Endier1's page

I don't read it yet, but thanks!!!!!

Thanks for your help!

I can see now than the elven chain isn't simply a chain of mithril as it was at 3.5. That I don't know is if someone will make a normal chain mail of mithril when they can do this armor for only 1000 gp more.

It's making a rule (mithril doesn't reduce the proficiency) and breaking it immediately.

Thanks again!

Elven chain
Someone can explain me why that specific armor costs 5150 gp and not 4150 gp?

Is really +1000 gp for use the light armor proficiency or that's an errata?

And another question. Can you add a new ability or upgrade the enhancement of a specific weapon or armor? Can you make a Celestial armor +4 or a Holy Flame Tongue?

Thanks!!!!

Feats: Deflect Arrows, Improved Grapple, Improved Natural
Attack (unarmed strike), One Finger*, Scribe Scroll,
Stunning Fist, Weapon Finesse

That's from the monk character used as NPC in that book....

¡Hi!

About the perception rolls: I'd roll Perception for players & horses, but with -5 to check because they are not expecting the ambush. Later confrot the roll with all hiding kobolds and traps, leting they "take 10" to stealth.

If one player rolls 12 an other 16, and the pit have and Perception DC of 10 and the kobolds in trees of 18, both players see the trap, but only the second player see the kobolds. In the surprise round let the player acts only against (A) menaces that they can see or (B) menaces that already are acting in their turns.

About the horses:
If the player mount don't see the pit, let the horse do its own perception roll agains it:
-The horse see the pit, jumps over it, and the rider rolls Riding to not fall down.
-The horse don't see the pit. Knocks down and takes damage from the pit, but isn't is *inside* the pit, only knock down in the floor. The rider shoud roll ride to avoid be tripped by the horse.
A Handle Animal CD 15 should be enough to calm the horse and let him to get up and move out the pit.

I'm not a natural english speaker, but I think is clear enough to help you. I'll try ellaborate more if you want.

Thanks, Paizo, for the free pdf!!!!!

Name of PC: Sherry Floyd
Class/Level: Chelaxian male Urban Ranger 7
Adventure: Hook Montain Massacre
Catalyst: Muck Graul

Name of PC: Wade Valdemar
Class/Level: Chelaxian male Duskblade 7
Adventure: Hook Montain Massacre
Catalyst: Muck Graul

Sherry and Wade were raised and they have another deadly adventures. In the Graul Farm, the group find Muck and battle with him. During the battle, Sherry, Wade and the thief were grappled and swallowed by the tendriculos. When the cleric and the bard finally ended the combat, only the thief was live. Sherry and Wade were died because the paralyzing digestive juiced of the Graul...

Name of PC: Sherry Floyd
Class/Level: Chelaxian male Urban Ranger 6
Adventure: Skinsaw Murders
Catalyst: Jumping from the tower

Name of PC: Wade Valdemar
Class/Level: Chelaxian male Duskblade 6
Adventure: Skinsaw Murders
Catalyst: Xanesha and fall down the tower

Name of PC: Shalelu Andosana
Class/Level: Elven female Fighter/Ranger 2/3
Adventure: Skinsaw Murders
Catalyst: Xanesha and fall down the tower

The seven players adventure group makes its way up to the tower, where Xanesha is waintng for them (I had an extra player for the day, who was playing with Shalelu). In the battle, the rogue was temporally petrified by medusa mask's Xanesha also. Wade & Shahelu were hit by the lamia and were knocked down in negative hit points. When the bard & the wizard/fighter of the group pushed the Angel Statue over Xanesha, the roof partially were down the tower, damaging seriously the Lamia and killing Shalelu and Wade.
Xanesha were stunned but life at the street with the cleric. During the next two rounds, the cleric attacked the lamia without any effect. When the lamia unstunned, seeing that the cleric were the only PJ near and that he was openly wearing the sihedron medallion, she decided taking it from him, before flee. Sherry's player ask me if he could jump out the tower and fall over the lamia with his weapons aimed to her... I tell him that he could, but the fall probably kill him too, because he was seriously wounded. He choose jump to save his best fried. I rolled the damage from the fall and automatically apply to Sherry and Xanesha. Sherry died from the falling, taking Xanesha with him, but now, they are songs about him in the city.... I'm thinking in doing a "version" of the combat as an opera and playing in Magnimar's and Sandpoint's theaters.

Notes about Elyrium:

About her pv
"6+"........ We are playing the campaign with Fixed Starting Points. 6 + 1/2 HD in fist level and +1/2 HD in the others. As Elyrium has a basic class, I considered her as another player, and she gained 6 pv more in her fist level
"3d8"....... derivated from her 3 HD of outsider
"3d6"....... derivated from her taumaturgue class. I didn't change her basic class HD to d8, because Taumaturgue is not a "standard" basic class. As all classes from splat books, we are not adjusting HD/Bab pairing.
"+6"......... Her con modifier multiplied by his HD

about her skills & feats
[9b/4b]: For skills, trained ranks/untrained ranks, for the Alpha version.
Nx - its the level when elyrium gains the skill (Alpha version) or feat. Sometimes, on buyed adventures the monsters have feats that they couln't have.
U - Untrained skill (por Alpha version)
* - Conditional modifier; it is not added to total modifier

We start the campaing with Alpha version, but we are adjusting the players and the monsters when a new version of PPRG is cooked.

