Nameless Assassin

Ignotus Advenium's page

192 posts. Alias of Joe Kondrak.


RSS

1 to 50 of 192 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

In the event timeline for the Exaltation Gala, Event 2, there's this line: "Review each of the areas of the senate, including those not currently accessible to the PCs."

Maybe I missed it, but where (if anywhere) is it specified which areas are or are not generally accessible?

I do see that in the event timeline, a few areas (such as emperor's hall) become inaccessible at certain points. However, none of the area-entries specifically mention being inaccessible in general.


SuperFaex wrote:
... Keep in mind, that every magic weapon by default also is a masterwork. That would explain the +9 to hit on both sides.

Indeed — good catch.

Amaranthine Witch wrote:
If the second head was not magical, her offhand attack would deal 1d6+1 damage, as she doesn't have double slice.

Agreed.

Thanks to both of you for helping me think that through!


chopswil wrote:

p. 62 NIGHT SWAN

what is the second weapon in the melee block supposed to be?

"Melee +1 chain spear +9/+4 (1d6+3) and +9 (1d6+2)"

I think the attack line reflects TWF, and it's just the other end of the chain spear (the one that can trip).

The chain spear's text entry on the PRD suggests it behaves like a double weapon. In the table entry, there are two damages listed, just like other double weapons, even though 'double' doesn't appear in the far-right column.

Getting esoteric here, but that opens the question of the weapon's enhancement bonus and gp value. If a chain spear is a double weapon (or treated like one), then the +1 chain spear in the NPC's gear entry might be worth ~4,000 gp (2,000 gp sell) — if both 'heads' are +1 (which jibes with the +9 and +9 in attack line). Or, only 1 'head' is enhanced to +1, the weapon is worth ~2,000 gp (1,000 gp sell), and the listed attack bonus(es) for one hand or the other should be 1 lower.


ubiquitous wrote:
Page 44 wrote:
Either way, the Society’s efforts reduce the number of Brotherhood of Silence agents present in areas D1, D2, and D3 by two each (down to two, two, and six, respectively).
However, the D2 encounter (page 45) is already listed as only having two Silent Initiates, plus Fair-Minded Efarni. Should this be 4 Initiates (and a CR4 encounter) and go down to 2, or 2 Initiates and go down to 0?

Down to 0, per this post from previous page.


Here are some results to browse through — any of those fit the bill?


Ravingdork wrote:

What is all this talk about kneeling? The word "kneel" doesn't even appear in the Core book according to my PDF search.

You're either prone, or you're not.

It doesn't specifically address the cover-related aspects, but kneeling is listed on the armor class modifiers table.

Edit: oops SF not SF. I predict that's gonna happen to me again, maybe once or twice.


Setting "build-mastery" aside, and looking rules-in-play mastery—I see lots of differences in mastery among players. The differences between various individuals' mastery of rules in play can be a large or small factor depending on how the game's being run.

For example, suppose a player repeatedly moves their mini around their allies, instead of through their allies' spaces (forgetting the rule that you can move through). This costs them extra movement, potentially missing the occasional round(s) of action as a result. Or suppose a player knows, or doesn't know, when they'll provoke AoOs due to movement.

It makes a big difference if the gm or other players point this out, and whether the player has an opportunity to adjust after a rule is pointed out. If nobody was watching the player's movement closely, or keeping silent, they'd be performing subpar. If a player moves around an ally, and then can't make it to the enemy to attack, if no one speaks up and says, "you can go through your allies' spaces, which in this case would allow you to reach and attack the enemy, are you sure you want to move that way?" — then the player's lack of mastery has a big effect on performance, but if they're prodded, then not so much.

Same thing for AoOs — if you don't know that you'll provoke when leaving a square, and you do leave the square, at one table, this could mean whack!, while at another table you might be asked, "are you sure you want to leave that square, you'll provoke."


Mogaru's breath weapon


An ominous weapon (+1 bonus)
Gravelly tonic (50 gp, +5 alchemical bonus for 1 hour)
Elixir of the thundering voice (250 gp, +10 competence bonus for 1 hour, still good because bonus is more than helm's)

With another fighter level, you could take Advanced Weapon Training to reduce the action(s) required to intimidate with the dazzling intimidation option.


