The alchemist sprinkles a small quantity of colorful dust that comprises the essence of all four elements. By favoring one element over another in this mixture, the alchemist temporarily changes the energy type of one weapon into another. For example, the alchemist can choose for a bomb to deal acid damage or a weapon with the shocking burst special ability to deal fire damage instead. Once an elemental effect is changed, it cannot be changed again until the anointing’s duration expires.
I feel like unless developers chime in on this —which seems highly unlikely to me(maybe the writer would come forward unofficially?)— I don't expect any definitive conclusion, but I'm still curious what you guys think of this.
Orichalcum Dust is an Alchemist/Investigator Annointing (available as/instead-of a discovery) from Arcane Anthology which says that it converts the energy type of the energy damage of a weapon to any other. However in it's flavor text it also mentions "four elements". Now whether sonic is an "element" might be irrelevant (debatable), but it is an energy type, and the description of the skill says "the energy type of one weapon into another" without listing any restrictions.
So it seems like sonic may not have been considered when this skill was created, however would it be considered too strong for the ability to convert to and from sonic? One could easily assert that they simply forgot that sonic was an option and that they would still allow it.
Alchemists already have the ability to take Concussive Bombs for instance (which does not waste a round of combat, and which allows changing bomb damage types on the fly. The only downside being dealing a little less damage). In fact, it would be a quite underpowered ability if one was to rule that each bomb has to individually have a round spend to alter the energy type, but even if it affected all bombs, there's no way for the player to deal multiple different elements of damage for the entire duration of the effect, which is also a downside (I suppose much less-so if it was sonic damage though).
I suppose another question would be would you allow the ability to work on all of a character's arrows/bullets/bombs or only one at a time?
Come to think of it, another issue with Orichalcum dust is that it doesn't state anything about special bombs. Would it still function to convert the damage of an Explosive Bomb to cold, while also causing the Explosive bomb to ignite the target with a cold fire? or maybe a normal fire?
This is a super obscure ability, as it seems like nobody on the internet used it or asked about it, except one case I found just a month ago asking the same question about sonic type. It would be nice to see a bit of use, but if people rule it a certain way then it will probably never really see any use.
It would be nice at the least to see someone wielding Lemongrab's sound sword. Granted that would be extremely weak and bad, but at least it would be cool.
I have just been ignoring this for the longest time. That said, I'm surprised I haven't seen anyone else talk about it or report it.
I don't know why, but for some reason the Paizo golem logo on the footer of every page is absolutely HUGE.
It's about 1100 or 1200 pixels high.
This is occurring on Firefox 61 for Windows. Doesn't occur on Chromium. I've tried disabling extensions, and it doesn't change anything (I only have 2).
I spent a very long time searching for this, and am surprised that I didn't find any answer: Is it following normal pathfinder rules to allow characters to purchase constructs just as they would items? Obviously a GM has last say, and would particularly be reasonable to limit the number —or even type— that they get, but I'm wondering about just a single typical construct, like a wood golem.
As far as I know it's not allowed in PFS. Although what rule(s) in PFS prevent it? That said, this is a side question; my main inquiry is not regarding PFS (Otherwise I would have posted in that forum).
I would think that it would be allowed considering the price for constructs is listed various times, but it never specifically mentions that they are normally purchasable. I guess they might be considered to be like custom-order magic weapons/armor?
I performed a search, and while difficult to find accurate terms, I surprisingly could not find any discussion about this.
Many creatures or NPCs in a game world may use polymorph spells to appear as something else. A good example of this would be a succubus, dragon, or a [humanoid or any intelligent race] spy.
My question is about what circumstances would players be able to notice that. Sure something like detect magic would obviously work unless it was masked, but I was specifically thinking more about using perception.
It brings up the issue of dealing with paranoid players as well, although that's not specifically what this is about; it's just curiosity.
Any polymorph effect counts as a disguise with a +10 modifier, and has penalties for being a different race or size (for example). Theoretically this would mean something like a dragon would be relying solely on it's disguise check to be disguised.
