Gyromancer's page

What's funny is a Cha caster with an Int and Wis of 7. Oh, the hijinks.

Again with the invoking of 3.x rules. This thread is in "Pathfinder RPG". Just because something is OGL doesn't mean we use multiple rules systems.

One more thing. If there were such a thing as DR/ flesh, would a monks unarmed attacks not overcome it simply because the monk stat block doesn't state that his unarmed attacks are considered flesh for the purposes of overcoming DR in addition to CI, Magic, Silver, et al?

BTW, the bald eagle was named during a period of history when being "bald" meant having grey, white or silver colored hair. English has a tendency towards "linguistic drift".

So the CL 20 mental stat caster (said stat presumably buffed crazy style with headbands and tomes and such[cuz, ya know, CL 20]) didn't have the presence of mind to make ANY offensive contact surface of their crafting endeavor out of Adamantine? Then why, pray tell, did they bother making a construct out of said very rare material? Did they, after 2 years and half a million gold pieces (travel expenses yada yada) say "Now my masterpiece is complete! Behold my Adamantine filled rust bucket golem! Mwahahaha"? Also, look @ the GD picture on the entry and tell me what that monstrosity appears to be made of. Because it sure doesn't look like iron or whatever else you might say went into the crafting.

I see a lot of references to 3.x rules. I thought this was in "Pathfinder RPG"?
That being said:

Made using one of the hardest and most precious substances... The vast amount of adamantine required to build even one of these destructive golems is so significant that most worlds do not have enough resources...

So @Aelryinth, you are arguing that ALL OF THE ADAMANTINE OF A PLANET would not overcome DR/Adamantine?

Yes! A crit is a crit is a crit. If they would like to confirm (and succeed in doing so), I roll off of a crit generator.

"The Doctor" is not and can never be a "God". At best with PF rule set I would term him as an Axiomite. Some peoples may worship him as a deity and by the rules governing faith their beliefs would be capable of granting them power, but they would in essence be using the "godless cleric" pathos. The Doctors that I remember disdain th entire concept of worship. In fact, when David Tenant's portrayal of The Doctor encountered an extra planar being portraying itself as 'satan' he proclaims it as "impossible".

I'm currently burning through the Malazan series. My neighbor handed me an old copy of Kender, Gullydwarves & Gnomes.

Agreed. Body Parts of Vecna.

I've had a guitar built for one of my bards that had a blade on one edge. Basically worked as an axe that I could attack with as part of my performance.

863. Even if the RAW allow it, no my 7th lol cohort cannot take the leadership feat to gain a 5th lvl cohort and camp followers of his very own.
864. Your Awakened Raptor ex-companion with lvls in Druid may NOT have a T-Rex companion that he rides into combat whilst casting (I don't care what you saw in Jurrasic World).
865. Whilst Good aligned characters are NOT allowed to commit Evil acts for the greater Good, Evil characters ARE allowed to commit acts of Good for the greater Evil.
866. Bringing up the rules of SR post combat with your GM can be like arguing quantum physics with a toddler.

With STR being a main build stat, and one I intend to pump every other stat increase into, with a composite longbow (add STR to damage)+ Gravity Bow; it adds some much needed versatility to the build. I mean what happens when she's only got 1 spell left? She wont be trying to go in swinging without some arcane backup. So in short, yep. Did it.

So I recently built a Sorcerer w/ a touch
Human Sorcerer (Bloodline: Draconic{Blue})
Stats
STR 17
DEX 15
CON 12
INT 12
WIS 11
CHA 20

Feats
Eschew Material*
Improved Unarmed Strike
Martial Weapon Proficiency: Longbow

Spells
Disrupt Undead
Jolt
Dancing Lights
Detect Magic
1
Shield
Shocking Grasp
So if fully prepped and aware ATK is 2 Claws +3 (2d4+6 plus Shocking Grasp 1d6+1)

This is kinda a one trick pony at 1st but next spell will be Gravity Bow and with a composite longbow this will be a very versatile character.

Also, let us not overlook the plausability that a being able to cast invisibility most likely has items of a magical nature (and therefore other auras to be detected.)

So here's how I've been handling this: improved unarmed strike + touch attack spell. PC makes one attack roll: if roll beats normal AC, unarmed damage+ spell damage. If roll misses normal AC and still beats touch AC then it's just spell damage (e.g. strike didn't hit square enough to be a damaging atk but still made touch contact for spell). If atk misses both, no harm done charge is still held till any contact is made. I think this is a fair ruling. However if a combatant is holding a charge and rolls a 1 the spell auto hits caster, regardless of confirmation.
With grapples I would say a concentration check is in order but if made touch spell hits.

I, too would like to know how many pitons are included. I have a player trying to make a 350 foot single man descent.

4d6, drop the lowest pip. Roll six sets of six. Pick ONE set. That's how I've been doing it for twenty years.