Crocodiles
Frogs
Leeches
Snakes

I'm not certain about how well any of these creaures hear, but they are predators that hunt in swampy/marshy areas, and would presumably be able to sense characters slogging through a swamp, whether that's via hearing, scent, or whatever.


...we fought caterwaul after caterwaul because they were the weakest monster with treasure type U.

...we mixed our potions together before drinking them.

...we defeated Tiamat without breaking a sweat.


I think a Carnivorous Crystal has come up in similar threads. Its slam is 7d8. Cave Druids (archetype) can change into one.

With the spell strong jaw (increases natural attack as if 2 sizes larger), I believe that works out to 16d6. See the table here — 7d8 -> 8d6 (per "coversion" since 7d8 not found), then -> 12d6 for 1 size increase, and -> 16d6 for 2nd size increase.

Ninja'd!


8 people marked this as a favorite.

In a couple of our campaigns, we use a d30 as follows:

At the start of each combat, when rollng initiative, the players also engage in a separate roll-off. That roll-off can be anything—a d20, d100, 2d6 or whatever (no bonuses/mods applied). The winner of that roll-off claims the d30 for the ensuing combat.

Then, once during that combat, the player can substitute the d30 for any single d20 roll, such as an attack, CL check, save, etc. The numbers from 1–20 function as they normally would with a d20, i.e. a 20 auto-hits and threatens, a 15–20 might threaten (subject to threat range), and a 1 auto-fails. The numbers from 21–30 are simply used as the result, but don't threaten or auto–succeed, except for a natural 30 on an attack roll, which threatens and auto-confirms a crit.

If a player doesn't use the d30 during the combat in question, they don't get to keep it for the next combat (there's a new roll-off every time), but they can use it for their initiative roll right before handing it off to the new roll-off winner.


Kalindlara wrote:
Ignotus Advenium wrote:
Anyone remember the su-monster (psionic monkey-type thing)? I haven't seen a pathfinder version, but maybe there's something similar with a different name?
I believe this is our version. ^_^

Thank you! Somehow I missed that.


Anyone remember the su-monster (psionic monkey-type thing)? I haven't seen a pathfinder version, but maybe there's something similar with a different name?


I'm looking for some advice regarding 2 traps that I'll be running tonight (traps and questions spoiled below):

spell crucible:

Trigger proximity (alarm); Reset automatic
Effect The spell crucible summons three shadowfire elementals
(see Creatures, below). Then the crucible makes a targeted
dispel magic (CL 12th) against each non-elemental creature
in the chamber. As long as the spell crucible is active, any
creature casting a spell or using a spell-like ability in this
room is immediately subject to a counter spell (dispel magic,
CL 12th). If the crucible succeeds in dispelling an existing
spell or counterspelling a spell being cast, the affected
creature or caster is targeted by a fireball 1 round later (10-ft.
burst, Reflex DC 14 half). The fireball deals 1d6 points of fire
damage per level of the triggering creature’s dispelled spell
(or the combined level of all spells if the crucible dispelled
multiple spells on that creature
).

The targeted dispel option for the spell dispel magic typically removes only 1 spell from the target if it's successful. The part at the end (bolded) of the trap seems to suggest that the trap might dispel multiple spells on each creature when it goes off.

Would you run it just like the spell, limiting it to removing only 1 spell? If you think the trap can remove more than 1 spell, would you roll once for each target, and dispel any or all spells on the target that that roll beats? Or, roll once against each spell on each target, dispelling or not dispelling each spell accordingly?

firefall:

Trap: Opening the door into area K10 unleashes the firefall,
a waterfall of burning oil that pours down the grooves and
quickly burns any living thing below. The oil is contained in
large vessels underneath the flagstones of the landing at the
south end of the room, and is discharged through a number
of tiny pipes leading into the grooves.
If the PCs set off the trap, the oil pours through the pipes
and then ignites. The grooves swiftly disperse the flaming
oil through the room and down toward the door leading to
area K9.

