Mavaro

Gisher's page

5,673 posts (5,895 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 64 aliases.


RSS

1 to 50 of 5,673 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

QuidEst wrote:
Squiggit wrote:
ChibiNyan wrote:


I hope Cackle actually does something now. Imagine using a Class feat to change the concentrate trait for auditory on sustains...
I mean, maybe. That'd still be better than what Eschew Materials does.
I'd disagree, mildly- Eschew Materials frees up a hand. Changing sustaining without doing anything for casting doesn't do much.

Sadly, it doesn't free up a hand.

CRB, p.209 wrote:
Eschew Materials... Unlike when providing somatic components, you still must have a hand completely free.


It will be interesting to see how, or if, Familiars are incorporated into the Witch Multiclass Archetype.


I started a thread on this problem yesterday. I didn't realize it was a recurring problem.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Suddenly clicking on most product threads takes me to the Paizo Golem with this message.

Quote:
You’ve reached this page due to an error on paizo.com. The web team has been notified and are working to fix the issue.

I'm on an iPhone 11 and using Safari. It doesn't seem to be a problem in the other forums.


Aratorin wrote:
Claxon wrote:

Regular unarmed strikes I don't believe would allow you to use the finesse quality because regular unarmed strikes don't also have the traits for maneuvers.

However, I believe if your weapon has the finesse trait and a maneuver trait you could make your athletics check with your dex bonus instead of your strength bonus.

The sickle is an example of a weapon that has the finesse and trip traits.

As far as I know there aren't Monk styles that have maneuver traits on them, but they would be more likely candidate to have finesse trait and weapon maneuver trait than being able to generically add it to an unarmed strike.

And I think this is intended. You don't use your punch (unarmed strike) to trip someone, you grab their leg and throw them off balance. Which isn't really a strike.

Wolf Stance has Trip while Flanking. The only reason for that would be to use the Agile Trait of that Attack.

It also lets you add the Item Bonus from your Handwraps to the Athletics Check.


10 people marked this as a favorite.
Justinian9 wrote:

I don't care what is in it just so long as it is complete data on whatever is in it. I buy the PDF and hard copies from here and I have to buy the PDF again for Hero lab.... I am learning not to make mistakes but Hero Lab keeps me right. If I get into Roll20 or Fantasy Grounds I have to buy it again! This is getting expensive.

Stop putting out products that are not complete Paizo.

Blaming Paizo because you are spending money at other companies is weird.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Valantrix1 wrote:
Portable hole, Rod of lordly might, rod of thunder and lightning, and rod of splendor for starters. Also, mirror of mental prowess would be fun.

I do miss the various magical rods. Also the Robe of Infinite Twine. It was just so useful.


Lycar wrote:
Huh, so they aren't. For some reason I was convinced that had changed that in PF 2. Makes Monks taking Fighter dedication and vice versa a tad less synergistic.

Yes it does, but Monastic Weapons can help. Those weapons can benefit from Monk abilities like Flurry and Ki Strike and as weapons can also utilize a number of abilities from Fighter (or other classes).


Salamileg wrote:
Forget darkvision, I want an ancestry with echolocation! Let me scream to create a mental image of the room around me!

Were you watching What We Do in the Shadows last night? :)


Lycar wrote:
Double Slice requires two melee weapons to work. Shields with bosses or spikes attached definitely count as melee weapons,...

I think it is important to use precise language here. A Shield Boss or Shield Spikes don't just count as weapons. They are weapons. But neither of them makes the shield itself into a weapon. They are real weapons that are attached to a shield which is not a weapon.

Lycar wrote:
...same as your fists, which are listed as the only melee weapon in the 'Unarmed' category, and one of the weapons of the 'Brawling' weapon group.

As Aratorin points out, fists are explicitly not weapons.

Lycar wrote:
It is a bit silly, but you could argue that the items listed in the weapons list after Fists are merely 'weapons attached to your fist'. ...

