Iziak's page

The 1E Beta rulebook had a lot of reused art as well. I'd expect the final version of 2E will have different interior art in many places, and done by more than just one artist.

In 1E, the ability to take a swift/immediate action "refreshed" at the end of each turn. In 2E, the ability to take reactions refreshes at the start of each turn. Although the 2E version is conceptually simpler, I think it leads to some undesirable situations.

In 1E, I can cast Feather Fall the moment I start falling. In 2E, I can do that... if I didn't happen to use a reaction on my own turn.

Or, just look at the stat block for a balor (as an example). It has two reactions - a standard attack of opportunity and one that triggers when it kills a creature. So, now, if it kills a creature and uses that reaction, it suddenly can't make an attack of opportunity for the full round? That could be crippling if some important spell gets cast and the balor "lost" its attack of opportunity because of this. If reactions refreshed at the end of each turn, then the balor's attack of opportunity would get "precedence" in a way, allowing it to respond to enemy actions before getting back to its turn and deciding if it wants to use that special kill reaction. If it had to make an attack of opportunity, then it just can't use that kill reaction - but that seems to me like a much better way for things to play out, since it puts a more sensible choice in the creature's hands ("Do I attack now and then not be able to use this other thing" vs. "Do I use this other thing now and then just hope nobody does anything I need to interrupt before my next turn").

Swift/immediate actions refreshed at end of turn for exactly this reason, always allowing you to "sacrifice" a future swift action to take an immediate action now. It seems weird to me that reactions don't work this same way. Reactions that actually react to somebody else shouldn't have to be sacrifice in favor of self-triggered reactions, but rather it should be the other way around.

Other than this, the new action economy looks pretty fantastic to me.

This is honestly the thing that I'm most disappointed by in 2E from what I've seen so far. I like many of the changes, and there's a few (like certain uses of resonance) that don't make sense to me but which I can deal with easily enough. This though? What happened to transforming into a cat (pest form) to do a bit of eavesdropping? What happened to summoning up an unseen servant to wait tables at a fancy dinner? These are commonplace uses of such spells. If power level is the concern, maybe they could require resources of some sort to maintain (maybe something like spending additional spell slots to extend the duration before it runs out), but simply hard-capping these sorts of spells to 1 minute makes them essentially useless outside of combat scenarios, which is the exact sort of issue D&D 4e had with its spellcasting. I mostly play low-combat games. Possession may have had a ridiculously long duration in 1E, but limiting it down to 1 minute (or even to the heightened 10 minutes) makes it useless for any of the interesting sorts of subterfuge it provided - the very sort of thing many people would think of when thinking about what such magic can do.

In D&D3.5, magic items were in the DMG and nonmagical equipment in the player's handbook, and although PF1e combined these into one book, it kept the chapters separate - but they were still largely distinct, with a differentiation between magical and nonmagical gear.

In 2E, I'm a bit confused about why they're still separate, or at least, why they have the division they have. The Treasure chapter contains alchemical equipment and nonmagical snares which in 1E would have been in the Equipment chapter, so it makes the divide between the two types of items a bit confusing.

Is there some reason I'm missing that makes it worthwhile or useful for these to be separate? It seems like it would just make it harder for players new to the system to find what they're looking for, when items are really just items when it all comes down to it.

umm, I am noticing some of the books are not on there. for example the revised Advanced Class Guide. is this because it is still in the play test?

To clarify further, the Advanced Class Guide is still a playtest, so will not be added until after its official release. The most recent playtest document is still available as a free download here.

Errata documents are at http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/resources.

I would recommend against Kingmaker (although cool, the kingdom building rules on top of the normal rules could be a bit much, and it may be too open-world for new players to really find a direction). I'd also recommend against Wrath of the Righteous because it uses Mythic rules and again, adding more complication isn't ideal with new players.

I can't say of Reign of Winter or Skull & Shackles, having not played or read through either.

Rise of the Runelords would probably work quite well. Players in it will usually know what their next "goal" is and it uses the base rules without too many additions. It is in many places quite "dungeon-crawley" though, so if that's not to your taste you may wish to consider others.

Hope that helps!

What Lord Malkov said.

Cure Moderate Wounds is completely wrong on the website page. It says 4d8 healing. It is definitely not

You're looking at the mythic version of CMW... look at the normal version by clicking the link in "source" from the mythic version.

