Kazaan's page

I'm running a little thought experiment for a character with the following parameters:

1) Primarily a melee-centric character.
2) "Knightly", so heavy armor is very desirable, as is a mount.
3) Has an "Undeath" flavor, but not Evil nor actually Undead (so he's a living character that "resembles" an Undead, but doesn't actively "use" them).
4) Focuses on fighting against Undead, particularly using powers normally associated with them.

He'll be called the Wight Knight and, essentially, he's a bit of a heroic character (or maybe anti-hero) who focuses on fighting Undead by using their own power against them. He has access to the Undead Sorcerer (or Bloodrager) bloodline so he looks like and has probably been persecuted in the past as if he were an undead and decides to take the high-road and fight against that stigma (or, if anti-heroic, he's taking out his frustration against Undead and using fear effects to keep normal people away from him). Maybe also a bit of self-loathing in there for good measure. Also, there will be a bit of a running joke of people speaking about him and someone misunderstands his title as "White Knight" and later has their mental image of a handsome knight in shining armor shattered when finally meeting him in person.

Some ideas for how to pull this off:

A) Cavalier with Eldritch Heritage (Undead) feat line or, alternatively, VMC Sorcerer with Undead bloodline.
- Pros: Satisfies Heavy Armor, Mount, Some Undead flavor/powers from EH/VMC(Sorc)
- Cons: Doesn't get One Of Us that lets him seriously abuse unintelligent undead, no spells (like Chill Touch) that can be used against Undead.

B) Steelblood Bloodrager with Undead bloodline.
-Pros: Satisfies Heavy Armor, Significant Undead flavor/powers through Bloodline and spells, and gets One Foot in the Grave (equivalent to One Of Us).
- Cons: No scaling mount, so must rely on mundane mount. Not a strong "Knightly" image for the class unless going more for of a free-lancer (in the original sense of an unsworn mercenary lancer).

C) Bloodrider Bloodrager with Undead bloodline.
- Pros: Satisfies Mount, Significant Undead Flavor/powers through Bloodline and spells, and gets One Foot in the Grave.
- Cons: No Heavy Armor proficiency and no casting w/out ASF (unless using Mithral Heavy Armor), better "Knightly" image as compared to Steelblood option.

C) Undead Scourge Paladin with Eldritch Heritage or VMC Sorcerer.
- Pros: Satisfies Mount, Heavy Armor, Undead Flavor/powers through Bloodline and more holy spells (focusing on anti-undead ones) through Paladin spell list.
- Cons: no real Undead-themed spells, and a bit too heavy on the "holy warrior" image which ruins the image of a frightful, undead-looking, anti-undead champion.

Are there any other options I'm not considering? Also, any tips or advise on how to go about building the character? I'm already looking at some spells like Chill Touch, Cause Fear, etc. if I go with a spellcasting option.

One of the things that bothers many people is the legacy of incorrect sword terminology that rose out of D&D and has been perpetuated throughout games, both tabletop like Pathfinder as well as working its way into computer-based RPGs. So what would a proper sword spectrum look like for Pathfinder? First off, we must take into consideration that the "short" and "long" in shortsword and longsword didn't really refer to the length of the blade so much as the length of the handle. A Shortsword has enough room for only one hand while a Longsword has a long enough hilt that it can be wielded in two hands. The fact of the matter is that what we call the Longsword in D&D, Pathfinder, and similar games isn't even a Longsword at all. What we'd call a Greatsword or a Bastard Sword is more akin to what would have historically been called a Longsword, and what we call a Longsword is more akin to what would have been a Bastard Sword or maybe an Arming sword. And we really don't have a good example of what would have actually been called a Greatsword. A true, historical Greatsword is more like a short Polearm than an actual sword. So, a more correct "spectrum" of swords would be as follows:

1) Shortsword: light martial weapon, 1d6(p) damage, 19-20/x2 crit No change needed; this one they actually got right
2) Arming Sword: 1-h martial weapon, 1d6(p or s) damage, 19-20/x2 crit, no benefit from using two-handed but, if proficient, is treated as light for TWF penalties, treated as shortsword for feats and abilities. This is your real knight's sidearm, meant to be used in conjunction with a shield.
3) Bastard Sword: 1-h martial weapon, 1d8 damage(p or s), 19-20/x2 crit, treated as Longsword for feats and abilities (eg. Weapon Focus, Improved Critical, etc). Actually takes the place of the old Longsword, a Bastard Sword was a hybrid of a proper Shortsword and proper Longsword.
4) Longsword: 1-h exotic weapon, 1d10(s) damage, 19-20/x2 crit, if lacking exotic proficiency, you must treat is as a 2-h martial weapon, treated as full 2-h weapon when wielded in two hands. Takes the place of the old Bastard Sword and is more properly used as a 2-h weapon for 2-h techniques (eg. shield of swings, pushing assault, etc). You'd only one-hand it if you were using your free hand for assisting maneuvers like a grab, shove, etc.
5) War Sword: 2-h martial weapon, 1d10(s) damage, 19-20/x2 crit, brace, treated as Longsword for feats and abilities. Takes the place of the old Greatsword with some added features and properly represents a midway point between a proper Longsword and a proper Greatsword
6) Greatsword: 2-h exotic weapon, 2d6(s) damage, 19-20/x2 crit, brace, can be used as if you have the Lunge feat, if you actually have the Lunge feat you can use it without taking AC penalty (for this weapon only), in Polearms fighter weapon group. What a proper Greatsword should be, more a polearm than a sword and used against charges