It's not 'a bit silly.' It's just wrong. Hands are not fists, fists are not weapons, and only the shield boss and shield spikes have the Attached property.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The rules aren't contradictory, but they are complicated. The best approach to understand them is to take things one step at a time rather than trying to grasp the whole process at once.

Step 1: Druids get a Focus Pool of one Focus Point as part of their Druidic Order class feature.

Current total: 1 Focus Point

Step 2: Basic Bloodline Spell states that "If you don’t already have one, you also gain a focus pool of 1 Focus Point." You do already have a Focus Pool so you don't gain a second Focus Pool with 1 point. Instead, the general rules tell you that you add 1 Focus Point to your already existing Focus Pool. (Just like the Healing Touch example that you cited.)

Current total: 2 Focus Points

Step 3: Advanced Bloodline states that you "Increase the number of Focus Points in your focus pool by 1." So you get one more Focus Point.

Current total: 3 Focus Points

So you end up with 3 Focus Points at the end of this process. Your Focus Pool can't be increased any more.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
YogoZuno wrote:
tivadar27 wrote:
Note: You can use Dexterity in place of Strength on the Athletics check to trip as well because of the finesse. Trip is an attack roll, and finesse lets you use dexterity in place of strength on all attack rolls with that weapon, not just strikes. This I actually love and would not change :).

Are you able to support this with rules at all?

The Trip action has the Attack trait, but I don't see that meaning any rolls made with the action are Attack Rolls.

CRB, p. 446 wrote:
When you use a Strike action or any other attack action, you attempt a check called an attack roll.


Courage Mind wrote:
Thanks guys. I have to admit though, I got a little confused with the distinction between innate cantrips and innate spells. As far as Arcane Tattoos feat is concerned, are the spells mentioned considered innate cantrips of innate arcane spells?

They are both Innate Cantrips and Innate Spells. Innate Cantrips are a special type of Innate Spell. (Note that the text that Taja the Barbarian quotes above is taken from the Innate Spells section.) An analogy is that a square is both a square and a rectangle because squares are a special category of rectangle.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Michael Sayre wrote:
Gisher wrote:
Michael Sayre wrote:
Quote:
What did Tar-Baphon look like when he was alive?
Willem Dafoe.
Np, they want to know what he looked like when he was ALIVE.
You may be overestimating how deleterious the transformation into a lich actually was for li'l Baphy. Remember, he perfected a technique found in the Cynotaph, likely originally created by Zutha, for his transformation, and Zutha just got a little grayer and rheumy after transforming.

I was thinking of Dafoe in Daybreakers. Vampire Dafoe, not lich Dafoe but close. Thanks for the link to Zutha. I didn't know anything about him. Pretty creepy.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kelseus wrote:
tivadar27 wrote:
Note: You can use Dexterity in place of Strength on the Athletics check to trip as well because of the finesse. Trip is an attack roll, and finesse lets you use dexterity in place of strength on all attack rolls with that weapon, not just strikes. This I actually love and would not change :).

This is a good catch, so he would have a +9 to trip with a whip, but only a +4 to hit with it.

Any takers on RAW for must be proficient with the weapon?

Everyone is proficient with every weapon. Untrained is a proficiency rank, and has a proficiency bonus (although it is +0). The PF1 distinction between proficiency and non-proficiency doesn't exist anymore as far as I can tell.

CRB, p. 10 wrote:
Each rank grants a different proficiency bonus. If you’re untrained at a statistic, your proficiency bonus is +0—you must rely solely on the raw potential of your ability modifier. If your proficiency rank for a statistic is trained, expert, master, and legendary, your bonus equals your character’s level plus another number based on the rank (2, 4, 6, and 8, respectively). Proficiency ranks are part of almost every statistic in the game.
CRB, class descriptions wrote:

INITIAL PROFICIENCIES

At 1st level, you gain the listed proficiency ranks in the following statistics. You are untrained in anything not listed unless you gain a better proficiency rank in some other way.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Michael Sayre wrote:
Quote:
What did Tar-Baphon look like when he was alive?
Willem Dafoe.

