Gray Eminence's page

144 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


1 to 50 of 144 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

Hey, wait! It was supposed to come out in January! I wanted to use my Holiday code for orderig this!

Tryn wrote:

related question:

Is it possible to "charge" your weapon before combat with a touch spell, then engage the fight and use spell combat to strike with your weapon (incl. Spell) and cast a touch spell?

If yes, hell:
Weapon + intensify shocking grasp + spell: intensify shocking grasp = weapon + 20d6 dmg for the cost of two 2nd level spells. :)

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.

Actually this was not how I read it. I think that this makes it possible to cast a spell that you know but you have not prepared. You must spend a lot of points though (3 points for a fireball or 5 for an empowered one), so I guess that you won't do it often.

As far as I read in an other post from Jason, it is the flavor of the magus to have lots of attack spells and only a small amount of defensive spells.

Mynameisjake wrote:

Example: 1st lvl Magus (who therefore doesn't have spellstrike) cast shocking grasp as part of Spell Combat, but misses on the touch attack.

On the next round, can the Magus still use Spell Combat to attempt a touch attack with the "held" spell and get his/her weapon attack as well?

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.

kyrt-ryder wrote:
Gray Eminence wrote:

I play a 8th level Magus in the current campaign, and yes, there are not too much touch spells on the Magus spell list, that's for sure.

You can help Shocking Grasp with Intensify Spell though.

Could you tell me what Intensify Spell does? I tried googling it and all I found is the old Epic metamagic feat, and I'm sure that's not what you were referring to lol.

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.

I play a 8th level Magus in the current campaign, and yes, there are not too much touch spells on the Magus spell list, that's for sure.

You can help Shocking Grasp with Intensify Spell though.

If you want to have a fighter who makes big damages even after moving, take the "Vital Strike" feat-line.

Don't forget that casters always have the SR and different resistances as their biggest enemy.

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?

sempai33 wrote:

I just want to konw a little thing, is it possible to use a vital strike attack against monsters that are not sneakable (like elementals)? Because, in the desdription of the vital strike, there is nothing that say that it's not possible. What do you thing about that?


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:

AOOs reset on the acting character's turn. Otherwise it would be possible for a character to make 2 AOOs between two of his turns, simply because of where he falls in the initiative order.

It's generally also easier to remember "I've taken an AOO since my last turn" compared to "I've taken an AOO since the last arbitrary reset point in the initiative where we stopped counting low and started counting high again." Especially when you take into account actions like Ready and Delay that change your location in the initiative.

Well, I was wrong then. Sorry for my previous posts.

Cralius the Dark wrote:

I believe the player is right. While there is no official reference, I think it is one of those things that is "understood". Obviously not, as this has come up in my game as well.

The best way I can explain it is spells with duration of 1 round.


Fighter Initiative: 20
Wizard Initiative: 19
A whole bunch of other combatants after.

Fighter takes his actions
Wizard casts daze on the fighter, the fighter is dazed for one round.
Everyone else takes shots at the fighter for the rest of the round.

What your saying is the next round when it is the fighters turn, he isn't dazed anymore. And if you think about it, he wasn't dazed for one round, it was less.

Point is the daze effect would end on the wizards turn, so the fighter would be dazed on his turn in the next round. I think would all agree that is the intended use of the spell.

Once the combat gets going (after the first round), I think of it as a continuous loop. Just like an old boardgame where you lose your next turn. It doesn't matter if you were first to go or last in that "round". The next time it's your turn, you don't get to go.

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.

Irrlicht wrote:

From PRD:

Touch Spells and Holding the Charge: In most cases, if you don't discharge a touch spell on the round you cast it, you can hold the charge (postpone the discharge of the spell) indefinitely. You can make touch attacks round after round until the spell is discharged. If you cast another spell, the touch spell dissipates.

Some touch spells allow you to touch multiple targets as part of the spell. You can't hold the charge of such a spell; you must touch all targets of the spell in the same round that you finish casting the spell.

Doest this apply to class abilities that work with touch too, like Cleric's Bleeding Touch and the like, or does it regard only spells/spell-like abilities?

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.

Fergie wrote:

I think an AoO would be considered a "regular attack", so the penalty would probably be -2 (str. x1) if you have the two weapon fighting feat.

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.

porkrind wrote:

The way I've always played D&D 3.5 and subsequently Pathfinder, a new round starts at the after all of characters have acted in the previous round. If a character made an AoO without combat reflexes at any time in the round, they couldn't make another one until the next round started.

This week, one of the other players told me that wasn't quite correct. They said that in a given round, if a character took an AoO before their turn, they could take another AoO after their turn within the current round because subjectively for that character, the next round had begun.

Is this correct, and does any one know of a page in the Core Rulebook or SRD that clarifies this?

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:

If you make a Full Round attack with a Quarterstaff using Two-Weapon Fighting, when an enemy provokes an attack of opportunity how should it be handled?

As a Two Handed Weapon: +0 Attack and 1d8+ 1.5 x Str?

Or as Two-Weapon Fighting(Primary): -2 Attack and 1.0 x Str?