FIREFALL TRAP CR 6
XP 2,400
Type
magic; Perception DC 30; Disable Device DC 30
EFFECTS
Trigger proximity (alarm); Reset none
Effect The door to this room locks, and flaming oil fills the
trenches in the room—it affects the southern 15 feet in
round 1, affects the whole room in round 2, and flows under
the northern door to affect area K9 on round 3. This creates
flaming rain in the infinite pit in round 4; 4d6 fire damage
and target catches on fire (Core Rulebook 444), Reflex DC
17 half; heavy smoke, target is unable to act and spends
the round coughing and choking, Fortitude DC 15 negates.
A choking character takes 1d6 points of nonlethal damage
each round until it succeeds at a DC 15 Fortitude save. The oil
burns off after 5 rounds, but the heavy smoke persists for 10
minutes. When the smoke has dissipated, the doors unlock.

The paragraph text says it triggers when the door is opened, but in the trap's stat block, the 1st effect is, "The door to this room locks," and then other effects ensue. I can't quite tell what the intent is here. If the door locks (closing 1st?), then the PCs would be on the safe side, with the flaming oil getting to them (under the door) on the 3rd round — the 1st two rounds, the oil would be burning on the other side of the door. Maybe opening the door "arms" the trap, and then the trigger = "proximity" to the source (deeper in the room, where the oil starts), which would likely put some PCs in the area that's affected on the 1st or 2nd round.

Any suggestions? How would you run it?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

They're very pricey (40k gp), but ring gates might do the trick. You could pass notes through them, or stick your head through and talk. Of course, their function goes way beyond just communication, hence the $$.


Question regarding a stat block appearing in level 11, The Tomb of Yarrix:

Yarrix:
In Yarrix's stat block (she's a variant mummy cleric), there's a ranged attack called 'ray' with no damage or other details listed. Any idea what that might be? I looked through her domains and other abilities and can find neither the source of the ray, nor any details about it. Maybe I'm just missing something.


thewastedwalrus wrote:
Ignotus Advenium wrote:

Stuff

...So, a creature with DR/epic would have natural weapons that, for the purpose of overcoming DR, are treated as having at least a +6 enhancement bonus....

So, for instances where a creature's DR is listed as "epic and magic" or "epic and evil" (and other similar instances) — do you think the parts after the and are technically extraneous?

I ask because it seems like there's no reason to have "DR 10/epic and magic" (using Julunggali as an example) or "DR 10/epic and evil," if epic = +6, and +6 overcomes the thing after the and due to material equivalency. Why are there existing instances of DR X/epic and material-or-alignment-goes-here?


From the UMR: "A few very powerful monsters are vulnerable only to epic weapons—that is, magic weapons with at least a +6 enhancement bonus. Such creatures' natural weapons are also treated as epic weapons for the purpose of overcoming damage reduction."

Where it says "...are also treated as epic weapons..." — I take that to mean that they overcome DR/epic, even though it says "...for the purposes of overcoming damage reduction."

If the intent was that their weapons are treated as if they have at least a +6 enhancement bonus, then that raises the issue of why there are many instances on the PRD of "epic and ___ ." Why would a creature's DR list "epic and magic" if magic is subsumed by epic? Against a creature with DRx/epic and magic, I can see a creature with DR/epic (itself) overcoming the epic part, but not the magic part.

To me, even if this holds:
A) Epic weapons are weapons with at least a +6 enhancement bonus (as the DR rule notes)

and this holds:
B) The natural weapons of a creature with DR/epic are treated as epic weapons

It doesn't necessarily hold that:
C) The natural weapons of a creature with DR/epic are treated as weapons with at least a +6 enhancement bonus

I know, it does seem that C follows from A and B, but that interpretation indicates that all of those entries with "DR/epic and ___" should simply be DR/epic. Some of you might say, "Yes, those entries are mistaken in a sense." Whereas I might say, "Those entries contradict C, meaning that C must not be what's intended."

Just thinking this through out loud — I don't feel too strongly about it either way. Thoughts?


Combat tiers from Tinkered Tactics work great if you can find them (currently unavailable here on Paizo.com).

