ForkOfSpite's page

Tahari's power drawn from the Topaz jewel states:

Tahari's spells and abilities affect her targets as though her alignment were neutral or evil, whichever is more advantageous to her.

(p. 18)

I'd like to confirm that this does *** NOT *** affect abilities from her opponents such as the extra damage from a holy weapon or a paladin's smite evil ability - those examples are abilities from other creatures rather than her spells / abilities.

On the other hand, if a PC is relying on bonuses such as those from the spell protection from evil, those bonuses would not apply since Tahari's spell/ability could be considered to be cast/originate from a neutral creature

These next questions are probably more appropriate for the rules forum, but I'm wondering how other people handled it. Encounter A at high subtier has a creature with the swallow whole ability and DR bypassed by bludgeoning. To "cut their way out", do swallowed creatures need to deal sufficient piercing and/or slashing damage, and does the "inside" still benefit from DR X/bludgeoning?

Wait...so your argument is that because the PDT hasn't specifically told us that they intended to not add stacking language that convinces you that they intended for things to stack? Nevermind that they specifically told us that things don't stack unless its says they do?

That's one possible argument; it was not my primary evidence, but the argument can certainly be made. All RAI arguments, by definition, require the GM to make a judgement call. The conclusion of my post was that it's certainly reasonable for a GM to go with 1d6.

... without a FAQ / development team post (or something resembling an "official source") this is a GM call, and it's certainly reasonable to decide that "+1d6" and "+1d6" do not stack. (Isn't there a rule about unnamed bonuses always stacking? Maybe that was only 3 / 3.5.) If my GM were to decide 1d6, I would at least ask if they could overlap - roll 1d6 twice and take the better result.

I clicked on this thread because I was wondering how this topic had 30+ responses. My interpretation aligns with the first couple of responses, but after looking at the other responses, I understand why 1d6 could be a valid answer. Despite those responses, I still believe 2d6 is the correct answer.

Correct answer: 2d6
(Fine, I can't state that as a "fact", so in my opinion, 2d6.)

The ability is "Sneak attack (Ex)" rather than "Sneak attack +1d6". This is the same as (for example) trap sense and bravery (fighter). This is different than (for example) armor training 1, armor training 2, etc, as well as 1st favored enemy, 2nd favored enemy, etc., and 1st studied target, 2nd studied target, etc.

There is one (Ex) ability called sneak attack. The +XdY gives how much is added to the sneak attack.

My confidence level means nothing (and I'm exaggerating it anyway), but I am "100% confident" that +1d6 sneak attack and +1d6 sneak attack combine to 2d6 sneak attack, but, of course, ...

... without a FAQ / development team post (or something resembling an "official source") this is a GM call, and it's certainly reasonable to decide that "+1d6" and "+1d6" do not stack. (Isn't there a rule about unnamed bonuses always stacking? Maybe that was only 3 / 3.5.) If my GM were to decide 1d6, I would at least ask if they could overlap - roll 1d6 twice and take the better result.

=========

edit:
arguments relating to how other sneak attacks are worded are, of course, irrelevant when it comes to RAW, but is this a RAI question instead? Again, this is definitely not proof, but I would think that this type of "intentional omission" (similar to investigators not being able to use spell-trigger items) would have already been addressed in the FAQ if non-stacking in this instance were the correct interpretation compared to other instances indicating that they do.

continuing the edit:
At least one other source exists to support the 1d6 answer: the ninja class does not mention anything about stacking sneak attacks. Perhaps this is an intentional base class / prestige class discrepancy? Despite this fact, I'm still confident that the correct answer is 2d6.

Scamperbaby wrote:

Ok thanks. Also, is there any ruling in regards to how far away a dragon could be and still attempt a grapple? For example, an ancient white dragon has 10ft reach, but 15ft with it's bite attack. I could see it being ruled either way.

There is no rule about which attack to use a standard grapple attempt with--you could use the bite if you choose.

