Jeraa's page

If an enemy has a tough time using escape artist and also lacks the strength to break the high DC, what does the 15 Hardness and 30 HP do? Can they just attack the manacles for 30 HP and they break or? Would the 15 Hardness be DR 15 essentially?

Hardness is similar to Damage Reduction, but different. Hardness applies to all forms of damage (Even energy damage). Even better, energy damage is usually halved before you even apply hardness - so a 30 damage fire attack is reduced to 15 damage, then the hardness of the manacles is applied, reducing the attack to 0 damage.

Another difference between damage reduction and hardness is that damage reduction usually has some form of damage that overcomes it. Hardness does not (with the general exception of adamantine ignoring hardness 19 and less).

Good evening Paizonians, and good morning to others. I was wondering if I could use a 5th level spell slot to memorize a 4th level spell instead?

Yes, but it is still treated in all ways as a 4th level spell unless you apply the Heighten Spell metamagic feat.

Spell Slots: The various character class tables show how many spells of each level a character can cast per day. These openings for daily spells are called spell slots. A spellcaster always has the option to fill a higher-level spell slot with a lower-level spell. A spellcaster who lacks a high enough ability score to cast spells that would otherwise be his due still gets the slots but must fill them with spells of lower levels.

The actual reason is because that isn't the sort of world people generally want to play in. Your typical game setting and the game setting implied by using the rules as written are two very different things (For those who haven't heard of it, look up the Tippyverse). Most people want medieval Europe with magic and monsters thrown on top, without regards to how different such a world would be.

Any other answer is just trying to find a way to justify that, even when it doesn't make sense.

4. I've always found the "well [insert professional here] doesn't fail" argument, because it's farthest from the truth. Many tight roe/trapeze artist have fallen to their deaths. Just as many a fireman has sadly died in a fire... in short, s&+$ happens to the best of us.

If you consider that for example, a fighter has an attack modifier +10 vs a fighter of lower stat value (we'll say an attack of +5); their chances of success/failure is not statistically the same being that the +10 will hit more often with lower average rolls.

Yes, tight rope walkers do somethings fall to their death, and firemen burn. But I can guarantee you it isn't 1 in 20 times (the rate of a critical failure).

On a normal attack, yes. But that isn't what we are talking about. A critical failure is only on a natural 1. It doesn't matter what your total attack bonus is. If both those fighters have the same number of attacks, their chance of a critical failure is statistically the same. If the +10 attack bonus fighter has 2 attacks (likely), his chance of critically failing in any given round is more than the other fighter, as it is based entirely on the die roll. The higher level fighter has more chance of doing something really, really, bad in a round than the less skilled one.

And no one has said anything about people not failing. Just that more skilled individuals should have less of a chance of it and not more. Less of a chance is not the same thing as no chance.

5. Comparing Feather Fall to Slow-Fall is a big, no-no. One can be used to leap off a dragon or what have you mid-flight. Doing so with Slow-Fall will likely still kill you. That's my two cents anyway. Feather Fall is more like insurance where as Slow-Fall is you actively trying to do something.

No, it is completely valid. You said you rules he couldn't use his Slow-Fall because of a critical failure. What sort of critical failure happens if you have feather fall on you? If you aren't applying the result of critical failures every time it happens, you are cherry picking and playing favorites. Either a critical fail happens and something bad happens, or it doesn't. Playing it both ways is bad form.

3. In the 22+ years I've been gming and 26+ years I've been playing; there has been little to no issue with critical success/failure mechanics.

Personal experience ultimately means absolutely nothing. Just because you don't have a problem with it doesn't make it right. My personal experience (and based on the responses given at other times people ask about it, the experience of many others as well) is that a critical failure is ultimately a bad thing. You are already punished for rolling low, no need to make it even worse.

Of course, not like any of this really matters. You already have your own opinion. You likely just want the validation of others instead of a real discussion anyway.

So, I've always been one to punish critical failures to varying degrees pending on the action involved much like critical successes. Not sure what the stance is with people here, but I've heard people gripe about how punishing for critical failures can "kill their mood".

So the drop is sufficiently safe enough for the Monk to normally slow-fall without harm. He however rolled a critical failure on his acrobatics check on an attempted 20ft leap across a room.

I ruled that, based soley on the fact he got a critical failure, his monkly grace could not save him at that time. The damage was negligable, but he insisted that he should benefit from it anyways.

Thoughts and opinions?