I changed Elyrium to Alpha in that time. I hope you can use her. It's only change the skills.

Erylium
Quasit female Taumaturgue3 (Lamashtu), CR 4; Outsider (Chaos, Extraplanar, Evil) Tiny; HD 6+3d8+3d6+6 (39 pv); Init +5; Spd 20 ft, 50 ft flying (perfect); AC 22 (+2 size, +5 Dex, +5 natural), 17 touch, 17 flat-footed; Bab/CMB: +4/-1; Atk 2 claws +11 c/c (1d3-1+poison, 20/x2) y 1 Bite +6 c/c (1d4-1, 20/x2) o Returning Dagger +12 rgd (1d2+0, 19-20/x2, 7.5 ft(x5)); Space/Reach: 2½x2½/0 ft; AE Poison, spell-like abilities, Taumaturgue spells, breath 1/día; SQ alternate form, DR 5/cold iron or good, Darkvision 60 ft, fast healing 2, inmunity to poison, fire resistance 10, corrupction, soul selling, summon familiar; Al CE; TS Fort +5, Ref +9, Will +6; Str 8, Dex 20, Con 13, Int 12, Wis 10, Cha 16.
Languages: Common, Abysal, Thassilonian
Skills [9b/4b]: Perception +9 (+0 Wis), Deception +10 (+3 Cha, -2 corrupción), Stealth +20 (+5 Dex, +8 size), Knw Religion +10 (+1 Int), Spellcraft +10 (+1 Int), Intimidate +15 (+3 Cha, +3 corruption), Diplomacy +10 (+3 Cha, -2 corruption), Knw Arcane +10 (+1 Int), Knw Planes +10 (+1 Int), Escape artistN n2, +9 (+5 Dex), ApparaiseN +5 (+1 Int), Fly +22 (+5 Dex, +8 maneouver), Knw History +10 (+1 Int)n4, LinguisticsN6 +10 (+1 Int), PerformU +3 (+3 Cha, -3 Sing*, -3 Oratory*)
Feats: Weapon finesseN1, Adept SummonerN3 , Master SummonerN5 .
Spell-like abilities [TS 13+Spell level, CL 6, based in Cha]
At Will: Detect good, detect magic, invisibility (self only)
1/day: Cause fear (as spell but area 30 ft radio centered in Quasit, DC 14)
1/week: Comunión (as spell and asking 6 questions, cl12)
Taumaturgue spells [TS 13+Spell level, CL3, based in Cha]
4n0: Guidance, mending, resistance, inflict minor wounds (CD 13)
3n1: Bane (CD 14), shield of faith, Summon monster I
2n2: Inflict moderate wouunds (CD 15), Summon monster II
Chaos Domain [TS 13+spell level, cl 3, based in Cha]
Chaos Touch (Sb): Melee touch attack. Target rolls 2d20 and takes wrost until 1d3 rounds or fails a test. Once against the same target on the same day.
Protection agaisnt law (Sp): 1/día
TRickery Domain [TS 13+Spell level, CL 3, based in Cha]
Copy Cat (Sb): As move action you create an illusory double that works as a mirror image spell (single image) for CL rounds (or dispelled or destroyed).
Disguise Self (Sp) Disguise Self 1/día
Alternate Shape (Sb): She can transform as a crow spending an standard action (Sor12)
Poison (Ex): In claws, Fort CD 14, 1d4 Dex/2d4 Dex. Based in Con and with a +2 racial bonus.
Breath (Ex): 1/day as standard Action. Ranged touch against 1 target (maximum 20 ft) with +11 to hit. The target must roll Fort CD 12 or be nauseated for 1d4 rounds. Based in Con.
Corruptions (Ex): Her association with Lamashtu gives her this qualities: .
Raspy Voice: +3 to Intimidte but -3 to Perform (oratory and sing)
Scaly skin: +2 natural armor
Terrible Breath: 1/day breath (see above) but -2 to Deception & Diplomacy
Posesiones: Tiny +1 returning dagger +1, miniature tiara (50 po), miniature black silk gown (25 po), Obsidiam unholy symbol of Lamashtu (10 po).

The invisible person doesn't need to be carrying a potion or a magic item though. Detect Magic will detect the invisibility spell. A Spellcraft check of DC17 (15 + spell level) would identify the school. As noted, it would take three rounds of concentration to pinpoint the invisible person (and they'd have to stay still and let you do it).

You can't use Identify on an invisible object someone else is carrying. You can't use Alchemy to identify an invisible potion someone is carrying. You have to see and handle the item for both of those, IMHO.

Sure, of course. On both cases.