Np, they want to know what he looked like when he was ALIVE.


Queaux wrote:
I want to try out those new rogue rackets. I love gambling characters that play dangerously and opportunistically. Getting a few more rackets to theme my base chassis around before picking up archetypes based off what happens during play is my preferred play style. I want to see a shift in direction in play, and all of the options are going to let me do that.

I missed the part about the Rogue rackets. Eldritch Trickster is intriguing. It sounds like a cross between Eldritch Scoundrel and Arcane Trickster.


I'm hoping to create something along the lines of the PF1 Psychic Detective or Questioner. My original plan was Investigator/Wizard MC, but now I'm thinking that using Witch MC and going with the Primal or Occult traditions might be more interesting.


pauljathome wrote:

I'm greatly enjoying my cleric of Gozreh/druid. At level 7 all his feats have been druid feats.

Thematically and mechanically it's a great mix.

Note - I dithered long and hard between cleric multiclassing into druid or druid multiclassing into cleric. Both would work well with the resulting character similar but also different.

Druid MC goes well with lots of other classes. I'm particularly fond of Wizard/Druid.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
AnimatedPaper wrote:
I could not help but notice “Eldritch Archer” as one of the archetypes. If it’s “Arcane Archer” but for all traditions, that might be cool. Especially if they retain the Imbue Area ability.

I'm not sure about Imbue Area, but it is usable with all four traditions. And since it was included in a list of other 'old-school archetypes' I'm sure that it is the new version of Arcane Archer. I'm really excited about this.


Sporkedup wrote:
PossibleCabbage wrote:
Where is all this stuff being confirmed?

https://www.alliance-games.com/downloads/243.pdf

Written by Mark Seifter, made available this morning for us all to read! Very cool stuff, including the whole Dhampir entry. :)

Linkified


3 people marked this as a favorite.
The-Magic-Sword wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
CorvusMask wrote:
Sporkedup wrote:
CorvusMask wrote:

Were are you getting this new info from? Oh wait*checks paizo twitch*

Yeah, that wasn't it :( I want info on APG too!

From this thread... scroll up?
I don't see Mark Seifter posting in thread unless I've missed something
I work in mysterious ways. ;)
Btw, can you confirm the "June" date in the article was a misprint?

I'd prefer confirmation that it was correct. ;)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ssalarn wrote:

"Game Trade Magazine issue 243 previews the upcoming Pathfinder 2e Advanced Player's Guide, including a 2-page preview of the Dhampir ancestry. A PDF of GMT 243 is free to download."

Game Trade Magazine with dhamphir heritage

Thank you for posting this! I didn't think I could be more excited about this book. I was wrong.


Squiggit wrote:

As I recall the argument is essentially that the ability to Cast A Spell and provide material components are given to you by spellcasting classes. The Wizard gains Cast A Spell and the ability to provide verbal, material and somatic components as part of their spellcasting feature.

People with only Innate spells, therefore, don't have the ability to provide components... so their spells can't have components, otherwise they couldn't cast them.

I would think this text would cover that.

CRB, p. 302 wrote:

Innate Spells

Certain spells are natural to your character, typically coming from your ancestry or a magic item rather than your class. You can cast your innate spells even if you aren’t a member of a spellcasting class.


Ravingdork wrote:
Innate spells arguably don't have spell components either, which means they're less likely to provoke. So that could be one plus in their favor.

That would be cool, but I haven't seen any text suggesting that Innate Spells don't have components.


Draco18s wrote:
Gisher wrote:
What's google?

You could try goo--

Oh.

LOL!


Draco18s wrote:
Gisher wrote:
Aubearus wrote:
Not to argue the point, but our Paizo accounts sync directly with Roll20.
That's interesting. I'd never heard of Roll20 before, and I couldn't find it in the Paizo store. (But I often find the Paizo store difficult to search.)

Should have tried google. :)

https://roll20.net/

What's google?


