Joe loves Rules's page

101 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


1 to 50 of 101 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
James Jacobs wrote:
Kalindlara wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
Joe loves Rules wrote:

How many legs does a kithangian have? The description says it is part horse and part scorpion, and there isn't a picture or a (x vs. trip) beside his CMD. Also... kithangians are super icky.

Thanks for being so available to your many, many fans! I love this thread.

There is indeed a picture of it in the book, but I can't remember off the top of my head how many legs it has. Eight or ten? Not sure. Someone out there surely has a copy of the Worldwound handy to count it up...

I had it two minutes after the question was asked... I didn't want to step on your toes, though. ^_^

The kithangian pictured is a biped. It stands on two horselike, hoofed legs. (Couldn't find the picture on the Web to link...)

Ah; there ya go. That's why it doesn't have a modifier to its CMD then! All is well and good!

Oops! You're right. There is totally a picture there. For some reason I didn't connect that it was same critter because I was imagining something on lots of legs. Thanks! :)

How many legs does a kithangian have? The description says it is part horse and part scorpion, and there isn't a picture or a (x vs. trip) beside his CMD. Also... kithangians are super icky.

Thanks for being so available to your many, many fans! I love this thread.

Don't know if this has been mentioned elsewhere as I didn't read all the comments, but bloodline guide suggests using arial bloodline arcana cross blooded with boreal bloodline to get snow shroud ability. This is impossible as arial bloodline is a mutated bloodline.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Probably time for a new thread with a new very specific question. What the original poster asked has been answered thoroughly. Questions about readied attacks (which is NOT what the OP asked), should be in one the many threads about them, or if they are truly original questions, in their own threads. This will keep these forums much more easily searchable and also help prevent people who are talking about different situations but don't realize it from arguing with one another.

RegUS PatOff wrote:

Joe loves Rules - I interpreted the OPs question as potentially working like this:

Offender with 30' move is 20' away
You have reach weapon
You have readied an action to attack and step 5' when this opponent enters one of your threatened squares

Offender moves 10', is 10' away in your threatened area, this triggers your readied action
You attack and step back 5', Offender is now 15' away from you
Offender moves 5' more, now back in your threatened area
Offender continues moving 5' more, triggering your AoO for your reach weapon
If these two attacks didn't stop the Offender (trips or fatal damage) then Offender ends adjacent to you (5' away), having moved 25'. Offender then attacks.

I've read a number of the trip-lock threads. IMHO most GMs will opt for this kind of flow - you get your attack for using a readied action and your AoO for using a reach weapon, but if they have the move, the opponent will get to you.

What you are describing is clearly a different kiting attempt from what the OP described. OP clearly described the step as the readied action and the attack as coming from an AoO and not readied action. This does not work for the reasons I stated above. Your described kiting attempt is an interesting concept that has different answers which probably deserve their own thread for the benefit of future rules seekers searching this forum.

No kiting, because this (the tactic described by the OP) would only get you one initial AoO anyway. After the first time, you're only 5 feet away, so the monster need only 5-foot-step in, which doesn't provoke. Also this is an AoO that the player would have gotten anyway. If all the player does is ready steps, he is trading doing anything (other than using a move action to do something besides move I suppose) for running away. And even that fails to keep the monster occupied if it stops chasing the player.

Also, if the monster feels like trading blows, it readies a swipe at annoying player next time he is in range and then moves somewhere such that annoying player will be in range after a 5 foot. Player gets his aoo, and monster gets its swipe.

another minor quibble: you can't take cross-blooded and tattooed sorcerer since they modify many of the same things.

LazarX wrote:
Dustyboy wrote:
so a two weapon warrior with two of those swords would make six attacks?
it's one of those things that doesn't stack... like the Improved Critical Feat, and a Keen-enchanted weapon.

Dusty, six?

Lazarx, why wouldn't they stack?

fortuitous takes 2 of your AoOs... just to clarify :)

Super necro!

But it appears unanswered. I looked to other abilities for a precedent and I found examples both of explicitly saying prereqs must be met and prereqs don't need to
be met for other abilities that give feats. Sooooo... anyone have an answer besides "expect table variation/ask your GM" or "well I would run it this way..."?