Was the possibility of critical success/failure on skill checks told to the players before hand? If not, I'm totally with your player. You can't critically fail a skill check. On top of that, no check of any sort (successful or otherwise) is needed to use Slow Fall. As long as he was within arms reach of the wall, he should of got it. From his point of view, you stripped him of a class ability with no just cause. The failure of the Acrobatics check already caused a problem - he fell instead of making it across. No need to double punish someone for 1 failed roll.

Critical success/failure with added stuff is just a bad idea, even more so with attack rolls. A high level character is more likely to critically fail on any given round than a low one. (5% chance with any d20 roll, higher level characters have more attack/round so more chances to critically fail.) That doesn't make sense. Nor does an expert climber having the exact same chance of a critical failure as a complete novice. Personally, if a critical success/failure mechanic is needed, it should be based on how you rolled compared to the DC of the check, not based on whatever number the die itself landed on.

Jeraa wrote:

Kalindlara wrote:

Huh. Usually those have the deity's name in their names. How bizarre. ^_^

It isn't bizarre. The actual name is "Desna's Shooting Star". d20PFSRD isn't allowed to use proper names of gods (or other Golarian names), so it changes many things. In this case, it became "Way of the Shooting Star".

Me thinks there might have been a smiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiidge of snark in her response.

I did just notice the face at the end. Anyway, for those that don't know, that is the explanation why some things have their name changed and may be hard to find.

Huh. Usually those have the deity's name in their names. How bizarre. ^_^

It isn't bizarre. The actual name in the book is "Desna's Shooting Star". d20PFSRD isn't allowed to use proper names of gods (or other Golarian names), so it changes many things. In this case, it became "Way of the Shooting Star".

Some requirements (such as worshiping a specific deity) may be left out because of this. It is one of the reasons d20PFSRD isn't a good source for official material.

Jeez, can the enemy just move outside the 20ft radius and snap the effects of the spell?

No. The 20ft radius just determines who is potentially affected. Once affected, the effects of the spell continue for the duration (in this case, however long the caster concentrates, up to a maximum of 1 round/level). Moving out of the original 20ft radius area does nothing to end the spell.

And yes, the spell affects everyone (friend or enemy, and including the caster) in the area, just like a fireball spell would damage everyone in the area. Spells that only affect some individuals in the area but not others specifically state so.

You can see in a darkness spell. All it does is make the available light a bit darker. Only if you are already in dim light when you cast darkness does it create total darkness. In that case, you would also have whatever penalties would apply in such conditions:

In areas of darkness, creatures without darkvision are effectively blinded. In addition to the obvious effects, a blinded creature has a 50% miss chance in combat (all opponents have total concealment), loses any Dexterity bonus to AC, takes a –2 penalty to AC, and takes a –4 penalty on Perception checks that rely on sight and most Strength- and Dexterity-based skill checks. Areas of darkness include an unlit dungeon chamber, most caverns, and outside on a cloudy, moonless night.

At 10th level, the cave druid can assume the form of a Small or Medium ooze as if using beast shape III.

My question is, under Beast shape III it says:

Diminutive animal: If the form you take is that of a Diminutive animal, you gain a +6 size bonus to your Dexterity, a -4 penalty to your Strength, and a +1 natural armor bonus.

Huge animal: If the form you take is that of a Huge animal, you gain a +6 size bonus to your Strength, a -4 penalty to your Dexterity, and a +6 natural armor bonus.

Small magical beast: If the form you take is that of a Small magical beast, you gain a +4 size bonus to your Dexterity, and a +2 natural armor bonus.

Medium magical beast: If the form you take is that of a Medium magical beast, you gain a +4 size bonus to your Strength, and a +4 natural armor bonus.

Would the ooze fall under the Medium magical beast category?

Magic beast is a specific creature type, like humanoid and undead. Oozes are not magical beasts, but creatures of the ooze type.

Edit: I see the question. Since the ability lets you take the form of a small or medium ooze, and the spell has a section for small and medium creatures, that is likely what they want you to use. Especially considering the wording of the ability:

A cave druid gains this ability at 6th level, except that her effective druid level for this ability is equal to her druid level –2. She cannot use wild shape to adopt a plant form. At 10th level, the cave druid can assume the form of a Small or Medium ooze as if using beast shape III, and at 12th level that of a Tiny or Large ooze as if using beast shape IV (treating the ooze as if it were a magical beast without a natural armor bonus). When in ooze form, the cave druid has no discernible anatomy and is immune to poison, sneak attacks, and critical hits.

So you use the appropriate line for magical beasts when taking the form of an ooze.

