You do not charge your weapon in spellstrike, you just deliver the charge with your weapon. So if you cast an other touch spell, the previous one is cancelled.
You do not use Spell Combat for that, you use two weapon fighting rules. Make an attack with the weapon and one with your hand, apply the necessary negative modifiers.
Reading the spell description, especially the part "The knife uses your base attack bonus ... when making this attack" tells me that it only makes one attack per round.
I would still not call the spell useless, however, since it inflicts force damage (which means no DR and also damages incorporeal creatures), and the spell only states that you must attack the creature in order to make the knife attack - it does not state that you have to attack it with melee, ranged attacks and spells will do also. Also, you can order the knife to flank your opponent with someone else - so you can order it to flank the opponent with the party rogue, making both the knife and the rogue deadly.
I guess that this is a spell that can only be used effectively in certain situations, which makes it a perfect spell for a spontaneous caster, like a sorcerer, but not for a magus, who must prepare his spells ahead.
Well, I played a magus (1st build) from 4th to 9th level and I loved it. Making and attack and then blasting your opponent with a spell newer felt so good before. On 9th level I can haste myself, attack 3 times (with a sword that is keen and flaming) and cast a spell in the same round. This is definitely not something I would call weak. And the fact that I can cast my own boosts makes it possible to go forward and discover alone.
The only problem I saw was that the magus gets depleted fairly quickly and needs rest. Of course, this comes from the fact that casting spells and attacking in the same round means that you are actually burning the candle on both ends.
I will be able to test the new build next week, so quite some time to go, but I'm quite curious. Just by reading it I think that the arcana pool is cool, but a bit low, with an INT of 16 I will only have 7 points. Seems to be a small amount to me for a full day. Also, maybe the d8 hit die could be improved. A magus needs to go into melee and stand there to be able to use his spell combat the most efficient way. And since both INT and STR are important abilities (INT is even more important with the new build), odds are that either DEX or CON will suffer, which means either more hits or lower HP.
Well, we'll see.
Sorry, it is Intensified Spell, and it lets you increase the damage cap of a spell that inflicts damage defined by dice/level. It has no prerequisites. For more info, check the APH on page 163.
Hi, I was just about to add a Pathfinder Tales subscription to my ongoing subscriptions, starting with Prince of Wolves. As I added it to my cart, it was OK, it showed that it will ship with my next subscription package (which will be in September, IIRC), which was just what I wanted. However, on the last screne of the order sequence, it seemed to me that it would ship separately, as it showed a separate shipping price. So what to do to have it shipped with my September shipment?
Yes, you can. It is just the name of the feat. It could also be called "a single, but big strike", which technically it is, but it would sound less cool.
Garreth Baldwin wrote:
My players asked me this weekend why you can aim a splash weapon at a grid intersection but not a 5ft square. They wanted to hit a spider swarm and said that instead of aiming at the creature (AC 17) they wanted to just hit the square (AC 5). After a long discussion we went with RAW but I still feel I owe them a better answer as to why you can aim at the intersection but not a swarm square.
If I understand the problem of your PCs, they wanted to hit the ground next to the spiders, instead of the spiders. Do not think about is as "hitting an intersection", think about it as "hitting the ground" next to them. This is a completely legal menauvre, but this was the spiders will not take direct damage, just the secondary effect, since the ground gets the direct hit.
Think about it this way: you have a cake in your hand. You can try to hit the clown dancing in front of you, or you can hit the ground next to his feet. The second one is much more easier, but the clown will only get a small amount of whipped cream on his trousers, and probably none on his face.
Sean K Reynolds wrote:
Well, I was wrong then. Sorry for my previous posts.
Cralius the Dark wrote:
Your example is wrong. If you read carefully the entry on the combat round on page 178 of the Core Rulebook, you will see that you are mixing the term "round" with the term "duration of one round". They are not the same.
Bleeding Touch is a Spell-like Ability (just check page 42 of the Core Rulebook, there is (Sp) right after the name of the power, before the description. So yes, you can hold the charge.
AoOs are not regular attacks. Page 180 of the Core Rulebook states that they are single melee attacks and they always use your regular attack bonus.
