Ju-Mo.'s page

Dasrak just a quick question.

As far as I can see, all people told you that it is just too strong.
And that a Sorcerer doesnt really need to be unchained.
He has no real problems (neither to strong, nor to weak).

Ever point I read is like:
A: "Sorerer are fine, your idea is either unnecessary and/or vastly overpowered"
You: "No its not [with arguments]"
B: "Yes it is [also with arguments]"

If nearly all these experienced players have the same opinion, maybe they have a point?

I for one have the same opinion. The Sorcerer is fine.
And ALL of your changes make him stronger. I have seen a lot of Sorcerer in my time and not ONCE I thought "oh its weak, oh it needs a rework"
And non of my players have ever thought this.

Rouge, Barbarian, Summoner (fighter and a few others) were either in discussion or just got houserules to make them more fitting for us.
Some needed a few session to figure it out, some only needed a OneShot to see that maybe some changes wouldnt be so bad (Summoner with pounce...)

But never the Wizard, the Cleric or the Sorcerer. They just work.

Yes you can.

Its a simple math formula.
You have the price that it costs to buy the stave and the price to create the stave (if there are no expensive material components, thats always half the price). If you just go with, 1 charge per spell.

So if you want to buy it,it is:
Spell Level x Caster level (minimum 8 or whatever you need to cast the highest spell, whichever is higher) x 800 for the first spell
+
SL x CL x 600 for the second spell
+
SL x CL x 400 for the third and every following spell.

If you want to craft it, it is half of that:
SL x CL x 400 +
SL x CL x 300 +
SL x CL x 200

If you just want to have disintregrate (as a wizard SL = 6, CL = 11)
6 x 11 x 400 = 26.400 GP, and thats it.

However, because having only one spell on a stave is kinda cheesy you want to make a stave of rays with disintrigrate, ray of exhaustion (3rd level) and scorching ray (2nd level).

So it goes like:
6 x 11 x 400 (disintegrate) +
3 x 11 x 300 (ray of exhaustion) +
2 x 11 x 200 (scorching ray)
= 26.400 + 9.900 + 4.400 = 40.700 GP to craft this stave of rays.
And 81.400 to buy it.

You can add metamagic to each spell (one, two or all), you just have to adjust the price.

So lets say we make a intensified disintregrate (7th level, 13 caster level), a maximised scorching ray (5th level) and a normal ray of exhaustion (3rd level).

7 x 13 x 400 (intensified disintregrate) +
5 x 13 x 300 (maximised scorching ray) +
3 x 13 x 200 (normal ray of exhaustion)
=36.400 + 19.500 + 7.800 = 63.700 to craft it.
Or 127.400 to buy it.

You can make it cheaper if you use more charges for a spell.
But thats another topic and in most cases it isnt that useful (only if you hardly ever use the staff and have a lot of downtime)

So I have another question, purely theoretical to be honest.
It would never happen at my table because I´m very clear about:" Pls dont abuse rules" and my player respect that.
And for over-time effects I tell them that they need to make the decision for the round (who has the ring of fire resistance, closing the eyes, averting the eyes etc) so that it has any effect.

What if at the start of his turn a charakter has the Smoked Googles on, he does make his save (DC 20, he roleld a 24 (Fort +10, Rolled a 6 and +8 from soogles) and than takes them off?
Another roll?
Remembering the roll and substracting the bonus to see what happens?

I know there is no RAW answear for that (or their is and he made his save so he is save for the round), but I´m really interested in solutions.

It could happen, that he moves away from an enemy, the enemy gets a attack of oppertunity and sunders his goodles. Nearly same scenario as above but the PC wasnt the one responsible for the removign of the googles.

I would tell him, that if he decides that he averts his eyes (or closes them) nothing now would happen and that if he decides that he opens them fully he either takes the 20% miss chance, as if the googles are still there but he has to adjust his eyes to the new brightness (which saves him from the gaze but gives him a 20% miss Chance, what a coincidence), but that at the beginning of his next turn the new chosen eye status would account for his save/chance of save etc

Just a question, but arent smoked googles only work if you wear them the whole round?

I always thought that protection from over time DMG/attacks only work if you have the protection for the whole round, not just a part of it.

If you close your eyes the whole time and open it just for your one vital strike attack, you have to make the same save that you would have to make it you never closed your eyes at all.

As I see it, its the same with a ring of fire resistance 30.
If the whole party is in a burning house (4W6 fire DMG each round for this scenario). You are immung to the DMG (max 24 fire DMG) as long as you wear the ring.
If you take it of you take the DMG, even if you just take it off walk around and take it on again.

The moment you take the Smoked Googles off and you look at the enemy that has a gaze attack (means you arent closing your eyes or looking at his feet) you have to make the Save.

I just realized that if would be a problem if you already rolled with the +8 bonus, but I always tell my players that to be protected from such attacks they have to be protected for a whole round for it to work.
So that was never the case.

Am I wrong with telling them that they have to be protected for the whole round to earn the benefits of the protection from over-time effects?

Every 9th level caster has one really strong class feature, casting 9th level spells.

That aside all have some abilites to get over the lower levels.
The shamen has hexes beginning with level 2. Depending on what hex he took, it could be better (Healing, for extra healing) or worse (Vortex spell, stagger if you crit with a spell) for low levels if he hits bad.

Every 9th level caster that I have seen in lower levels depens to a degree on d20 rolls. Either for cantrips or for weapon attacks because his ressources got used up.
Sadly he doesnt have any DMG cantrips, like arcane 9th level caster.

So the only thing he can do is keep hitting with his crossbow/dagger and moving in a good position.
What could help are the total defense action (+4 AC) or fighting defensively (+2 AC and -4 to attack). If he doesnt hit either way, take the -4 to attack, move into a flanking position and give the fighter the +2 flanking bonus.

Or take the total defense and hope the enemies dont roll that well.
With a shild and a medium armor, he should have a decent AC and with total defense it should be hard to hit him.
10 + 6 (breatplate) +2 (shild) + 4 (total defense action) = 22 AC + Dex.
Should help him to stay alive until he gets more spells

You also could make it a sorcerer instead of a wizard.

There is no really good bloodline for illusion spells, but the Rakshasa Bloodline makes it harder to recognize which spells you cast.
Which can be good if you use a lot of Illusion spells.

Otherwise, Fey bloodline is thematically nice for gnomes imo, and it gives a +2 to your save-DC against compulsion spells. Which can be really nasty.

As there are no rules you can argue both ways and both side can say: "But mine is RAW and yours isnt".

There is no ingame rule for observing actions. None.
We just assume some things because
a.) it needs to be done so that one can play the game
b.) we have a reality that shows us a a few things

Not all Actions are observable. Thats just a fact.
Most actions are observable, because most action change the status quo.
But some actions DONT change the status que, so the only thing you can observe is that status quo DOESNT change (which in itself is in observation).

However: You can NOT know for what reason no action to change the status quo was taken. That would be mindreading. There are spells for that, but we let them be for this case.

For example a telepathic bond conversation that exceed the limits of a "free action" and is deemend an full round action.

The NPC or the PC just dont move, but you hae no idea why they dont move or why they dont attack/cast spell/run etc.

You just see them standing still. Ofc you succed in you perception check to see the PC/NPC standing, but thats in no means a way to know what they are doing. (Well there is a feat "Telepathy Tap", and it works with sense motive, not with perception)

As you see, there are action which you cant see and who are not observable (at least not, if you dont have a really specific feat).

So who says which actions are observable and which are not?
As said there are no ruels for either case (and as you said correctly to make an attack of oppertunity you need to see some action) and a few actions are not oberservable.

If there are rules for both cases, and a few cases are just not ruled, its totally up to the GM and the table how to handle it.
Thats a point where you use b.) you sense of reality.

And not every readied action is observable, thats easily proven, see above. So if a specific readied action is observable or not, isnt ruled, its ALWAYS up to the GM how to handle things.
I really dont care, if someone says, "every readied action is observable" or "no readied action is observable". For one it doesnt concern myself and my tables and second, as there is no rule, its just GM concern.

I just wanted to clarify that there are no rules for this topic and you sometimes need real world logic to handle these things.
If you handle it as if there was a ruling, pls be my guest, but its not RAW.

The only thing I dont really like is how you always take perception and not sense motive, as it is obvious the more appropriate skill for sensing the motive of another, but as said, not my table.

The OP has a lot of answears to his original question and a few new things he can consider and a few differnt opinions, so he can take his pick how he wants to handle things.

Probably not the information you expected to receive but I am a high-functioning autistic with ADHD as are a large portion of most TTRPG players.

You are right, but I highly appriciate the answear :D

That sounds like a nice addition to the rules, maybe I have the time to look it over and impliment some of these things in my second group.
The first being in Book 6, in the last Dungeon, dont have any real need for a kingdom anymore, tbh. At sometime its a self running system, which only needs goverment if you are at war.