I don't think the effects have ever been stated anywhere else than in the curse water spell. Unlike holy water, which is included in the Equipment chapter.

Unfortunately, that FAQ is wrong. Bastard swords are by default a one-handed weapons with a special clause that lets you use them 2 handed easier, not a 2 handed weapon that lets you wield it in one hand with added effort. If they want to rewrite the weapon table to reflect their rules change (appearing as a 2 handed martial weapon), that is fine. But as written in the book, that FAQ is wrong.

Wow, did this get off track.

Here's my 2 cents and I think it is very simple reasoning:

Proficiency in the earth breaker allows you to wield it 2-handed without penalty and you get to add 1.5 strength modifier to damage. Since the earth breaker is only a 2-handed weapon, you cannot be proficient in using it one-handed. Therefore, if you wish to use it one-handed, you take the penalty of -4 to attack for not being proficient and only get your normal strength tor damage.

That isn't how proficiency works at all. With a few specifically stated exceptions (bastard swords, for example) there is no change in proficiency based on how many hands you hold the weapon in. Proficiency is a simple binary - either yes or no. If you are proficiency with a longsword, you are proficiency with all longswords. Including Small sized ones (wielded one handed as a light weapon) and Large sized ones (which would require 2 hands). You still have the -2 wrong size penalty, but that has nothing to do with proficiency.

Who sets watches? I don't think that's something I've done since 2e, maybe early 3.0. It's just something that none of my groups I play in ever really think about.

I mean, when you go camping in real life you don't set watches. Everyone just goes to sleep in their tents and wakes up in the morning. The odds of something hostile stumbling across your camp by random is vanishingly small, and if it does the chance that it will be of a CR to actively challenge you is also pretty small.

If there is a story reason to expect someone to be actively looking for you, then sure, set up a watch. Just randomly? Seems pointless.

Todays campers also generally (but not always) do so in relatively safe areas. Wild animals have learned to generally avoid human contact (again, there are exceptions), and humans generally aren't considered prey. Plus, we aren't in a world with multiple intelligent nocturnal monsters, many of which wold just love the chance to attack a group of sleeping tasty humans. You can't compare real world activities with fantasy versions. The two worlds are ultimately no where near each other in pretty much any instance. Comparisons like that don't work.

It is a common error. Players tend to think of the real world and how things work here and giving no real thought to just how different your typical fantasy world really would be.

aren't negative and positive energy necromancy effects

Not by default. Many uses of negative energy are necromancy effects, but nothing about negative/positive energy makes either automatically a necromancy effect.

The official rules are very clear. Many spells have a cap on their effects. Unless something specifically says it changes the cap, the cap remains. You are very unlikely to get any sort of official response or FAQ, and if you do it would likely be "No reply needed".

And as many times as I've seen people repeating incorrect information despite being shown multiple times that they are wrong, redundancy in a thread is not a problem. What you wish would happen doesn't matter. I wish people would actually make their own decisions/rulings instead of running to the message boards for every little problem. But that isn't likely to stop any time soon.

From the soul bind spell:

The focus for this spell is a black sapphire of at least 1,000 gp value for every HD possessed by the creature whose soul is to be bound. If the gem is not valuable enough, it shatters when the binding is attempted. (While creatures have no concept of level or HD as such, the value of the gem needed to trap an individual can be researched.)

If you can research the hit dice of a creature for one purpose, theoretically you can do so for other purposes. And if it can be researched, such knowledge could already be known and covered by the relevant Knowledge skill.

The fragile quality has nothing to do with the items hardness.

Fragile: Fragile weapons and armor cannot take the beating that sturdier weapons can. A fragile weapon gains the broken condition if the wielder rolls a natural 1 on an attack roll with the weapon. If a fragile weapon is already broken, the roll of a natural 1 destroys it instead.

Armor with the fragile quality falls apart when hit with heavy blows. If an attacker hits a creature wearing fragile armor with an attack roll of a natural 20 and confirms the critical hit (even if the creature is immune to critical hits), the armor gains the broken condition. If already broken, the armor is destroyed instead. Fragile armor is not broken or destroyed by critical threats that are not generated by natural 20s, so if a creature wielding a weapon with a 19–20 or 18–20 critical range scores a critical hit on the wearer of this armor with a roll of less than a natural 20, that critical hit has no chance to break or destroy the armor.

Masterwork and magical fragile weapons and armor lack these flaws unless otherwise noted in the item description or the special material description.