Unless the dragon has the Grab special ability, I don't think the grapple attempt is associated with any particular natural attack. Instead, it attempts the Grapple combat maneuver and the target must be within the dragon's natural reach (10 ft.).

(searching for verification of "target must be within ... natural reach") ...

I don't see anything that specifies how far away a target can be when a creature attempts to start a grapple. I guess I had always presumed that the target must be within reach. I am confident that the grapple attempt is not associated with any particular attack, so feats like weapon focus (bite) would not give a bonus on the CMB check.

I think I just figured out a potential solution. I'm just going to roll 1d12 + (1d12/6) -1. I don't think that this will make a huge difference in the distribution. If it might, please let me know. I'm not really much into statistics.

The problem with this method is that you are only half as likely to roll a "1" than any other number from 2..12 (plus it still generates a 13 at equal probability to the 1).

Pseudos's solution shouldn't need a table. Just like iterative attacks, one d12 is "primary". The other one determines whether or not to add one to your primary - add one to the primary if the secondary is at least as big as the primary (and reroll if you get two 12s).

*** edit ***
If the secondary is less than or equal to the primary, add one. My incorrect "at least as big as the primary" is completely wrong and makes it impossible to roll a 1 (among other probems).

You are rewording exactly what I have already said in my original post.

My apologies to Pseudos. I thought about adding "(elegant solution!)" or something like that since I didn't think getting the exact distribution would be so easy with two d12s and only a single reroll. I thought that specifically quoting you implied I was not attempting to take credit for it.

We can get REALLY close to how you want this to work (143/144):

1. Roll 2d12, we need to know which is which. Reroll if both are 12.
2. If the second die is less than or equal to the first die, add one to the first die for your result, otherwise use the first die.

With the minor correction that the {12,12} result gives 13 rather than 14, this algorithm works giving 13 a slightly higher probability than the others.

Re-rolling {12,12} corrects back to perfect probability: 143 total outcomes and assigns 11 of them to each number from 1..13.

Once you have 1-13, you can just roll any third die and maybe do something like "even/odd":
(even) keep the 1..13 result
(odd) add 13 to get a 14..26 result

[many other systems will exist to get you from 1..13 to 1..26]

In the "Five-foot Step: Teleportation and Bladed Dash, etc" thread, a couple of people effectively answered "no" to the first question (d-door), but most say yes. However, it also looks like the majority say "no" when the sequence involves Bladed Dash rather than Dimension Door.

Using just a d12, you'll always have an integer multiple of 12 possible outcomes: for 'n'd12, you have 12^n outcomes. That will never be evenly divisible by 13, so you cannot assign the same number of outcomes to each number 1 to 13. Impossible to get the uniform distribution you desire.

You're not going to get a uniform distribution involving a multiple of 13 without a n*13-sided die (where n=1,2,3,...).

exact option:
roll 1d20 (reroll outcomes from 14 to 20)

approximate solution:
(1) roll 1d1000 for a uniform result from 0-999
(2) divide by 77 (dropping any remainder)
(3) add 1

result (probability)
13 (76 / 1000)
12 (77 / 1000)
11 (77 / 1000)
...
2 (77 / 1000)
1 (77 / 1000)

probability of getting 13 is slightly less than the others, so it's not exactly uniform. Depending on your purpose, it might be "close enough".

another exact solution, but likely won't work for your purposes:
(1) draw a card from a standard deck
(2) ace = 1; number = number; jack=11, queen=12, king=13

Perhaps I'm on the wrong side of an obvious 5-foot step interpretation. I'm wondering if opinions are varied enough to warrant a FAQ (or at least a FAQ request).

You can move 5 feet in any round when you don’t perform any other kind of movement.