Thanks for your replies :)

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.

babelbgm wrote:
Ta thanks thats what i thought but my gm wanted to make sure, after i got two attacks off on a flanked cloud giant, and done it a total of 111 hp, thats was with a critical, im not that normally that good lol

But you did not multiply the sneak attack damage for the critical, right?

xJoe3x wrote:
Gray Eminence wrote:
I'm not sure when are you afraid of AoO: when you activate it, or when you make the attack with it. To activate it, make a 5' step or cast it before closing for combat and hold the charge. You are considered armed while holding the charge, so no AoO for the touch attack.
It was when I activate it. Holding the charge seems to work well as does casting defensively at 17.

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.

I'm not sure when are you afraid of AoO: when you activate it, or when you make the attack with it. To activate it, make a 5' step or cast it before closing for combat and hold the charge. You are considered armed while holding the charge, so no AoO for the touch attack.

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 a tiny creature is within your square, do you, with an adjacent ally, flank this creature?

A strict reading of the RAW would say "no" (since a line from the center of your square to your ally's square does not pass through two opposite sides of the creature's square), but I'd buy the argument that you are providing flanking by standing on one side (of your choice) of said creature.

How have others played this situation?

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?

Cosmo wrote:
Gray Eminence wrote:
Hi, you wanted to authorize my card for my March subscription items on Wednesday and there was a card problem, but when I logged in today to fix it, I was not able to find the missing order. Could you make it appear so that I'll be able to change the payment method? Thanks!

I have resent the payment method failure email, which should contain the links necessary to fix your order. If you continue to have issues with the order, please let me know.


Thanks for the help. New payment method added, it is OK now.

Hi, you wanted to authorize my card for my March subscription items on Wednesday and there was a card problem, but when I logged in today to fix it, I was not able to find the missing order. Could you make it appear so that I'll be able to change the payment method? Thanks!

jyster wrote:
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:

Firing into melee exists

Stabbing into Melee does not Exist.

If the terrain for example creates penalties then DM should rule on those situationally specific, but for the most part your allies do not provide cover to opponents....

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.

Cormac wrote:
Gray Eminence wrote:

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).

I think there is actually no cover in second example if you take step to the west.

Yes, you are right.

Papa-DRB wrote:

The 3rd round in Detect Thoughts allows you (if failed save) to read surface thoughts of the create.

Do you have to speak/understand the language in order for this to work? IE. The wizard only speaks/understands common and he casts the spell on a troglodyte who only speaks draconic. Can he read the thoughts on round 3?

-- david

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).

Entropi wrote:
Or, Paiso could stop writing on the front of the box what it contains. That way it passes through customs without trouble almost every time.

Actually that would be against the law, while my proposal is not...

Stegger wrote:
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.

Stegger wrote:
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.

Gorbacz wrote:

Entropi, this is really strange. I live in Poland, and as far as I know the entire EU has lifted import customs on books from US. In my three years of Paizo purchases I never had a single issue with a package being held by customs or charged any additional costs.

Perhaps the problem is at the Danish end ? Maybe the customs are unaware of the regulations ?

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.

skyde wrote:

Sorry about the noobish quest but I have a question about ranged touch attacks. Specifically do you have to account for the range modifiers for them?

Example Sorcerer Aberrant bloodline power Acidic ray states that you can fire that baby to 30 feet. What kind of range modifiers would you get?

Best regards,

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.

OK, for those who say you can take 10, here is the question: Why would the description of the spell say that you must make a successfull DC 7 INT/CHA check to contact a being from the elemental planes, if the caster may take 10 and so the minimum result is 12?

Ravingdork wrote:

Can you take 10 or take 20 on ability checks like you can on skill checks (subject to all the same limitations of course).

I have a summoner with contact other plane who doesn't want to lose his spells for a week. If he can take 10, then he can auto succeed when contacting certain planes.

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.


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

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?

Please, please please, where are those sets that were almost ready two weeks ago? I'd so like to use them in my Sunday campaign...

Any new info on release dates of new sets (especially House of the Beast)?

Maybe Paizo could ship them from Europe to European addresses like they did with Dungeon and Dragon Magazines. I would like to order it directly from Paizo, even if it costs a bit more, but a shipping cost almost as much as the price of the book is a bit too much for me...

One more question: will you include monsters for the Set Piece also in your future sets? Like Salamanders and fire snakes for the one in Pathfinder #20?

N'wah wrote:
Gray Eminence wrote:

Hi! Great minis I have to say. My party went crazy when they saw them on the combat map... :D

When do you plan to release the "House of the Beast" minis? Can't wait to see them on my gaming table!

The "House of the Beast" set will hopefully be going live in a week or two. The set's 90% done, but I wanted to wait and release that set and its accompanying Bestiary article at about the same time. I might also make some more minis for the set, if I can bring myself to draw more giant bugs. That adventure has a LOT of giant bugs.

Sounds great! I plan to start House of the Beast in approx. two weeks, so I guess it will arrive just in time. :-D

Thanks for the help!

Hi! Great minis I have to say. My party went crazy when they saw them on the combat map... :D

When do you plan to release the "House of the Beast" minis? Can't wait to see them on my gaming table!

1 to 50 of 144 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>