You can detect the invisibility spell AND any other objetct or magical effect that the invisible creature is carrying.
And you can't identify an objetc that you can't manipulate during the casting.

I'm sorry if I gave that impression. I'm not an english natural speaker...

Cheers

Thanks a lot.
Where can I find the intensity of the aura for spell, because you talk about a "faint" aura?

In the spell's description of the PH. Also in d20srd.org

But, you can identify the potion and the spell with en identify spell (or harrow for CoCT)?

Yes, you can identity the effects of a potion with a "Identify" spell or, if you have an Alchemist Lab, with a Spellcraft check (Player's Handbook too, spellcraft skill description).

Cheers

I wish to know 2 things:

- when a spellcaster casts "invisibility" and wears a magic ring, does a "detect magic" can localize the ring and so the invisible man?

Yes, but only in the third round from the casting.

A example: A sorcerer of level 4 with invisibility (caster level 4, faint aura) and a ring of protection (caster level 5, Faint aura). My wizard cast "detect magic"

Round 1 after the casting: I know that they are one o more magical effects in the area of spell.
Round 2 after the casting: I know that they are 2 magical auras, and the force of the greater. In the example the greater aura is a faint aura.
Round 3 after the casting: I know where are each aura. They are both in the same square at ten feet ahead from me. Also, I can do, as free action Spellcraft checks to detect the school of the magical effect (Illusion for the Invisibilty and Abjuration for the ring).

I can "locate" an invisible creature with a detect magic, but I can't attack her because the detect magic spell needs concentration, and doing it's an standard action. But I could locate the invisible creature and pinpoint her to my friends.... same thing that success with a hearing skill check.

- does a "detect magic" can detect a potion in which there's a potion of "charm person" or another spell? Thanks!

I'd say no to it. The potions are magical objects, and they are detected too by a "detect magic spell". But you can't say what spell effec are inside the potion bottle because you only know the school. With a detect magic you can't say that a potion is a "charm person potion". You only know that is a "enchanment potion". It could be a "charm person potion" or a "herorism potion" or any other spell from enchanment.

My players did a similar thing. They cleared all the superior fort before down to the first dungeon level. They kill Lyrie but then went to the Temple, where they were soundly defeated by the Yeth Hounds and ran for they lifes out from Thistletop to Sandpoint.

Later, after healing, the goblin druid, captured by Shalelu, told them about the Tentamort lair. They went through the lair by night after casting a sleep spell to the nearly tower guard. I dm the dungeon as they was write without comeback to the fort and, "evading the reinforces" on it. reinforces that I didn't prepare.

You could do samething similar saying that they are "a lot of goblins" in the fort and is easier to infiltrate in the dungeon by the tentamor lair than fight them.

Cheers!

Updated, reloaded and with 50% more notes and links: here

Good work, Locworks, for summarizing all threads in the same place. You should edit your propossition to add the "take 10" variant that you explain us previously to reduce the time in play. I think that didn't see it on the last thread. The aid another option should work only if the helper continue investing his turn (standard action) to direct the attacks of the rogue, not only once for all the combat, I think.

Said that, is better that the knowledge skill must increase to be effective than a simply invest of two skill points (equivalent to five skill ranks in previous editions of game).

Not is that the skill option like me more than the fortified, :o), but is a good rule that I wouldn't care see in the PRPG.

Hi!

Another option to downgrade a little the sneak attack that we was speaking of was the Fortified option. It gives each monster individually a grade of protection agains sneak attack (and critical attacks if its is necessary).

I like the talent option too, but the skill option, IMO, is not going to have any positive effect in nerfing the sneak attack. If the rogue wants sneak a monster (one previuosly immune, of course), he should do a larger inversion to sneaking it that one or two skill points. He already have gained more hit points, more options (talents) and a more effective skill points.

Cheers!

Fischkopp wrote:

How about use it as written? Everytime you rage you can rage one round longer for free...

Exactly what I was going to suggest.

We are doing that too. We haven't any problem in play about that.

And we are using Big Game Hunter as combat feat too... again without any problem in play about that.

Name of PC: Sir Mortimer
Class/Level: Chelaxian male Fighter 5
Adventure: Skinsaw Murders
Catalyst: Plumetting Inferno (Haunt)

Sir Mortimer ran to the Observatory to help Lamahno, the fighter/ranger/transmuter when the haunt activated (it was an Universal Haunt because they were only four PCs). Both PCs failed their Will saves and both jumped through the windows. Lamahno could grapple the roof, but Sir Mortimer failed the next Reflex & Climb rolls. Even, the attack failed with a natural one in the dice... and died from the falling.

I'm sure this has been asked, but here we go

** spoiler omitted **

He has the same inherent bonus. He doesn't have them casting wishes. He has them, reading magic Tomes (Tome of leadership, Tome of undertanding, etc) from the DMG.

Domain & School abilities as spells not SLA. Or SLA with Verbal & Somatic componets.

Something as the bonus known spells from the sorcerer is a good idea too. May be as: Evoker Lv2: "You gain a extra slot spell per 2 caster levels you possess. That slots only can used to cast Magic Missile"

Cleric & wizards should cast spells

Cheers!

