a 1d8 in both hands, instead of a 1d6 and still get Weapon Focus etc in a single feat?

So my players (Wu, go somewhere else!) are about to reach the end of Jade Regent now, but the Rebellion Points are a bit weird.

I checked how much RP can they get at the max and I got to 28. Five of that is for actually killing the Jade Regent, so it's 23 before the end-fight.

Now I look at the Teamwork Scores, especially those of the JR and Anamurumon. The events under Sow Discord can reduce their Teamwork scores by 25 and 20 respectively, so if the PCs have done everything, they'll have a Teamwork Score of 25 or 30 at the lowest before the fight.
23, the max they can get as Rebellion points, wouldn't have a chance to reduce that below 0.

Since the whole thing seems to be made as a Yes/No trigger - either the score is 0 or below and the alliance is broken, or it's 1 or higher and it's all peachy - that math seems extremely weird to me.

Alright, I'll most likely try to take the actual score into account when determining how the NPCs react, but I still find it weird that it's impossible for two of the NPCs to even break their alliance, and almost impossible for the Raven Prince (he's down to 22 if everything is done - miss one step to get Rebellion Points and you can't break him loose either).

Let's say I have a Nalfashnee Demon for example.

It has "Aura unholy aura (DC 23)"

Unholy Aura: http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/u/unholy-aura

Especially this effect is nasty:
4. If a good creature succeeds on a melee attack against a warded creature, the offending attacker takes 1d6 points of Strength damage (Fortitude negates).

Now... can the caster of the group dispel that Aura? Or at least supress it? It's based on a spell but not exactly a spell, so I'm not sure.

Except for ranged attacks/spells, is there a good way to deal with that creature?

Ok, so the old DR rules, with +3 overcoming Cold Iron etc.

I always assumed that you need an actual +3 Enhancement bonus on the weapon to overcome Cold Iron, and that a +2 Flaming weapon would not be enough, even though it also costs +3 to make.

Weapons with an enhancement bonus of +3 or greater can ignore some types of damage reduction, regardless of their actual material or alignment.

Under the Magic Weapons section they usually differentiate between Enhancement Bonus (the actual +x on a weapon) and "Weapon Bonus" (the total number for determening price), so I figured it was clear.

Now however, DR/epic in Mythic Adventures states that for DR/epic those special abilities count. A "+1 Keen Flaming Burst Holy" counts as a +6 for that and overcomes DR/epic.

So, does the same apply to normal DR too, or is that a special case for Epic DR?

I'm playing in an E6 game, and we just reached level 4.

I'm a Ninja so far, TWF with daggers. Now sticking to Ninja for the last 3 levels will work easily enough, I know that.

Yet I'm wondering if there aren't any great multiclass options I might give up on.

The world itself is extremely low magic. There are almost no magic items, and magic classes are almost as rare, but not unheard of, so they're all possible for PCs. Only class not available is the gunslinger.

Stat array is: 10/16/12/14/10/16

The role I have in the group is that of face/diplomat/dirty sneaky thief and also some damage in combat, though the Barbarian does a far better job at that then me.
Whatever I multiclass in should if possible help those roles

Funny enough one of the classes I'm looking at is the Sorcerer, but then again I think it's quite silly.

As there are only 3 levels left (E6, remember?), I wouldn't want to multiclass more than 1 or 2 levels. 3 possible but only if the option is really great.

Ok, I'm a little confused about Haunts.

a) Dealing HP damage via channel energy/cure spells etc. neutralizes it, but it will reform after a certain time.
b) Fulfilling the Destruction condition finishes the Haunt forever.

But what does Dispel Magic do to it? Neutralize till it resets? Destroy completely? Does it even do anything at all?

Ok, I was convinced I had read somewhere that if you're mounted you can choose the square from which you attack.
In other words: If I'm on a horse, with a reach weapon, and someone is adjacent to me/the horse, then I can still attack him, by simply picking a square that's 10 ft away from the enemy.

However I've searched forever now, and I can't find that. Am I wrong? Is that not how it works?