I cant really say much to UR, because I dont have it.
Is it a offical origianl Paizo Pathfinder product or a third party?

4.) Yes it means you have to decide, what is more important for that hex.
To be able to travel through very fast, or do give you extra BP every turn.

5.) I dont know the official ruling, but I just took the city grid and draw an aqueduct in in (or let the players draw it in)

6.) The CR of the highest monster the PC take in.
With animal handling it could be a dire tiger (CR 8, so loyelty +2), but they still have to find it and bring it in.
If they find something other (like a Wyvern) they can just beat it unconsious and take it in. Or maybe bribe it, with food or money.

7.) Yes. If you have 5 granary, you could have 25 BP in total saved.
If you save 4 each turn, it goes like: 0-4-8-12-16-20-24-25.
Everything over that is just wasted again.

8.) The whole kingdom. Because the stat just always represent the whole kingdom, so everything that modifies that stat modifies it for the whole kingdom.

9.) No you cant. You dont get "+1 edict", you get "maximum of 2 edicts".
If you have 10 palaces you dont get 10 x "+1 edcit", you get 10 times "maximum 2 edicts" which results in maximum 2 edicts.

That all said, kingdom building rules are far from perfect.
And its seldom gamebreaking if you houserule some things.
The moment in the game you have 2 palaces, your edicts doesnt change very much anymore. If you need to change 3 in one month, a lot has to go wrong for the PC. In most cases waiting a month doesnt hurt that bad.
I think in my group that will finish book 6 soon, that last time the changed their edicts was in-game 3 years ago.

I play kingsmaker the second time now, with different groups.
While Kingdom building is fun, it doesnt really help in breaking the game, as long as the PC dont hord lots of BP and take them all for themselves and their equiptment.
However to do the long in-game runing time, item crafting is the real "game breaker". Too strong and too specialist equipment of a powergaming group can break any AP, and Kingsmaker gives the players the time to do it. But that also only if abused, if used moderatly its perfectly fine. (like always with all rules)

Both groups are totally different from their playstyle and their choices, however both kingdoms evolved naturally. With a good mixture of saving BP for tougher times and spending it on buildings that would make sense for a kingdom.
"We have problem with local bandits... well we should build a prison soon" and so on.

Your last quoted statement then loses validity.

No it doesnt.

Because you accused someone of "nope, you are reading into it and adding assumptions and requirements. ..."
And if their ist no RAW, everything is an assumption.
Thats all I said.

I know perfectly well, that you need these assumption sometimes to play the game.

That said, I pointed out that if there are no rules, its a GM topic and that the OP wont get an answear here.
Just extra opionions on how to handle the situation, but he will never get an RAW answear.

The difference between the things you pointed out (moving away for a attack of oppertunity, spell being cast etc) is, that this are all things you can really see.
A readied action cant be seen, its a mindset. And as long as you cant read minds its really hard to see.

Or to be precise it depens on how much logic do you want?
Sometimes readied actions are more easy to see (a bow with a drawn arrow is easy to spot, even the genral direction can be spot), some readied actions are hard to see (If he makes a move if drop my weapon) and some are impossible to see (If he attacks my friend I (a sorcerer) cast a still and silent invisbility on myself)

And even these examples are highly debatable.
And as long as something is higly debatable its all assumptions and a GM call.

That said, perception is to see things and sense motiv is to interpret things.
Percetption is to see that he has drawn a weapon, sense motiv is to interpret it as: "He wants to attack" " He wants to drop his weapon" "He wants to pretend to attack" "He just likes his new sword"

To see that a persion draws his sword is easy, to know what he wants to do with it is not so easy until he did what ever he wanted to do.
You can guess, but you cant know.
Sense motiv lets you know what he wants to do with his drawn sword.
If you roll high enough for whatever DC the GM sets (because there are now rules so GM call, if and how high the DC is)

Some with a readied action.
You see someone who doesnt attack his turn, maybe he is waiting his turn until his buddy flankes the enemy. Or maybe he readied an action for something.

To tell how much an readied action is seen is a GM call.
And because you see you enemy on the battlefield all the time, perception is in my opionion the wrong skill for it.
I would call for a sense motiv check to see if you interpret the drawn sword as a readied action, a wait action or maybe something else.

And yes that are all assumptions, non of this is RAW, beacuse there is no RAW on this matter. If you think perception is the right call, pls use it. I think sense motiv ist the right call, so I will use that.
And if you allow all your players to always know what exactly the enemy is planing and reading ... pls do so, its you table not mine.
But its as much RAW as my sense motiv or anything else.
Its just a GM call, because there is no RAW.

Does anyone have any ideas of how to snap me out of this dumb mindset and allow me to finally enjoy the support types I love so much conceptually? Like, I have lots of fun when I trap a few enemies in a pit so they aren't a problem for a bit, And I love healing and buffing my allies... I just feel like I don't do enough...

Because its mostly a mind think, maybe some facts can help?

With just his "Inspire Courage" he dealt more DMG than any other (including an old mix-maxed pounce Eidolon) party member.
How?
Well simple math, they were lvl 11 at the time, so its a simple +3 to hit and +3 to DMG.
Means every attack the fighter, the Eidolon etc 3 DMG were "his DMG"
If the eidolon hits with 3 of his 5 attacks and the fighter with 2 of his 3 attacks, 15 DMG were only dealt through the bard.

And every attack that uses the +3 to hit (fighter has a +20 to attack, rols a 5, so 25 total and the armor class of the monster is 27, so he doesnt hit UNLESS the bard sings which gives him another +3 for 28 total) is ONLY the bards DMG, because without him no DMG.

This simple calculation showed our bard, that he did by far the most DMG of the whole group. Indirectly ofc.
The player was saticfied and continued to play his bard until his bard found true love and retired with 3 children.

Just because you dont deal a lot of direct DMG, doesnt mean you contribute less in a fight.
Healing and keeping the party alive, singing as a bard, countering the enemies spells or just a stone wall to split the enmies are hugh contribution to a fight.
You wont see a direct result, that tricks your mind into thinking you did nothing good or you wasted your turn but thats wrong

If you play a healer, everytime someone doesnt go down because of your heal, so that he can get another full attack in, the whole DMG of his full attack are only possible because you healed him.
You could say its your DMG.

Maybe this helps.

And yes support charakters sometimes have turns where they to "nothing" like shoting with a crossbow. That sometimes feels a little bit underwhelming. There is no way around it.
Spritual weapon helps a little bit (you can still attack and deal a little bit of DMG) or a crossbow.
And you can always ready an action to shoot the caster the moment he wants to cast something. He could fail his concentration check, so why not try it.

Well I always thought of light like an area, which can be seen nearly indefinitely, if there is no obstacle.
And if the light source is further away you just take the light source as your point from which you calculate the distance that you can see.

If a torch illuminate an 20 foot area, anyone who can see the torch sees this area (if there are no further obstacles) in bright light.
Normal mali because of range still apply, but otherwise their is no reason to not see it.

If I stand 45 foot away from a torch (20 foot bright light, 20 foot dim light) I see everything very clearly, but the one holding the torch wont see me.

If you look at the real world, its the same.
If I sit in a dark room I wont see anything. If someone 50 foot away lights a torch, I wont see which colour my clothing has, but I will see what colour his clothing has. If he is further away it depens only on range how much and how good I can see him and his equipment, but as long as he is holding the torch, I dont have any problems with the light.

nope, you are reading into it and adding assumptions and requirements.

Not to be rude, but there are NO rules for observing a readied action.

I´m on board with a sense motive check.
Perception would be, where is the creature, which weapon does it wield etc.
But what their intention are, is normally a sense motive check.

For the OP, there is no rule that tells you what will happen.
Overrun is a possibility (but would give Person C an attack of oppertunity unless A has improved overrun) and only works if C is no more than one size category larger than A.

If A doesnt wanna make an overrun maneuver, there is no rule for what will happen.
A GM can allow him to just stop (and wasting his whole turn), to target C with his charge attack (if he moved at least 10 feet) or even say well you moved a little bit, but you can stop before you hit C and even spend you sandard action as you see fit (if A moved less than his movement before his stopped).

For a GM-call I find it important to know, when did C interrupt A's Charge. Right at the start of the charge (before A moved his first 5 feet), nearly at the end of the charge (when A is only 10 feet away from B) or somewhere in the middle?

But as said, that purely GM territory and at least in my knowledge there are no rules for what happens if a charge action is interupted by an readied action.

Thanks. I just envisioned what power a vampire with the ability to turn into a bat swarm and two levels as a rogue would have.