Potential FAQ Question:

Related question- (if anyone thinks the answer to the 1st question is "yes")
Could the character cast Bladed Dash instead of Dimension Door? (separate question in case the specific wording in the Bladed Dash spell affects the situation)

I had always assumed that each end is enchanted separately, but the CRB does not necessarily support that assumption. The CRB does specifically state that each end can be made from a different material, but the crafting section simply indicates that enchanting a double weapon takes twice as long and costs twice as much. To me, this suggests that a "+2/+1 quarterstaff" cannot be created and enchanting the flaming property affects both sides rather than just one side for the standard (single weapon) upgrade.

Searching the pdf for "double" does come up with some references that indirectly supports treating each end separately:

(1) The paladin Divine Bond ability specifically states that the bonus only applies to one side of a double weapon (CRB p. 63).

(2) Rod of Flailing acts as a "+3/+3 dire flail" (CRB p. 486). The +3/+3 notation at least suggests each end could be enchanted separately.

*** EDIT: The PFS Guild Guide indicates that player treat the cost or each end separately for purchasing limitations, but given that each end can be made from different materials, this also does not necessarily imply that the two ends can have different enchantments. ***

Potentially related question:
How do spells that target a weapon interact with double weapons? If keen edge is cast on a double sword, does it affect both sides or only one?

how would you stop your enemies from swarming (overrunning with numbers) your support spellcaster(lvl 7 debuffer witch)?

levitate or fly?

As OP openly stated (as "treading tenuous ground") any mention to the "real-world" is irrelevant. I think many FAQ responses have mentioned that (and I apologize if I'm incorrect about stating that as a fact.)

Re: FAQ on cold-weather outfit
As several people have posted, this is highly unlikely to get a FAQ response since the rules are clearly stated (+5 bonus on the Fort saves).

Re: PFS
Unless the scenario specifically mentions environment effects, gms are not required to include them. The field guide suggests that gms include environment effects if they are comfortable with them.

Additionally, the GM may consider utilizing terrain and environmental conditions when those effects have been written into the flavor of a scenario but the mechanics that are normally associated with them by the Core Rulebook have not been added to the encounters.

GMs may use other Pathfinder RPG sources to add flavor to the scenario, but may not change the mechanics of encounters. (...) Additionally, if an encounter already includes mechanical effects of terrain, weather, or hazards, please be aware that these things are also considered mechanics that may not be altered.

If the scenario does include the environment effects, then hopefully the gm can notice this before the game and maybe change to a different scenario (anyone up for The Confirmation again?). More likely, the scenario does not specifically include environment effects in which case, for the fun of all ("A GM's duty is to provide a fair and fun game." Guild Guide p. 9), the gm can feel free to ignore those effects for a low-level party that has already spent all of their prestige and therefore cannot purchase any wands of endure elements (or has no one capable of using it).

(*** EDIT: I just want to include one more statement in parentheses. ***)

This is not a entering your box question but a entering the area around your box that you threaten *aka the red zone* were enemies have to be to kill you and you can kill them.

So a monster runs at you and enters your red zone with the intent to do bodily harm. does that reckless attack provoke an attack of opportunity?

I understand if a warrior runs att you with his weapon drawn but as he gets close enough. he slows down and enters your red zone with caution. you don't get an attack of opportunity.

Provoking an Attack of Opportunity: Two kinds of actions can provoke attacks of opportunity: moving out of a threatened square and performing certain actions within a threatened square.

Moving: Moving out of a threatened square usually provokes attacks of opportunity from threatening opponents. There are two common methods of avoiding such an attack—the 5-foot step and the withdraw action.

Performing a Distracting Act: Some actions, when performed in a threatened square, provoke attacks of opportunity as you divert your attention from the battle. Table 8–2 notes many of the actions that provoke attacks of opportunity.

Remember that even actions that normally provoke attacks of opportunity may have exceptions to this rule.

Removing the "entering your square" from the situation makes this straight-forward. Entering a threatened square does not provoke no matter the method in which the square was entered. Leaving a threatened square provokes (as does performing specific actions within a threatened square).

all that aside how many size categories must something be before a being is able to be able to enter its space? is it 2 size categories?