Masterwork items (usually) remove the fragile quality. Masterwork items have the same hardness as non-masterwork items. By the rules, increasing the hardness will do nothing to the fragile quality.

Detect magic only detects 2 things - active spells, and magic items. It does not detect spellcasters. Arcane sight on the other hand can detect spellcasters.

Taking away spellbooks won't prevent spellcasting. You only need the book to prepare the spell. Taking away focus or material components can help prevent casting, but not all spells have those. And the ones that do can usually still be cast if the caster has Eschew Materials.

Short of making an antimagic zone or binding and gagging the casters, you generally can't outright prevent casting. Binding and gagging wouldn't even stop a psychic character, however. The can cast when paralyzed.

Jeraa wrote:

Lady-J wrote:

So the fcc has decided to remove net neutrality in a 3-2 vote. So you guys in the united states need to contact your congressmen and let them know how bad of an idea that is. This will mean internet companies can throttle your internet speeds and force you to pay even more money to receive internet they can even then force websites and other online companies to pay exorbitant prices just to not have traffic to their sites slowed down for people using that particular internet service. The chairman of the fcc claims it will let the market decide which companies live and die if they do such things but that idea is fundamentally flawed in many areas around the USA only have access to one, maybe two internet providers in a given area. There still a chance to save net neutrality as there are a few more steps that need to be taken for them to remove it completely, but you will need to contact your congressmen and have them represent you and your needs and uphold your right to be able to have affordable un throttled internet.

And this is related to the Pathfinder RPG how? Wrong place. You want the Off Topic board.

because it has the potential to effect the entire paizo site as a whole as well as many of the resource sites used for pathfinder content plus the general discussion board is one of the most visited forums so its much more likely to be seen

Still the wrong place. And we (the US population) don't have as much control over what happens as many are led to believe. The country as a whole mostly supports net neutrality, and the FCC vote was still against it. The person who gets the most people voting for them in the presidential election is not guaranteed to actually win the election. The government mostly does what it wants. It may or may not happen to coincide with the wishes of the people.

But as the entire issue is a political one, I suspect the thread will be locked and/or removed. So it doesn't really matter.

So the fcc has decided to remove net neutrality in a 3-2 vote. So you guys in the united states need to contact your congressmen and let them know how bad of an idea that is. This will mean internet companies can throttle your internet speeds and force you to pay even more money to receive internet they can even then force websites and other online companies to pay exorbitant prices just to not have traffic to their sites slowed down for people using that particular internet service. The chairman of the fcc claims it will let the market decide which companies live and die if they do such things but that idea is fundamentally flawed in many areas around the USA only have access to one, maybe two internet providers in a given area. There still a chance to save net neutrality as there are a few more steps that need to be taken for them to remove it completely, but you will need to contact your congressmen and have them represent you and your needs and uphold your right to be able to have affordable un throttled internet.

And this is related to the Pathfinder RPG how? Wrong place. You want the Off Topic board.

Phantasmal Killer conjures the scariest creature. So your answer isn't valid. You'd have to name a monster/creature of some sort.

You don't have to name anything at all. It pulls from your subconscious mind. You don't even have to know you are afraid of it until it is right there in front of you. And the creature formed doesn't have to be one that actually exists. Maybe it does. Maybe bits of it are taken from other creatures. Doesn't matter.

its actually 1000g per spell level and it would be a 0 level spell so 1000 gold x0 is 0

For cost calculation purposes, 0-level spells are treated as 1/2 level spells. Otherwise their costs would always be free.

And Ultimate Campaign changed it to 100gp/level.

Can you take a 10 when you are trying to combat train an animal?

Taking 10: When your character is not in immediate danger or distracted, you may choose to take 10. Instead of rolling 1d20 for the skill check, calculate your result as if you had rolled a 10. For many routine tasks, taking 10 makes them automatically successful. Distractions or threats (such as combat) make it impossible for a character to take 10. In most cases, taking 10 is purely a safety measure—you know (or expect) that an average roll will succeed but fear that a poor roll might fail, so you elect to settle for the average roll (a 10). Taking 10 is especially useful in situations where a particularly high roll wouldn't help.

You aren't in immediate danger, nor are you distracted. So yes, you can Take 10.

Ambrus wrote:

I've been trying in vain to figure this out and would appreciate some insight. I have a character with a BAB of +7 and a natural Slam attack. The player is tired of making a single attack every round...

You should already be getting two attacks at BAB7, one a -5 iterative. It could be two slams, or two weapon attacks, or one of each (unless your creature type's physique somehow gums that up).