If you want a good paradigm shift from the whole "madness is evil" thing Steven Erikson wrote some of the best (IMO) fantasy. The series is titled 'Malazan: Book of the Fallen'

I'll be a little more specific. If a Druid fornicates with a vampire would it go against the natural order enough to revoke druid status?

I have ruled before that necromantic items and effects are "not natchy" and would result in loss of druidic abilities because it grossly violates a Druid's bond with the natural world (As with something like necrophelia). I'm trying to an outside perspective regarding consensual copulation between a druid 6 and a Vampire Sorcerer 19. Does anyone else think this crosses some kind of ethical boundary for a druid?

30. One or more of your PCs parent/mentor dies and you are at the funeral.
31. The town where you live is besieged by monsters.
32. While walking down the street when an old crone breaks out in a fit of what appears to be either insanity or prophecy.
33. The ruling monarch has died under mysterious circumstances.
34. Your groups homes are the target of a serial arsonist.

Granted. You fall asleep and die choking on your keyboard.
I wish noboby went hungry.

Entangled: If you want to cast a spell while entangled in a net or by a tanglefoot bag or while you're affected by a spell with similar effects, you must make a concentration check to cast the spell (DC 15 + the level of the spell you're casting). You lose the spell if you fail.

So snapping your fingers while you are tied up doesn't work outright. A check must be made.

Combining Magic Effects
Spells or magical effects usually work as described, no matter how many other spells or magical effects happen to be operating in the same area or on the same recipient. Except in special cases, a spell does not affect the way another spell operates. Whenever a spell has a specific effect on other spells, the spell description explains that effect. Several other general rules apply when spells or magical effects operate in the same place:

Stacking Effects: Spells that provide bonuses or penalties on attack rolls, damage rolls, saving throws, and other attributes usually do not stack with themselves. More generally, two bonuses of the same type don't stack even if they come from different spells (or from effects other than spells; see Bonus Types, above).

Different Bonus Types: The bonuses or penalties from two different spells stack if the modifiers are of different types. A bonus that doesn't have a type stacks with any bonus.

Same Effect More than Once in Different Strengths: In cases when two or more identical spells are operating in the same area or on the same target, but at different strengths, only the one with the highest strength applies.

Same Effect with Differing Results: The same spell can sometimes produce varying effects if applied to the same recipient more than once. Usually the last spell in the series trumps the others. None of the previous spells are actually removed or dispelled, but their effects become irrelevant while the final spell in the series lasts.

One Effect Makes Another Irrelevant: Sometimes, one spell can render a later spell irrelevant. Both spells are still active, but one has rendered the other useless in some fashion.

Multiple Mental Control Effects: Sometimes magical effects that establish mental control render each other irrelevant, such as spells that remove the subject's ability to act. Mental controls that don't remove the recipient's ability to act usually do not interfere with each other. If a creature is under the mental control of two or more creatures, it tends to obey each to the best of its ability, and to the extent of the control each effect allows. If the controlled creature receives conflicting orders simultaneously, the competing controllers must make opposed Charisma checks to determine which one the creature obeys.

And that's how stacking works...

In my experience If a spell has a somatic component you must be free to move around. A caster that is bound would have to succeed a concentration check and even then the spell would be subject to arcane fail.... I'm pretty sure I have read rules on this in Core. I'll go hunting.

I'll be a little more specific. If a Druid fornicates with a vampire would it go against the natural order enough to revoke druid status?

If a PC has carnal relations with an undead, is it necrophelia?

After some research, I definitely agree it would fall under the dirty trick combat maneuver with a reflex to avoid. Once per day and PC must declare they are "holding it". If they fail to use their reserve before some arbitrary time....well things could get messy. Should be fun. Thanks folks!

~"A damsel in distress. What do you do?" "Ummm.....Call Lightning!"~

So I have a group of six lvl 6 PCs, two of which are Druids: Maximillion Testicles and Kalea. Max prefers to wild shape into an eagle. This last session Kalea posed the question: "Could Max crap in the eyes of a monster to blind them?"
I like to allow creativity in my game. I try to be very flexible in adapting rules to fit situations the creators may have overlooked. My question is: have any other GMs run into this question and if so what was your adjudication?

Ok, so if I'm understanding this right you have a goblin PC in RotRL. That alone says quite a bit about how far you are willing to stretch things. As the result of this interaction is either the PCs help to remove lonjiku or don't (resulting in freebees from amieko or not) I don't see much problem with the barbarian putting that drunk old man in his place from a legality standpoint. He was warned after all. *SPOILERS* When lonjiku comes up dead later on maybe the barbarian (or the whole party, in league with the goblins obviously) become suspects in the murder. As GM it is as always up to you.

EDIT* Sorry, kobold pc. But still... Kobolds are not known for being on the side of good and such...