Finneous Emberstorm's page

I would put my thoughts on this as it dispels the whole spell, otherwise you could have unusual interactions if casting it on someone affected by a spell like Reduce Person or Giant Form.

And off topic:

While this does open the can of worms of being able to use restoration to remove a select few buffs from enemies without a dispel check, I feel the 3 round cast time of lesser restoration, GP cost of the regular and greater versions, combined with the fact that it still has a saving throw and has to overcome spell resistance balances that. So while this is an unusual use for the spell I feel it by no means is overpowered.

Held charges aren't held in your hand. Nowhere the rules says that, and you can discharge them with a kick, a nudge, or even licking someone (work better if you are a toad with a tongue attack).

Fair enough, but you still can't use spellstrike to make touch attacks through the weapon without making a normal (not touch) attack. (as was suggested by Ryze Kuja.)

Yes, Spellstrike does give the magus more options for delivering touch spells.
It does not however give the ability to deliver them through the weapon as a touch attack because it never says it does.
The extra option for delivering touch spells is the ability to deliver them with a successful attack roll vs full AC because that is what the ability says.

You can't use the sentence "spellstrike gives the magus more options" to use options it doesn't actually give.

You are correct in that it does not change the normal rules for using touch spells in combat and if the magus wants to touch them he can totally still touch the subject WITH HIS HAND to discharge the spell.

Nothing in any of the rules allows the magus to deliver touch spells through his weapon without an attack at full AC.

If it did reach based magi would be able to buff party members at reach without having dealing damage to them.

Spellstrike (Su): At 2nd level, whenever a magus casts a spell with a range of “touch” from the magus spell list, he can deliver the spell through any weapon he is wielding as part of a melee attack. Instead of the free melee touch attack normally allowed to deliver the spell, a magus can make one free melee attack with his weapon (at his highest base attack bonus) as part of casting this spell. If successful, this melee attack deals its normal damage as well as the effects of the spell. If the magus makes this attack in concert with spell combat, this melee attack takes all the penalties accrued by spell combat melee attacks. This attack uses the weapon's critical range (20, 19–20, or 18–20 and modified by the keen weapon property or similar effects), but the spell effect only deals ×2 damage on a successful critical hit, while the weapon damage uses its own critical modifier.

It only lets you discharge the spell as part of a normal attack.
It does not let you make touch attacks with the weapon to deliver spell as touch attack.

The charge is held IN YOUR HAND. Making an attack with the weapon (i.e. you have to hit their AC) allows you to discharge the charge held IN YOUR HAND though the weapon.
If you miss (whether by bouncing off a shield or otherwise) the requirements of hitting the targets AC is not met and the spell held IN YOUR HAND is still held IN YOUR HAND.

And the FAQ confirms that if a Magus misses with the attack and clangs off the armor/shield, he has the option to discharge the spell through the weapon like a normal touch attack.

That's actually not what the FAQ says at all.

The FAQ says if your attack clangs off the armor you still have the charge held IN YOUR HAND.
There is no option to deliver the attack as a touch through the weapon as a touch attack at all.

The FAQ says that you have to touch something other than a weapon with your HAND to discharge it as a touch attack.
Accidentally or intentionally.

Maybe this will help answer the question.

One of the Spellstrike FAQs says :

Magus: Can a magus use spellstrike (page 10) to cast a touch spell, move, and make a melee attack with a weapon to deliver the touch spell, all in the same round?

Yes. Other than deploying the spell with a melee weapon attack instead of a melee touch attack, the magus spellstrike ability doesn’t change the normal rules for using touch spells in combat (Core Rulebook page 185). So, just like casting a touch spell, a magus could use spellstrike to cast a touch spell, take a move toward an enemy, then (as a free action) make a melee attack with his weapon to deliver the spell.

On a related topic, the magus touching his held weapon doesn’t count as “touching anything or anyone” when determining if he discharges the spell. A magus could even use the spellstrike ability, miss with his melee attack to deliver the spell, be disarmed by an opponent (or drop the weapon voluntarily, for whatever reason), and still be holding the charge in his hand, just like a normal spellcaster. Furthermore, the weaponless magus could pick up a weapon (even that same weapon) with that hand without automatically discharging the spell, and then attempt to use the weapon to deliver the spell. However, if the magus touches anything other than a weapon with that hand (such as retrieving a potion), that discharges the spell as normal.