1 bite attack in your full attack

no matter the source(s) of your bite attack

You do not get additional bites or any other natural attacks from a high BAB

Small side note. Not all the feats in style's feat path are style feats. Many people assume they are because they incorrectly labeled as such on d20pfsrd.

Gwiber wrote:

Not sure where you get this isn't RAW, there's a reason all magic items (usually) come with a +X (competence, luck, etc) bonus in their description. Same bonus types do not stack with each other.

And you do know you can only wear, and have "in effect", two (magical) rings at a time, right? (since you mentioned three rings in your post)

I recommend rereading the thread. While the bonus type of the items wasn't mentioned in the original post, he's assuming they are the same bonus type. The thread is not about whether you can stack the int bonuses, it's about the skill ranks given by items with int bonuses.

Three magical rings is an example of a slot conflict.

Hope this clears things up for you.

The paizo PRD has the correct version.

lemeres wrote:
When they say 'no extra attacks', they mean 'no extra attacks',


lemeres wrote:
or more clearly 'this doesn't increase your number of usable arms as far as attacks go'. Sure, you can use a vestigial arm to attack, but that means one of your original arms has to sit there limply.


I'm on my phone so no link until this evening. But SKR, in explaining that very FAQ clarifies that it is only total number of attacks that matters.

How many attacks can a cat person (with claws) make? 4 (claw/claw/unarmed/unarmed)

How many attacks can a cat person (with claws) with 2 vestigial arms make? 4 (claw/claw/claw/claw)

note that this second cat person has to go get more claws somehow and can't make unarmed strikes in addition to this routine where if he had gotten his extra arms from being a synthesist or something else with out the vestigial arm restriction, he could make all 6 attacks (but not of course as part of a claw pounce).

also regarding 3), BAB has NOTHING EVER to do with how many natural attacks you can make... NOTHING! EVER!



1) yes

2) RAW yes - RAI maybe

3) same as 2, but as with all things related to vestigial arms, prepare for flames and argument! ;)

4) no

To say only the higher bonus item gives ranks is (maybe) RAI, but not RAW unless there is a written rule somewhere I missed. It also creates a bizarre situation where putting on an int bonus item could cause you to lose skills. Also as a general rule it shouldn't matter in what order you put your gear on if there are no slot conflicts (i.e. wearing 3 magic rings etc.)

That said RAI certainly seems to be that you get no more skills then you get int mod. Letting players pick skills from either (or any if more than 2 items) up to int mod seems like the easiest accomodation of (my interpretation of) RAI, but is no more RAW than saying only skill bonuses from highest (or first if they give equal int mods) int mod applies, and is perhaps less RAW then they all apply...

I probably wouldn't let them all apply at my table, though.

dragon ferocity is "a bonus on unarmed strike damage rolls equal to half your Strength bonus" not unarmed strikes get 1.5x str. So adding half a str bonus to the half you are already getting only gets you to 1x str mod.

Or maybe if you have a really picky DM and an odd str mod (example 5 because of 20str) you get str mod - 1, since half str mod (in example 5/2 round down = 2) plus half str (2 again) equals str mod minus one (2 + 2 = 4 = 5 - 1).

Krodjin wrote:
Yeah, he'd get the 1.5 from Dragon Ferocity on his claw attacks as well as his UAS...

Nope. Just full strength on claws or perhaps (depending how you read it) full strength minus one if your strength mod is odd.

Goodness there is a lot of confusion about how natural and unarmed attacks work. Literally every (non quoted) sentence of your post was incorrect, Trekkie.

Adopted can give you tusked.

You can use natural and unarmed attacks together.

The two weapon fighting line of feats has no interaction at all with natural weapons.

You can use unarmed attacks to kick even with out improved unarmed strike.

Using natural attacks does not give a minus to unarmed/weapon attacks.

Monks can only use ki to make an extra attack as part of a flurry (also they don't have ki at level 2).

Whew! Hope that clears some stuff up!