Also, clear acrylic deck boxes work great — the kind with the top and bottom that are almost the same, but nest together. There's room underneath for minis, and the boxes happen to be 2" x 3" x 4", meaning you can get heights of 10 feet, 15 feet, and 20 feet, or double any of those if you stack a pair.

Here's an example.


Just for reference:

PRD wrote:
For creatures with spell-like abilities, a designated caster level defines how difficult it is to dispel their spell-like effects and to define any level-dependent variables (such as range and duration) the abilities might have. The creature's caster level never affects which spell-like abilities the creature has; sometimes the given caster level is lower than the level a spellcasting character would need to cast the spell of the same name. If no caster level is specified, the caster level is equal to the creature's Hit Dice. The saving throw (if any) against a spell-like ability is 10 + the level of the spell the ability resembles or duplicates + the creature's Charisma modifier.

LINK: Spell-Like Abilities


The rules text could certainly be clearer. My own interpretation is that you can't charge as part of a trample—you're using a full-round action to trample, so all you're doing is trampling, that's it (using only the movement part of overrun). Since it specifies a full-round action for trample, I think that overrides the "action" part of the overrun rules. From a RAI perspective, trampling and then getting an attack (or potentially a full attack via pounce) is unbalanced (too good), but I admit I'm guessing at that to a degree.

But, I think you can double move while trampling, in any direction, since overrun says "...during your move..." I know I said above that trample overrides the "action" part of overrun, but there's not much else to go by (repeat, text could be clearer). The double move is supported by this faq.

I certainly don't think you HAVE to charge. First, because I don't think you CAN charge. Second, if you HAD to charge, the trample text wouldn't say, "...no matter how many times its movement takes it over a target creature."


An aside (and perhaps overthinking it):

There's also the concept of slot affinity to consider. The idea is that certain types of bonuses and powers belong in certain slots. Some examples are the feet slot for movement, belt slot for physical stats, and eye slot for senses.

There's nothing set in stone, but it does affect balance and should at least be considered. It's why you don't typically see things like eye-slot items that boost your speed, and other similar mismatches. If you can get gloves that boost your AC, then that frees up the slots that typically boost AC for other purposes.

In a sense, part of the cost of an item is the precious, limited, popular slot that it takes up.

@Matt2VK — you're right... Add a little for magic missle immunity.


I agree with all the posters suggesting to compare vs similar items before going to the guidlines.

If you are going to follow the guidlelines to get your price...

Claxon wrote:
...Compare it to the rule that literally says armor bonus other than natural armor or AC is bonus squared * 2500. By the table reading it should be 40,000.

I agree wih this ^. (40,000 gp price / 20,000 gp cost)

AC bonus (other) = bonus squared X 2,500 = 4 X 4 X 2,500 = 40,000.

Since you mentioned gloves (slotted), that's it. If the item were slotless, then multiply by 2 again (80,000 gp).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Devilkiller wrote:

Since I don't see any rules for determining the size category of the Whirlwind I'm guessing that it has the same size category as the creature which created it...

I agree, and wouldn't try to determine the size category of the whirlwind by looking at its measurements and such. It's just the size of the creature that became the whirlwind. So, a Medium creature's whirlwind can't pick up or damage anything larger than Small.

There are several other threads that have discussed this issue, with posters questioning the same thing. I happen to think it's just an artifact of a small tweak made to the ability's text after it was picked up from the older language, from elementals (SRD).

Compare these two passages:
From the PRD's UMR whirlwind entry: "Creatures one or more size categories smaller than the whirlwind"

From dandwiki: "Creatures one or more size categories smaller than the elemental"

I think something just got lost in the transition, and that the size of the creature that forms the whirlwind is what's meant.


Also, a belt of dwarvenkind would work. It cost's more than you've set aside (14,900 gp), but it does provide substantially more benefits than just darkvision, such as a CON bonus and saving throw bonuses.


If you can cast permanency and darkvision, you can do it yourself for 5,000 gp.

It's permanent, but could technically be dispelled, so the higher the caster level the better, to make it harder to dispel.


Some of the arcanist's exploits are rather unique. A few that stand out to me are:

Counterspell allows an arcanist to counterspell as an immediate action, rather than the readied action that other casters must use to counter a spell. This makes a big difference in how often counterspelling actually gets used.