Here's the relevant quotes:

At 11th level, a zen archer may hit targets that he might otherwise miss. By spending 1 point from his ki pool as a swift action, the zen archer can ignore concealment. By spending 2 points, he can ignore total concealment or cover. By spending 3 points, he can ignore total cover, even firing arrows around corners. The arrow must still be able to reach the target; a target inside a closed building with no open doors or windows cannot be attacked. These effects last for 1 round.

The creature cannot see. It takes a –2 penalty to Armor Class, loses its Dexterity bonus to AC (if any), and takes a –4 penalty on most Strength- and Dexterity-based skill checks and on opposed Perception skill checks. All checks and activities that rely on vision (such as reading and Perception checks based on sight) automatically fail. All opponents are considered to have total concealment (50% miss chance) against the blinded character. Blind creatures must make a DC 10 Acrobatics skill check to move faster than half speed. Creatures that fail this check fall prone. Characters who remain blinded for a long time grow accustomed to these drawbacks and can overcome some of them.

It seems fairly straightforward that a Zen Archer could spend 2 Ki points and ignore the total concealment imposed on him by the Blinded condition, right?

I guess I could say "You're not sure where the enemy is now, so you attack the wrong square" Unless he makes a perception check vs the enemy's stealth check I suppose.

Would the enemy gain the +20 bonus for being invisible against the blinded character, because he can't be seen? Or is the -4 penalty the blinded guy gets as far as it goes?

Also could the Zen Archer simply spend 3 ki to overcome "total cover" and simply pinpoint the target that way? I don't think so, but I'm sure it will come up.

Ok, it seems kinda obvious, but I got into a little bit of an argument with one of my players yesterday about it, so I wish to see if I was wrong.
And also see if I should change it, even if I was right.

You can target the weak points in your opponent's armor.

Prerequisites: Dex 19, Improved Precise Shot, Point-Blank Shot, Precise Shot, base attack bonus +16.

Benefit: As a standard action, make a single ranged attack. The target does not gain any armor, natural armor, or shield bonuses to its Armor Class. You do not gain the benefit of this feat if you move this round.

Now he did a Pinpoint Targeting (PPT) attack and then wanted to move his speed. I told him, he can't do that cause he used PPT. He disagreed obviously and said that only counts if you move before the shot.

To me the rules seems obvious: If you move, you can't use PPT afterwards. If you use PPT you can't move, but you can still use your move action for other stuff.

And that's how I ruled. Felt a bit like a dick, to not allow him to do the rest of his full attack either, but I figured in that moment "Ok they're 12th level, they should know by now how their feats work"

However he did also say this, and it got me thinking: "Ok, if I can't do this, then why would I use PPT? I would just flurry and shoot my 7 arrows at him" (he's a Zen Archer and took it via his bonusfeat)
To which I kind of have to agree. Even if it's a high AC target, chances are with his 7 attacks (4 of which are at full BAB) he'll hit at least once, maybe more than that, even though PPT might be a guaranteed hit.
It makes PPT useful in the Surprise Round, but that's pretty much it. Which seems horrible for a feat with those pre-reqs.

So two questions I suppose:
1) Did I rule correctly by RAW and RAI?
2) Do you think it's overpowered to houserule the feat and remove the movement restriction from it?

Do I calculate the CMD using the Monk level (like flurry) or my normal, lower BAB?

This is assuming a normal Monk, not a Maneuver Master.

My party aquired a "flawed crystal ball", which acts like a normal Crystal Ball except with the following addition:

flawed crystal ball (the subject of the scrying automatically notices the magical sensor created by the crystal ball)

Which in my opinion is a quite debilitating flaw, as it makes it nearly impossible to use it on enemies.
However it can still be used to keep track of party members and such.

So I'm not sure how to price it.
42,000 like the flawless version seems far to high at least.

I avoided reading much in here, to avoid getting spoilered, in case I find a game to play in. So even if that was answered already, I didn't see it.

But I'm wondering. Pirates almost by definition aren't nice people. They plunder innocent merchants, maybe even kill them and sink their ships. They murder and backstab each other when it seems like a good idea.

You can say buccaneers are different, but honestly they're not. The only difference is that they only attack innocent merchants from certain nations and not from others. They still kill and murder people that haven't done anything to them.

Even more moderate pirates don't really have the stuff heroes are made out of. They might just rob and steal and not murder and rape and burn, but that's still not very heroic.