If only they were pre-painted... then I'd probably do $100. As is, $0... they just aren't useful to me. The sculpts are amazing, but my painting skills are nil.

Bestiary 3 Universal Monster Rules doesn't have the table mentioned!

http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/bestiary3/universalMonsterRules.html#nat ural-attacks

Good note, although you can use the table from Bestiary 2 in the meantime. I don't believe there were any changes between the two versions.

I notice that the "Kamadan" is mentioned in the extensive copyright notice at the end of the PRD, but the "Displacer Beast" is omitted from that list. Wasn't the Kamadan based on the Displacer Beast? And weren't both monsters originally created for First Edition AD&D?

In the early days of 3.0, WotC gave the authors of Tome of Horrors an irrevocable license to update certain creatures from previous editions of the game to the new rules (most of the first ToH consisted of such updates; volumes 2 and 3 were primarily new monsters). Thanks to the OGL and WotC's permission, all the creatures from the ToH are Open Game Content and so can be used by non-WotC publishers such as Paizo. Presumably, the Kamadan was one such creature.

There seems to be an error in the PRD with the Reach entry for the Girallon:

Quote:

Space 10 ft.; Reach 19 ft.

Reach should be 10 ft. as per the errata document.

So all this time I've been measuring out 4/5ths of a square for nothing? Inconceivable!

When should we be seeing the Advanced Race Guide added to the PRD?

Nox Arcana has some good stuff for game music. Also check out Jamendo.com, a website for freely-licensed music which you could use. Try searching for a tag like "Ambient", "Fantasy", or "Soundtrack" and you should come up with some good stuff which you can use legally without needing to pay for it. :)

Remember also (because I think it is easy to miss): Oracles automatically gain access to Cure or Inflict spells, so in terms of knowing healing spells they're on par with clerics.

Okay, this could do on for hours, and I have a game starting soon, so this is going to be as quick as I can make it.

My personal take on it is that Augmented should be added whenever the creature's type changes. However, it is pretty clear that either the game devs don't agree with me, or they forget sometimes, or they have different criteria to me on when to apply it.

Having said that, though, especially after examining the examples you gave, a lot of it is based upon the intent of the Template itself. If the resultant creature is meant to be just an altered version of the base creature, it gains Augmented, but if it represents an entirely different species (something that may visually resemble the base creature, but has a defining characteristic that makes it different), then it does not.

So, at the end of the day, no hard and fast rule exists.

Okay, thanks! Much appreciated.

Noted. :)

Cool, thanks. Now I'll just let this thread return to the Graveyard of Blog Discussions. :)

Okay, in short:

When creating a template, should I always ignore the subtype, always add the subtype, or use it on a case-by-case basis and, if the last, what do I base its application on.

(Lots of good stuff)

Thank you for your lengthy explanation!

I wouldn't think that whether or not the augmented subtype is granted by a template would change the skill points the creature has; that has more to do with changing type in the first place.

I guess the most confusing thing for me is when the subtype is and isn't used. As examples:

1) The Fey template (Bestiary 3) does not grant it, but the Foo template does, even though they both change the creature's type.

2) The Foo template explicitly says that the augmented subtype is added. The Juju Zombie template (Bestiary 2) says nothing about the subtype being added, but the example creature has it.

3) The normal Zombie template specifically says that the subtype is not gained. The Foo template specifically says that it is. The Fey template says nothing about the subtype and DOES NOT grant it; the Juju Zombie template says nothing about the subtype and DOES grant it.

4) Perhaps most confusingly, the Lycanthrope template says nothing about the subtype. The template actually doesn't even change the creature's type (it just adds the shapechanger subtype). However, in the statistics for the wererat (but, curiously, not the werewolf), "augmented humanoid" is listed for the lycanthrope's human form on the same line as its race and class (NOT the same line as its type), and it is nowhere to be found in the hybrid form stat block.

Anyways, the reason I'm asking this is because I'm thinking about writing a 3pp supplement which includes some templates, and this is the one major template-related issue I can't quite figure out.

Thanks!

Could we see an update to this list perhaps? February seems a little out-of-date and I think this is a useful tool for people who (like me) want to catch up on their Pathfinder back-purchases and want to focus first on things which may soon be hard to find.

As the header asks, what does the augmented subtype do? Why do certain templates grant it but not others (and is it gained or not if the template doesn't specify)?