Metamixing allows an arcanist to add a metamagic feat to an already metamagicked spell (without using a rod).

Quick Study allows an arcanist to change her prepared spells on the fly (with spells from her spellbook), which adds a ton of utility. Other casters with a spellbook can normally only do this only once at best (via their bonded item).


Kotello wrote:
If I Bluff somebody into thinking it is a healing potion, but it is really a harmful spell like that, and they drink it willingly, would that bypass spell resistance and saving throws?

I don't think so.

In these results, I found this input from a developer, and there's this FAQ.


Kotello wrote:
What about Magic Missile? How would that work? Would the drinker be able to cast magic missile on somebody else or would he be hit with magic missiles himself?

The latter.

Potions wrote:
The drinker of a potion is both the effective target and the caster of the effect.


I think it should be a runestone, too, but don't have anything in particular to back that up. I settled on my decision rather quickly after skimming some other threads and reading both items.


@ Tangent101

That seems pretty clear to me, with a few tweaks. In one spot, you have "enchantment" instead of enhancement, and there are several instances of "damage resistance" that should be "damage reduction." Also, maybe say, "weapon special abilities such as..." Instead of, "weapon enhancements such as..."

And, I suppose it might help to reference the chart and/or the CRB section or page #.

Finally, It may be worth a quick search to see if it's been faq'd or addressed already elsewhere. (I haven't done that myself.)


@ Tangent101

I guess I take that to mean something like, "A weapon with this enhancement bonus is equivalent to this material for purposes of bypassing DR," rather than, "A weapon whose enhancement bonus and special abilities are equivalent to this total bonus counts as this material for purposes of bypassing DR."

Just above the chart, the text does specifically say "enhancement bonus," which is how I arrived at my interpretation.

Perhaps it's FAQ-worthy? The question would have to be written concisely to make it a good candidate.


@ Jeraa, yup that's right.

Interestingly, a +2 keen flaming burst bane weapon (+6 equiv) will overcome DR/epic, but won't overcome DR/silver, DR/cold iron, or DR/adamantine.

Although, if you can afford that, you might as well get it in one of those metals, or just skip an ability or two, and make the enhancement bonus +3 or +4.


Also good to note: A non-cold-iron magic weapon has to have an enhancement bonus of +3 to count as cold iron for purposes of bypassing DR. A magic weapon that is merely +3 equivalent, such as a +2 frost weapon, does not count as cold iron for such purposes.


Seems like quite the build. It did get me thinking about how vulnerable to dispel magic it might be. Without the beast shape IV in effect, is the build still "ok"?

Sidetrack regarding dispel DCs for this unique ring:
When I took a look at the ring, I noticed that it has an interesting facet where it has a caster level of 7th, but casts beast shape IV, a 6th level spell, which would normally require a minimum caster level of 11. This leads to a question/discrepancy about the DC to dispel the effect (not talking about targeting the item itself here, rather the spell on its wearer).

If you use the item's caster level (7) to determine the DC of the caster level check, the DC is 18 (11 + 7). I think I lean toward doing it this way, since the CL for spells cast from rings, wondrous items and such is typically handled that way.

If you use the minimum caster level that can cast a 6th level spell (11), then the DC is 22 (11 + 11). This also seems reasonable, and I would accept such a ruling at a table without much fuss. Going with CL 7th, though, might make the item better-balanced for its price, and seems closer to RAW (even though technically a 7th level caster can't cast a 6th level spell).

With dispel magic, there's also the option of targeting beast shape IV specifically, assuming the would-be dispeller had ID'd the spell. In that case, you target the DC of the spell with the caster level check, which results in a DC of 19 (10 + 6th level spell, +3 for the modifier from the minimum 16 INT required to cast a 6th level spell).

So, a dispeller would be rolling a caster level check against 18, 22, or 19, depending on the factors I listed above. At higher levels, this is not too difficult for an enemy spellcaster (say, level 10–14 or so, possibly with Dispel Focus or Greater Dispel Focus). Granted, the wearer could use another standard action to transform again, unless the dispel also included a rider effect (like Destructive Dispel).