MOVING THROUGH A SQUARE

Square Occupied by Creature Three Sizes Larger or Smaller: Any creature can move through a square occupied by a creature three size categories larger than itself.

A big creature can move through a square occupied by a creature three size categories smaller than it is.

Presuming that both creatures are at least size small, there needs to be a three size category difference to move through each other's square (in general).

Re: Dimension Door
This should not provide a problem. If it did, the tactic "5' step away and cast d-door" would not be possible. A gm could certainly interpret conjuration (teleportation) as "any other type of movement", but hopefully, the gm would be consistent with that ruling for NPCs as well as PCs this person might have in other Pathfinder games (unless, of course, different home rules apply).

Re: Bladed Dash
Presuming that the description provided in the OP is accurate, it's a transmutation spell rather than conjuration (teleportation), and the description specifically mentions "move up to 30 feet". Although I would allow a 5' step before (or after) casting that this spell, I can certainly see the argument against allowing it; however, is a DC 19 concentration check too difficult at level 9 or higher? Is there a reason not to cast defensively? (If I'm interpreting the spell correctly, this would even grant an extra attack against the original target against the BBEG that was unexpectedly full attacked.)

Glossary wrote:

Panicked: Characters who are panicked are shaken, and they run away from the source of their fear as quickly as they can, dropping whatever they are holding. Other than running away from the source, their paths are random. They flee from all other dangers that confront them rather than facing those dangers. Once they are out of sight (or hearing) of any source of danger, they can act as they want. Panicked characters cower if they are prevented from fleeing.

2. The frightened entry in the fear section says that if the fear source presents itself again while the creature is still frightened, it must flee again. It does not say this for panicked. Is it implied to be the same for panicked?

Presumably, the original source of the fear effect is still a source of danger from the perspective of the panicked creature, so yes, it must resume fleeing (if the fear effect has not expired).

There's nothing anywhere that indicates that wearing an intelligence-increasing headband would even get you extra languages (even with Linguistics as a keyed skill), nor that removing it and putting it back on again would let you change the chosen languages.

"Nothing anywhere" seems excessive; from the core rulebook:

Permanent Bonuses: Ability bonuses with a duration greater than 1 day actually increase the relevant ability score after 24 hours. Modify all skills and statistics related to that ability. This might cause you to gain skill points, hit points, and other bonuses. These bonuses should be noted separately in case they are removed.

This leads to two reasonable questions:

If "yes" to both, then the headband should grant extra known languages, and if Linguistics is one of the skills tied to the headband, it can possibly grant additional languages depending on the user. This further leads to other questions being discussed in this thread.

separate saves

My opinion only (easy to implement)...
Keep players "in initiative" for a few rounds after encounters (keep track of enemies bleeding out). During this time, does the player cast resistance? Does the player cast guidance?

Another suggestion (also easy to implement)...
Ask the order in which the spells are generally cast (i.e. resistance followed the next round by guidance). At the beginning of each combat, roll a d10 to see how many rounds are left on those spells. If you roll a "3", the guidance has three rounds left and the resistance has 2 rounds left. If you roll a "1", the guidance only has one round left, and at the beginning of the player's turn, the resistance expires.

If you follow that suggestion, there is a good chance the player will counter with casting those spells once every 5 rounds rather than once every 10 rounds... which isn't really a problem, but it potentially slows the party down twice as much. In this case, the player has 1d10+5 rounds left (one fewer for the first spell cast).

Final suggestion (this one takes it too far in my opinion) ...
You also might need to keep track of detect magic. Is this player using detect magic (or other "detect spells")? That takes time (three rounds per 60 foot cone). To completely scan in four directions while also taking the time to rebuff resistance and guidance, it might take 2 minutes.

Re: threatening from 10' away?