Actually you are right. Your player is mixing rounds with turns. The number of AoOs a character may perform are tied to a round, unlike for example swift actions, which are tied to a character's turn. This is most likely based on the logic that AoOs are reactions to what others make during their actions. This is somewhat uncommon, as most things are tied to a characters turn in a given round, not the round itself.
A round begins when the character with the highest initiaive count takes her actions and ends when the character with the lowest initiative count takes his. This is different from a character's turn. AoOs are "refreshed" at the begining of a new round and not on a characters turn. See page 180 of the Core rulebook to see that AoOs are tied to rounds, not turns. Also, check the description of the feat Combat Reflexes on page 119 for further evidence.
Elister Eyeswild wrote:
Quaterstaff is a two handed weapon. Even when you use it in two weapon fighting, you still hold it in two hands, you just strike with both ends. So you make your AoO-s using the two handed stats.
I guess that this is pretty clear, since Protection from Evil protects against enchantment[charm] effects of evil creatures and the captivating song of a harpy is a charm effect and a harpy is an evil creature, someone already under the effects of Protection from Evil when the harpy begins to use her captivating song ability is unaffected by the song as long as the spell lasts. If he recieves the spell while under the effect of the captivating song, he recieves a new saving throw with a +2 morale bonus.
Do not forget that casting deffensively changed significantly in Pathfinder, it is no longer a Concentration check but a caster level check, which is much more difficult to make.
The short answer is, that the official rules of the Pathfiner Roleplayining Game is in the Core Rulebook, not in the wiki. Since the Core Rulebook does not state anywhere that a cleric of Norgorber can not be of N alignment, which is only one step from the alignment of the deity, it is allowed.
Also, if you check page 166 of the Pathfinder Campaign Setting, you will see that it actually fits the structure of the church of Norgorber, which is divided into 4 parts, depending on which aspect a cleric worships: those who hold him as the god of secrets can quite easily be of TN alignment.
The Grandfather wrote:
If I make an unarmed trip against a flat-footed (who does not have either Combat Reflexes or Uncanny Dodge), can I be knocked prone for failing the combat maneuver check by +10?
Yes, since you fall prone because you made a disastrous attempt, not because your opponent was so good.
Dire Squirrel wrote:
If you take RAW, than the answer is NO. If you take a real life example, the answer is also NO. Just think about a big hairy spider runnig between and around your legs, trying to bite your toe. Why would it be easier to hit this pesky spider just because you have an ally standing next to you?
Thanks for the help. New payment method added, it is OK now.
Cant find anything official, can you use trip during cleave?
No, you can't. In PFRPG the mechanics of cleave changed significantly, it became a standard action in its own right. The concept is much the same that was introduced into 3.5 with the Book of Nine Swords for maneuvers. The feat enables you to perform a maneuver in combat that is not allowed otherwise: you can try to attack and damage multiple foes with the same strike. Emphasis on strike. Just check the first sentence of the feat.
So technically if you cleave, you do not "attack", but use the cleave feat as your standard action in your round.
Freddy Honeycutt wrote:
Actually they do. Allies provide cover for opponents for ranged attacks, it is called soft cover, see page 196 of the Core Rulebook. Since reach weapons use the cover rules of ranged weapons to determine cover, soft cover applies.
Yes, you are right.
Detect Thoughts is not a language dependent spell, so you do not have to be able to speak the language of the creature. See page 212 of the Core Rulebook for details on language dependent spells. An example of language dependent spells is Command.
There is no such thing as "stabbing into melee", since if you attack with a longspear, you are in melee (longspear is a melee weapon with reach). So no -4 for that. If you would hurl your spear, then there would be a -4 penalty, because then you would use your longspear as a ranged weapon.
As longspear has reach, you calculate cover as if you were attacking with a ranged weapon (even though you are in melee), which in this case means that your opponent has cover. It is a soft cover, which means that it only provides a +4 bonus to AC, but not to Ref. saves.
If you can take a 5' step to the South in your first example and to the west in your second example, the cover would become only partial cover, so the AC bonus would be only +2 (if your GM approves it).
Thats true, but here in Denmark you pay 25% vat on everything, and it is applied to all imported stuff outside EU if its value is above something like 15-18 US $... as far as I know..
Well, than as far as I can see it, you should have your stuff shipped to someone in an EU Ms other than Denmark and ask him/her to put it in an envelope and send it to you. Or if you live near the border, open a PO box in the other country and go get it once a month.
