Kasahara's page

Any ability score increase is considered permanent if you can maintain it for 24 hours. This then allows you to use it to qualify for feats and such. You cannot USE those feats if you drop below that ability score again (ie through ability drain or when the eidolon goes away) but use returns when the score returns to it's previous level.

Look at Ability Score Bonuses in Appendix 1: Special Abilities of the Core Rule Book.

Doing it by that rule has a few complications if the DM is a hardass.

But, I did just find the post I needed literally right before I checked here again. Here's a link if anyone else needs it.

Thanks though. ^^

My DM in a game wants me to cite something anything from a PF dev that says that a Synthesist is allowed to use their game statistics while fused to qualify for feats and such. I remembered seeing such a post ages ago, but my search-fu is failing epically. Can anyone point me in the direction of such a post/clarification?

PRD wrote:

The eidolon remains until dismissed by the summoner (a standard action).

quick read of the rules reveals many things

Interesting, that's not in my copy of the APG. Guess I should have checked the PRD then, thanks.

Full-round action to fall asleep.

I was looking for a more direct solution as opposed to trying to kludge it through forced unconsciousness.

After taking another look at the summoner's eidolon class feature, it neglects to mention anything about manually dismissing the eidolon. Maybe you need to "put it away" for a moment while you step inside town, or maybe you need to call upon your Summon Monster spell-like ability to accomplish a goal. Either way, there's reasons why a summoner might want to occasionally send the eidolon back to its home plane for a little while.

Is there a way to do this? If so, what type of action would it be?

to expand on this....How does Weapon Focus work for a wildshaping druid? I assume she would need to take Weapon Focus individually for each type of natural attack. Would that be a correct assumption?

That would be correct; in a nutshell it works the same for everyone. Each time you take Weapon Focus, you specify a specific type of weapon. So in the case of natural weapons, regardless of your class, you'd still get one specific natural weapon per Focus. So you could have Weapon Focus (Claw), or Weapon Focus (Bite), etc. But yes, each one is a separate feat slot.

On the other hand, when the grapple rules were written, there was (to my knowledge) no way in existence to potentially make two grapple checks in a single turn. So... Dunno. If I was your GM, I'd probably allow it - I'm inclined to assume that it's listed as only being an option for your "maintain check" because that was the only possibility at the time, and that you're not actually bound to that method. However, strictly by the text, a case could be made to limit pinning to a "maintain check". So talk to your GM. If you're considering this for PFS, be prepared for table variance.

That's what I was thinking as well. My interpretation of the intent is that the grappler would be able to utilize those grappling options on his turn as long as he has some feasible way of initiating the necessary grapple check. Flurry of Maneuvers seems to give him that chance.

Got a couple of questions on the maneuver master archetype.

Flurry of Maneuvers states that the monk may attempt additional combat maneuvers as part of a full-attack action, regardless of whether the maneuvers would normally require standard actions, or if they would normally replace attacks.

At 8th level, the monk can perform 2 maneuvers with FoM. Can he spend the first one grappling a creature, then (assuming he succeeded) spend the second bonus maneuver pinning the creature in the same round?

Second question - As written, there's nothing stopping the monk from using Flurry of Maneuvers while wearing armor. Opinions on that?

It definitely needs official errata.

I'm in the camp of believing its not gonna break anything to let him flurry in armor, if you actually stop to look at how the archetype is set... for melee attacks. The only thing that would be broken is Flurry + Rapid Shot + Manyshot, however that issue is irrelevant of his armor. They can just add the line from Zen Archer that states that Flurry is exclusive from them.

Not to mention, the high-threat weapons that people are worried about... his armor is still irrelevant there. Even if he goes unarmored, he'll still be fully capable of using those weapons. The armor isn't the breaking point.

Giving him armor but taking away Flurry makes him a dumbed down fighter without any offensive potential -- Compare it to a two-weapon fighter/ranger and try telling me he isn't left miles in the dust without his Flurry. An "extra option" is useless if that option makes you crappy, essentially being a frontliner with a definitive lack of frontline features. He needs to keep Flurry to be competitive with his peers, so if armor negates that... armor just won't be used at all, and the extra proficiency feature goes to waste.

I conclude there's a consensus that the archetype needs errata; the armor aside, the ability to stack Flurry with Weapon Training, or with Rapid/Manyshot, renders a Sohei grotesquely strong (particularly in the mid-levels when they have literally twice the number of attacks at a same or better attack-bonus than many other classes). They're actually better archers than Zen archers.

It definitely needs official errata.

I'm in the camp of believing its not gonna break anything to let him flurry in armor, if you actually stop to look at how the archetype is set... for melee attacks. The only thing that would be broken is Flurry + Rapid Shot + Manyshot, however that issue is irrelevant of his armor.

Giving him armor but taking away Flurry makes him a dumbed down fighter without any offensive potential -- Compare it to a two-weapon fighter/ranger and try telling me he isn't left miles in the dust without his Flurry. An "extra option" is useless if that option makes you crappy. No one would ever use it.