If your target (or the part of your target you’re aiming at, if it’s a big target) is at least 10 feet away from the nearest friendly character, you can avoid the –4 penalty, even if the creature you’re aiming at is engaged in melee with a friendly character.

This indicates that the -4 penalty for shooting into melee does not apply when they're not adjacent, but it still describes the target and friendly character as engaged in melee which is defined as ...

Two characters are engaged in melee if they are enemies of each other and either threatens the other. (An unconscious or otherwise immobilized character is not considered engaged unless he is actually being attacked.)

Re: interpreting Reckless Aim

Benefit: When you shoot or throw ranged weapons at an opponent engaged in melee, you can choose to take a –1 penalty to your AC and gain a +2 competence bonus on your attack roll. However, when you roll a natural 1 on a ranged attack roll made with this bonus, you automatically hit a random adjacent creature that threatens your intended target.

Reckless aim effects are only relevant when the target is engaged in melee (which includes your ally attacking from 10' away). If a nat 1 is rolled, you automatically hit a random creature that is adjacent and threatens the intended target.

"Adjacent" is (hopefully) self-explainatory; your ally engaged in melee with a reach weapon is in no danger.

"Threaten" ...

You threaten all squares into which you can make a melee attack, even when it is not your turn.

... so you can "accidentally" hit the target's ally if:

Note:
If you are targeting an opponent standing next to his buddy with no one else around, Reckless Aim has no effect since those two are not "engaged in melee" which requires the two creatures to be enemies of each other.

2) Is the feat on page 24 or 25? If it is, then it's legal for PFS play presuming you bring the appropriate supporting paperwork (including the current version of the Additional Resources pdf);

-- edit --
legal for a human? I suppose that depends on the answer to your first question.
-- end edit --

1) no definitive answer from me

-- edit --
I think so, but I could easily be incorrect.
-- end edit --

From a PC's perspective, clone, at best, serves as an inexpensive resurrection *** if *** the group survives. If it's a TPK, then clone works as a resurrection that costs everything you own.

Clone exists for the campaigns that focus on the BBEG but do not want to use another lich. Clone is an option that writers can use to extend a campaign if the writer is not confined by NPC wealth tables...

"Of course my conqueror has duplicates of all his items; he's THAT prepared. In fact, he underestimated you the first time and left his unique artifact back here with his clone rather than annihilating all of you out with it ten levels ago."

Stealth check can't be 15 unless you have -5 to stealth and roll a 1... Don't forget the +20 to stealth with invisibility spell...

I'm not denying that the rules are ambiguous, and a FAQ would help PFS players. I was just asking why no one was applying the modifiers for moving or being engaged in combat (or for distance).

My post premised on using the rules as written in the invisibility special ability section. Using the rules as discussed in the stealth section could lead to differences... let's check! (A hiding from B)

Your Stealth check is opposed by the Perception check of anyone who might notice you.

Thus, if B's perception roll (including modifications as detailed in the Perception description) is at least as good as A's stealth check (including modifiers as I will discuss shortly), then B "notices" A.

You can move up to half your normal speed and use Stealth at no penalty.

presumption I made in my post.

If you are invisible, you gain a +40 bonus on Stealth checks if you are immobile, or a +20 bonus on Stealth checks if you’re moving.

Given the +20 bonus, let's change my stealth 15 to a stealth 35 check. We get a different result because we're no longer considering the invisibility special ability

This DC 35 needs to be adjusted by DC modifiers as described in the perception skill (such as +1 per 10 feet). Furthermore, we are faced with the fact that "notice" isn't a defined game-term, so it would be reasonable, and at least partially consistent with the invisibility special ability, to say DC 56 to pinpoint the square. I think the core rulebook does adequately and consistently indicate that the invisible creature still gains the benefits of full concealment (presuming B only has standard methods of detection; no see invisibility, no blindsight, likely excluding a dozen other methods.)