Well if you're going for extreme cheese, make sure to pick up all your magic item natural attacks. ;)

tsuruki wrote:

I'm pretty sure that you cannot use a natural attack and unarmed in the same action.

Otherwise many monster stat blocks would list an extra unarmed attack in addition their natural weapons. Unless you WANT to give the colossal dragon yet snother attack.

From the PRD:

Natural Attacks wrote:

You can make attacks with natural weapons in combination with attacks made with a melee weapon and unarmed strikes, so long as a different limb is used for each attack.

tsuruki wrote:

If unarmed attacks worked like that you wouldn't need the natural weapons, since you would just use 2 arms, 2 feet and a head but.

Regardless of class you only get as many unarmed attacks per round as permitted by your bab. Monk's exclusively have the ability to flurry.

I'm not 100% sure which post you are arguing against, but yes you are correct, you only get unarmed strikes up to what is allowed by your BAB (perhaps plus some for various feats). However for natural attacks you do just get however many attacks you have, and you can use both natural and unarmed/weapon attacks provided they don't share limbs.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Well if we're pretending we can use order of operations to get around clearly spelled out caps, shouldn't you add boon companion before some of the class levels? Then you can use all 4 Boon Companion levels...

ah yep. missed that post by drake. thanks nefreet.

Your head is not a limb for purposes of 1-limb per attack. The bestiary is full of 1-headed creatures with bite/gore or gore/gore, including the iconic tarrasque who actually has bite/gore/gore.

Oops yeah, I meant to say "if you haven't read the combat section in the core rule book *recently*..." Sorry about that!

Ciaran Barnes wrote:
Ciaran Barnes wrote:
MartianInvasion wrote:
Now my reading of Improved Unarmed Strike is that you can use it for kicks. So does this mean I now have 5 attacks: Claw, claw, bite, kick, kick?
I'm pretty sure no kicks, unless you are a monk.
This FAQ would be more clear if the mentions of monk were removed from it. A monk's Unarmed Strike class feature allows him to make kick attacks, among other things, while his hands are full. Why does this appear under monk instead of general rules for unarmed strike. Yes, I am inferring that mention of it here implies others cannot do it. Inference is part of deciphering rules, correct?

Kicks (and headbutts) as unarmed strikes are specifically called out in the core rule book. In combat the very first section under standard actions is attack. Second attack listed is unarmed attacks. If you haven't read the combat section in core rule book, I highly recommend it. Even with a decent grip on the rules and having read it more than once, I have found answers to my questions in there.


The Morphling wrote:
FLite wrote:

Grey area:

The GM could reasonably rule that both FS and IFS are essentially the same source, and even untyped bonuses from the same source do not stack.

Or the GM could rule that IFS is just adding 2 more bloodlines to the list of blood lines that grant +2.

Just because the GM can rewrite the rules of the game at will, doesn't mean that the printed rules are grey.

For the convenience of future searchers, this should probably be a seperate thread.

The Morphling wrote:
ajulieinajar wrote:
kadance wrote:
So, was the real question: How can I get an extra +2 Cha for sorcerer abilities on top of the +2 I already have?
I would say the question was more, are we sure I can't get that extra +2 to Charisma. But that's probably semantics lol

You can. A crossblooded sorcerer has both bloodlines, so you could be an Infernal/Rakshasa blooded Crossblooded sorcerer, take Improved Fiendish Sorcery, and have +4 effective Cha.

Enjoy the crippling drawbacks to the Crossblooded archetype though... :P

Er no. Even cross-blooded 2 of the 4 bloodlines still only get the +2 effective charisma.

yep! :)

Again... Yes, you can ignore the monk level req.

There is actually some debate as to whether you don't get to ignore the prereqs for elemental fist or you don't get to ignore elemental fist as a prereq (the interpretation I lean towards), but either way you can indeed take efreeti style at level 2.

LazarX wrote:
Spending a Ki point is a non-action that's tied into the ability you're spending the point for. That ability would be whatever action it would be called for. Spending a ki point to get extra attacks isn't a separate swift action, it's part of the full-atttack action you're powering up.