So and now there's an AP where you play Pirates. Without spoilering too much, but just how evil is the stuff they do in the AP? Let's divide that into
a) How evil is the stuff they have to do to get through the AP
b) How evil can they be, while still operating totally within the AP

What I mean with b) is that I'm aware you can turn every AP into evil, if you want to, but that usually derails it fairly quick. I'm wondering where the "breaking point" for S&S is, if that makes any sense.

Blinding Ray is written as being a "Cleric 2" spell, not a "Cleric/Oracle 2" as it's usually written.

Is that an oversight or is the spell really only for Clerics and not for Oracles?

Ok, so my players have collected a metric ton of magic and mundane items (well to be honest I didn't check the weight, but it gotta be close :) ) and obviously want to make it to gold now to equip themselves.

So far I was under the impression the Purchase Limit given on the Settlements page is the maximum the town can buy. So a Small Town could buy magic items worth 5000 gp and such.

Now after a player mentioned it and I re-read the rule, it seems to say that the 5000 is only the limit per item, and not the total.

Is that correct? (English isn't my first language, so I sometimes do misunderstand weird sentences)

It seems weird, that they can sell like 10 or 20 items for 5,000 gp EACH, for 50 or 100k, but when they try to sell a single item for 7,000 they can't afford it.

Now with the release of the Mythic rules I'm considering if I should implement that to some degree into Jade Regent.

My group is currently near the end of Book 4, and perhaps will kill Munasukaru next session or the one after. Considering they're currently working with Kami as well, that would make a good spot for their Ascension I'm thinking.
They're nearing Minkai now too and their destiny, so going Mythic seems appropriate.

However I'm worried that that might trivialize the other two books too much. They're already having little trouble killing everything I throw at them.
On the other hand, since they're already doing that, adding Mythic might not even make a huge difference.

Obviously the Oni enemies at the very least would get some Mythic tiers as well, as might some of the more prominent enemies. Normal mooks would stay mooks, but might gain a level or get the Advanced template.

I don't plan on giving them the full 10 tiers. Maybe 1 or 2 is what I'm thinking now.

Am I the only one who considers doing that, or are there others?
What do you think is a decent upper limit on Mythic tiers for JR?

This is a bit nitpicky, but could make all the difference in an upcoming battle.

The creature in question is the Gorgon:

Breath Weapon

A gorgon can use its breath weapon once every 1d4+1 rounds to create a 60-foot cone of green gas. Those caught in the area of the gas can attempt a DC 21 Fortitude save to resist the effects, but those who fail the save are immediately petrified. This petrification is temporary—each round, a petrified creature can attempt a new DC 21 Fortitude save to recover from the petrification as long as it is not caught within the area of effect of the gorgon's breath weapon a second time while petrified. A creature exposed to the gorgon's breath a second time while already petrified becomes permanently petrified, and can no longer attempt to make additional Fortitude saves to recover naturally. The save DC is Constitution-based.

I bolded the spot that I'm not 100% sure about. It calls out "the gorgon's breath weapon", not "a gorgon's breath weapon".

As I said, it might be a bit nitpicky, but those are magical creatures so nitpicky is what you need sometimes.
In this situation they're fighting two gorgons, and as such one of them might be effected by the breath weapons of both gorgons in the same round. Would that mean they're immediately perma-petrified if they fail both saves, or is it actually literally only if they get hit by the breath weapon of the same gorgon again?

Ok first this is what Acrobatics says:

I'm sure I read a feat or something, that allowed you to do this and not be flatfooted. Also if possible avoids the additional check when taking damage, but that flatfooted part is the most important.

If possible something a monk can use.

Basically is the "Improved Cover" provided by arrow slits better or worse than Total Cover in regards to Improved Precise Shot?

I don't wanna hose my archer who got that feat, but I also don't wanna make it too easy for him to just shoot the enemies through the slits without any penalties that should apply.
I almost think the way it's written means, IPS applies in full and the Improved Cover doesn't give any AC bonus.

I figure though that after making a full attack through the slits the enemies could 5ft step to the side and be in Total Cover at least, and could use the sniping stealth rules in the other rounds (once they 5ft stepped in again to attack). Though even with the +10 from Imp Cover (and -20 for sniping) the archers perception is insanely high and he'll most likely see them.