Basically, the spellstrike gives the magus more options when it comes to delivering touch spells; it’s not supposed to make it more difficult for the magus to use touch spells.

posted February 2012 | back to top

The second paragraph says that weapon is not the object holding the charge. It's still in the hand like for a normal caster.

So even if the GM says you hit a table, or you get disarmed you still have your held charge.

A couple of questions.

Is there going to be an update to the multiclass archetypes to go with the updated classes? Some, like alchemist, do not work anymore without fiddling a bit. Or is it OK to guess on what the intended changes would be on them?

Second, on page 13 it mentions bards getting free cantrips based on their muses, but the only free spells I see for them are first level spells. Summon Monster, Soothe, and True Strike. Did i miss something somewhere? Or is this a mistake?

I was thinking about spellcasting and how having most spells having verbal and somatic components required them to be 2 actions.

What if it was changed so that there was only a single type of casting action, and verbal, somatic and material became traits.
I think it would have a few benefits.

1) It would cut down on the action types for spellcasting. (I honestly think having 3 different action types for spellcasting and 3 more types for item use is a bit much)

2) It would free up design space for more single action (or variable action) spells without requiring them to be verbal or somatic only.

3) It would make spells follow the same format as weapon actions. They just list how many actions it takes and have stuff like Attack, Open, Stance, etc. in the trait list.

My group is taking turns running Doomsday Dawn.
My turn is next and I'll be running In Pale Mountain's Shadow.

We are a large group with 6 PCs.
On page 3 of Doomsday Dawn it says to adjust encounters for groups larger than 4 PCs. (With rules for this in the bestiary).

For groups of monsters this is easy (just add more). And for single enemies its easy enough (add a second, possibly weaker one).
I'm reluctant to just add the elite template to enemies as I feel that this might skew the numbers.

So my question is this:
What should I add to the final fight in the adventure where all the enemies are different?

Is it still possible to cast (or memorize) a spell (not heightened) in a higher level spell slot?
I didn't see this specifically called out in the book but i may have missed it.
If not then its going to severly limit use of lower level spells that are always good but never hightenable (like true strike).

Hi,
I'm in a group where we take turns GMing. I was wondering, if we were to take the PDF of Doomsday Dawn and divvy the adventures out among us as soon as we get it, for the people running later adventures would this spoil the earlier adventures they would be playing in?
Or is this set up more like an adventure path where it really wants a single GM for the whole thing?

Hi,

I don't post much, but I found an interaction with the new power attack and +1 weapons that i think is unintended.

This has nothing to do with old power attack at all.

NOTE: I do not mean this negatively at all.
I really like what I'm seeing and can't wait to see how it all fits together. I just mathed this out for fun and thought it should be mentioned.

It seems to me that if you have a +1 weapon, then power attack is less useful especially if you only have 2 actions to attack with, but sometimes even if you use all 3 to attack.

Going under the following assumptions.

Power attack adds base weapon damage.
+1 weapon adds base weapon damage.
20's always crit.
crits double all damage.
power attack only increases 1st attack in a round.

Assume a weapon does base damage X and extra damage added to the attack form anything else is Y.
so a basic attack does X+Y.
a +1 weapon does 2X+Y,
power attack does 2X+Y,
and power attack with a +1 weapon does 3X+Y.

NOTE: If power attack with a +1 weapon does 4X+Y, then all this math is meaningless. (but it was still fun)

Lets assume 20 rounds of combat with each attack roll getting every number exactly once for ease of math.

I'll list 3 columns, the number needed to hit in the first, the damage with power attack in the second, and the total damage from both single attack actions in the third.