While this isn't a clear answer one way or the other on the original question. it should be noted that the above contains several pieces of misinformation. Pertinent corrections:

1) base monks can not use ki to make extra attacks during any full attack, only during a flurry of blows.

2) using ki to make an extra attack during a flurry of blows is a swift action.

If you cast magic missle modified by toppling metamagic and hit one target with all your missles, how many trip attempts do you make? In other words, if your caster level affords you 3 magic missles and you hit the same target with all 3, does the target take 3d4+3 once or 1d4+1 three times?

While this doesn't answer the agile + double slice question, it is worth noting that "shield" is a magic item slot, so you can only use one magic shield.

Sandbox wrote:

the faq does seem pretty stinky...

the more i read the more i agree that Paragon Surge deserved the nerf bat, but all this spell list mumbojumbo is a load of bs.

if you honestly take the SkillFocus+EH+IEH feat chain bully for you. you win a couple of spells. Nerf paragon surge so that you can't use IEH to grab spells. problem fixed.

my beef always had been with paragon surge it stunk of cheese hot off the presses.

Improved Eldritch Heritage(Arcane) is a Huge feat investment and backstory.

yeah since knowledge skills and arcane bond aren't useful at all... pfft

On a less snarky note, thanks for the FAQ paizo! I'm looking forward to further clarifications and loop-hole closings. Nice job!

Artanthos wrote:
Joe loves Rules wrote:
hot demon babes - as noted above by Justin - for a +2 or +4 infernal bonus

I have better uses for hot demon babes.

Yea, it is definitely profane, but what the heck.

Oh you're right. It is a profane bonus rather than an infernal one.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

hot demon babes - as noted above by Justin - for a +2 or +4 infernal bonus

Ohhhh. I get it now. Thanks! :)

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm a little confused by the this FAQ. Could you give an example of what is not allowed?

Is the idea that bloodline spells can only be cast from sorcerer spell slots? And similar abilities behaving similarly?

Also you get a stat bump every 4 levels...

Kazaan wrote:
Keep in mind that, while bleeding damage doesn't stack, you may still have multiple sources of bleed damage. Say, for example, you get hit with a 1d4 bleed, a 1d6 bleed, and a 1d8 bleed. Usually, we'd simplify this and say you just have a 1d8 bleed. However, this is incorrect in the same manner as multiplying critical based on a single roll rather than rolling damage twice (ie. 1d8 crit by rolling 1d8 and multiplying the result rather than rolling 2d8). You're supposed to roll 1d4, 1d6, and 1d8 and take the highest value among them. You could very well roll a 4 on the 1d4 and a 2 on the other two dice.

Yes, this is all very true. And RAW you would roll it all every turn (but of course only use the highest).

I'm assuming we're talking hp damage bleeds only. Otherwise it gets more complicated...

from the PRD:
Bleed effects do not stack with each other unless they deal different kinds of damage. When two or more bleed effects deal the same kind of damage, take the worse effect. In this case, ability drain is worse than ability damage.

Bleed damage does not stack. One check stops bleeding.

You can even intermix kicks and arrows in a full attack.

off the top of my head, some ways of standing:

it's a talent for a rogue or ninja (free action but still provokes)

ki stand is a 1-feat option if you have a ki pool (swift action and no provoke)

monkey style lets you attack normally from prone or stand with out provoking as a move or make a DC:20 acrobatics check to stand as a swift (no provoke)

blessing of fervor is a 4th level cleric spell (swift no provoke)

I think there are several archetypes and a couple of prestige classes.

So basically, I don't know a way for everyone to do it with just one feat, but there are several class based options that cost approximately one feat or less.

thaX wrote:

Not sure about the 5 foot step, I have had it ruled both ways in game. My understanding is that standing up takes the place of a 5 foot step, even though it provokes. If the threatening enemy has combat reflexes, moving away in the same turn has clobbered me in the past.

I also can agree that it makes sense to be allowed to 5 foot step after taking a hit when the character stood up. That would make sense to me, but, again, a GM in a game has ruled against this a couple of times.

Standing up is not a 5-foot-step equivalent. It definitely takes your move action.

1 to 50 of 101 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>