Ok, looking for some honest opinion from other GMs and also players of course.

I'm still relatively new to GMing, so I'm aware that I make mistakes. I just don't think this was one, but I got into a little bit of an argument with a player about this, so I want to see if my perception on this matter is correct.

This was an encounter in the Jade Regent AP #2. It's just a tiny side-encounter and not a huge spoiler, but I'll spoiler the AP text anyway:

So what happened was this:
The NPC comes up to the group and yells at them drunkenly that he finally found them, and they better pay up the weregild for the dog they killed or he'll be forced to declare the blood feud.
I was fully prepared for the face of the party to say "Nope wasn't us", and make the diplomacy check and most likely succeeding easily. Or just pay the 50 gp. I ruled the chance for a fight at this encounter at maybe 5% or so.

Just to make this clear, the PCs were innocent of the crime, and got framed for it.

What she did instead was basically tell him "F*$§ off or I kill you", pretty much in those words, and shove her way past him.
She rolled good on her Intimidate too.

For me that meant however he was now convinced that they really did it, he's drunk and he feels honor-bound now to his threat before to declare a blood-feud (which apparently is a big thing to Ulfen), so while he was shaken from the Intimidate he'd still rage and attack.
He actually crit the face with his Battleaxe and nearly send her into a coma with a single hit.

All that happened over 4 months or so ago, so details of the exact happenings are a bit fuzzy but I do remember that much. As I said I was fully prepared for them to just buy him a drink and convince him it was not them, I was really surprised by the way the face reacted, so that stuck with me.

Now this week I had a talk with the player and this situation came up.
He feels I dismissed the Intimidate check too easily. He said from what they saw in that region chest-thumping would be a better result than sweet-talking and the guy should have backed down. Even if he would have come back later, maybe with friends.
I explained my reasons why he didn't, as above.

He then said, I should have let him make a Sense Motive check to figure out that Intimidate wouldn't have the intended result, and that Diplomacy might be the way to go. Mind you, he had never asked for that, if he had, I'd probably would have told him.
I kinda felt if those things would happen passively all the time, it turns the game more into a video game where you get the options that work, never getting a chance to pick a "wrong" one.

I also don't want to tell players when they say they do something "No, you don't, because X", because I kinda hate that. It's their character, if they wanna attack someone, it's not my place to tell them that their character wouldn't. (unless it's obvious the player is drunk and really would not attack the LG king in full view of his bodyguards or something)

So I think here's where the issue is:
While I think Diplomacy and Intimidate are powerful tools, sometimes enemies just have so compelling reasons to fight the PCs that they can't just be convinced or scared into surrendering or walking away.
They might be more scared of the BBEG than the PCs and attack anyway (after all they know the demi-god like sorcerer is known for invoking brutal vengeance for failure). Their family might be threatened. They just don't give a damn if they die or not, for some reason or another (greater hit to their honor from retreating than by losing the fight for example).
Mind you, I don't think that's the case with most enemies, but in some situations yes.
Also often you don't have the time to properly scare them that much. Usually the PCs will enter a room in a dungeon and the guys there will attack them pretty much immediately or the other way around.

He kinda agrees with that last part, Intimidate takes time after all, so does Diplomacy, but not really the first one.

So I guess the points I want to hear opinions on:
a) Did I really disregard his Intimidate unfairly?
b) Should I have given him a passive Sense Motive when he did the Intimidate to tell him that's not what his character thinks is the best way?
c) Would you agree some people are just beyond Diplomacy/Intimidate when it comes to that for one reason or another? Or should that at most give them a bonus to resist it but if that's not enough they're still running, abandoning their family or whatever?

As I said be honest, and if you think I should have acted differently, or that you'd be pissed too if that happened to you, then tell me that.

Or becomes unconscious?

Obviously some spells that require concentration would, but what about others with round or minute/level durations?

For example which of those would end?
a) Summon Monster
b) Grease
c) Haste

None? All?

Ok, I plan on throwing a swarm or two at my players soon, but from what I see in the d20srd about Swarms they don't seem to entangle or snare or otherwise keep people from just moving away. It doesn't even seem to count as difficult terrain.