Any thoughts?


Maybe pick a themed set from a lesser-used slot, such as body and/or chest. If the items' appearances are symbolic and matched, they might be memorable and cohesive for the group. For example, "our yellow sashes" or "our blue shirts".


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Calybos1 wrote:
Is there any way of boosting the CL roll?

An arcanist can increase his own CL by 1 by spending 1 from his reservoir (or CL +2 with potent magic exploit)

Also, Destructive Dispel is pretty nice—if the dispel works, the target is stunned for 1 round (edit: target gets a save).

And, if you target a specific spell, you're rolling against the spell's DC instead of the caster level +11. In certain circumstances, this is an easier check. Eg, a 14th level caster that cast mirror image on himself. As a normal dispel, you'd be rolling against 25 (11 + CL14). If you specifically try to dispel mirror image, it would be only 12 (10 + spell level 2) + the caster's casting stat modifier. Please correct me if I'm wrong about this.


Giant Angry Burning Stinkyface


Joe Lai wrote:


Now we draw a potion of lead blade and drink it as a standard action.

One small problem I noticed—that'll have to be a wand and a UMD check, since lead blades can't be a potion (because it has a range of personal).


The Acrobatic feat grants a +2 bonus to Fly skill checks.


Here's a feat and a shield special ability:

Ray Shield: Ray Shield's prerequisites are substantial and the shield may be damaged, so I imagine the feat is rarely taken. It doesn't boost your AC, but you can negate ranged touch attacks, including rays, up to one per round.

Mirrored: This ability primarily deals with gazes, but does increase your touch AC versus rays.


Here are 2 lists of results that help ferret out luck bonuses:

Results for "luck bonus" on PRD

Results for "luck bonus" on d20pfsrd

There are not too many, but a few things pop up: War blessing or fated bloodrager ability from destined bloodline, for example.


CBDunkerson wrote:
Place the center of a 30' radius circle anywhere within 25' + 5'/2 levels of the caster. Targets within the circle are impacted by the spell.

I believe the whole area, or any target, must be within the spell's range per this often-overlooked passage:

Magic wrote:
A spell's range indicates how far from you it can reach, as defined in the range entry of the spell description. A spell's range is the maximum distance from you that the spell's effect can occur, as well as the maximum distance at which you can designate the spell's point of origin. If any portion of the spell's area would extend beyond this range, that area is wasted...

For example, a fireball placed right up to the edge of a caster's maximum range would have a roughly half-circle shape, as none of the area would extend beyond maximum range. This would apply to individual targets that are out of range, too. Besides having to be within 30 feet of each other, all targets of hypnotize must be within close range.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ian Bell wrote:
Ignotus Advenium wrote:

earlier post:
I think the efreeti loses the immunity while in troll form. Here's my case (some of this has been mentioned above):

The efreeti's SQ in this case is as the spell giant form I. That's a polymorph spell, so this applies:

Magic / transmutation school / polymorph wrote:
While under the effects of a polymorph spell, you lose all extraordinary and supernatural abilities that depend on your original form

immunity entry in the UMRs indicates that immunity is either (Ex) or (Su)...

Univesal Monster Rules wrote:
Immunity (Ex or Su)

...so the efreeti loses it.

I suppose it could be debated whether the efreeti's immunity depends on its original form. I think it does, and admit that my case hinges on that.

Here's the thing, though; the efreeti has the (fire) subtype, and polymorph effects do not change your type. The (fire) subtype grants immunity to fire, the efreeti is not immune to fire just as a special efreeti ability. It seems to me to be very much clear-cut that the efreeti will not lose the immunity (or the vulnerability to cold, for that matter.)

I've read a lot of threads about polymorph effects and whether they change a creature's type, and there seems to be some disagreement on that count.

Wall of text about polymorph and creature type:
Arguments that they don't are often based around this portion of the polymorph entry:

Magic / transmutation / polymorph wrote:
Polymorph: A polymorph spell transforms your physical body to take on the shape of another creature. While these spells make you appear to be the creature...

and point out that it doesn't explicitly reference "type". Arguments that they do reference this line in the same entry:

Magic / transmutation / polymorph wrote:
...When you cast a polymorph spell that changes you into a creature of the animal, dragon, elemental, magical beast, plant, or vermin type...