Does it just serve as a note to GMs that, hey, the creature used to be this, or does it have some mechanical meaning which isn't discussed in the creature type descriptions of the Bestiaries?

Thank you!

I mean, think wbout it, when a creature dies and gets raised as an undead creature, it should look like the base creature. Yes, we have zombies, skeleton, ghosts, vampires and graveknights, but what about an ogre shadow, a troll wight, a red dragon wraith or a minotaur spectre ?

Shouldn't undead be a template to be applied instead of any eligible creature ?

Sounds like a good idea for my first 3pp if I ever get around to it... :)

I feel the need to point out that if you loose a prerequisite to a feat, you loose use of the feat until you meet the prerequisite again.

Well, technically, you keep that feat but it has no effects IIRC.

You gave up your hex class feature at first level. There's nothing implying that the gravewalker gets to ignore that rule.

The evangelist cleric can't take selective channeling at 1st level. They can't take extra channel. Or any other feat that requires channel energy. They don't have the channel energy class ability. They gain it at 3rd level.

See:

Sermonic performance replaces the 1st-, 9th-, and 15th-level channel energy abilities. This caps the cleric's channel energy damage at 7d6 points.

That says it replace the channel energy abilities. The gravewalker doesn't say that it replace the hex ability, just that it replace the hex gained at 1st level. That's more akin to if the evangelist was "Sermonic performance replaces the additional damage dice added to channel energy at 1st-, 9th-, and 15th-level"... which clearly wouldn't replace the class feature altogether.

stuff

Ah, but couldn't it be interpreted more like:

level ... special
1 Cantrips, Hex (0), Aura of Desecration, patron spells, Spell Poppet
2 Hex (1)
3
4 Bonethrall

OR:

level ... special ... hexes
1 Cantrips, Aura of Desecration, patron spells, Spell Poppet 0
2 1
3 1
4 Bonethrall 1

? Many class's features are organized that way (the monk's many abilities being the prime example). Using such a format for the witch would be rather silly and space-consuming, but couldn't one reasonably assume it means the same thing?

He does not have the ability to cast 1st level spells until he gets to level 4.

By your ruling I could apply for a PrC requiring me to be able to cast 2nd level spells because I will actually be able to do so one day if I live long enough.

Rangers have "-" 2nd level spells per day at 4th level. That means that they have NO 2nd-level spellcasting feature. At the same level, rangers are listed as having "0" 1st level spells per day. This means that they have spellcasting ability, they just don't gain any spells from their class level. It is the same with the witch and the archetype being discussed. A witch normally starts at 1st level with "1" hex. The archetype replace the first hex she gains. 1 - 1 = 0. A witch with the archetype starts at 1st level with "0" hexes. That means she still has the class feature, she just doesn't have an automatic hex. 1 - 1 != "-".

If the archetype said that she gained her hex class feature at 2nd level instead of 1st, that would be a whole nother story (see my discussion of druids and wild shape, above).

Iziak, this is exactly how my GM ruled on the question, and it is specifically what I asked about the last time this thread came up. I don't believe the wording explicitly states that the class feature of "hex" is lost, just the FIRST LEVEL HEX.

Happy to hear that. At least that means that you can use it in the way we both consider to be logical.

The argument against this is that until you can exercise a class feature, you are not considered to have that class feature. That is, I believe, how Sean K Reynolds interpreted it.

This would not be the first SKR ruling that I find egregiously wrong, fwiw.

SKR's comment (assuming that you were referring to this) doesn't actually contradict what I'm saying, I think.* What he said basically amounted to (altering the example because I think it is easier to understand than monks and non-core feats) "You can't the Natural Spell feat (prerequisites Wis 13, wild shape class feature) until you have gained wild shape, which typically happens at 4th level."

I agree with that. You shouldn't be able to take Natural Spell at levels 1-3. Level 4 should be the lowest level you should be able to take it. Plus, it would make characters which are created at a high level be more optimized if they could choose whatever feats they want at any level rather than being restricted by prerequisites, while characters which advance level-by-level would usually take feats they can use.

The wording of the witch archetype we're dealing with here, however, leads me to believe that the class feature is still gained at level 1, just that the first hex isn't gained.