Not the one the CR table suggest, that I can tell you :D

However it can make for an interesting encounter, where players have to think outside the box (or just running away)

there were some other things going on in the scenario that made the encounter even more challenging

Thats another point, some people (my younger self included) totally miss.

If you are strictly talking RAW (and ignore that CR is ALWAYS a tricky thing), than you can make some really broken stuff.

Especially if you take class-levels and templates.
Thats why their is a sentance like: "Compare the monster to other monsters too see which CR it should be" and "generally it gives +X to CR".

As someone who likes to build his own monsters and to tweak existing ones, I learned it the hard way.
Some times you get a monster which is weaker, sometimes its totally on the spot but more often than not you get something much stronger.
And it all depends on you party (if you make a monster as an encounter)

There are monsters I would never ever give monk-class levels (2 levels in Monk gives you +WIS to AC and evasion), because its just so strong. At least not for a +1 CR adjustment.
Some with paladin/antipaladin (CHR to all saves)
Some monsters with +2 WIS, +1 CHR, doesnt really matter, but if you look at higher level Monster, like a Balor or special ones at lower CR, their stats are just not build for class levels.
A Balor with 2 class levels in Antipaladin would get +8! to all of his saves through his CHR alone. It doesnt really matter what you will tell me, but +8 to all saves is not a +1 CR adjustment.

Sometimes people forget this (and I really thing sometimes they dont see how strong some monsters in AP's are).
Its not about the class level alone, ist about the combination of stats/abilities and class levels/templates.

Ever had a swarm with levels in rouge or monk?
You know the one you can only DMG with AoE spells which are mostly Ref Saves? And giving them Evasion, so that they are nearly invulnerable.
Like a Bat swarm (CR 2) with 2 levels in rouge.
+3 to Ref from the class +2 from Dex (+4 Dex for class adjustment) and evasion.
Thats a "CR 3" creature with a +12 Ref, evasion and swarm abilites.
And I bet a lot, that most level 2/3 partys would die against this monster.

CR is a tricky thing.
If in some AP some writer said, ok this solar is CR 25, thats fine.
There is no right or wrong and there are very few CR 24/25/26/27 monster to compare your monster too. And the monster that are existing all have a LOT of special abilites which makes it much harder to judge how strong it really is.

Thats just to this:" But they say its only ..."
Yes and they also say: "CR is tricky, compare it and adjust it it seems necassary"

For the question: Why there are not more PAL 20 Solar or Anti paladin 20 Balor Monster?
There is no answear, there just isnt.
You can explain it like:
"There are just not enough wars/EXP farming to get from CR 22 to CR 23 for more than 1 creature every 100 years"
"It takes a god a lot of effort to promote a creature in his service to so much power, and than he has to allow another god do to the same, so they rarely do that"
"There are not much souls who can handle such power, so even if you tried to keep your class levels only one in a billion can keep a few of his class levels"

Or any other reason you like.

The metagame reason on the other hand is simple:
"You just dont need a lot of monsters with a CR over 20"
So why bother making them? In all my years of playing I can count how often I needed a CR 21+ Monster in a campaign on one hand.
Not even talking about CR 25 or even CR 30 (With the expection of "Warth of the Rightous")

I'm not saying that Mythic isn't powerful, I haven't played it yet, so I don't know, all I'm saying is that it seems that many of the things it gives can be obtained by a regular character.

Your spell caster example - easily duplicated by a metamagic rod of quicken.

Fighter, Haste will give an extra attack at full BAB. (There are a number of full BAB classes that can self haste). Not to mention the feats Many shot and Rapid Shot

Barbarian that can teleport and make full Attack - Multi class as Magus/Barbarian.

agreed, it's not ideal - I'm simply saying it's possible.

As I said, with specific charatker builds you can do the same things mythic people can do too.

In case of the caster you could cast as a swift action AND use a matemagic rod, but thats not whats so powerful.
You can have the perfect spell for every situation (if you know the enemie and the spells). And that with mateamagic (if you have the talents and the level isnt higher than the highest level you can cast) and as a swift action.

Hatse is something the mythic charakte also gets.
It was a "non buffed" situation, just because mythic charakters have at least the same buffs or its a situation where a buff spell would be wasted.

You barbarian example is perfect.
You can do this, but ONLY with a specific charakter build, where you sacrafice things. Mythic just says: "You can do it"
Every charakter build can do it. Not just a BRB/MAG or a Monk or other specififc builds.

I´m well aware that you can simluate most mythic abilites with the a specific charakter build on a high level.

But mythic gives this ability options to every build and very early at that.

In WotR you get your first mythic tier at level 6 i think.
Which means you than have a Sorcerer 6/1.
Which can cast 4 level 3 spells and you know 1.
With you 5 mythic powers you can cast additionally 5 quick level 3 spells AND this 5 spells can be every spell that you want it to be and they come with a caster level bonus of +2.

You took haste as your spell known, but now you have a flying enemy?
Cast Fly as a swift action on the fighter and haste him with your standard action.
The flying enemy can cast deeper darkness on his turn?
Ok now cast daylight as a swift action and magic missle as your standard action.

A lesser metamagic rod is 35.000 GP, thats a little bit much for a level 6 charakter. And even if he found one, he would have used 2 of his 3 daily uses on one encounter.
With mythic you another have 3 quick spells if you like. And the spells dont even have to be your known spells.
Ofc you could habe a scroll flying and a scroll daylight, buts its highly likely that you dont have them or at least not a lot of them at this level.

Mysterious Stranger you could use your mythic talent at 3rd level to get it a second time at third level.
However to be honest, I didnt look it up and totally forgot that its a 3 tier ability and that without the mythic feat you would be only able to take it one time.
Is quiet some time that our group played WotR (we finished book 5 and than the GM wanted to take a break, because being the GM was more work than he thought, normally I´m the GM but he wanted to try it) and I just rememberd, that our fighter sometimes didnt even roll his attack rolls and just his DMG, not even carring for crits.

@TxSam88
There are a lot of things that mythic gets that makes it broken.

You get another ressource (mythic power: 3 + 2x mythic tier).
You can to a lot of stuff with this ressource, a lot of this stuff is a swift action, like for a wizard: Cast any spell (with a standart action or less) of you spell list of a level you can cast as a swift action.

So a level 12/3 wizard, hast 9 mythic power.
And on the first round of combat he can cast any spell he wants from his spell book as a standart action and than cast any spell of 6 or lower level on spell list as a swift action, with a +2 bonus to his caster level.
If he knows his spells, he most likely knows the best spell for this encoutner/situation.
He even can apply any metamagic feat he knows (as long a the spell level is not higher than what he would be able to casst)

Thats something he normally cant do and not at this rate.
If you say you just need 2 extra perfect swift spells per encounter, he can fight in 4 encounters per day. Thats a lot and with every mthic tier it gets better.

For a figher there is a mythic path ability, that gives you +5 on you
subsequent attacks.
So a fighter 12 with normal +12/+7/+2 who uses it 2 times gets +12/+12/+12, which means with another mythic path ability nat 1 isnt a fail, you hit nearly every monster every time without even rolling.
Just because even in normal games a figther often hits with his first attack if he rolls higher than a 1.

Another thing is:
Only magus or a specific charakter build can teleport/move everywhere on the battlefield and make a full attack.
But he has to use his spells and he still only attacks as a magus.
So at level 12 he hits with a BAB of +9/+4.
You dont want to give this ability to a fighter/barbarian/paladin.
But thats exactly whats happening with mythic.
Now a paladin can to this AND he hits with +12/+12/+12 AND a nat 1 doesnt fail.

You just get more options to choose from and you can choose more option to optimise you charatker. Which means if you optimise you charakter you can optimse him even further/more.

That you get +2 on any ability score every second level, just further optimises your charakter.

You are right a lot of charakter builds can to stuff a mythic charakter gets with one or two mythic abilities.
But one ist your whole charakter build/class choise and one is just one or two of 10 mythic path abilies or 5 mythic feats you get.

Yes it should be option 1.)

There is nothing in the spell discription of mythic spells that say otherwise.
If you pay 2 points you get the augmented version with the extra effect.
The extra effect just says: „As a move action you can move the blade barrier“

Nothing else, no extra cost.
Otherwise it would say: „As a move action you can spent 2 additional Points to move the BB“

It’s simple:
You spend 2 points, you get the augmented version. The extra effect of the augmented version is: „As a move action you can move the BB“
No additional cost is mentioned anywhere.

You spend 2 Points to cast the augmented version of the mythic spell.
1 Point is for the mythic version. This cost is included in the 2 points you pay for the augmented spell.

So if you cast Blade Barrier:
0 Points: normal Blade Barrier
1 Point: Mythic Blade Barrier
2 Points: Augmented Mythic Blade Barrier

You dont pay any additional costs after this.
He can use a move action every round to move the Blade Barrier.