Not to highjack Entropis thread, but the vat is ok to me, it is the fee from the custom service that is way to hígh, as it often doubles the price for the book shipment.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think you only pay the fee of the customs service if you have to pay VAT and so the shipment is held and there is a customs process.
Gorbatz, goods arriving from the US into the EU are not subjected to VAT only if the VAT value of the products is 10 EUR or lower. If you have a VAT that is 20 or 25%, then a shipment worth 40 EUR (shipping cost included) will be subject to VAT. During the last months, a tipical shipment from Paizo was 50+ USD, which is roughly 40+ EUR. Also note that if a shipment contains items falling into different VAT levels, the highest is used for the whole package. So for example, if a package contains books (usually privileged VAT) and a CD (usually normal VAT), even the VAT content of books will be calculated with the normal VAT. AFAIK the cards and maps for example are not books but games. This means that if you are a subscriber to both the maps and the books, your shipment may easily end up being witheld by customs.
Spells, Sp abilities and Su abilities do not have range increments. The range listed is the maximum range for them, unlike for weapons. This means that you cannot Acidic Ray on someone who is standing 40' away by taking a a -2 on the shot.
You might also want to check pages 213-214 of the Core Rulebook on the range rules of spells.
While you can take 10 on an ability check, you can only take 10 if you are not in immediate danger or if you are not distracted. For the spell Contact other plane, you must roll the INT or CHA check to avoid your mind being overwhelmed by contacting an other reality (see the third paragraph of the spell's description. So the caster is (seriously) distracted which means that (s)he cannot take 10.
This can also be deducted from the fact that the DC for the check is 12 or lower except for contacting intermediate or greater deities. Now a caster must have a minimum of INT or CHA score of 15 in order to cast the spell (the spell is 5th level), which means (s)he has a minimum bonus of +2 for the relevant ability. If the caster could take 10 for this roll, the check would not make any sense.
Hi, on Monday you have tried to authorize my card for the February subscription package, and it was turned down. (It happens a lot, as my card that I use for internet shopping is usually empty and I put money on it when I know that I will have to pay for something.) I wanted to correct the problem today but I could not find the order in my order history (usually it is on the top of the list, I just click on it and enter a new payment method). Could you tell me what happened to the order?
Last night we were playing with our group and we had some problems interpreting the Swallow Whole ability under the PFRPG rules. In 3.5, every monster I could find in the MM that had this ability had the same phrase in the description, that stated that if someone manages to cut the way out, the wound automatically closes and an other swallowed individual must cut his/her own way out. I can also recall a construct in one of the earlier Pathfinders (it was called Tophet IIRC), a sort of prison used by rulers to punish those who offended them, and this monster specifically stated that if someone manages to cut its way out, the hole will not close. I remembered it, because it was "going against the general rule".
For some strange reason this rule was always repeated in the description of each monster, and not in the description of the Swallow whole ability at the end of the MM.
So question No. 1: Now PFRPG repeats the description of the MM in the Bestiary on the Swallow whole ability, but the description of the monsters in the Bestiary is completely different from those found in the MM, and it does not mention anything about the wound. Does it close automatically like it does in 3.5, or once someone manages to cut the way out, the others may follow?
Question No. 2: Is exiting the belly of the beast through the cut-out wound a move action, a standard action or something else? Does it cause an AOO?
Question No. 3: Does the damage caused to cut the way out add to the damage total of the monster, or is it handled separately?
Question No. 4: A monster may not use the swallow whole ability if someone cut his/her way out until the wound is healed. Does this mean that the monster must get back to full Hp before it may use the ability again, or does it mean that it must heal only a number of Hp that was inflictid in order to cut the way out?
Any help, especially quoting the necessary rules would be greatly apprechiated.
The rules say that mithral armor has an armor check penalty 3 points less than normal armor of the same type. A paragraph later it also states that all armor and weapons made of mithral are automatically masterwork items.
It is not clear - at least to our group - if a mithral armor has an armor check penalty that is 3 (as it already includes the 1 point for being masterwork)or 4 (3 for being mitral, 1 for being masterwork) points better than a regular armor?
Sounds great! I plan to start House of the Beast in approx. two weeks, so I guess it will arrive just in time. :-D