ALTERNATE EXAMPLE:

Rangers gain 1st-level spells at 4th level, but they have 0 spells per day, a value which might be modified by ability scores and feats. The fact that he has 0 spells at 4th level wouldn't keep him from taking feats requiring a caster level or "ability to cast 1st-level spells", for example. That he has no spells per day by default doesn't change that he has the class feature. However, he still couldn't take a feat requiring a caster level or the like BEFORE he reaches 4th level, which is the same as SKR's comment and my wild shape example above.

* My reasoning here is based on my interpretation of SKR's comment, which may not be the same as everyone (or his own) interpretation.

Here's the EXACT WORDING of the replacement: "This ability replaces the witch's 1st-level hex."

Here's the EXACT WORDING of an ability of the sin eater inquisitor, for comparison: "This ability replaces exploit weakness."

Here's the EXACT WORDING of the "wild shape" section of the aquatic druid: "An aquatic druid gains this ability at 6th level, except that her effective druid level for the ability is equal to her druid level – 2."
-------------
Here's what I get out of all this:

An aquatic druid does not have the wild shape ability AT ALL until 6th level. The fact that it then functions at her druid level - 2 is irrelevant to this discussion.

A sin eater never has the exploit weakness ability AT ALL.

A witch gains her hex ability normally, but she doesn't gain a hex automatically from her class level at level 1. Note that it says that it replace her 1st-level hex. It does NOT say that it "replaces hex" (as it would be for a complete removal like the sin eater's), nor does it say that she gains the ability at a different level (as it would be for the aquatic druid).
-------------
TL;DR: I would rule (at least in my games) that witch's gain the hex class feature at level 1 and can take feats to learn new hexes. She just doesn't gain one automatically.

Type isn't the only thing that dictates what you are proficient with - you can also take it as a feat or through class levels.

So, when you polymorph, we need to be clear whether these extra proficiencies are maintained. You certainly wouldn't expect to lose martial weapon proficiency with a greatsword if you polymorphed into a troll (which otherwise only has simple weapon proficiency), however you would expect to lose it if you polymorphed into a bear.

The simian case I think is one which has fallen through the cracks. I think either simians should be monstrous humanoids or there should be a simian sub-type for things like Girallons which gives them simple weapon proficiency.

Richard

Polymorph doesn't do nearly what you're thinking it does anymore... take a look at the spell itself, but also the polymorph subschool in the chapter on Magic. If those two sections don't say that something DOES change, then it DOESN'T change. IIRC, feats and the like are not changed.

I haven't read through any of the discussion, so here's my response to the OP directly:

Is eating meat an inherently evil act? It generally wouldn't be considered such by much of society, provided that the meat came from a non-humanoid, non-"sentient" creature. I don't see why the same wouldn't be the case for drinking blood directly. It may be considered more gross or be shunned, but I doubt "evil" as long as people aren't seeing their friends and family sucked dry.

A great read!

Just a minor suggestion for these articles: Could you include links to the previous ones at the top of the post? That way if someone misses one they can easily navigate back to find it. Considering this is going to be ten posts long, it would be good to have some form of navigational aid.

Awesome announcement.

Possible way to resolve the CRB vs. not issue: Odd-level characters use only CRB options, even-level characters pull in some archetypes and the like from other sources, maybe tossing in a samurai, ninja, and antipaladin (since those are really just big archetypes rather than new base classes). That way other books are represented without overwhelming the CRB stuff, and there's plenty of space open for NPC designs using non-CRB base classes.

I'm just going to go ahead and bump this because I was wondering the same thing, especially with regards to duration.

Commoner.

/thread

Can't get any more simple then that.

After that (and expert), fighter.

Kaven Windstrike: I KNOW I cant be the only person who's initial reaction to the picture was "Its Han Solo!!".

Same though here, you're not alone!

^I'd assumed that one was a softcover. If it's hardcover then that'd certainly be a likelihood.

The Pathfinder Campaign Setting: Inner Sea World Guide and Pathfinder Chronicles: Campaign Setting books are both hardcover.

Pathfinder RPG Beta? It's softcover, but might look like a hardcover if the picture was blurry.

Would it be possible to have a zip or tar archive of the whole PRD added to the site? Would make it a lot easier for offline usage (and less bandwidth then pulling all the HTML pages).

Downloading the whole thing would eat up a lot of bandwidth, so they probably wouldn't want to encourage it. However, there are various software programs which can download all of the pages on a website so you can view them offline (just do a web search for something like "website copier"). For obvious reasons, though, any downloaded version wouldn't be updated when the online PRD is...