The wording is a bit off, but every augmented spell has the same first line: "If you spent X points, ... "
You just spend the points to get the augmented version.
In this case, the augmented version has the benefit, that you can move the spell as a move action. You need no additional cost.

Its more a " If you spend 2 points, than you get this additional benefit for the duration of the spell"

And yes thats strong, but its mythic, its strong and not very well balanced.

As there is no ruling your GM will have to go either by:
1) No Ruling = It cant happen (you lose the XP but you dont lose a level
2) a houserule
2.a)
Take back you level like suggested (easy if you have written down what you gained last level, otherwise just subtract a few skill ranks until you are fitting a charakter level of 1 level lower and rule a HD to see how much Life you lose (and take a not of that number, so that you get the exact same amount again if you get your 10.000 XP back)

2.b)
You could take a permanent negative level (like Energy Drain) until you earned enough XP to be qualify for you current level.
Its easy to apply and to remove, it makes your charakter weaker, but not so much that he would be useless.

2.c)
Any other houserule your GM likes

The chainmail „only“ weights 125 pfd.
25 pfd * 5 (because it’s huge) = 125.

RAW it just talks about the initial metal object, which would be the chainmail which is lighter than 500pfd.

So I think that the weight of the creature doesn’t matter.
Otherwise it would/should say so. And the spell would be mostly useless, nearly everything large has more than 500pfd, even PC.

Guess what?
It is still a Polymorph spell and it can still be canceled with a Dispel Magic spell, without save or spell resistance.
Mage's Disjunction would remove the need for a caster level check against the level of the Polymorph.

Thats genius.

If she wants to do this trick again, just tell her that you have recently read how clone really works and that sadly, but for the better she cant copy it.

If would also have the benefit, that the party dont have any buffs on them at the start of the fight and that a few magic items dont work too.
So its a really good start for your rouge.

NGL I argued this with her, but she argued she was dragon when the flesh was taken. However she's one of those players that reads all the alternative rules (especially the construct rules) and argued it was possible until I gave in. But I can't take it away from her at this point since its been a year IRL and kinda hard baked into the story at this point. We've also had a talk about her doing s*$* like this, and she has stopped, but its hard to deal with a character like this:
It does bother me however that she saw fit to add 25 HD to her character and add it to her caster level, and throw the dragon's stats onto her own.
Str 48
Dex 34
Con 26
Int 34
Wis 30
Cha 28
How she got these stats? She added the dragon's stats to her own. a young dragon, but still a dragon. She also gets a big buff from her wayfinder of the stars giving her a massive buff to everything (and we're talking like 28 ioun stones in the Wayfinder)
-...

Its your game, so as a GM you can let her be or change it.

And if a player reads a LOT of rules and makes such a grave mistake I would question it if it wasnt intentional.
There is NOTHING in any rules that I know of that even suggest that you can to what she did.
Even if i read "clon" totally wrong (on purpose or on accident) I would only get that stats of a young red dragon, with an INT of 12 thats not that impressive and only 11 HD really sucks for all my spells.

She just plain cheated. If you dont address it, its ok. As said its your game, but she cheated.
I would address it, I wouldn't call her out for cheating (normally cheater dont respond well if they are caught and I´m a peacefull person who avoids trouble if necassery).
However I would tell her, like I said above, that I got a better unterstading of the rules thanks to the forum and that what she did was sadly not RAW and not even RAI, so she cant do that and that we have to build her charakter new and stripping some of its power.

Stats are hardly ever baked into a story, only flavour is.
She can be looking like a dragon and having the BAB of a wizard and her normal stats. Changes nothing in the story just makes her weaker (and by weaker I mean in this case, it makes her normal and not overpowered strong).
Let her look like a young red dragon and even keep her fly speed (with her being large and a poor fly speed so -6 to fly, so she has to invest a lot of skill points to keep flying if you bring up wind or some other ideas mentioned above OR just cast overland flight and fly with the spell and not her wings)

If you want the encounter to be memorable and NOT discuss this problem of her totally misunterstanding the rules, just copy her.
Let the rouge be whatever you like (he found a scroll clone and a scroll polymorph, so the same spells she used) and just add some monster stats to his own (and the monster abilites).
You can make him really fast with a quickling and he would be small. So a lot of walls with only small openings and a town where the streets are too small for a large dragon to fly would be his way to stay out of her way.
Let his to fighter companions also be some young red dragons (in armor, cause they are fighter) who alos used this trick.

The problem is:
her charakter is MUCH stronger than she should be.
You have a level 16 Rouge (thats like a CR 16 Monster, give or take) and want him to be a challange for a better version of a anciant red dragon (CR 19).
And the anciant red dragon has "only"
STR 38 (she has 48, so -10)
DEX 8 (she has 34, so -26)
CON 27 (she has 26, so + 1)
INT 20 (she has 34, so -14)
WIS 21 (she has 30, so - 9)
CHA 20 (she has 28, so - 8)

That more like a CR 20 or even CR 21 creature.
You are asking how a non-magical CR 16 creature can fight a magical CR 21 creature.
Well the answear is, he cant.
Even with all the tricks, the difference is to huge.
Thats why cheating is called cheating and why nobody expect the cheater likes it.

You can only make it interesting if you handle her as a CR 21 creature, and give the rouge a boost. So make him CR/level 21 or 22 (22 cause she has minions [her party but for her thats just minions at this point]) Like 6 times the advanced template. So +24 to all his abiliy scores and +12 natural armor.
Or make him a rouge 20 and only +2 advanced template (+8 to all abiliy scores and +4 natural armor)
Or any other template (or combination of templates) that pushes him +6 on his CR.
Or let there be 8 or them (8 CR 16 creatures are one CR 22 creature, and with the way pathfiner works, 8 small creatures are not as much a thread as 1 big creaure in most cases)
Or make him a ghost.

I hope you see HOW much he has to gain (and how stupid that would be) so that the encoutner would be interesting/challanging.
Only with mundane items and a few environmental tricks (wind/buildings/suprise round etc.) you can never hope to achieve a +6 difference in CR.
+1 yes, maybe +2, everything else is not really possible in PF.

So you have like 3 choices:
1) Talk to her and make her charakter right.
2) Let her be and up your game (like 6 advanced templates etc)
3) Let her stomp the encounter and encourage her cheating.

Another way to deal wth flying characters (doesnt work always but can work) is mundane or magical wind.
It imposes a penalty to all fly checks and a lot of flying movements (especially in a small area with lots of obstacles) need a fly check to succeed.
A lot of people i know only try to get the +14 on fly (check her size and maneuverability for potential boni/mali) to auto succeed the DC 15 check to hover. A penalty (or combination of penalties, like tanglefooot back, net, sickend, shaken etc) can make it really difficult to fly with her wings in a way she wants to.

There is also a DC 25 check if you collide with a object of your size or smaller to not hit the ground. A few traps with boulders, walls etc with her siza (medium or large i guess) could bring her down easily if she hasnt invested enough into her fly skill.

Its normally not that hard to impose the shaken condition and a tanglefoot bag to a creature if I know it. That would be a -4 penatly (-2 shaken and -4 Dex because she is entagled, so another -2)

All that really matters is the first fork.
After the first one it is "simple" to make more.
Just take 100 forks, get to a plane, let them synchronize, go back and sell them.

So how to get the first fork for a plane?
With time and research, the Gate spell, with outsiders, natural existing doorways and so on.

Most planes are well traveled to and its not that hard for a high level mage to get his hand on a fork.

If a player would attempt to get to another plane without searching/buying a fork, I would most likely take a similiar path than you.
With research, time and money.
I wouldnt make a common, uncommon etc distinction between planes.
Lets say about 1 month for the research in a suitable area (like the Worldwound and the Abyss, Cheliax and Hell and so on) or year in another area. It takes a lot of time to get there in my opinion if you start from scratch.

I never unterstood 3b/3c/3d.

For your charakter if I unterstand it correctly:
You can summon monster in one round (because it only costs 3 actions and you can finish the spell at the end of your turn).
However because of this houserules they wont be able to attack until you take an action in the next round to tell them to attack?
If so: To they still help with flanking/blocking the way/making attack of oppertunity?

If no, your charakter is weaker.
You can only summon once every two rounds because you need an action to command them and you gain no benefits from them.
If yes, at least you can block enemies, force the enemy spellcaster to cast defensiv/move, disable their charge abilites and so on.
You can sommon less monster per combat, but its harder to interrupt you and you can surprise your enemies with your summons.
Only drawback you cant to anything in a surprise round.

If you focus on summoning monsters with spellpoints you will lose a lot of spellpoints per day because you will cast the same spell more then once. And if you dont use it more then once you will have wasted a lot of feats you need to make you summons stronger.
If you dont take the feats, why even bother with summons.