Can't be 2 slams. As a natural weapon, slams never get iterative attacks from a high BAB.

Natural Attacks: Attacks made with natural weapons, such as claws and bites, are melee attacks that can be made against any creature within your reach (usually 5 feet). These attacks are made using your full attack bonus and deal an amount of damage that depends on their type (plus your Strength modifier, as normal). You do not receive additional natural attacks for a high base attack bonus. Instead, you receive additional attack rolls for multiple limb and body parts capable of making the attack (as noted by the race or ability that grants the attacks). If you possess only one natural attack (such as a bite—two claw attacks do not qualify), you add 1–1/2 times your Strength bonus on damage rolls made with that attack.

Sure cute fuzzy bunnies, majestic forests, and towering mountains are nature. But so are wolves tearing apart rabbits, forest fires, and volcanic eruptions.

Destruction is as natural as life. Nature is more than forests and bunnies.

RAW, no. Other sources are not CORE, therefor not a part of the game.

In practice, most GMs filter spells by campaign. Ours has a number of Druid orders and all have their own lists (mostly the same, but...). A Druid cannot cast any spell that destroys nature...except for the Black Rose (various 'blight' spells and abilities). Taking any of the 'nature domains' also limits and grants spell choice. Elemental focused Druids are really good for such spells, but see a number of others 'slighted' (a la school specialization). It is all a part of her world and gives the texture we can really get into. YMMV.

RAW, yes. Whatever sourcebooks you choose to use, the druid automatically knows every druid spell in them. Unlike a wizard (and others) who only know certain specific spells and must choose to learn one of the spells.

Anything else is a houserule. Which is fine, but should not be presented as a rule in the Rules Questions forum.

Could someone explain to me what benefit a feat like Spell Specialization would have on the spell Chains of Light? I don't believe I understand how caster level works. I have an idea which is a level 5 wizard who had +1 caster level via Varisiam Tattoo could cast a fireball that is 6D6. Also the duration of certain spells could be longer due to caster level. Are there other things as well? Thanks all.

The range of most spells, chains of light included, are based on caster level. A higher caster level also makes spells harder to dispel. It also means it is easier to get through the targets spell resistance. A higher caster level would also make your concentration checks (if any are needed) easier.

Xenocrat wrote:

The inside cover of Blood of Shadows spelled out the five light conditions (bright, normal, dim, dark, supernaturally dark) if you can get a copy.

Exactly, but the people I was talking to elsewhere were under the misapprehension that "supernaturally dark" was exactly the same as "magical darkness"

Elsewhere in the rules "supernatural" does mean "magical", so the confusion is understandable. With darkness, it works differently.

Supernatural Abilities (Su): Supernatural abilities are magical but not spell-like. Supernatural abilities are not subject to spell resistance and do not function in areas where magic is suppressed or negated (such as an antimagic field). A supernatural ability's effect cannot be dispelled and is not subject to counterspells. See Table: Special Ability Types for a summary of the types of special abilities.

Bonuses of the same type don't stack. I assume the lucky horseshoe gives a luck bonus (I can't find it to make sure). The halflings ability is not a luck bonus, but a racial bonus.

As they are different types, they do in fact stack.

So our cleric (Pharasma True Neutral) just threw out a negative channel at our enemies, and my paladin is trying to gauge his reaction. Should he flip out, or just give him dirty looks.

While a lot of evil things do use or are powered by negative energy, negative energy by itself is not evil. A good-aligned cleric can cast inflict light wounds (and others), which uses negative energy.

The swarm normally deals damage to any creature within its space.

If the swarm has no idea a creature is there can it still do damage?

Specifically an intelligent swarm in the same space as a character protected by the mythic ability undetectable?

By the rules, any creature in a swarm's space takes damage. It doesn't matter if the swarm knows they are there or not, in the same way a fireball doesn't care if your are invisible or not.

The specific ability might indicate otherwise. What undetectable ability are you talking about?

Edit: I assume you mean the legendary item ability?

Undetectable: This grants its bonded user the ability to become utterly undetectable while invisible. While invisible and in physical contact with this item, the bonded creature can't be detected or scryed by any method.

I see nothing about that that would prevent you from taking damage within a swarm. The swarm doesn't need to know you are there - you just take damage.

I had always thought the prefix of demi- was for partial (not half), BUT I was surprised to learn the official definition has both half and partial, but in the context of lesser... Meaning, "partial & lesser," so the OP still makes a valid point.