CrystalSeas wrote:

In my PDF of the Core Rulebook, Nimble Dodges has a "reaction" symbol

Core Rulebook wrote:

1ST LEVEL

NIMBLE DODGE [one-action[reaction] FEAT 1
ROGUE
Trigger A creature targets you with an attack and you can see the attacker.
Requirements You are not encumbered.
You deftly dodge out of the way, gaining a +2 circumstance bonus to AC against the
triggering attack.

The page itself shows the symbol.

But the underlying description of the symbol has an unclosed bracket, and what looks like an error.

The [reaction] symbol is what shows on both the PDF page and the printed page. But it looks like there is a stray bit of machine-readable code that is an open bracket followed by 'one-action'.

Since there is no closing bracket, it doesn't display anywhere. Looks like Roll20 is adding in the closing bracket and forcing the 'one-action' symbol to display in error.

That makes sense.


Aubearus wrote:
Not to argue the point, but our Paizo accounts sync directly with Roll20.

That's interesting. I'd never heard of Roll20 before, and I couldn't find it in the Paizo store. (But I often find the Paizo store difficult to search.)


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm going to quote the above with a little different emphasis.

CRB, p. 18 wrote:
Prerequisites Any minimum ability scores, feats, proficiency ranks, or other prerequisites you must have before you can access this rule element are listed here. Feats also have a level prerequisite, which appears above.

Since prerequisites are minimum requirements rather than exact requirements, the general rule is that you can take a feat that has your level or lower as a prerequisite. There are a few ancestry feats that are exceptions and state that they can only be taken at first level.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Nimble Dodge is a reaction. It is clearly marked as such in the CRB. I have no idea what a 1-action reaction would even be since reactions and actions are separate categories. Are you sure that this roll20 is a Paizo product?


Draco18s wrote:
Andrew Teo wrote:
With a greater striking rune, heightened to say level 7, the spell does 7x3 d12 with a great sword.

I don't know how you arrived there.

Quote:

You swing a weapon you’re holding, and the weapon magically

multiplies into duplicates that swipe at all creatures in either
a cone or an emanation. This flurry deals four dice of damage
to creatures in the area.
This damage has the same type as
the weapon and uses the same die size. Determine the die size
as if you were attacking with the weapon; for instance, if you
were wielding a two-hand weapon in both hands, you’d use its
two-hand damage die.

Heightened (+1) Add another damage die.

Four, +1, +1, +1 is seven.

7d12 damage.

From this and another thread, I've come to believe that Andrew Teo has a unique view of how Striking Runes work.

CRB, p. 581 wrote:
A striking rune stores destructive magic in the weapon, increasing the weapon damage dice it deals to two instead of one.

Everyone else reads this as "increasing the [number of] weapon damage dice," but Andrew Teo reads it without inserting the implicit "number of." By that literal reading, Striking Runes actually increase the value assigned to the phrase "damage dice."

To you and me, a greatsword wielded two-handed has a "damage die" of 1d12 regardless of its Striking Runes. It is a fixed value defined on the weapon table. But for Andrew Teo a Greater Striking Rune redefines "damage die" to mean 3d12.

So you calculate seven damage dice as (7x1)d12=7d12, but Andrew Teo calculates it as (7x3)d12=21d12.


Cloylar wrote:
Can you attack using reach from bo staff and stand still when a medium creature comes towards you. If you have a 10ft reach thx to bo staff it fulfills the trigger however stand still says "you strike out when your foe tries to flee..."

Meeting the trigger requirements is the important part. If they are 10 ft from you (and hence in reach of your no staff), and they then move one square toward you then you get your strike from Stand Still.

Since word 'flee' does mean run away rather than run toward, I understand your confusion. However, that sentence doesn't say 'flee from you.' In this case it makes more sense to read 'flee' as 'flee from their current square.' After all, the name of the feat is Stand Still, not Don't Run Away. ;)


Deadmanwalking wrote:
The-Magic-Sword wrote:
They go on dates and stuff, it's super cute.