In early game your summons will be better cause you can cast less spells (so it doesnt cost so much extra spellpoints) and the duration is buffed heavely.
In late game you will have more problems with "wasted" spellpoints because you cast the same spell more than once and the duration is much weaker, which means scounting or longer fights are harder because your summons have a shorter duration.

Low resources/Low Magic should make your summons stronger in comparision.
The enemies of a paladin with a +5 longsword and a +6 Str-belt (+8 to attack) need a better AC, then the enemies of a palading with a +2 longsword and a +2 Str-belt (+3 to attack).

You monsters in both scenarios have only their normal attacks, so if the enemies AC goes down their usefullness goes up. Same with DMG and the DC of saving spells from enemies.

In conclusion:
There are a few disadvantages and a few advantages.
All in all there are to much houserules to tell you how it will play out.

So Azothath is right:
Have fun.

Also i the only reason i am still arguing is because neither you nor Bolafon have provided sufficient evidence that i am wrong. You and him argued the same point. Only one bloodline cause the text said one bloodline at the top of the paragraph. You have failed to refute me effectively when i bring up that the bottom of the paragraph says that if the character already has a bloodline it advances that bloodline instead of choosing one bloodline.

To be honest:

I have a really simple approach, I look at the rules if there is a strict RAW. If there is than I post it, what people than do with this information is their thing not mine.
If there isnt (like now) than I give my interpretation (in this case ONE means ONE and not TWO), and than I stop arguing.
Maybe I will explain something that isnt unterstood correctly, but if you just wanna argue with "A ...no B.. no A ... no B" I´m out.
Its wasted time.

You have no rule that supports your opinion (TWO is ONE because I get TWO for ONE) and I too have no RAW ruling for the way I will handle it (ONE is ONE and not TWO).

Its just two opinions both are not supported by rules directly.
On another recent forum post I read, that if in doubt always chose the less powerful/less loopholey interpretation of the rules and that the desginer team follows that guidline.

You can take that advice, you can ignore it (I know exactly what of the two you will chose, its not hard to guess).

@Meniacwyrm

You will most likely never get an official answear.

If you ask a question in the forum and a few people are telling you someting doesnt work like you think it schould work and it starts to get into a "A.. no B .. no A... No B" kinda argument there is not a lot to win.

It kinda sounds like you just want people to agree with you so that you can tell your GM or your players: "Look how OP my PC/NPC is and its totally legal, because the thing you will maybe criticize is apporved by the forum."

You could also argue,
1.) that because the arcana says "one bloodline" and the crossblooded sorccerer has 2 bloodlines, that it just doesnt work at all.
2.) that it works for both.
3.) that it works only for the one he has to select.

You can argue for all of that.
The most people here are ageeing, that 3.) is the way it works/should work/is intented to work.

And because there is no official ruling and never will be an neither sidde will be able to (most likely) convince the other side, you have two choices:
1.) You accept that it souldnt work
2.) Ask your GM or tell your players, if/that it works in your home campaign.

Belafon wrote:

Almost works

The Bloodline Development exploit specifically lets you select one bloodline. It doesn't matter if you already have two, the exploit only works for one of them.

You would have to take Extra Arcanist Exploit as your 3rd-level feat (selecting bloodline development and School Understanding) if you want both to be at level 23. Without that - if you took Bloodline Development as your regular 1st-level arcanist exploit you couldn't use your FCB on School Understanding until 3rd. Because you can't increase something you don't have. Doesn't really matter at 20th level, but does change when you get the 20th-level power.

You definitely don't get the alternate capstone. Having an arcane school doesn't automatically make you a wizard. Having a bloodline doesn't automatically make you a sorcerer. Having a domain doesn't automatically make you a cleric (just ask an inquisitor). And even if it did (it doesn't), the capstones are based on class level, not the level of an individual ability.

** spoiler omitted **

Crossblooded is a sorcerer archetype that modifies your bloodline to let you choose from 2 bloodlines and mix and match their powers tho. It is still one bloodline for the purposes of the development i think. And you off set the restriction from the bloodline development ability by taking that extra level in sorcerer.

Lets say we rule it your way and i take crossblooded anyway. How can i develope one of the bloodlines without leveling the other? Am i now a 23rd level fey/1st level serptine crossblooded sorcerer? Thats not how crossblooded is ruled as its one bloodline modified to let you choose its powers from 2 normal bloodlines

The Arcanist exploit says "chose 1 bloodline".

If you than take a level or levels in sorcerer you stack your levels for the purpose of his bloodline and only this bloodline.
So for both bloodlines of the crossblooded Sorcerer you count as a sorcerer level 1 and for this one bloodline they have both, you can stack your levels.

You will gain both bloodline arcana, -2 to will saves etc (like a crossblooed sorcerer level 1).
Than you determine what bloodline both have (lets stay with undead) and for this one you count as a sorcerer of level 20 (or whatever you have combined).

The exploit only lets you chose from one bloodline, so you only chose from one. In my opinion that quite clear and simple.

Me I'm honestly thinking no, long life would be great but that long? I think eventually you would want an out as an option.

Its Pathfinder. There is always an "out" button. Just ask a god to help you die.

If we take them out of the equation, and just ask if you wanna be immortal without Gods as an out button, why not. The last out button will always be the death of the universe.
And if I´m a level 20/10 charakter I can travel to all the places there are. Not only golarion, but the whole universe and if that gets boring, there are planes with infinite space for me to explore.

But my charakter would need a really good research topic (dimension of time) or a few project to oversee (like Baba Yaga in Irrisen) so that he has something to do until the universe dies.

/rant on:

Personally I think some of the rituals of obedience should be set right. There are some that sooner or later will force the character to fail performing them (looking at you 'sacrifice an intelligent creature' etc. can hardly have everyone who perform this do it DAILY without some major effect on the general population and or believers).

In your case, what if you converted everyone around to be a believer (by the sword?) what then, you automatically fail to perform the ceremony?

at the very least I would add the bit that some of them have that goes: '...if you can't, then madidate on x for y time while doing z..'
-
Also it helps if you link or paste the thing you ask about.

/rant off.

in your case, being cruel doesn't have to be being overly evil. eating a very fragrant greasy meat-on-a-stick in front a hungry bagger might get you there just fine and you can hardy be called evil for having a snack, no? (well except for them 'meat is murder' bunch i guess).
As long as you don't break any laws your indifferent cruelty can at most be frowned upon. look for the cases where not caring is enough. You don't even need to laugh at their faces to get it to work.

That are "just" 365 kills a year.

Granted they killed them as a group and sometimes a dozen in a day (bandits/ trolls/ giants etc) and no one each day.
But keeping them prisoners and than kill them off one by one each day, would be possible.
If its only this one PC/NPC who has this feat.

I think cruel is evil, doesnt matter if it hurt someone physical or mentally. And even if the outcome is postive for the other person, its my intention that counts for my aligment.
At least in my interpretation.

If I push someone on the street and he gets run over by a car I´m evil.
If I push someone on the street, so that he gets run over by a car, but the car stops and he is unhurt, is an evil act, although nothing bad happend.
If I push someone on the street so that he gets run over by a car, but the car stops and its a reunion with his childhood love and they live happily ever after, its an evil act even if I helpd him find his true love.

On the contrary:
I push him onto to street, because a knife is flying straight towards his shoulder and I want to save his life, while getting myself hit with the knife is a good act.
If he then gets run over by a car the outcome is worse (knife in shoulder = injury vs car runnning him over = death), but its still a good act because the intention is good. I wanted to save him from the injury and I didnt see the car.

If I eat in front of a starving person, because I´m hungry i would classify it as a neutral act.
Good would be sharing the food, neutral would be just eating.
However looking him into his eyes and eating it just so that I can be cruel and to see him sufer.. thats an evil act.

Even if you just use an Illusion to let them suffer (showing them how their familiy is dying in the most painful ways or just that his wife breaks up with him) is an evil act.
You want to let someone suffer, thats cruel, thats evil.

Ofc non such minor evil act will change your aligment on the spot.
But over time, if you enjoy people suffering and if you are cruel just because you like it, you are an evil person.

Ofc some classes get a lot better and a few just a little.
For the Wizard, in comparision with a normal human wizard, he has more HP (+1 per HD, because he has more Con), +1 AC (Dex), +1 Fort/Ref/Wil (Con/Dex/Wis), +1 INI (Dex)

+1 HP/HD = the Feat Toughness.
+1 AC = Feat Dodge
+1 to each saving throw = 1,5 Feats (+2 is a feat and +1 is half a feat)
+1 INI = 1/4 feat

So its about 3,75 feats more, thats a lot.
Not only that, ability scores are better than feats, because he can take more abiity DMG or Drain until he goes down AND they push all his skills.