I'm thinking the originators of the demilich as a viable monster went for cool name without actually being pedantic about the context.

And yes, it IS completely possible to make a lich more powerful than a by-the-book demilich, but in lich evolution (if it can be called that) demilich is the final more powerful stage.

No, he doesn't really have a point. I posted the original reasoning behind the name from the original monster back in AD&D. It never had anything to do with power. It had everything to do with form. He just assumed (incorrectly) they were referring to power. And rightfully so - to most people, it does mean half-power. But that is only part of its definition.

It is the same for the original name for non-human player races. Demihumans (like elves and dwarves). Something that is partly human, but ultimately isn't.

I knew I could fit it into the title.

I looked Demi up in the dictionary and among other things it means half, which fits for Demigod. (half-god) But it doesn't fit for Demilich since the monster is more powerful than a normal lich.

Is there another meaning for Demi which means twice as powerful?

Demi can also mean part of, or partly belonging to. A demilich is therefor only part of a lich. From its original description back in 1st edition AD&D:

Demilich is a misleading term in that one might assume the "demi" refers to status. However, it refers to the state of the lich. Only a small part of the body of the lich remains - dust, the skull, and possibly a few bones.

A demilich is called that because it is only partly a lich, not because it has half the power of a lich.

Can you use Intensified spell on magic missile to get more missiles?

Intensified increases the damage dice of a spell by 5 levels, but magic missile doesn't deal damage based on level. A missile always does 1d4+1 damage, caster level has nothing to do with it. Instead, you gain more missiles. As the damage dice of the spell never actually increases, I would have to say you can't have an Intensified Magic Missile.

You can use Vital Strike with Studied Strike. Just note that the additional damage from Studied Strike is not increased by Vital Strike, as it is precision damage. Vital Strike does not increase the amount of precision damage an attack does.

They're DEATH spells after all, not "a lot of damage" spells.

Because having a character die from 1 failed roll was considered bad in 3.5 D&D, so the spells changed in Pathfinder.

And I would hardly say "most death spells just do 10x caster level damage". Of the 25 official Pathfinder spells the Archive of Nethys lists as having the [death] descriptor, only 3 deal 10 damage/level (Finger of Death, Wail of the Banshee, destruction). Several more do kill on a failed save (bloatbomb, circle of death, death clutch, death knell, malediction, massacre, power word kill, symbol of death).

So in fact, there are more [death] spells that cause instant death (8) then there are that cause 10xlevel damage (3). Granted some of those instant-death spells only function under certain circumstances, like death knell.

so long as you make your save the effect is the same as difficult terrain ie moving at half speed and not being able to charge or take a 5 foot step

No. Even if you make the save, you still have the entangled condition (reduced speed, penalty to attack rolls and Dexterity, concentration check to cast spells). The entangled condition specifically prevents charging. You are entangled regardless of whether or not you make the save. We have already covered this earlier in the thread.

There are multiple ways to be slowed down. Difficult terrain is just one of them. Just because you are slowed does not mean it is the same as difficult terrain. Dragon Style does absolutely nothing to allow you to charge while entangled.

Lady-J wrote:

well dragon style will just bypass the tangle foot effect all together and allow some one to charge

Silvermane... wrote:

How so?

Doesn't work.

Benefit: While using this style, you gain a +2 bonus on saving throws against sleep effects, paralysis effects, and stunning effects. You ignore difficult terrain when you charge, run, or withdraw. You can also charge through squares that contain allies. Further, you can add 1-1/2 times your Strength bonus on the damage roll for your first unarmed strike on a given round.

Says nothing about being able to charge or run while entangled, which is why you can't charge under the effects of a tanglefoot bag. You ignore difficult terrain, but the tanglefoot bag doesn't create difficult terrain. Nor does it help avoid being glued in place, as that is neither a stunning or paralysis effect.

If you fired +4 Arrows with Human Bane

Would you get both- the icy and bane damage?

Yes.

IF you look at the table labeled "Ranged Weapon Special Abilities", you will see most of the special abilities listed have a little number 2 next to them. That means:

2 Bows, crossbows, and slings crafted with this ability bestow this power upon their ammunition.

Saldiven wrote:

shaventalz wrote:

I basically always have some way of using it on my casters. Regardless of whether you can take 20 on the Spellcraft check (or have the time), it's much easier to just say "I have Read Magic, can we move on?"

I'm not sure why saying, "I have Read Magic, can we move on?" is any easier to say than, "I'll take a 20, can we move on?"