It would be cool if Paizo could look into the offline storage capabilities of HTML5, though... that might work well for the PRD to at least some extent.

I'm assuming this post isn't a violation of acceptable use policy.

Question: Why would it be?

I've had some problems doing a "find in page" for some things, especially in the bestiaries.

For an example, go to
http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/monsters/monsterIndex.html

and try to "find" the word Imp and you get no returns, despite Imp being in the list at least twice.
The same thing is true for the word "giant" "ogre" . Pretty much any word I try to find in the page, fails.
-S

If by "find" you mean using your web browser's built in find functionality (using something like Ctrl-F), it is working fine for me in Firefox 11.0 on Ubuntu 11.04.

I agree. I think it should say "Primary casting stat" as opposed to Wisdom.

Agreed. That's how we're ruling it in the game I'm in.

I have this subscription as was wondering If I missed Pathfinder Companion: Dwarves of Golarion. I don't have it in my list or did it come out earlier than I started my subscription.

Note that according to the store blog, Paizo is running very low on copies of Dwarves of Golarion. If you want it, I wouldn't wait too long...

Out of curiosity, did any of the APs come with inserts that I would need to look for?

No Adventure Paths have inserts that I know of. A few books in the Chronicles/Campaign Setting line have multi-panel maps, but not the APs.

Thanks again everybody! There's some great advice here, especially with the sawtooth saber and Greater Two-Weapon Fighting not being all that "great".

I should be able to rebuild the character now so that he still fits both my original vision and has some nicer stats.

Thank you!

Thanks everyone; some clarifications of the original stats.

The AC is NOT in rage. It will go down another couple points while raging.

For thematic reasons, it is really important that he have these two specific types of weapons (battleaxe and broadsword; since there's no broadsword in the game, longsword is being used instead). I know that using two different weapons is worse than using two of the same weapon, and that two-handed fighting is generally better than two-weapon fighting.

But, thinking about it further, I might go with "having the two weapons be the same thing mechanically and reskin them in-game". That way the penalties wouldn't be as problematic, and it would still work in-character.

Tels: What book is the sawtooth saber in? I don't recall seeing it in the CRB.

Thanks everyone!

Are these decent stats for a two-weapon-fighting barbarian?

Level 12 orc (not half-orc) barbarian, 15 point buy:
AC 23
HP 143
Fort +13, Ref +9, Will +4
DR 6/-
Melee:
+1 furious battleaxe +17/+12/+7 (1d8+8/x3) and
+2 furious longsword +17/+12/+7 (1d8+9/17–20)
Melee (while raging):
+1 furious battleaxe +22/+17/+12 (1d8+13/x3) and
+2 furious longsword +22/+17/+12 (1d8+14/17–20)
Rage lasts 30 rounds/day. I might use the elemental rage rage power [APG] for increased damage.

The low AC and saves really worry me, and the attack rolls aren't super-awesome looking either because of the -4 to each one from two-weapon combat. Having never played above level 10 before, do these look decent?

Thank you!

So, is there a physical second printing of this which includes errata? If so, does it say "Second printing" on the inside front cover the same way the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game hardcovers do?

Thanks!

Sorry, found it a few pages back. For reference: There have been three printings. The "second" printing was not labeled as such and included only one small piece of errata due to a mix-up. The actual "second" printing is marked as such and includes much more errata.

So, is there a physical second printing of this which includes errata? If so, does it say "Second printing" on the inside front cover the same way the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game hardcovers do?

Thanks!

The best level 0 spell has to be detect magic, especially since cantrips/orisons are at-will in PFRPG (every time you enter a room, you can cast it).

The most interesting is probably spark from the APG. Sure, it can only target a small item, but you can use it to set one leaf in a pile of dry leaves on fire... provided your GM agrees that it can spread normally, it can be used quite creatively.

"beep beep ... beep beep"

You're awoken by the obnoxious drone of a dying machine.

You find yourself lying in a statis casket.

When you scan the room you see another five marines in similar caskets.

You also note the walls and floor are thick with dust and age.

"beep beep"

The dying machine lets out one last status message before coming to an unspectacular halt.

You note you are currently unarmed and without armour.

The room has one door and there are no guards to be seen.

Please introduce yourselves.

.