Whichever position you take, some problems arise:

For the "they don't" crowd, just one that I can think of off the top of my head is that the knowledge check to identify creatures becomes muddied. As an example, a party coming across a human druid in the form of a lesser-known animal might want to roll a Knowledge (nature) check to identify the animal. But, it should be Knowledge (local) to identify, based on the druid's humanoid type—and it ends up all metagamey to sort out. Another issue that arises from this position is which spells would or wouldn't work, such as hold animal or hold person (using the druid/animal as an example).

For the "they do" crowd, there are issues, too. For example, you'd become immune to mind-affecting effects when polymorphed via a spell like undead anatomy if it changed your type to undead, which I don't believe is intended (the polymorph spells tell you what changes and what doesn't).

Having said all of that, I lean toward (and accept) your position that polymorph spells don't change your type. But, I still think an efreeti's immunity to fire depends on its original form, even though as you say, the fire subtype grants it that immunity. Consider the analogy of a dwarf, or really any creature whose type (or subtype) lists darkvision. Do those types or subtypes "grant" that darkvision just like the fire subtype "grants" immunity to fire? I'd say yes. Yet, darkvision is one of the specific things mentioned in the rules about polymorph spells as something that depends on a creature's original form, and is lost while polymorphed. I cut the snippet short in my 1st post—here's the longer version:

Magic / transmutation / polymorph wrote:
While under the effects of a polymorph spell, you lose all extraordinary and supernatural abilities that depend on your original form (such as keen senses, scent, and darkvision)

Just because something is granted by a type or subtype, doesn't necessarily mean that it's not dependent on its form. I could see an ability being granted by a type, and still being lost while polymorphed. The magical beast type grants a unicorn its darkvision, and the unicorn doesn't have darkvision as a special unicorn ability, yet, it would seem to lose its darkvision while polymorphed.

Did I improve my argument here? I don't feel too strongly about it, but still lean toward, "The efreeti loses its immunity to fire while a troll via change shape (giant form)."

As a "hot" creature from the Plane of Fire (curls of smoke), it just feels like an efreeti's immunity is dependent on its form.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think the efreeti loses the immunity while in troll form. Here's my case (some of this has been mentioned above):

The efreeti's SQ in this case is as the spell giant form I. That's a polymorph spell, so this applies:

Magic / transmutation school / polymorph wrote:
While under the effects of a polymorph spell, you lose all extraordinary and supernatural abilities that depend on your original form

The immunity entry in the UMRs indicates that immunity is either (Ex) or (Su)...

Univesal Monster Rules wrote:
Immunity (Ex or Su)

...so the efreeti loses it.

I suppose it could be debated whether the efreeti's immunity depends on its original form. I think it does, and admit that my case hinges on that.


ryric wrote:
One thing to remember is that unless you can talk to the summoned creature, all it can do is fight. That having been said, quite a few of the possible summons speak Common or have telepathy.

Good point. Many of the outsiders (such as archons) have truespeech (Su), which also works. Although, like common, not in a silenced area.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I agree, the summoner's turns taking longer than the other players' turns is a potential issue, but that can be avoided if the summoning player takes steps to keep things moving.

As a player, I pre-select a short list of candidates from the longer list, and then limit myself to that short list during a session. This reduces the time spent deciding what to summon, and 2 or 3 candidates are enough to cover most situations. With a short list, it also makes it easier to have stats at the ready, whether you prefer cards, hero lab printouts, or shortcut links on your device. Having your minis or pawns ready to go ahead of time helps, too.

Limiting yourself to a handful also saves time on your subsequent turns, because it's easier to "know your monsters" when the list is short. One last thing that helps is simplifying your monster's tactics according to basic roles, like attack, flank, or interpose.

I like that tip above about letting other players drive the summoned monster(s) now and again.


Realm of the Mammoth Lords interests me, partly because of a particular monster I have in mind, but I wouldn't be disappointed at all if it were Numeria.

1 to 50 of 192 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>