Is that planned? It just doesn't seem like it makes much sense to me. If someone is covered by 5000 tiny spiders and they all bite him, he can't just take a 5 foot step and suddenly they're all gone. They don't even get an AoO because a swarm never threatens.

Heck, the way I see it, I could on my turn walk straight through a swarm from one side to the other, and could do so without problem.

Is that really how it works? Seems kinda lame.

Is there a way to boost a poison's save DC, aside from using multiple doses?

Most poisons that are halfway affordable to be used on a semi-regular basis have a DC of 13-15, which even at first level is more of a cointoss than anything else, and just gets worse as time goes on.

Other poisons that have a DC that actually makes them useful, have prices in the thousands.

I don't really see why. You don't want to make poisons too powerful I suppose. But it just feels silly. Wizards can throw around save or dies all day long after a few levels, heck Witches with the Sleep Hex can do so at level 1. And all of them got at least one if not more than one way to boost said DC. Not to mention their base save is already higher than most poisons.
But oh no, be careful of the rogue. He might be overpowered if we allow this!

Is there a way to distill multiple doses into a single one, or something like that?
A feat to increase DC?

Anything?

Ok... so I'm currently playing a rogue who's good at using Disguises and all the things involved with it. It's a low magic world so stuff like Disguise Self or Alter Self don't exist.

But, now that I read deeper into it, it just is confusing as hell.

Disguise says:

Your Disguise check result determines how good the disguise is, and it is opposed by others’ Perception check results.

Now Perception itself does not mention Disguise at all, so it would seem it's a straight up check of the kind "If you roll higher Disguise than his Perception, he won't recognize you"

But that's where it get's interesting. Or confusing, whatever you want.

Disguise further gives a list of modifiers on how elaborate your disguise is:

Disguise Disguise Check Modifier

Minor details only +5
Disguised as different gender1 –2
Disguised as different race1 –2
Disguised as different age category1 –2
Disguised as different size category1 -10

Ok, so I understand that just changing a few details about yourself is easier than changing your race. That part seems to make sense... at first glance at least, UNTIL you realize what that actually means.

Disguise is put against someone's Perception. There are only a few Perception modifiers mentioned in case you're impersonating an actual person and the one making the Perception check knows that person. If you just look like "someone else, not me" they wouldn't get a modifier on their Perception.
I will ignore those modifiers for now for that reason. It doesn't change anything, since they'd probably apply in all examples below and just raise the Perception skill, but not change the underlying problem.

Now let's assume someone with a +15 Disguise skill, and someone with a +10 Perception is looking for them. And for sake of easiness let's assume the Diguised person takes 10.

Normal check: +15, on average can be beaten by rolling 5 more on Perception than the disguise roll, so that would be a 15 or higher.
Minor details only: +20 ... suddenly he needs a 20.
Disguise as an elf: +13 and now only an 13

It goes on like that, but I think you can see it.

What does that mean?
It means that in effect I'm better of just letting my hair down and wearing some glasses, because that gives me a +5 to my check.
Or if I'm playing a male character, glueing on a fake beard.
It would be stupid to try and look like an elf or make myself look older, because that apparently makes people recognize me faster.

In other words: Looking almost exactly like myself makes me look nothing like myself. While looking like an 80 year old gnome male instead of a 20 year old human woman would have everyone recognize me because I now got a -20 penalty on my Disguise check and apparently I'm looking just like myself.

That honestly doesn't make a lick of sense to me.

So am I looking at this wrong and is there something I didn't consider. Or is the whole system a little broken?

Ok, so assume someone uses Shadow Conjuration to mimic a Summon Monster spell.

Ok, I get that attacking it, casting a spell on it, or getting attacked by it all count as "interacting" with it and allows a willsave.

However, there's still a few questions:
a) Let's say they fail their save the first time, do they get new saves each time a new "interaction" happens?

b) assuming the caster summons 1d3 identical shadowy monsters. Does disbelieving one of them disbelieve the others? I figure at least it should give them the +4 bonus to disbelieve, yes?

c) Objects automatically disbelieve. Does that include intelligent magic items, and could said item warn it's friends for the +4 bonus?