Besides, it's already possible to Flurry with a Greatsword without using Sohei, so I doubt it would end to world to give him "flurry with your weapons in armor" even with Weapon Training (which he has to wait until 6th to gain).

I'll add my thoughts to that thread as well.

So I've been lurking around for a while hoping that at some point one of the developers would go ahead and chime in on the intent of the Sohei archetype in regards to wearing armor.

Can a Sohei Monk use his Flurry of Blows while wearing armor? I've seen numerous different player opinions, but seriously, was an official response ever given? The normal monk's weapon/armor proficiency section is where the "can't flurry in armor" notation is given. It could be argued that since the Sohei replaces that section entirely, that it also overwrites the "no flurry" condition. The other side of the argument, is that generally something must state its an exception in order to be one.

Of course, the follow-up question is -- if a Sohei can't flurry in armor, why bother giving him armor? So... yeah, did any of the devs ever clarify?

Sleet Storm already does this at lower level and with a greater area of effect (unless you're shooting for height).

And Sleet Storm reduces speed to half with a successful Acrobatics check, or there's no movement at all.

As far as Difficult Terrain, look up the definition in the CRB. Anything that hampers vision creates difficult terrain, and Sleet Storm certainly hampers vision.

So, Sleet Storm = reduced movement, doubled terrain costs, greater area, no save, no spell resistance, all with a 3rd level spell.

Edit: It's not difficult terrain, it's hampered movement due to poor visibility. Results are pretty much the same.

A storm that blocks all visibility within its area is a double-edged sword. The enemies can't see out of it, and my party can't see into it. This means we lose line of sight to the enemies granting them total concealment against us, making a good portion of my party rather useless. Sure, I can keep raining down area effects without needing to specifically see what's happening, but my allies won't be able to do much to help.

That being said, Sleet Storm is still a good spell when used right. But taking the above into account, it's not a "use anytime" thing. It's situational. I will have it in my spell list, but I won't be using it all the time for the above reason. My Ice Storm combo doesn't feature this weakness, so the higher spell slot seems justified.

I love Witches, but they are very hex-based with fewer spells/level (though the new Icy major hex rocks).

I REALLY love Druids, but your Animal Companion will sit idle, and the wealth of ranged damage you have is mainly found in Flame Strike. Mixes poorly, though the thought of an Icy themed Druid is cool. (Ouch, pun unintended.)

I'd go Sorcerer (much maligned as it is). If you want to crank Ice Storm out regularly, and then toss more spells to finally kill them, you need volume.
Unless somebody can think of an effective Ice Storm/Archer build...
Oh, my, this actually could work with Arcane Archer (also maligned), though let me emphasize 'could'.

Or you need party assistance, so they can join the fun/do the killing for you. Make certain they know you'll be setting up this Winter Wonderland so they can get prepare reach weapons/ranged-weapons/Nimble Moves/Spring Attack etc. If they just walk up to the entangled enemy (and get smacked anyway), it ruins half the fun.
You may want that feat that lets you change the elemental damage so you can Rime more spells. Acid (Cold) Arrow would also have no save, and Magic (Force now Cold) Missile can stop a set of charging barbarians. (Again, this isn't much damage, so you need volume to keep pummeling them.)
(Going off to contemplate lockdown Arcane Archer...)

Scrolls, wands, staffs, Pearls of Power, etc. One does not need to go sorcerer to have large volume of spells, ne?

Debuffing and controlling is something the witch does with noticeable advantages over the other classes. Consider the following: Cast a persistent spell upon someone who's fallen victim to the Misfortune Hex. Regardless though, witch is a lot more flavorful to my roleplaying concept; with druid being the runner-up. Mostly likely though, I'll stick with witch. ^^

Kasahara wrote:

DT states that each 1 square is treated as though it were 2 squares of movement.

In short, your speed is halved.

No. Read it again. Difficult terrain is not the same as half speed.

Difficult terrain isn't an effect on you. It's an effect on the TERRAIN. It's a change in the requirement for entering the square, it really has nothing to do with you or your movement options. Thus, there isn't any multiplication here. It literally means that entering a difficult square (on foot) expends two squares of movement, nothing more, nothing less. It doesn't mean you have half speed; there is in fact a big difference. Your speed is a statistic belonging to you. The terrain is a statistic belonging to the square on the ground. These are two 100% independent factors. ^^

This may not fall under the multiplying rules though, hence my question.

There was never any multiplication, so why would it apply? ^^

That's exactly how I read those rules as well. Ice storm sets you up in DT, and then the Rime Spell makes you entangled. You're basically not going anywhere for a few rounds. Very nice way to halt clusters of baddies and then rain down the justice on 'em.

Yup!