20+, 6X+2Y, 8X+4Y only crits
19, 9X+3Y, 10X+5Y
18, 12X+4Y, 12X+6Y
17, 15X+5Y, 14X+7Y
16, 18X+6Y, 16X+8Y
15, 21X+7Y, 18X+9Y
14, 24X+8Y, 22X+11Y: second attack hits on a 19 here
13, 27X+9Y, 26X+13Y
12, 30X+10Y, 30X+15Y
11, 33X+11Y, 34X+17Y
10, 36X+12Y, 38X+19Y
9, 42X+14Y, 44X+22Y first attack starts critting on a 19 here
8, 48X+16Y, 50X+25Y
7, 54X+18Y, 56X+28Y
6, 60X+20Y, 62X+31Y
5, 66X+22Y, 68X+34Y
4, 72X+24Y, 76X+38Y second attack starts critting on a 19 here
3, 78X+26Y, 84X+42Y
2, 84X+28Y, 92X+46Y

As you can see not using power attack usually is better, with a few possible exceptions around the 15-16 range if X>Y. Possibly 13-17 if X is significantly better than Y.

Now for the 3 action attack routine.
Note I'll be assuming that the two -5 attacks on both sides cancel out and leave them off the chart for easier math. Plus it lets me copy/paste the chart above for the power attack side. :)

20+, 6X+2Y, 8X+4Y only crits
19, 9X+3Y, 10X+5Y
18, 12X+4Y, 12X+6Y
17, 15X+5Y, 14X+7Y
16, 18X+6Y, 16X+8Y
15, 21X+7Y, 18X+9Y
14, 24X+8Y, 20X+10Y
13, 27X+9Y, 22X+11Y
12, 30X+10Y, 24X+12Y
11, 33X+11Y, 26X+13Y
10, 36X+12Y, 28X+14Y
9, 42X+14Y, 34X+17Y first attack starts critting on a 19 here
8, 48X+16Y, 40X+20Y ^ also third attack starts hitting on a 19
7, 54X+18Y, 46X+23Y
6, 60X+20Y, 52X+26Y
5, 66X+22Y, 58X+29Y
4, 72X+24Y, 64X+32Y
3, 78X+26Y, 70X+35Y
2, 84X+28Y, 76X+38Y

So now that we have the chart lets solve each one and see what ratio of X to Y we need for each one for power attack to be good.

20+, 6X+2Y, 8X+4Y
19, 9X+3Y, 10X+5Y
18, 12X+4Y, 12X+6Y
Power attack is only better here if Y is negative (highly unlikely)

17, 15X+5Y, 14X+7Y
-14X-5Y, -14X-5Y
X vs 2Y
X would have to be more than double Y for power attack to be beneficial.

16, 18X+6Y, 16X+8Y
-16X-6Y, -16X-6Y
2X, 2Y
/2, /2
X vs Y
X would have to be greater than Y

15, 21X+7Y, 18X+9Y
3X, 2Y
X vs (2/3)Y
X would have to be more than 2/3 the value of Y for power attack to be beneficial

14, 24X+8Y, 20X+10Y
4X, 2Y
X vs (1/2)Y

13, 27X+9Y, 22X+11Y
5X, 2Y
X vs (2/5)Y

12, 30X+10Y, 24X+12Y
6X, 2Y
X vs (1/3)Y

11, 33X+11Y, 26X+13Y
7X, 2Y
X vs (2/7)Y

10, 36X+12Y, 28X+14Y
8X, 2Y
X vs (1/4)Y

9, 42X+14Y, 34X+17Y
8X, 3Y
X vs (3/8)Y

8, 48X+16Y, 40X+20Y
8X, 4Y
X vs (1/2)Y

7, 54X+18Y, 46X+23Y
8X, 5Y
X vs (5/8)Y

6, 60X+20Y, 52X+26Y
8X, 6Y
X vs (3/4)Y

5, 66X+22Y, 58X+29Y
8X, 7Y
X vs (7/8)Y

4, 72X+24Y 64X+32Y
8X, 8Y
X vs Y

3, 78X+26Y, 70X+35Y
8X, 9Y
X vs (9/8)Y

2, 84X+28Y, 76X+38Y
8X, 10Y
X vs (10/8)Y

So in the cases above it can be more useful to use power attack depending on the ratio of X to Y.
Even if X is only half of Y (as in the cases of [1d12+13], [1d8+9] and [1d4+5]) you gain benefit from power attack if you need from a 9 to a 13 (and suffer no loss on an 8 or 14).
But if X ever drops below 1/4 Y (as in [1d12+27],[1d8+19] and [1d4+11]) power attack will always be a bad choice with a +1 weapon.

I realize I have no idea how much static damage players get so I've no idea what Y could be.