That said, even if it's disguise was terrible, the rules (disguise skill) seem to state that they'll get away with it unless the creature does something strange/remarkable (or unless they're disguised as someone that someone's seen before). This would be GM's discretion I suppose, but what are you guys' opinions on this?
Perhaps something I said is also wrong? Regardless, this is a hybrid discussion between both advice and rules, and I'm quite curious about it. Everything about the rules for this subject just seems strange, vague, or even outdated. Anyone have any better rule suggestions? (house rules)
You cause your own skin to peel off your body and animate as a magical creature you control. You may project your consciousness to your animated skin or return it to your actual body as a standard action. When your consciousness is in your body, you are helpless (except for transferring your will to your skin, or dismissing the spell).
Your possessed skin is identical to you in all ways, except the following: It has only half the number of hit points you had at the time you cast the spell, and cannot be healed above this maximum; construct type, traits, and immunities; Str 3, Con —; DR 10/piercing or slashing; and compression (as the universal monster ability). Your skin can take any actions you could normally take in your own body (such as to fight or cast spells).
When your skin leaves your body, your body’s hit points drop to 0. Your body cannot heal damage naturally while you have no skin, nor do spells that cure hit point damage work on your body; only regeneration (from a regenerate spell, ring of regeneration, the regeneration monster ability, or any other effect that can regrow missing limbs) or heal can regrow your skin and allow you to heal above 0 hit points.
If your body is regenerated before your skin returns to it, the skin dies and your consciousness returns automatically to your body. Your skin can be preserved with gentle repose and is suitable for any purpose that requires some of your flesh (such as a resurrection spell) or any magic or ritual that requires a creature’s skin.
When your skin returns to your body, you regain hit points equal to your skin’s remaining hit points. If the spell ends before you reunite with your skin or if your skin is killed while you are in your body, you remain helpless and at 0 hit points until your full body is restored to you (requiring powerful magic, as described above). If your body dies while you are possessing your skin, you die when the spell ends, regardless of how many hit points the skin has left. If your body or skin is slain with your consciousness in it, the spell ends and you are instantly killed.
This spell leaves long scars on your skin where it split apart, although these fade normally with the use of healing magic.
No Constitution score. Any DCs or other Statistics that rely on a Constitution score treat a construct as having a score of 10 (no bonus or penalty).
Low-light vision.
Darkvision 60 feet.
Immunity to all mind-affecting effects (charms, compulsions, morale effects, patterns, and phantasms).
Immunity to bleed, disease, death effects, necromancy effects, paralysis, poison, sleep effects, and stunning.
Cannot heal damage on its own, but often can be repaired via exposure to a certain kind of effect (see the creature's description for details) or through the use of the Craft Construct feat. Constructs can also be healed through spells such as make whole. A construct with the fast healing special quality still benefits from that quality.
Not subject to ability damage, ability drain, fatigue, exhaustion, energy drain, or nonlethal damage.
Immunity to any effect that requires a Fortitude save (unless the effect also works on objects, or is harmless).
Not at risk of death from massive damage. Immediately destroyed when reduced to 0 hit points or less.
A construct cannot be raised or resurrected.
A construct is hard to destroy, and gains bonus hit points based on size, as shown on the following table.
Proficient with its natural weapons only, unless generally humanoid in form, in which case proficient with any weapon mentioned in its entry.
Proficient with no armor.
Constructs do not breathe, eat, or sleep.
Note that Skinsend gives all construct traits (and presumably none of the features). The only traits I see not making much sense to transfer would be the ones talking about proficiencies. It's maybe debatable, but I don't see why/how a proficiency would be lost considering it's more a mind/skill-based trait, and that it doesn't say constructs can't learn proficiencies. If it intended to mean that they cannot become proficient in armor it should have said specifically that.
So aside from that probably non-issue, the main thing I wanted people's opinion on (and/or Paizo staff's) is the entry that says "gains bonus hit points based on size as shown in the following table". Do you think it will work for Skinsend? Aside from difficulties in figuring out how they'd interact with the conflicting information of halving hit points, I don't see why this wouldn't be included in the list of traits that the 'skinsent' target would get.