I'm sorry, but you need to work on your sentence structure a little; I could barely read your post...

I'm Sorry. I'm not very good at english language...

Endier1 wrote:

Isn't neccesary the feats to attack this way.

Wha? Do you mean that he doesn't need Two Weapon Fighting? Or some other feat?

Yes, he doesn't need any feats to do this, but the severity of the penalties makes this sort of PC worthless going by the PHB.

Yes, that I was saying is that character doesn't need TWF feat. He attacks with a weapon (heavy shield) and blocks with another shield. It is the same thing that attacking with a long sword and gain the shield bonus of a tower shield. He has a -2 penalty to attack because the tower shield, not because he is doing a two weapong fighting.

Cheers!

Kurocyn wrote:

1st level Dwarf Fighter carrying a tower shield, a heavy spiked shield, and has the feats: Improved Shield Bash, Heavy Shield Specialization, and Shield Snare. (I use flaws, thus the extra feats)

From what I understand, this PC would only get the shield bonus from his tower shield, suffer a -2 on attacks due to the tower shield, only apply .5 of his STR bonus to the attacks AND suffer a further -10 pentalty to the attack due to bashes only being "off-hand." (had he Two Weapon Fighting this second attack penalty would only be -4)

Rules or not, this simply cannot be right.

Has anyone ever worked with/around this issue before?

-Kurocyn

Hi!

I think that character has the shield bonus from his tower shield on his off-hand and attack with spiked shield with full str bonus (right hand) with a -2 on attack due the tower shield.
He strikes with heavy shield (as he could strike with a long sword) and he blocks with tower shield (as he would with a long sword in the other hand too).
Isn't neccesary the feats to attack this way.
And, of course, he doesn't gains twice the shield bonus beacuse they not stacking similar to not staking the armor bonus of a chain armor and a protection brazers.
If he wants to use this feats, he must take with the tower shield, but it doesn't let attack with him per SRD rules.

That I don't know (I have a lot of discussions with my players about it and never someone has answered to me) if the armor penalty of both shield should pply to his skills or only the wrost (as per armor+shield vs baggage)

Cheers!

Hi!

I like Bravery for the Fighter.
Bardic Music is cool too.

Well done Paizo.

I'd like the domain & school powers than they are in Alpha. My only concern is that they are Spell-like & Supernatural abilities instead of spells.

In this thread it was said a similar thing about channeling energy. It is a litle change that I'm house ruling.

Thank you for your wonderful work, Paizo!

Cheers!

Gailbraithe wrote:

What's a "TS"?

Sorry, I was thinking in "Saving Throw", but in Spanish es:

Tirada de Salvación

:-))

Ja, ja, ja.

OK, thanks again

I was going to saw that she is incapacitated by her reflection, you can have aldern have a small makeup mirror (small steel mirror) that he holds up to iesha while striking her with his razor, the PCs could run in as he is basically torturing her and try to save her, my question is if they manage to save her and kill aldern what happens to her?

She dies too.

Hi!

Cool video!

Someone could tell me where the music of the video come from? I know that I've listened before, but I don't know where it was.

Thanks

I'd like that speaking a language and writing it were different skills.

This way I could do the savage ranger that knows the language of his favored enemies but that he can't write anthing, or the mercenary barbarian from exotic lands in the border of the world that can speak the common language with a funny accent but don't knows how to write his own name and must put the X. Same thing for the tailor who becames an adventurer fighter from necessity when his natal village is destroyed by the villain or the urchin who spy foreign merchants to robbing them. Now, if they hasn't Int bonus, they must know how to decipher script (and forger documents or write), to speak another language.

A lot of characters should know other languages but isn't neccesary to them know how to write said languages, and it isn't possibly to do it.

Cheers!

A book about magical academies and bard schools on all the world, similar to Gods of Golarion.
Its locations, greater masters, famous people what was studend on it and its relations with other schools and local governments.

And "lost" schools too, with information about wizard specializations/prohibited magics and special techniques for each one (as the Inscribe Rune or Acadamae Graduate feats)

¡Hi!

I'm agree that the raise rules need a full revision because they penalising same the GM as the player. However, I don't like so much the revised rules, because when you can cast Raise Dead, you can cast also Restoration, and the negative level have not the desired effect in game.
I was twisting some spells and the raising rules with this and the Psionic Revivify power in mind. Please tell me that you think about it.