Maybe his strong points didnt get that much stronger, but he has less weaknesses. Which also makes you stronger.

And strength. Most people forget the carrying capacity.
In mid and late game nobody cares, but in early game, I have had a few min/maxer who dumped Str down to 7 (point buy).
Until you remind them, that they have to carry cloths, their spell book, rations, rope, maybe a dagger and/or a crossbow and so on.

+2 to Str just gives you the leasure to worry less about it and if you play point buy, to even dump it down to 8 (so 10 after +2), so you can buff you Int or Dex even more, cause you can use more points.

All fair points. I'm more wondering how the Azlanti, with ability score bonuses only, might stack against some of the higher RP player races. Dwarf, Drow, or Aasimar for instances.

If you count all races in the span of an AP/campaign nearly equal, Aztlanti are stronger (especially if they get a bonues feat and skilled).

In specific situations this or that race is stronger.
Melee fighting in a cave without light?
Dwarf/Aasimar/Half-orc etc will win because they can see.

Ranged combat in dim light?
Elvs/Half-Elvs will win because they have low-light vision.

Fighting in a small tunnel, without much room to move?
Halflings/Goblins will win, because they are small an can move/attack better/without penalty.

Depending on the situation and the class/build you chose every race has its strong and weak points. So overall races are more or less indentical in their strength if you count the sum of encounters in a campaign.

That said, humans are as strong as a race than dwarf and aasimar throughout a campaign.
Making a stronger human with a lot of extra ability scores is unbalanced/stronger.

If you take point buy its depending on the arrey you are chosing, but it can be more than a 12 points over everyone else.

A normal human Fighter, point buy 20, will take something like:
16(+2)/14/14/10/10/10 for 18/14/14/10/10/10
The Azlanti takes the same arrey for
16(+2)/14(+2)/14(+2)/10(+2)/10(+2)/10(+2) for 18/16/16/12/12/12

For a human to get this arrey they would need to take
16/16/16/12/12/12 without racial modifiers, which equals 36 points.

Depending on the arrey and the original point buy it can be more or less than 16 points, but in every case its much stronger.

That aside, from a game balance point, would a race with +2 to each stat, and absolutely no other racial features be balanced, as from a RP perspective?

You could compare it to the normal human.

You can trade the +2 to ony ability score and the bonues feat to a +2 on two ability scores.
So you get +2 to 2 ability scores and +1 skill rank per level (which is weaker than +2 IN).

An Azltani gets even more ability scores, so from this point of view he is stronger than a normal human.

I did that too in my current campaign.
Up - Down and one stat can be swapped (so with one 15 or 16 every spellcasting class is possible)

Only downside it have with that, is that I have a player who rolled 2 times really low (one time was a 4 on Con and nothing higher than a 13), the first reroll wasnt that much better, so I let him reroll a second time, there he got otherwordly stats (2 times 16, one time 17 and nothing smaller than 14).

In average between all 3 rolls he would be more or less average,
just this one last reroll, was so good that he dwarfs all other charakter.
This and that he is the only powergamer in the round sets the belance off.

In hindsight I would probably let people reroll her lowest stat until its higher than before and than the second lowest and so on until a the minimum limit (15/20/25 points, combined 66 etc) is reached.

I dont know, I think the rerolls (although they were nessacery) just got me on the wrong foot, cause every other player just rolled one time.
And yes I know, that a player could just have a lot of luck on his first role and get godly stats. But if its on the first try I just think its fairer.

So as said, the next time I let people role for stats and someone gets really bad stats, he has to reroll the lowest or second lowest stats until a minimum limit is reached

Azlanti get +2 to every ability score.
I think its mentioned in the "Inner Sea World Guide"

A few NPC in Rise of the Runelords are Azlanti, so they should be build with this, but I dont think its mentioned there.

Thanks for all the replies.

To add more context, I'm the DM for this campaign, and while we are playing mostly Pathfinder 1e rules, we are playing in the Warcraft universe using the old rpg books and some 3.5 things.

There's an item called healing belt that let's you heal (dur) others or yourself and one player asked if he could have 2 or 3 on top of each other so he doesn't need to equip a new one to use it and just has to remove the empty one. I said I didn't like this because it felt to me, like a really cheesy way to try to beat the action economy system, but it seems to be the RAW that he can do that.

Toshy wrote:

I remember to have read somewhere, that it doesn't depend on which you put on first, but which has the higher Caster Level.

So for example if you would wear a magic ring with CL 8, one with CL 5 and would put on an additional one with CL 10, the ring with CL 5 would stop working.
Bit it might be, that that was just something I read here or a houserule as I couldn't find an official rule like that right now.

I liked this idea though, be it a houserule or not.

All magic items should be revisited with the GM.

So if you feel like its to powerful, its not possible, or you just make it more pricy.
My wizard started to craft a LOT of effects on top of each other.
GM was ok with it, but after some time, I was like... well I think its too broken with just +50%.
So I proposed the idea that the first extra effect was +50%, the next two are +100%, the next three are +150% and so on. Also add a +5 for the craft check.

That way stacking became a lot harder and pricy over time.

On the other hand, an item that works only 1/day has his own formula to get to its price.
You craft the item like it works infinite times per day (Caster level x spell level x 2.000) and divide it by 5 (so /5). Now multiply it with the number of times you think it should be used per day.

So an item that can only be used once a day costs as much as an permanent item divided by 5.

DeathlessOne wrote:

My hard and fast pricing for this is:

1.5x(Most expensive magic effect) plus cost of (next most expensive magic effect) = Market price of new item

You might want to reconsider that quick rule. There are circumstances where that might actually be the cheaper way to price magic items. If you made a headband of mental superiority +6 that way, you would save 18k.

Normal way: 36k + 54k + 54k = 144k
Your way: 54k + 36k + 36k = 126k

diff of 18k.

Isnt it like every new effect gets the x1,5?

So it would be 36 +(36 x1,5) +(36 x1,5) = 144k.
Which would be the exact value it is descripted in the books.
And most item I did the math are made with this rule.
(some are just priced randomly and some are rounded up or down, which is really confusing for someone who like me who likes mathe a lot, but I get the reason for it).

That said: Pricing is something you have to work out with your GM. The formulas are nice and it works in most cases, but not in all.

If you craft an item from scratch and it has differnt effects, like one with 20k one with 30k and one with 40k, you would have to do the mathe like: 40 +(20 x1,5) +(30 x1,5) = 105k.

If you have an item with an existing effect (say 30k) and you add new effect (which are worth 20k and 40k), than you would have:
30 +(20 x1,5) +(40 x1,5) =120k

So it would be possible to have the same item, with the same effects, but it is priced differntly, just because you took an alternative route to get there.

A ring of invisibility (20k) which gets the effects of a ring of featherfall crafted on (2,2k) would be 20 +( 2,2x1,5) = 23,3k
A ring of featherfall which get the effects of a ring of invisbility crafted on would be 32,2k (2,2 + (20 x1,5)).

But the spell's effect is not a special ability, nor any of the other categories, so these defaults do not necessarily apply.

If it isnt an ability you get, than one could argue, that the breath weapon that you get with Form of the Dragon is also not a standard action to use. It never says that it is a SP or SU ability.

As said, it is the ONLY reference you have in the rules what to do if no action is given.

And as before, none of you can give me any other rule.
All you say is:" If its that, than it is a bad spell", which doesnt really matter in a rules question.

It doesnt really matter if you like it or not, the spell could be a spell which will never ever gets used (like some other really bad spells i have never seen in a gameplay).

For Blessing of Favor, you are right.
However if you look for the phrase: "choose" you will see that every spell that use it, doesnt use an extra action for it. Because choosing something isnt an action.
Selecting something is. It may sound the same, however as said before, game terms and normal word are different.

And to be honest, I dont think you will ever acknowledge what rules are given in this situation.
Which I kinda understand, as a standard it is really weak and as a move action its just "ok".
I would prefer to have another action that can be used, but thats not what the rules are for. My preferences are not to debate.
Only rules are, preferences are for the advice forum, or because I´m not really strict, to ask after a rules question is answered.

The question: "Which action is it?"
Can be answered with: "There is no clarification, ask you GM." (Only really true answer)

In a second sentence you can/should say:
"There are rules for using unmentioned actions, and thats always a standard action."
and/or
"There are rules for redirecting a spell, which would be a move action"

Thats the answer to this question. Nothing else has a rule backing it up.
If you want to aplly on of this two rules or not, or if you want to make a houserule, please be my guest.
But there are nor rules for it, this are just advices.

If you wanna argue, that the rule:"In doubt use standard action" doesnt work/shouldnt be apllied its ok.
As said many times above: Its the only rule I know that deals with this kind of thing. If you have another on, please share it.
If not, maybe its the right thing to do, even if you dont like it.