Sarenrae is in a committed relationship with Shelyn and Desna, while Shizuru is likewise in a committed relationship with Tsukiyo, so this is probably not the case.

It's possible both of those are open relationships, but it doesn't seem at all likely (in particular in regards to Shizuru and Tsukiyo), and even were that true there's no evidence of these two being interested in each other.

Claxon wrote:

I'm pretty sure Magic Sword was just joking around.

Though if you serious about the Shelyn, Desna, Sarenrae thing that is new information to me.

It is true.

Gods and Magic, p. 21 wrote:
Desna encourages her followers to chase their bliss, find what impassions them, and explore. She recognizes love in all its forms and remains committed to her lovers Sarenrae and Shelyn. She also shares a close relationship with Cayden Cailean and has no reservations about taking on new lovers.

So this relationship is both committed and open.


ESttt wrote:

Question 4, regarding the weirdness of the Wolf Stance (which I know has been a very debated subject)

The Wolf Stance gives your wolf jaw unarmed strike trip. What the actual f? Why can't I just trip exactly as effeiciently by just using the standard trip action?

The benefit of having the trip weapon trait is that it allows you to add the item bonus from your Handwraps to the athletics check.


Unicore wrote:

Even with GM support, I'd argue that both the abjurer and the diviner have better focus powers than Hand of the Apprentice.

Protective Ward makes the wizard like a defensive minded Bard. Status bonuses to AC are tough to come by.

Hmmm. I hadn't noticed that Protective Ward is a status bonus. That would be an appealing choice for Arcane School Spell for a character with Wizard Dedication. If there is a Bard in the party, Protective Ward would supplement Inspire Courage pretty well. +1 status to pretty much everything. :)


Valentius wrote:
Another tactic I considered was having Gustav throw the bomb, but I don’t know if Familiars can attack like that.

They can't. Familiars don't have any ability to attack.

Valentius wrote:
Also, do physical shields and the shield spell stack?

They both grant circumstance bonuses to AC so they don't stack.


lemeres wrote:
Elaserdar wrote:
Luke Styer wrote:
Elaserdar wrote:
Any suggestions on how to circumvent this problem? I am more than happy to take feats and such to make it happen. For example I was planning on taking breath control, and powerful leap. But this doesn't get around the base speed issue. I would prefer to avoid using the fly spell, as it loses the comedic value of flopping around.
Since your goblin doesn’t actually know what a shark is, it might be more workable to pick some other animal totem and find the comedic value in the goblin simply insisting that whatever else you picked is a shark.
a great idea, although unfortunately I have already portrayed myself adopting the facial features of a shark with raging. I guess although he doesn't really know what a shark is, he assumed the right face by instinct.

Yes, but your goblin doesn't KNOW that sharks are fish, does he? Heck, he might have seen a drawing of a shark head, but maybe he never saw the latter half (not too surprising- the head is the more interesting half). He doesn't know that sharks aren't bipedal humanoids.

You could always run around as a Street Shark.

I had never heard of Street Sharks before. At my age, my first thought was a Landshark.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Blade Ally let's you add one property from this list: disrupting, ghost touch, returning, and shifting.

Radiant Blade Spirit adds flaming and the alignment properties to that list.

So now your list of options is disrupting, ghost touch, returning, shifting, flaming, and compatible alignment.

You have more options to choose from, but you still can only add one to your weapon.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Blade Ally only lets you add one property. You could add flaming or holy, but not both. Radiant Blade Spirit only expands the list of choices, not the number of properties added.

But you are correct that Blade Ally isn't limited by the fact that your blade is only +2. You would effectively be wielding a +2 wounding, shock, flaming sword or a +2 wounding, shock, holy sword. Neither could be created only using runes.


Cralius the Dark wrote:

Funny. I was looking up this very question because of the Shocking Grasp spell.