Because you don't run into questions over whether you can take 20, you don't have buffs running out as you sit there, you don't have to say "X, unless this is my opposition school, which has a total of X-5"... you just say "I read it."

Also, I suspect using Spellcraft to ID a scroll takes as long as using Spellcraft to ID an item (3 rounds.) That would put the take20 at 6 minutes per scroll. I've ended up in parties with barbarians that start breaking down doors after rounds of inactivity.

You suspect wrong.

Decipher the Writing: The writing on a scroll must be deciphered before a character can use it or know exactly what spell it contains. This requires a read magic spell or a successful Spellcraft check (DC 20 + spell level). Deciphering a scroll is a full-round action.

Fuzzy-Wuzzy wrote:

TOZ, I'm confused. What are you demonstrating with your spike stones example?

They were presenting an example of an item/effect where the damage is explicitly stated as "per square occupied".

But spike growth isn't an example of that. A 1-square Medium creature takes 1d4 damage when moving 5 feet, and the 6-square wide Colossal creature also takes 1d4 damage when moving 5 feet. Size and the number of squares occupied have absolutely nothing to do with the damage of the spell, just the total distance moved.

As far as I can remember, and as far as I can see when looking, there are no spells or effects that deal damage based on the number of squares your occupy. Effects are binary - either part of you is in the area and you are effected, or none of you is and you aren't.

I'm thinking of taking craft wondrous items feat as a alchemist, but the alchemist has a fairly limited access to required spells. If I'm understanding the rules correctly I can craft items without the required spell for a +5 increase to dc, but I wanted to know since we have a few sorcerers on the team can they help by providing the spell even if they don't also have the craft wondrous items feat?

You can skip the spell requirement for any magic item except spell-completion items, spell-trigger items, or potions. So scrolls, wands, staves, and potions.

You can meet the spell requirement by using a magic item with the spell, or another spellcaster. The other spellcaster does not require the relevant item creation feat. Just remember that you must provide all the spells everyday you work on the item, so the sorcerer must be there every day you work and must spend the appropriate spell slot each of those days.

blahpers wrote:

It isn't like we're talking about a fine print technicality thing--you cast the spell, you use up the material components whether it works or not,

Can you cast a spell without a valid target though?

True Resurrection specifies as Raise Dead (with some differences), and Raise Dead specifies a "dead creature touched" as the target. True Resurrection stipulates the following differences:

Quote:

This spell functions like raise dead, except that you can resurrect a creature that has been dead for as long as 10 years per caster level. This spell can even bring back creatures whose bodies have been destroyed, provided that you unambiguously identify the deceased in some fashion (reciting the deceased's time and place of birth or death is the most common method).

To me that seems like we don't have a valid target.

I would probably have the spell fail without consuming components, explaining that this seemed different to a fizzle or other failure with no manifestations or energies appearing at all. Then allow a Spellcraft check to see if the character realizes they have no valid target.

I do think it's probably also a reasonable ruling to expend the components though.

To the original issue, could you spring the surprise earlier, or prevent aquisition of the diamond until after you're ready?

Basically, yes you can cast a spell without a valid target.

Spell Failure

If you ever try to cast a spell in conditions where the characteristics of the spell cannot be made to conform, the casting fails and the spell is wasted.

Spells also fail if your concentration is broken and might fail if you're wearing armor while casting a spell with somatic components.

If you always had to have a valid target (or otherwise had to have valid conditions) that line wouldn't be necessary. It is always possible to cast a spell, whether or not the conditions are valid for the spell.

Wei Ji the Learner wrote:

Alternatively, to *not be a dick* don't have the diamond vanish. The spell simply fails to work. Let the caster figure their own things out.

Following the rules is "being a dick"? It isn't like we're talking about a fine print technicality thing--you cast the spell, you use up the material components whether it works or not, same as if you tried to wish someone to be hit by dominate person and they made their saving throw.

In some peoples view, yes. Same as with using sunder to destroy PC equipment (also somewhat when PCs use sunder against enemies, reducing loot) or taking the wizards spellbook. Technically, it is all allowed, but considered a bad move on the part of the DM. I don't have a problem with it, but others do.

2ndGenerationCleric wrote:

But it says it strikes as a spell, not a weapon. Doesn't that indicate touch ac, like seemingly all other spells?

When they say it strikes like a spell, they do on behalf of how it interacts with DR, SR, hardness and such kind of defenses.

Its been 3 and a half years since the post you are replying to.