My only goal was to give the information that their is a rule for unmentioned action and that it COULD be apllied.
I dont really wanna discuss it, just because I think we will NEVER be on the same page.

And I bet if I ask 100 players there are 10 for this, 10 for this, 10 for this solotion, and so on. So its ok to not be on the same page.
If this spell ever comes up, I will rule it in my best knowledge and most likely with a houserule. I kinda like the move action and the potion scnario. (Maybe its wrong with the rules, but it sounds fun for me)

So their is no real use to argue the same thing over and over again.
If there is a new rule I never heard of before, I would be really pleased to learn it, until than its just: "I like this, I want this and no I dont have a rule" between a handful of people.

With that I´m most likely out.

Its in the combat section under using a special ability.
Just open the combat section and search for "standard action".

I dont have my books at hand, so sadly I cant give you the page. However it shouldnt be that hard to find.

Its the only rule that I know of that gives a general action to interaction if their is no other action mentioned.

And as said with the breath weapon and Form of the Dragon, in nearly all cases you have to use the rule, normally it will be applied without much thought. At least in my experience, its kinda a normal thing.
Nobody would have ever argued that the breath weapon you get is anything less/other than a standard action.

A side point:

Contagious Zeal is a valid spell for a potion. Seeing how it works, in potion form it is more useful than other spells that target multiple creatures, as the person who imbibes it can still share the benefit with other people.

It is curious to have a spell that is more useful as a potion than as a cast spell. Sadly, an Alchemist can't learn it. An extract of it would be good.

Thats a way I would never have seen it, but you are right.

No, that's why it is the perfect example. Because it is obvious that no one should be forced to accept it, even though you can quote exact wording and make direct, and 100% true statements about why it counts as redirecting a spell. Thank you for proving the point, which is that because you can cite something, even something completely true, does not make it the absolute correct answer (for an opinion) and more specifically, that no one else could possibly have their own valid point.

No its a nonsense example.

Oh, thank you. It's very nice of you to lay out the only possible way anyone is allowed to have an opinion. The only two possible choices.

Well if you ask in the rules forum, how big the BAB of a Fighter 5 is, my answear would be 5.

I explained why there are two choices.
I prefer the choice of a standard action. It goes much more with the general rule, that if there is no action mentioned, its a standard action.
I can see Azothaths point that its only a redirect implendet in a spell, which would make it a move action. I dont know and I would never dare to say which on of these two is the right one.
But if you wanna talk rules, you only have two available.

First the genreal rule, that using abilites without an mentioned action is a standard action.
Second the rule to redirect a spell with a move action.

Thats two rules and you can chose which you wann ably. If you like you can argue days after days which is better/righter, I dont know it.

However I know (or at least I´m pretty sure) that there are no other general rules for actions.

Why do you think a standard action is the default in this case? I’d say it’s a “not an action”.

Because there is no rule for anything else. As far as i know, if you can do something extra with a spell (Draconic Reservoir, Fire Breath etc) there is normally an action mentioned.

Doesnt matter if its a feat, class ability, spell or anything else.
If you need to use an action, you use either the action that mentioned or if nothing is mentioned a standard action.

So if a get the ability to do something thanks to a spell, it doesnt matter WHAT, but I have to use an action (and non-action is an action) to do it, than I use the action that is mentioned in the spell.
So neither Form of the Dragon nor Contagious Zeal mention an action.
Both give me an ability (breath weapon/sharing the benefits) that i can use.
So I look at the only rule that I know of that tells me what to do if their isnt an action mentioned, and that rule tells me to use an standard action.
So I need to use an standard action to use the breath weapon and I need to use a standard action to share the benefits.

If anyone (PizzaLord for example) has another rule that is either more specific or has another reason to be applied, please tell me.

But please use a rule and not a:" I think its a non action, because I fell like it". Its a rules question use rules.

Azothath says that its just redirecting a spell.
Ok maybe. Thats also a rule and another way to look at it.
As said above, I dont know if its just redirecting a spell (move action) or just using an ability the spell gives me (standard action).

And I wont really argue for any one of the two sides to be honest.
Because as I see it, their is no possibilty to know which of the two rules has to be applied. For that the spell is to vague at least imo.

However it doesnt matter how much I look through the rules I dont find anything that would support a full-round, swift, immidiate, free or "non-action" action.

So:
If no action is mentioned its a standard action.
If you argue its just redirecting a spell (which can be done, but not from me) use the action (move action) you need for that.

As long as there is no other rule/possibilty to apply another rule, I dont see any other option than these two.

@Pizza Lord, there is a huge difference between the word redirect in a description and redirect in a RAW term.

I hope you know that that comparrision doesnt count and nobody who has the last bit of knowledge about the rules would ever read it like that and that you just used a really bad example.

If there is an action to use (and non action is an action for that) to do something (and even speaking as an action) it has to be in the description of the feat/spell/ability.
If thats not the case you have to look for a general rule that covers it.
Like the using of all abilites is a standard action, unless otherwise noted.

If you look at the spell you wont find an action in its description. As said above, if you missing a specific rule/action, you have to look for a general rule, if you like it or not, thats how things work.

That may not be RAI in some cases, but its how rules work.

So you can argue, its a move action like redirecting a spell or using an ability (that the spell gives you) and its a standard action.

And spells can give abilitys like form of the dragon and breath weapon.
There is no action in the spells description for the ability which action you have to use, so you might argue that it can be used as a non-action.
Even breath weapons in general doesnt say what action a breath weapon is, and there are monsters with full-round, standard, move and swift action breath weapons.

So you look for the genreal rule (cause there is no specific rule) and you will find out: Using and ability is a standard action, so if you wanna use the breath weapon that you get from form of the dragon, you have to use a standard action.

And I'm pretty sure most if not all have ruled it that way.
If you start to argue: "no mentioned action in the spell means a "non-action", than the breath weapon of form of the dragon (which doesnt mention an action) should also be a non-action and thats not something which sounds or feels right.

So either you redirect Contagiuos Zeal(move action) or you say the spell gives you the ability to share it (standard action).

Thats the only thing that the rules cover and you can debate what of the two cases is right.
I never used the spell and i would have said standard action, cause every action that doesnt have an specific action is a standard action.

Thanks to Azothath I was remined that you could also say that it gets redirect, which makes the spell more worth it.

Just a few side notes:
The Inquisitor replaces and alters solo tactics, so it isnt "legal" to comibne Sacred Huntsmaster and Ravener Inquisitor.

The witch uses a 3pp elemental as a familier with a REALLY strong ability for a healer which isnt legal (its third party content + i cant rly imagine getting it legal as a familiar). And its more than strong, it costs her nothing and out of combat healing will skyrock, so they can start every encounter with full HP for like nothing.
And in combat healing is so strong, that you need to do so much more DMG to harm/challenge them.

The NSC Aasimar cant be Mystic Theurg at this level.
He needs at least second level arcane and devine spells, and spell like abilites dont count (there was an FAQ for this).
So Cleric 3/Sorcerer4/MT would be possible.

Thats just a few side notes, if you know about them and you as the GM are ok with them nothing to add to it. (I personally have only something against the witchs familiar, too strong, INQ wouldnt be that bad in that aspact and MT is something needs some working in generall imo)

For the combat:
A white dragon of this level is a melee combatent, the bloodrager too.
You have 3 heavy hitters (Monk/Babarien/INQ) one animal companion (from the INQ), possible another animal companion from the druid, which make 5 melee fighter (6 if the Druid uses wildshape), with a nice healer in their backline.

I dont know how the encounter was played, but the Dragon can fly and you party isnt that good at it, with fly by attack and his breath weapon he should be more than able to kill them and the fog cloud hits the player much more than it hits him.
A 20% miss chance, no sneak attack and much harder navigation to flank the dragon. Means you get a longer fight.
So his breath weapon with 10d4 (25 DMG average) shouldnt kill them but at least the which should have lost a nice portion of her HP, than fog cloud and landing or fly by attacks would have done the trick.

However a burning entanglement and a crit from a babarian are rly the killer for an enemy who takes extra fire DMG and has only 115 HP.
The babarian took more then half life in one hit.
Every encounter (even the BBEG) can be a short fight if they PC crit often enough and the saves arent in their favour.

The bigger problem is that you have a LARGE party (4 player and 2 animal companions) and most of them are melee.
As said above thats really strong against other melee typ fighters, who do nothing but fly in the mid of the party and start hitting and getting hit. Dont expect fights like this to last longer than 2-3 rounds.

A flying dragon with his breath weapon or in a snowy condition (miss chance through snow, so not for the dragon, difficult terrain, on top of a frozen river, white dragons can swim etc) would have made the fight not only challenging but really hard.
Using fire spells on top of a frozen river and killing a dragon on it (which will than stop flying if it dies and tumple to the ground), would be overkill.
Just to give a few examples how enviroment can change a fight really drastic.