* * *

Raise Dead
Conjuration (Healing)
Level: Clr 5
Components: V, S, M, DF
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Touch
Target: Dead creature touched
Duration: Instantaneous
Saving Throw: Will (harmless)
Spell Resistance: Yes (harmless)
Raise Dead lets a cleric reconnect a corpse’s psyche with its body, restoring life to a recently deceased creature. The spell must be casted within 1 round of the victim’s death. Before the psyche of the deceased has completely left the body, this power halts its journey while repairing somewhat the damage to the body.
If the subject’s soul is not willing to return, she receives a Will saving throw.
A raised creature -1 hit points (but stable) after being restored to life. Any ability scores damaged to 0 are raised to 1. Normal poison and normal disease are cured in the process of raising the subject, but magical diseases and curses are not undone. While the spell closes mortal wounds and repairs lethal damage of most kinds, the body of the creature to be raised must be whole. Otherwise, missing parts are still missing when the creature is brought back to life. None of the dead creature’s equipment or possessions are affected in any way by this spells.
A creature raised first time by this spell gains permanently the Raised subtype and an undead aura equivalent to a creature of undead subtype of 2 HD that can be detected by Detect Undead or similar abilities. Each new spell casting on that creature adds +2 HD equivalents to this aura. A living creature of Raised subtype whose Undead Aura is bigger that his Constitution Ability Score can’t be raised by this spell.
A creature who has been turned into an undead creature or killed by a death effect can’t be raised by this spell. Constructs, elementals, outsiders, and undead creatures can’t be raised. The spell cannot bring back a creature that has died of old age.
Material Component: Diamonds worth a total of least 5,000 gp.

Resurrection
Conjuration (Healing)
Level: Clr 7
Casting Time: 10 minutes
This spell functions like raise dead, except that you are able to restore life and complete strength to any deceased creature. . If the subject’s soul is not willing to return, the spell does not work; therefore, a subject that wants to return receives no saving throw.
The condition of the remains is not a factor. So long as some small portion of the creature’s body still exists, it can be resurrected, but the portion receiving the spell must have been part of the creature’s body at the time of death. (The remains of a creature hit by a disintegrate spell count as a small portion of its body.) The creature can have been dead no longer than 1 day per caster level.
Upon completion of the spell, the creature is immediately restored to full hit points, vigor, and health.
A creature raised by Resurrection gains only +1 HD to his Undead Aura, and the Raised subtype if she hasn’t when the spell is cast.
You can resurrect someone killed by a death effect or someone who has been turned into an undead creature and then destroyed. You cannot resurrect someone who has died of old age. Constructs, elementals, outsiders, and undead creatures can’t be resurrected.
Material Component: A sprinkle of holy water and diamonds worth a total of at least 10,000 gp.

True Resurrection
Conjuration (Healing)
Level: Clr 9
Casting Time: 10 minutes
This spell functions like raise dead, except that you can resurrect a creature that has been dead for as long as 10 years per caster level. . If the subject’s soul is not willing to return, the spell does not work; therefore, a subject that wants to return receives no saving throw. This spell can even bring back creatures whose bodies have been destroyed, provided that you unambiguously identify the deceased in some fashion (reciting the deceased’s time and place of birth or death is the most common method).
Upon completion of the spell, the creature is immediately restored to full hit points, vigor, and health. You can revive someone killed by a death effect or someone who has been turned into an undead creature and then destroyed. This spell can also resurrect elementals or outsiders, but it can’t resurrect constructs or undead creatures.
A creature raised by a true Resurrection spell not gain the Raised Subtype or increments her Undead Aura.
Even true resurrection can’t restore to life a creature who has died of old age.
Material Component: A sprinkle of holy water and diamonds worth a total of at least 25,000 gp.

* * *
Raised Subtype
These creatures were back to life and always have an undead aura around them. A raised creature can be detected by effects that identify undead creatures even they are alive.
Traits: A Raised creature posesses the following traits (unless otherwise noted in the creature's entry).
--Undead Aura (Ex): A Raised creature has a particularly necromantic aura corresponding to the accumuled HD received by the creature due raise dead or resurrection spells that can be detected by detect undead spells or equivalent abilities.

From that I know, it says that the character is treated as one level lower for casting variables... Sure, the wizard doesn't lose any memorized spell, but he can't casting it because he hasn't the minimum caster level required to do it.
If later, his level drain is removed by another effect, he could cast it because he doesn't lose the spell.

It is not about the level drain's rule; it is about the minimum caster level's rule.

Casters have a lot of bookkeeping already, and I know it makes it harder if we add the idea of "-1 spell slot per spell level" or somesuch, but something has to be done other than "-1 effective spellcaster level".

Now, of course, it needs to be clarified; if a 3rd level wizard has one negative level, and his CL is therefore 2, does he lose access to 2nd level spells? (Since wizards don't gain 2nd level spells until 3rd level)
If this is the case, I think it's not as unfair, but it does need to be clarified.

I was thinking about it, and when I search on the SRD, I found something about that. Because their caster level is not enough, they shouldn't cast their 2nd level spells with a negative level...

CASTER LEVEL
A spell’s power often depends on its caster level, which for most spellcasting characters is equal to your class level in the class you’re using to cast the spell.
You can cast a spell at a lower caster level than normal, but the caster level you choose must be high enough for you to cast the spell in question , and all level-dependent features must be based on the same caster level.
In the event that a class feature, domain granted power, or other special ability provides an adjustment to your caster level, that adjustment applies not only to effects based on caster level (such as range, duration, and damage dealt) but also to your caster level check to overcome your target’s spell resistance and to the caster level used in dispel checks (both the dispel check and the DC of the check).