And in case you don't have the Inner Sea Magic book, here's more food for thought:

Ice Spears

School conjuration [cold]; Level druid 3, sorcerer/wizard 3, witch 3

Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S, M (a small stalagmite-shaped crystal)
Range close (25 ft. + 5ft./2 levels)
Effect 1 ice spear/4 levels
Duration instantaneous
Saving Throw Reflex half and see below; Spell Resistance no

Favored by the spellcasters of Irrisen, this potent spell can disrupt spellcasters, topple enemies, and break even seemingly unstoppable charges. Upon casting this spell, one or more giant spears of ice lance up out of the ground. Each stalagmite-like icicle affects a 5-foot square and tapers to a height of 10 feet. You may cause a number of ice spears equal to one spear for every four caster levels you possess to burst from the ground. A creature that occupies a square from which a spear extends (or that is within 10 feet of the ground below) takes 2d6 points of piercing damage and 2d6 points of cold damage per square—creatures that take up more than one square can be hit by multiple spears if the caster is high enough level. The explosive growth can also trip foes. When the spears erupt from the ground, they make a combat maneuver check against any targets that take damage from the spears, with a total bonus equal to your caster level plus your Intelligence, Wisdom, or Charisma modifier, whichever is highest. Each additional ice spear beyond the first that strikes a single foe grants a +10 bonus to this CMB check. If the check succeeds, the ice spears knock the foe prone. A successful Reflex save halves the damage and prevents the trip attempt. If you cast this spell upon an area covered with ice or snow, such as atop a glacier, frozen lake, or snow-covered field, the spears strike with additional force. Saves against the effect suffer a –2 penalty and the spell gains a +4 bonus on its combat maneuver check to trip foes.

Ice Storm is described to set up an area of ice and snow, so it should give the bonus to Ice Spears if you follow up with it next round. In addition, the creatures entangled by the Rime Spell effect have a -4 dex penalty, which makes their Reflex save bonus -2 lower than normal. Plus the -2 saving throw penalty to save against Ice Spears when its cast in an area of ice and/or snow, and I think I've got a good chance to trip a creature or two as well!

Though, it would only be a few tripped creatures since its just one Ice Spear per 4 caster levels, so I guess it would only be situationally useful. But still, not a bad strategy I think. ^^

Things typically don't multiply in Pathfinder I thought.

If you divide move by 2 for difficult terrain and by 2 for entangled, then the likely effect is dividing movement by 3?

Hence, a 30 foot move is cut down to 10 ft with the two effects?

...Not exactly.

Look up how Difficult Terrain works. DT states that each 1 square is treated as though it were 2 squares of movement. Meaning that moving 5 feet requires you to spend 10 feet of your movement speed.

Under the rules of Entanglement, your speed is halved. So if you have 30ft movement, you now have 15ft movement.

If you have 15ft movement, moving in DT is rough on you. The first square you move into has already stolen 10/15 of your movement. If the next square is also DT, then you need to still have 10 feet left in order to take that square. But you don't. So you're stuck after the first 5 feet. Understand?

Edited for spelling errors and such. ^^;

I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks so. xD

With a little bit of number crunching, I noticed that a creature with 30ft of movement is effectively reduced to 5ft per move. (Entanglement cuts it in half to 15ft, but then moving through difficult terrain doubles the movement cost, meaning the creature can't afford to continue moving after 5ft... unless they double move, but that means they can't take a standard action.)

And @Rory, Stone Call looks like a nice spell too, thanks for the suggestion. Though it looks like I wouldn't be able to take it if I did choose witch... unless a patron has it... -goes to check-

Edit - Anyone who has access to the Inner Sea Magic content, what's you guys' opinion of the Ice Spears spell? Might be a nice combo with my Ice Storm strategy.

I kinda like the spell Ice Storm thematically, and it would fit well into a character concept I was tossing around. I have noticed, however, that the general consensus of the spell is that its... okay. Not terribly bad, but not terrifically good either.

That being said, I think the spell lends itself rather nicely to some creative optimizing. For example, Rime Spell metamagic. This would cause the spell to also entangle any creature that receives the cold damage from the modified spell, with no save against the entanglement.

This seems particularly nifty to me with Ice Storm. Provided that the affected targets aren't particularly resistant to cold damage, everything in a 20ft radius of the target spot just got ensnared for 4 rounds... in the middle of difficult terrain! With no save. That sounds really nasty to me.

Combined with a trait like magical lineage, it can be given Rime Spell for free. (I'm not sure if the rules agree, but me and my DM agreed that ML should be allowed to select any spell you intend to learn, and not just one you already know).

I'm considering either witch or druid for the concept that I'm envisioning, leaning more toward witch for those fun little hexes. If you can't tell, I'm going for something of a controller, who enjoys ice spells (naturally I'm dumbing it down because I don't feel like explaining the character's roleplaying concept xD). Is that little strategy of mine warranting of the spell slot (and the trait)? Or do I have better options around that level that I'd be better off with? Any advice would be greatly appreciated. ^^