Jeraa wrote:

Danzibe1989 wrote:

Hello! So I was having a chat with my GM when he brought up he discovered something new about Feather Fall to him. Curious, I asked what it was. He says that Feather Fall requires a concentration check to cast, which i'm pretty sure is wrong, and that you can't cast it on stationary creatures only free-falling creatures.

Targets one Medium or smaller free-falling object or creature/level, no two of which may be more than 20 ft. apart

Clearly this is meaning Objects that are already falling, not objects and creatures already falling. The OR is a clear separation yes?
So nothing should stop me from casting Feather Fall and then jumping down a hole yes?

I saw a thread on Feather Fall from 2012 but it didn't hold answers to my questions.

The duration is "until landed". If you are standing on the ground, you are already landed and therefore the spell ends instantly. It must be cast on you while you are falling.

until landing or 1 round/level

You are wrong sir. try again.

Whichever would come first. Which would be "until landed" as you are already in contact with the ground.

And would thus require a concentration check for vigorous motion during casting.

No, it isn't vigorous motion. It is worse than that.

A character cannot cast a spell while falling, unless the fall is greater than 500 feet or the spell is an immediate action, such as feather fall. Casting a spell while falling requires a concentration check with a DC equal to 20 + the spell's level. Casting teleport or a similar spell while falling does not end your momentum, it just changes your location, meaning that you still take falling damage, even if you arrive atop a solid surface.

Requirements: Certain requirements must be met in order for a character to create a magic item. These include feats, spells, and miscellaneous requirements such as level, alignment, and race or kind.

A spell prerequisite may be provided by a character who has prepared the spell (or who knows the spell, in the case of a sorcerer or bard), or through the use of a spell completion or spell trigger magic item or a spell-like ability that produces the desired spell effect. For each day that passes in the creation process, the creator must expend one spell completion item or one charge from a spell trigger item if either of those objects is used to supply a prerequisite.

It is possible for more than one character to cooperate in the creation of an item, with each participant providing one or more of the prerequisites. In some cases, cooperation may even be necessary.

If two or more characters cooperate to create an item, they must agree among themselves who will be considered the creator for the purpose of determinations where the creator's level must be known.

No mention whatsoever of only applying to certain item types. A spell prerequisite for any magic item can be met by a second person or a magic item supplying the spell.

I was looking at mages magnificent mansion earlier and it requires an ivory door sculpture, a silver spoon and a piece of polished marble as it's focus. Now ignoring the fact they need to be worth 5 gp (say for the sake of this question each one is worth 5 sp what would be the correct interpretation?

1) It doesn't work because the total cost is 1.5 Gp.

2) It doesn't work because they're foci not material components.

3) It does work because it ignores the need for components worth 1 Gp and each component is only worth 5 Sp.

4) Something else I haven't thought of.

#2 is the main reason. Focus components are not material components. Eschew Materials only deals with material components.

If the spell did require multiple material components, and each was priced at 5sp, then Eschew Materials would remove the need for all 3, and #3 would be correct. As written, the feat only checks if the specific material component costs 1gp or less. It says nothing about the total cost. However, I don't know of a spell with multiple expensive material components.

@Darksol - You are absolutely correct. Gate also doesn't work because it cannot connect two points on the same plane. That's surprising. I should read spell descriptions more often; I've been running Gate incorrectly for years.

@Rajnish - immovable rods are not immovable, but the fastest you can move a 'locked' immovable rod is 10ft./rd. Which cuts out almost all of the moon's momentum, allowing Earth to pull it down.

Though it suddenly occurs to me that you still need food/water for the climb... I guess that's another 4,000 for the ioun stone.

Still only 23,000 gp. Any 7th level character should be able to do it.

The fastest a creature can move the rod is 10 feet/round. The moon isn't a creature. If anything, it likely counts as weight supported by the rod, meaning the rod instantly shuts down as soon as it makes contact with the moon (which definitely weighs more than 8000 pounds).

Hello people!

My group were having a discussion regarding casting multiple spells per round.

My question is: If a spell is cast as a ranged touch attack, does that enable you to cast it multiple times using a full-round action, if you have more than 1 attack?

I would say no, since to cast a spell, for example Snowball, you need to use a standard action. But my friend thinks that; since a full-round action with high enough BAB enable you to attack more than once, you should also be able to cast multiple spells if it's considered a ranged touch attack.

What is your opinion on this?

Hope to hear from you.

All spells have a specific casting time listed. Usually a standard action. A high BAB grants extra attacks (during a full attack action as a full round action). It does not give extra actions, and does not effect the number of spells castable in any way.