With the "every cost" you could say that the outsider is weakend after his realese, if they player sacrifice something (like a few thousend lives of their citicens) he gets his full power back.
The problem is, he has to be strong enough to keep up with a level 18 party, (so about CR 21), but if he joins them Nyrissa has a huge problem.

That all said, you shouldnt worry to much about his strength and how long he survives. At this level he should have enough power to deal with them for a dew rounds. Especially AoE attacks in a small mountain enviroment to hit the whole party and not much space to get into flanking will hit them hard.

You could take an angel (like an Astral Deva, CR 14) and give it some evil templates. Like Half fiend (+3 to its CR) give it some more Hit Dice (5 for +1/+2 CR) so that you have a CR 18/19 monster.
And than you could give it either some simple class template or give it 1-2 thematic special abilites.
Like can wild shape (cause you have a druid in the party, was able to maximes heal (witch) but now through its corruption, it hinders positive energy, and uses negative which it maximises now.

You could give it a companion (like the huntsmaster and the druid) so that i doesnt have to fight alone.

You mentioned that your party steamrolled a CR +5 encounter, so I guess you want a more challenging fight.

If so, they classes and builds of the players would be good to know.
Depending on this it changes a LOT:

I play Kingmaker too, and if my bloodrager and ALC gets the chance to buff themself for a fight, 1 or 2 melee rounds is all they need to oblitarte every enemy. Thats usable 2-3 times a day and than they are wasted and need to rest or be MUCH weaker.

Kingmaker has a lot of 15 min adventure days.
So in there normal exploration mode they wont have a lot of challenges, expect if they get ambushed or you play er clever monster (or make good use of the terrain/enviromental rules)

So a build of the party helps a lot in finding a good challenging enemy.

LVL 18, the normal AP ends with level 17, so I think you want to play it so that they are lvl 20 when they meet Nyrissa?
When and how are they gonna meet it?
In a cave, in the first world, will they go to the monster, or will it search for the players.
Maybe it will try to corrupt the tiefling to help him.

And one more question, if the monster wanted to kill Nyrissa, why should it fight against his own herolds/children/champions?
Why not help them?

Yeah, purely RAW thats all you can get.
There could be an erreta or an FAQ, but its a very late release (2018), so I doubt there is much.

As long as there are no items that buff the CL, it works like a normal arcane bond.

But we all know RAI it works like a normal arcane bond even with a higher CL and you shouldnt have to discuss something so obivous for more than 2 minutes with a player.

[qzote=Azothath]rom Wizard class
Arcane Bond (Ex or Sp): {Para 3} A bonded object can be used once per day to cast any one spell that the wizard has in his spellbook and is capable of casting, even if the spell is not prepared. This spell is treated like any other spell cast by the wizard, including casting time, duration, and other effects dependent on the wizard's level. This spell cannot be modified by metamagic feats or other abilities. The bonded object cannot be used to cast spells from the wizard's opposition schools (see arcane school).

The problem is that the PA doesnt alter, it replaces arcane bond.

If i have a wizard archtyp that says:
"You ignore every arcane spell failure chance from armor.
This replaces the normal Weapon and Armor Proficiency of the wizard"

You would ignore what the normal wizard says about spell failure chance. You would only look at the archtyp.

Same here.
The PA gets a ability instead of arcane bond (so RAW it has nothing to do with arcane bond anymore) that works like a slightly (RAI)/much more (RAW) better arcane bond.

RAI its totally clear that the meant, it works like an arcane bond, but has slight improvments.
However RAW they made an oversight.
As it is written: "Once per day while holding the book in one hand, she can use it to cast any one spell she has written in the bonded book, even if the spell is not prepared."
Without any further restrictions (the normal resrtictions for arcane bond are implied through RAI and should be used, but RAW their are no restrictions) you can cast a 9th level spell if he is in your spellbook.

Power Word Kill is written in my spellbook? Yes.
Have I used that ability today? No.
Is my spellbook in my hand? yes.
Than I can cast Power Word kill.

And every wizard can write every spell down in his spellbook if he finds a scrool to copy it from.

HOWEVER I just found (while writting this post) another argument.
You clearly cast a spell:
"[...] can use it to CAST any one spell [...].
And:

You can cast a spell at a lower caster level than normal, but the caster level you choose must be high enough for you to cast the spell in question, and all level-dependent features must be based on the same caster level.

If you cast a spell (which you clearly do) you need to have a caster level which works for the spell.

So RAW a Wizard 15 with items/feats that give him +2 to his caster level, would be able to cast a 9th level spell.
That would mean as long as he doesnt have this items or spell specialisation for one specific spell you cant to much more with this abiliy even if you read it stricly RAW.

So RAI it clearly has the restrictions of a normal arcane bond.
Only RAW yes he can cast higher spells IF (and thats a big IF) his caster level is high enough for the spell he wants to cast.

RAW they sadly let a wording slip as far as I can see.

A wizard is allowed to write a 9th level spell (if they find a suficiant scroll or spell book) in his spell book.
And RAW it is written that he can cast one spell he has written into his spell book once a day without preparing it.

The only thing you can mention it, that its clearly the same as an arcane bond feature, so its not a Sp, its a normal spell.
Even the normal arcane bond is a Sp, but you cast the spell as a spell, not as a Sp. The Sp it that it allows you to cast this spell, but the spell is cast as a spell.
Doesnt change that much, just changes, that he needs to use material components (so no wish).

So you could say:
"Yes they made a mistake in the wording. They clearly ment it to be like the normal arcane bond, but thought that every inteligent being would know not to cast a 9th level spell at first level, so we play as RAI. You can only cast spells you can cast"

"RAW is RAW and the Nr 1 rule is, its my table, you cant a 9th level spell as a 1rst level PC, because thats RAI and I play it as RAI"

or

"Ok if you think its a good idea to let a first level PC cast one 9th level spell per day, we can to it. Just remember, your enemies can do that too." And their first encounter are three wizards with this archtyp and a lot of cool spells in their spellbook.
Like Cloudkill (for a VERY fast TPK) or Power Word: Kill, do just kill his PC or Imprisonment (so they need another 9th level spell (freedom) to get his PC back or energy drain (just a more fancy Power Word kill) or Meteor Swarm (to kill the whole town they where visiting).

All of the above with a much more polite wording please.

So much ideas. *evil grin*
He will be the first to scream "Unfair" if his PC dies to a Power Word kill in the first encounter. You than can say to him:" Well its only played as RAW, I wanted to play it RAI, but you insisted."

As said, nothing gets a player faster down to earth than using a loophole/oversight against them.
I only had to use that one time. I can't remember what exactly but it was like:" Well we could play like this, but I dont think you would want to play against that loophole. However if its legal, a few NPC will use it, why not its stronger than everything else."
After a very short thought he realised that I was right and he shouldnt abuse the loophole. It luckily never came up again.

A wizard can write new spells into their spellbook by copying them from another wizard’s spellbook or a scroll. You just have to pass a Spellcraft check. There is no limit to the level of spell a wizard can add this way.

Thats true.

As said, RAW its an oversight in the wording.
RAI its fairly clear to NOT cast a 9th level spell as a first level PC:

Its obviously a better arcane bond, in that you can even cast spells of your oppisition school.
Which is really strong if you think about it.
You dont even need two spell slots for it, you just need your once a day ability/spell.
Opposition school: Abjuration? At level 15 you can cast mind blank as your once a day spell. You dont have to use your 2! (if your Int is 26 or higher) only spell slots of the day.

Thats the advantage of this class ability.

In all other aspects it has to follow the normal arcane bond restrictions.
You need to have the casting time, the material component, the sufficiant Int (16 for 6th level spells, 19 for 9th level spells) and the sufficiant level (so level 15 for 8th level spells and level 17 for 9th level spells).

You can use metamagic as long as the spells level doesnt get higher than the highest spell level you can cast.

RAW it may read that way, but at least RAI it should be fairly obvious that you cant cast a 9th level spell as a first level PC.

I think what it meant is, that she can use her arcane bond/the book bond do cast any spell and is not restricted by: Cant cast spell from the wizard’s opposition schools.

And a wizard has to cast this spell normal (including material components) and not as a SP.

If you are the GM just tell the player its not RAI and that its a wording oversight of the staff.
That shouldnt be that hard to argue, that you should never be able to cast a 9th level spell as a 1rst level character.
For the unlikely case that the PC doesnt want to understand that, you could always have the enemy be the same class and cast 9th level spells yourself.
Nothing faster to get a player to drop a loophole than using it as a GM against them.
Your PC will understand that the ability doesnt work that way, when he loses initiative and gets hit by a Power Word kill, with no Save, and HP he cant possible reach for the next few levels.