Endier1 wrote:

Sure, you are right mechanically. Criticals is about luck and sneak is about knowledge.

I was explained in another thread that, for now, critical hits are not a problem and I was wrong mixing both them. It was because the designers had changed the way that sneak works, but they hadn't changed the way that the monster quality of immunity to criticals were working. Sneak attack is changed, but critical hit is not.

Would you have the link to that thread?

Sure, there is. Second and third post.

Endier1 wrote:

Even though I understand the mechanism that dismiss one thing to the other, I don't undestand how any creature could be sneaked (defined as a hit in a weak spot) but not could be affected by a critical hit. Is a thing that excels my undestanding.

I'd love to find out the current basis for the immunity against criticals.

May be in Alpha 3....

That's a good remark. Immunity to sneak attacks (not a living creature no discernible anatomy in 3.5, therefore no vital spot) and immunity to critical hits are linked.

What happens when a weapon scores a critical hit?
A critical is a particularly effective attack from the point of view of the weapon (good battleaxe-fu) and from the point of view of the target (weak spot).

The sneak attack is not weapon-based. It is only a particularly effective attack from the point of view of the target (disadvantaged situation and weak spot).

Second difference: the critical hit requires a specific result on an attack roll (natural 20, 19, 18 or 17) and then a second confirmation roll. Therefore a critical hit is an essentially random occurrence. The attacker lucks out twice: by finding his weapon's sweet spot and by hitting the target's weak spot. I would say it doesn't require any specific knowledge of the target's weak spots.

A sneak attack is not a random occurrence. If the conditions (flanking, etc) are right and if the attack hits (no natural roll condition), the damage is applied.

In summary:
A sneak attack requires:
1. a class-based knowledge of the target's weak points (rogue's first-level training) for living creatures with discernible anatomies) (3.5)
2. a skill-based knowledge of the target's weak points for other creatures (my proposal)

A critical hit is a luck-based (not a skill-based) effect.

Sure, you are right mechanically. Criticals is about luck and sneak is about knowledge.

I was explained in another thread that, for now, critical hits are not a problem and I was wrong mixing both them. It was because the designers had changed the way that sneak works, but they hadn't changed the way that the monster quality of immunity to criticals were working. Sneak attack is changed, but critical hit is not.

Even though I understand the mechanism that dismiss one thing to the other, I don't undestand how any creature could be sneaked (defined as a hit in a weak spot) but not could be affected by a critical hit. Is a thing that excels my undestanding.

Said that, whatever the solution may be, I'll be with it.

Cheers!

Here is something else about SLAs and SNAs, they are not hindered by armor. A wizard in armor can rely on his school powers without fear of spell failure. Supernatural abilities are also not affected by spell resistance and do not provoke AoO.

While these changes are not bad, they will affect how a wizard or cleric (or possibly a druid) plays in game. A drow will always be affected by the evocation school's energy ray.

Sure.

On the otherhand, many SLAs and SNAs work like spells. So blindfolding a spellcaster will prevent them from targeting some powers (or at least hinder rays and touch SLAs in some instances). Solid barriers will block some effects too, though it would be odd to box up a spellcaster for a trial. However, such a box with a hole smaller than 1-foot will block most effects and still allow conversation (see the section on line of effect in the SRD).

They were examples... nothing more. :o)

Cheers!

Which SRD are you looking at? 3.0 or 3.5?

I'm looking at my 3.5e DMG and the 3.5e SRD and this is what I have (page 289 of the DMG btw).

From the same SRD too...

Spell-Like Abilities: Usually, a spell-like ability works just like the spell of that name. A few spell-like abilities are unique; these are explained in the text where they are described.
A spell-like ability has no verbal, somatic, or material component, nor does it require a focus or have an XP cost. The user activates it mentally. Armor never affects a spell-like ability’s use, even if the ability resembles an arcane spell with a somatic component.
A spell-like ability has a casting time of 1 standard action unless noted otherwise in the ability or spell description. In all other ways, a spell-like ability functions just like a spell.
Spell-like abilities are subject to spell resistance and to being dispelled by dispel magic. They do not function in areas where magic is suppressed or negated. Spell-like abilities cannot be used to counterspell, nor can they be counterspelled.
Some creatures are actually sorcerers of a sort. They cast arcane spells as sorcerers do, using components when required. In fact, an individual creature could have some spell-like abilities and also cast other spells as a sorcerer.

Spell-Like Abilities: Using a spell-like ability works like casting a spell in that it requires concentration and provokes attacks of opportunity. Spell-like abilities can be disrupted. If your concentration is broken, the attempt to use the ability fails, but the attempt counts as if you had used the ability. The casting time of a spell-like ability is 1 standard action, unless the ability description notes otherwise.
Using a Spell-Like Ability on the Defensive: You may attempt to use a spell-like ability on the defensive, just as with casting a spell. If the Concentration check (DC 15 + spell level) fails, you can’t use the ability, but the attempt counts as if you had used the ability.