First of all I'd like an opinion if you think it's viable considering factors such as "[url="http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2plx9?Words-cannot-fathom-the-terribleness-of-Skinsend"]the terribleness that is Skinsend[/ur]" or other reasons.
Secondly, if you think it could/should be allowed, how would you propose it functioning in the order of calculations?
I guess I only see two methods: 1. add half the bonus (to half health); 2. add the full bonus (to half health)
Option 2 may be too strong, but maybe not (due to downsides such as dying at 0 health and not being able to heal by conventional means*.
Option 1 certainly seems reasonable; particularly if regular healing was allowed. If regular healing wasn't allowed, option 2 would maybe even be fair.
Lastly, do you think there's any other traits that shouldn't apply?
*Someone thought that the "cannot be healed conventionally" wouldn't apply, but personally I don't see why it should. It's one of the major downsides that makes it overall more balanced. Their argument was that healing was valid to do because Skinsend's description mentioned "you cannot heal past half your health", which would be pointless to say if you couldn't heal. I don't see that as justification, since fast healing, regeneration, and make whole would all still work to heal, making that "cannot heal past" not pointless.
5 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Answered in the FAQ.
So while the poison blog answered many questions, some people may still have some; I know I do.
The following will list some questions some people might have. The questions in color (OOC) are particularly important, since as far as I know they have not been answered by staff/development. The second question (first non-colored question) was addressed by the blog, but is somewhat in conflict with the PRD & CRB (the 3 spiders example), so I thought I'd mention it.
regarding quantity, timing, and stacking of saves:
Saves done on the poison's-target's turn (typically end of turn) always seem to be for curing the poison, never for saving against acquiring a new poison. I'm quite sure that is the case based on the blog.
However, I guess a weird exception would be if a creature poisoned itself though. In that case, would they have to roll 2+ saves on their turn? or just the 1+ (depending on dosage) for acquiring it? (in which case the poison 'timer' wouldn't start until next round)
Saves must ALSO always be made before the player's turn for the poisons that hit him before his turn (based on blog's example. With the exception of self-poisoning), but should/can all those doses bundled into one effectively concentrated dose, or rolled separately? Some people seem to say they should/could be, since that's what the CRB/PRD says/implies —and it saves dice rolls— but the blog seems to say that that's clearly not the case (scenario C).
Regarding failed-save-exposure of multiple doses of [contact/injury] poison:
When multiple doses of poison are acquired(failed save) outside of the target's turn, will each acquisition individually apply the poison effect/damage? Blog says yes, but is the answer still yes if only one save was given to the target for multiple poisons?(this question relies on the previous question, if [contact/injury] poisons could/should be stacked)
Note: I'm not talking about damage taken during the target's turn, but the damage from acquiring the poison. (if target fails a x+2+2 fort save would he still acquire 3 individual effect/damages, as well as the standard 1 effect/damage on the target's turn?)
I don't see why not, since they should both have as similar functionality as possible aside from having to roll less dice.
regarding poison with initial and secondary effect:
Subsequent doses of a poison never deals the initial effect more than once while the poison is still affecting the target. But, does that mean when a target acquires another dose of the poison, will the poison apply the secondary damage/effect instead, or simply apply no damage/effect at all since the initial already triggered?
touch injection: would touch injection function with ingested or inhaled poisons?
This is a quite minor question, but I thought I'd ask.
Poison conversion: would/should poisons converted by poison conversion result in their frequencies and onsets getting changed to ones appropriate for their new type? (injury poisons never have 10 minute onsets, so why would an ingested poison converted to injury poison still have a 10 minute onset?)
This is a big daddy question I would like answered in the FAQ
Question some people may wonder but which has already been answered by Jason Bulmahn:
If a save is succeeded for a poison during the target's round and more than 1 consecutive save is necessary to cure that poison, will the poison still deal it's effect/damage for that round?
Answer: no.
These are really minor questions that I also don't care much about, but maybe it's worth asking since they aren't answered as far as I saw, and some people might want to know.