I hope i didn't bore anyone too much and if i made any mistakes let me know.

Again, this is not a complaint or meant negatively in any way. I just saw this and it looked unintended, so i wanted to mention it.

There are 2 things about crafting staves you missed.

First all spells in the staff need the to have the same caster level and second the minimum caster level for spells in staves is 8.

So what you're looking at for a cost is

400 x 2 x 8 = 6400
300 x 2 x 8 = 4800
200 x 1 x 8 = 1600

for a grand total of 14,400.

Staves are expensive.

I would have to go with a "NO" here also.

This is for two reasons.

One:
As Blackstorm stated it says non sor/wiz spells, which means spells not on those class spell lists.

Two:
If you did allow access to spells from other lists at level 5 or below regardless of them being on the sor/wiz list, then there's nothing to stop the sorcerer from getting spells from the summoner list, which has many 7th level sor/wiz spells at level 5, including Summon Monster 7. This is clearly more powerful than the spell is intended to be.

Creating a gestalt character isn't really about making two single class characters and combining them (though that approach can work) so much as it is designing your character level by level and choosing 2 classes each level.

Every level you look at what you have so far and you can use it all to qualify for either class you take. So yes you can use both classes to qualify for nature warden in your case.

Also you have to look at what each class grants you each level and if they ever grant the same thing you only get the better progression of that thing. In the case of animal companions it can and will vary by DM because different DM's have animal companions stack differently. By RAW (non gestalt) animal companion levels stack only if the animal you have is acceptable to both classes. This can lead to some cases where you end up with 2 low level animals. Some GM's however go the reverse and allow them to stack regardless.
In either case however animal companion is a single class feature, unless your DM rules otherwise, so if you get it from 2 different classes as a gestalt character at the same level it only counts as a single level for determining the power of the animal companion.
So in the specific case of taking a mammoth rider level and a ranger level at the same time, it would only grant one level of animal companion.
On the other hand when you do take levels of mammoth rider it doesn't matter whether its "A side" or "B side" since they all count together for determining what the character has for abilities.

Another one to consider is the Adept list. It has a decent variety of spells to pick from not normally available to divine casters.

I would probably do something like have the armor gain the Broken condition and fall off the wearer if the save was failed. It's only a level 3 spell.

Locke1520 wrote:

erik542 wrote:

But he has "tricked" the scroll into thinking that he is a native. For the purposes of casting the spell he counts as a native. Picking targets is part of casting the spell. Therefore he is a native for purposes of picking targets. This is akin to an outsider UMD'ing enlarge person to work on themselves.

UMD tricks the vessel not the arcane energies within the vessel. This is a scroll not a wondrous item. Once the spell is cast the spell functions per the normal rules UMD just allows someone who could not normally USE the scroll it to use it. This is a weird corner case though that would have to fall under GM discretion so YMMV

[citation needed]

Just think about the precident of having UMD change if you're a valid target. Someone casts Hold person on you from an item. "I use UMD to fool it into thinking I'm an outsider, so now I'm not a valid target."

It might be worth noting that Melee Touch Attacks are considered Armed Attacks and so do NOT provoke Attacks of Opportunity to begin with. Replacing them with regular attacks changes nothing. As everyone else has stated its the Casting (not the attack) that provokes.

Am I good on assuming that a witch's patron knows all those spells on the witches spell list? I just choose spells from that list on my spells per day per level?

I dont gain two new spells or whatever like a wizard.

actually no. A witch's familiar acts as a spellbook of sorts and you have to add spells to it by brewing it "potions." Its in the sidebar on page 68 of the APG. they start with 3+int mod spells known. thats on page 67 under Witch's Familiar.

I would suggest recalculating the entire value based on the current most expensive ability every time you upgrade it and subtract from that the amount already spent on it. Item upgrades are usually done in downtime anyway so the extra math shouldn't be a problem.

Actually I would say that the monk gets a few more attacks with flurry of blows than just 15/15/10/10 as a 10 monk 10 shadowdancer.

The effective BAB for flurry of blows would be 10 from monk and 7 from shadowdancer, giving a 17 bab for 4 regular attacks plus the 2 extra attacks at the 2. for a total of 15/15/10/10/5/0.