SRD is very doubtful about it...

Cheers!

As far as I can tell, you still need regular casting components for spell-like abilities unless otherwise stated.

May be I'm wrong? I'm not sure now... But, d20SRD.Org says the same thing that my copy of SRD... check it, please.

Anyone the designers (or anyone else) could help us?

Thanks for your answer, Kaisoku.

Cheers!

There is a predecent for requiring somatic or vocal component if you want to house rule it and justify it to your players. If i recall, any SLA or SNA that mimics a spell that has an expensive (over 1gp) material component, such as Wish, still requires that material. There you have rational for ruling that SLA and SNA require gestures and/or verbal if the spell does. Could further be explained as the gesture and vocal help focus the mind to cal upon the inherent power.

-Weylin Stormcrowe

Could you tell me where this come from? I was searching for it and i couldn't found it. In PH and in MM is said, and clearly, that they haven't, even for XP or foci...

Spell-Like: Spell-like abilities are magical and work just like spells (though they are not spells and so have no verbal, somatic, material, focus, or XP components). They go away in an antimagic field and are subject to spell resistance if the spell the ability resembles or duplicates would be subject to spell resistance.

I only remember an exception to this rule: warlocks. They cast his SLA with arcane spell failure... [Complete Arcane pp. 7] And is SPF not somatic component... I was wrong initially about it.

I have got to admit I agree with you here, I think that as spell like abilities they are a bit out of flavour with the wizards and clerics traditions. Unfortunately I can't see any other way of implementing such cool powers with out keeping them as they are. I would rather keep them, than lose them.

I'd like keep the actual domain abilities as they are, but with a note to have them verbal, somatic components and spell failure (for wizards) if the spells that they mimic have, they work indeed as spells. And it is another saying that they could benefict from Spell focus (instead of Ability Focus) and metamagic feat (instead of feats of emulate metamagic effects, as quicken-spell like ability) so much the better.

Cheers!

I have got to admit I agree with you here, I think that as spell like abilities they are a bit out of flavour with the wizards and clerics traditions. Unfortunately I can't see any other way of implementing such cool powers with out keeping them as they are. I would rather keep them, than lose them.

Hi again.

I'd like too keep them.
I only was asking if would be better that they have somatic and vocal components even they are SLA or SNA. Is only neccesary adding it to the description.
Nothing more.

Cheers!

Well, I'll explain a little more my previous examples; if anything is not understanted, tell me and I'll try to do better. English and me are not good neighbours... :o)

1. Wizard grappled.
Well, it happens in alpha 1.1, not in 2, and I don't remember if could pass now with the new rules. The wizard was pinned by the choker. Of course, use an SLA cause an AO except if is cast on defensive. Magic missile has a Somatic component as spell, but not as SLA. It couldn't be cast as spell being pinned, but it can be cast as SLA.

2. Wizard Tied.
The bad guys could mantain him drugged or anyone solution propossed. Else, I liked his idea of use a SLA being tied for untied him. Isn't an example to a thing broken.. is an example of anthing that couldn't be done as spell (without metamagic, of course) but it could be as SNA.
Another example could be the transmutator that being tied use his telekinetic fist to break a glass coup and use the rests to cut the ropes. It is not broken, simply it can pass and as spell it can't.

3. Cleric with Charm domain
It is CN of a CE deity. I'm affraid that the cleric is not going to be punished by her deity... is more possible that she be reward :o). Of course is an standard action that could be noted or identified if, and I mark de "if" is detected. As spell is more probabbly to be noted by wittness that haven't spellcraft studies that as SLA.
Others domains as the Touch of Glory (Glory) are SNA, not SLA, and aren't subject to the spellcraft check and could be abused with easiness.

4. Evil Cleric
Well, again the solutions are easy. You are right. He coud be detected, dispelled or anything. But, the question is that the cleric CAN do it, tied and gagged in the middle of a sesion. I don't think that magic manacles creating controlled anti-magic fields are very common too. With a somatic, verbal, etc component, the world continues turning without need magic to do all. And again, any SNA derived from a domain could be problematic except in that anti-magic portatic field.

Sorry by not explain well my examples in the OP.
Is truth that when I have a player that has a good idea, if he is working inside the rules, I, normally, let id do. I could be more estrict, but normally I do not bear it in mind.

Cheers!

¡Hi!

I'm afraid that i don't explain it well.

I'm not searching for possible solutions to this examples. They are that, examples that things that happend in our game. And nothing (well, maybe someone yes) of them could pass being spells, not SLA.

Said that, that I was asking in loud word is... Clerics and wizards cast spells, not spell-like abilities. It should be more "appropiated" to them that their special class abilities (domains and spell schools) were more "spell-like" than mental actions that they activate.

It's more flavor than other thing...

Cheers!

Hi everyone!

I don't know if anyone had this problem too.