Once again, I agree that a FAQ would help... I think applying both the +20 bonus to stealth (stealth description) and DC=stealth+20 (invisibility description) is one of the specific items being discussed here. I was just commenting, for those that were referring to the invisibility special ability, that I didn't notice anyone including the modifiers for combat, moving at half speed, or moving at full speed.

Why is no one accounting for the negative modifiers to the perception DC? Let's consider the numbers as described by the invisibility special ability (generally notice the presence of an invisible creature within 30' with a DC 20 perception check)

case 1--
ready to interrupt spellcasting by an invisible creature
base = 20 (DC: 20)
in combat or speaking: -20 (DC: 20-20 = 0)
some distance (25') away: +1 per 10' (DC: 0+2 = 2)

perception roll
2 to 21: can fire arrow but need to guess square
22+: pinpointed square, 50% miss due to total concealment

case 2--
creature casts invisibility defensively then moves 30' (full speed)
base = 20 (DC: 20)
move at full speed: -10 (DC: 20-10 = 10)
some distance away: +1 per 10' (DC: 10+3 = 13)

perception roll
less than 10= no idea where creature went
perception 11-12= know it moved, quickly lost track
perception 13-32= general idea which direction it move
perception 33+= know its current square (still full concealment)

case 3-- same as 2 but stealths 15' (half-speed)
stealth check = 15 (hypothetical; no penalty on stealth check)
base = stealth + 20 (DC: 35)
move at half speed: -5 (DC: 35-5 = 30)
some distance away: +1 per 10' (DC: 30+1 = 31; could be 30+2=32 if creature moved 15' directly away from you and is thus 20' away)

perception roll
less than 30 = no idea whether or not it moved
perception 30 = know it moved
perception 31-50 = know approximate direction it moved
perception 51+ = go ahead and charge the square (50% miss chance)

unlikely;

Dimensional anchor specifically mentions several Core Rulebook spells as well as "similar spell-like abilities." Neither dismissal nor banishment were listed as methods of transportation prevented by dimensional anchor. Since it's also a Core Rulebook spell, it's tough to argue that dimensional anchor also prevents banishment from working.

Thanks. I was simply wondering if "run as written" implied that the planar attributes should not be included since they were not mentioned. It's easier to rationalize if the enhanced (and impeded) magic should be ignored, it should have been specifically mentioned to do so.

Apologies if this is obvious ...

According to the Game Mastery Guide, the Plane of Fire should have enhanced fire magic and impeded water magic. Typically, rules from sources other than the Core Rulebook are at least mentioned, so should the enhanced and impeded magic be enforced, or should they be ignored?

A darkwood tower shield is always available, so there is no fame requirement.

The gp limit based on fame applies to items that ...
a) you do not have specific access via a chronicle sheet
b) are not "Always Available Items" (as defined on p. 23 of the guide)

Thank you.

Apologies in advance for questions that have likely been answered thousands of times. Nevertheless, the answers are not clear to me.

From the PFS FAQ:
"Are official blog post FAQ's or Errata updates legal for Pathfinder Society Organized Play?"
Yes. Please follow these clarifications.

First question:
Where can we find "official blog post FAQ's" and "Errata updates"? (I have found FAQs for several publications, but I have not found any specific errata notifications.)

Second question:
Other than the Guide, PFS FAQ, and Additional Resources, where should we look for --- PFS OFFICIAL --- rules clarifications?

Potential third question:
If the answer to the second question involves more than ten or so particular threads on the message boards, will someone please share sound advice for GMs new to PFS regarding how to learn about official rules clarifications?

just a bit late on this (and it solves nothing), but ...

The balor example is not 100% consistent with a large creature wielding a medium-sized whip. Although the base damage (1d4) and ability to treat as a light weapon are consistent with a medium-sized whip, the balor is not taking a -2 penalty on whip attack rolls due to using a weapon that is inappropriately sized by one step.

+20(BAB) +1(enhancement) +12(str) -1(size) -2(2WF) = +30