Actually it is in the rules.
Page 276. under damaging armor.
it is listed under leather FWIW

Thank you! That settles it for me.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
graystone wrote:
PS: I'm not sure creature bulk is a good example of sane conversion numbers but again, that's what we got: they tell us a 1/2 orc we'd normally say was 215 weight can be carried off by a halfling tossing them over their shoulder with out any loss of movement and without magic... So that 60 pound number seems more reasonable than going with what we'd think of as real world numbers. ;)

I'd say a full orc is around 215 lbs. So a 1/2 orc would be around 108 lbs. ;)


Claxon wrote:
Ezekieru wrote:

Honestly, treating later levels' ability boosts into Intelligence as a way to get another skill increase would probably help Intelligence's value as a stat quite a bit. It'd allow the player to get more skills to master/legendary, which might be worth it for some builds.

I dunno', I hope someone on the design team sees this and considers it for a future round of FAQ/errata.

You are right that intelligence's value in PF2 is very low, since the value of a trained skill is pretty low since it doesn't get to increase.

Basically everybody can end up with 3 skills at Legendary and Rogues can get 5. So the system disincentivizes attempting to gain more skills, since they wont increase and the cost of gaining additional trained skills is often expensive, except for that Human racial feat.

But I can guarantee int is not going to get you skill increases, because that would make wizards the best at skills again, which would replace rogues skill monkey position, or at least threaten it highly.

We don't know exactly what the APG version will look like, but based on the Playtest version I suspect this change would leave Investigators far ahead of Rogues or Wizards.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
dpb123 wrote:

Timeshadow,

I'm trying to figure out how alchemist dedication allows you to make lesser elixir of life at level 4. I get the feeling I'm missing something obvious but I can't figure out what.

Timeshadow is talking about using the crafting rules (CRB, p. 244). They use your character level, not your Advanced Alchemy level.


A while back I put together a few charts showing the progression of your alchemy abilities if you take the main Alchemist Multiclass feats at the earliest possible levels. Thought they might be useful here.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ravingdork wrote:
I'm building towards extreme mobility so that nothing will be able to stop me or hold me down (at least not for long).

The Matthew Wilder build. ;)

♫ Ain't nothin' gonna break-a my stride
Nobody gonna slow me down
Oh no, oh no, I got to keep on moving
Ain't nothin' gonna break-a my stride
I'm running and I won't touch ground
Oh no, I got to keep on movin' ♪


Spontaneous casters can have a slight advantage over prepared casters when it comes to innate cantrips gained through heritage or ancestry feats. Those use Charisma, so spontaneous casters who have matching spell traditions get the same Spell DC's and Attack Rolls as they normally have. Prepared casters use Intelligence or Wisdom so they will typically not do as well with those Innate cantrips even if they have matching traditions. It makes it a bit easier for spontaneous casters to always have a wide variety of damage types available.


With the new action economy there really isn't a mechanical reason for the old 'double weapon' designation. So the Orc Double-axe isn't a thing right now. If your player just wants a two-bladed axe for flavor then the greataxe might work.

Quote:
Greataxe: This large battle axe is too heavy to wield with only one hand. Many greataxes incorporate two blades, and they are often “bearded,” having a hook at the bottom to increase the strength of their chopping power.

I suppose that you could just make up a version with the double blades at both ends, but mechanically it wouldn't have any advantages.


PossibleCabbage wrote:
*Sniff* the Aboleth has come so far since it was a unique monster in i1 later reprinted in the Fiend Folio.

That takes me back.


Castilliano wrote:

You can:

-Squeeze through tighter spots, perhaps for spelunking or sneaking in an unprotected route.
-Share spaces with your allies, which if you use small emanations & auras, could be meaningful.
-Ride small creatures.
-Be carried easier, perhaps tossed
-Fit more of y'all in a Purple Worm. :)
-Disguise yourselves as Gremlins easier

So yea, other than getting into places you couldn't if larger, other uses tend to be contrived or of negligible value, at least until some small flying critters get the Mount trait. :)

It also can make it easier to get cover.

1 to 50 of 5,673 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>