In our games, the fact of the domain & school powers was spell-like abilities, and not spells, had a lot of secundary problems. Various examples:

*Our wizard used his magic missile power (Evocation) being grappled by a choker without need doing a spellcraft check.
*Later, the same wizard, captured by the villains, used his 1st level power (a sobrenatural effect, not an SLA) to break the ropes that were tying him. Again and again until the rope was disitegrated by the acid.
*The cleric, with the Charm domain, using her charm person ability (becase it hasn't verbal, somatic or material components, only a light concentration and a mental command) to charm a shoopkeer and don't pay her buying with a lot of witness.
*The evil cleric, tied and gagged using his lesser confusion power (from Madness domain) in the middle of the law court that was going to judge him.

All this actions couldn't done if we put a note in both classes saying that his SLA and supernatural abilities derivated from domain & school powers have verbal, somatic and material components (same as warlock)if the spell that simules have them.
Therefore both classes have its powers but they are not obtaining an unfair advantage from them using as mental command actions...

Cheers!

Immunity to critical hits is a special quality of certain creatures: so you have to look it up under the monster entry.

3.5 Sneak attack under the SRD states: Any creature that is immune to critical hits is not vulnerable to sneak attacks.

Paizo Alpha2 modifies that part of sneak attack. It hasn't changed the monster entries yet.

OK, thanks for your answer.

That sneak attacks are now allowed against creatures immune to criticals in no way implies that rogues can do criticals to creatures immune to them. The only line in sneak attack that addresses criticals states that sneak attack damage is not multiplied during a critical: it doesn't address the actual getting of a critical and so it remains as is in 3.5

Could be...

SRD haven't any one explication about what "critical hit" means except as mechamism... Natural 20 must be confirmed to be critical. BUT in the description of Fortified armor ability, both (critical hit & sneak) are the same thing.
If a rogue can sneak a creature previously immune to critical, now he can do a critical hit to it. Except that, of course, in the sneak description was a note about it.

Fortification: This suit of armor or shield produces a magical force that protects vital areas of the wearer more effectively. When a critical hit or sneak attack is scored on the wearer, there is a chance that the critical hit or sneak attack is negated and damage is instead rolled normally.

Maybe, as I'm not a english-language natural speaker, I didn't understood both rules correctly. On spanish it seems say the same thing too.

Endier1 wrote:

An acceptable solution would be that only could be an sneak attack per action, or better than, that sneak attack were an standard attack and not part of a chain of attacks.

Inspirational! (scribble, scribble...)

I was thinking more about it... and it is no good as it seems.

Sure, Sneak as standard attack could be a solution, but it isn't work about critical hits in creatures, until now, immune to them.

Skill rank & Talent options manage the sneak for the rogue class, but don't handle criticals of another classes. Should the fighter (or the barbarian!) take ranks in Knw Arcana to to critical hits in a construct...? With only 2+Int skill ranks per level? I'm afraid that no.

I continue voting for the Fortified option.

¡Hi everyone!

Isn't only about sneak attacks... it's about critical hits too...

New Alpha rules (maybe yes or maybe not, it is not clarified yet) let doing sneak and criticals to creatures, until now, immune to them: incorporeal & constructs are only two examples.

Sneak as a standard attack will reduce the potency of sneak, but no has any effect on critical hits... The Fortified option (here and here) handle both perfectly, it is full backwards compatible and has as bonus that it lets manage each monster individually.

One rule to govern all...

Kirth Gersen wrote:

Praetor Gradivus wrote:

BTW, I started playing in 1979 so really am annoyed at how the thief turned from a specialty skill character that could do massive damage occasionally to the best damage output non-spellcaster.

Amen, brother!

I second that.

I'm too. I wish sneak attack were as 3.5 but (and this is a BIG "but") I'm afraid that it is going to be impossible. Therefore, I'm working for the sneak (and criticals attacks) are controled and not overpowered.

An acceptable solution would be that only could be an sneak attack per action, or better than, that sneak attack were an standard attack and not part of a chain of attacks.

Another solution would be a mechanism of control about it: namely ranks in X skill or rogue talent against X subtype. But, as I said previoulsy, that solutions, IMO, are asking too little. Of course, they are better than nothing, but all of them are forgotting that not all monsters of a subtype are the same thing.

The Fortification option, however, treats each monster individually, and have the same advantages that skill or talent options in combat. The percentile roll is not going to slow the turn because is the same roll that a blur or blink spell and with these spell is not possible to sneak a monsters.

Cheers!

Pneumonica wrote:

I would like to ask something - am I misreading, or is it possible to hold off on declaring a combat feat until well into your turn? Thus, if I make an Attack of Op and drop a creature, and haven't used a combat feat this round, could I then declare that I'm using Cleave and drop another one gratis?

Please, move away any possibility to mix AoO and Cleave.

It's horrible to be the barbarian fighting with the fighter against a giant (or any monster with reach) and that the rogue fail his tumble check. AoO and rogue out. Who is the next to die? The barbarian or the fighter that was quietly smashing the big monsters because a cleave.

No, thanks.
Use a cleave in your action is OK, using it in other's action is broken.