Inhaled poison:
Do inhaled poisons have a limit of concentration to fit in x-sized flask? it's certainly a question where GM's common sense dominates, but if PF would officially just say something like "past 5 doses reduces range increment by 5' (or maybe 50%)" it might be nice.
Do inhaled poison clouds remain for any amount of time after they are deployed? (this is somewhat pertinent, but simple for DM to just house-rule)
While I'm certainly not saying people shouldn't give their opinions on this, I'm mainly asking these questions in hopes at least one or some of them (poison conversion, secondary effect) will be answered by developers and/or clarified in the future by FAQ.
Also, I guess if I missed something you can ask it here too. I was almost going to add "does concentrated inhaled poison increase AoE?" but it seems like a terrible question. I see no reason why it would if it already gets the higher DC & duration.
The title is probably sufficient enough to convey the question, but just to be clear I'll explain.
Do you think touch injection could apply an ingested type poison to a creature? It seems like the answer (RAW) leans towards no, but potions can be administered via touch injection and they're normally ingested, so by association it would make sense for poisons to work too.
By the same logic of saying no to ingested poisons, inhaled wouldn't apply either(because it's not being inhaled), or possibly even injury, where one could plausibly rule that you need to take damage for it to apply(which I don't think is true RAW, but it kinda makes sense to distinguish it from contact in some way). This sort of argument seems pretty convincing to say that ingested would apply via touch injection since it would otherwise make touch injection rather useless for administering poisons.
On a side note and somewhat related note, Do you think that a poison converted via Poison Conversion discovery will have it's onset and/or frequency changed to be appropriate to it's type? i.e. should an ingested poison converted to an inhaled poison still have a 10 minute onset and minutes frequency?
It seems rather strange to have the frequency and onset remain unchanged, and also maybe makes the discovery a bit weak.
D20PFSRD Poison Conversion entry
There seems to be a lot of different mention of various smoke/fog effects in this game, many which seem to have varying effects from others.
Here are some varying smoke effects (to which I'd like to mainly discuss 2 of):
- Fog cloud // obscuring mist (pretty straightforward but perhaps one thing could be clarified)
- Smoke from Pyrotechnics (which I guess includes Eversmoking bottle too)
- Smoke as an environmental hazard
Fog cloud obscures all sight past 5 feet. Pyrotechnics and Eversmoking bottle don't provide any detail on range, nor do they provide the detailed effects of the situation (all sight being obscured).
I would assume that it provides full [50%] concealment at all ranges to those inside the area; What do you think?
Would smoke from Pyrotechnics essentially cause blindness to anyone in the fog [who doesn't otherwise have some way to "see"]?
Would an attacker who can see through the smoke/fog get a bonus to hit versus fogged/smoked targets (due to the targets getting a penalty to AC)? I wouldn't think so, since It doesn't mention any of the effects of blindness in fog cloud's description or any other smoke/fog description for that matter, but it would follow logically.
Another thing that would be good to clarify is more specifically how Fog Cloud works.
Fog Cloud's description doesn't specify what a targeted creature needs to be within 5 feet of for it to be treated as 20% concealment— the attacker, or the outside edge of the cloud, or either. By logic, my opinion is leaning towards that if they're either on the edge of the cloud or their attacker is adjacent to them they'd be treated as 20% concealment, but I suppose only on the edge makes sense too, which is maybe the RAI?
The following is just asking the same question in a different way (giving both significant scenarios):
- Would a person within the last 5 feet of a fog effect have [20%] concealment or full [50%] concealment to an attacker outside the fog (and on the same side of the fog as the person on the edge)?
- Would a person 10 feet within the cloud (or more) have [20%] concealment or full [50%] concealment when adjacent to their attacker?
Lastly while on this topic, I'll quickly throw in the question: Would you consider Pyrotechnics smoke to stack with Solid Fog and/or stinking cloud or other effects? I guess there's not much reason to think that different fog effects wouldn't stack (and logically one would think that identical effects would not stack). I guess in real life creating new smoke would push other smoke away (that's all wind is, moving air, the air is just clear), so maybe that's a reason.