Challenge: Build a Tokusentai (Special Battle Squad) consisting of nothing but Rangers which would be sent out on the most difficult missions for the state.

Criteria: Team must consist of 5 PCs and 1 GMPC. All characters must be single-class Rangers. If desired, the GMPC may be a Slayer. Each character must have a unique point compared to the others. They must also work well as a balanced team (teamwork feats are highly recommended). One of these PCs must be "Red", the leader of the squad. The GMPC is "black", s(he) is more of a lone wolf type who only links up with the group when teamwork is beyond absolutely necessary or as the plot demands. Others should have some kind of a "color" theme appropriate to their skills and personality. They should emphasize the positive aspects of their color more than any negative aspects. For instance, "Yellow" may be a little bit of a coward, but don't focus on that, instead emphasizing traits like cheerfulness or using mental strengths to compensate for physical shortfalls (This site can help with establishing color-based personalities). "Black" starts at level 5, "Red" starts at level 4, and the rest start at level 3. Alignments should be LN, LG, NG, or CG for the PCs while the GMPC can be CG, NG, TN, or CN. Races should be appropriate for a "civilized nation" so predominantly non-vile races should be used. If a race like Orc, Drow, Goblin, etc. is desired, it should have a very good backstory accompanying it. Include ability scores, feats, skills, traits, and equipment load-out (assume normal WBL for each character). Potential missions can include anything from hunting down very dangerous criminals, clearing dangerous caverns near settled areas, patrolling dangerous wilderness, etc. May also be used as elite scouts in very dangerous situations like major battles.

Ready... Set... GO!

I came across this line in Glossary/Invisibility in a moment of serendipity:

A creature can grope about to find an invisible creature. A character can make a touch attack with his hands or a weapon into two adjacent 5-foot squares using a standard action. If an invisible target is in the designated area, there is a 50% miss chance on the touch attack. If successful, the groping character deals no damage but has successfully pinpointed the invisible creature's current location. If the invisible creature moves, its location, obviously, is once again unknown.

If, as a standard action, you can "sweep" your hand (or a weapon) through two adjacent squares in order to find an invisible creature, what exactly is stopping you from doing this at any other time? Shouldn't it be possible to hold a Shocking Grasp charge and attempt to touch two enemies in one "swing"? Of course, only the first one to actually get struck suffers the spell effect, but it's a nice backup in case you miss; you have a chance to touch a second enemy for no additional action economy. Even better if you have a multi-touch spell like Frostbite or Chill Touch.

The Fighter Bonus Feats FAQ is contradictory with the Magus, Myrmidarch FAQ. Which one is correct? Alternatively, what specific situations does the Magus FAQ break the assumption set by the Fighter FAQ?

Magus, Myrmidarch: Do my weapon training and armor training abilities stack if I multiclass into fighter?

Yes.
Armor training requires more explanation as to how they stack:
Fighter armor training 1 (gained at 3rd level) also gives a fighter the ability to move at normal speed in medium armor. A myrmidarch gains armor training 1 at 8th level, and also gains this ability to overcome the speed reduction of medium armor.
Fighter armor training 2 (gained at 7th level) also gives a fighter the ability to move at normal speed in heavy armor. A myrmidarch gains armor training 2 at 14th level, and also gains this ability to overcome the speed reduction of heavy armor.
A multiclassed character with armor training 1 from fighter (3rd level) and armor training 1 from myrmidarch (8th level) gains the ability to overcome the speed reduction of heavy armor (as it is the equivalent of armor training 2, which grants that ability).

Source, May 2013

Fighter: What feats can I retrain at level 4, 8, and so on?

Class entries in the Core Rulebook are written assuming that your character is single-classed (not multiclassed). The fighter's ability to retrain feats allows you to retrain one of your fighter bonus feats (gained at 1st level, 2nd level, 4th level, and so on). You can't use it to retrain feats (combat feats or otherwise) from any other source, such as your feats at level 1, 3, etc., your 1st-level human bonus feat, or bonus feats from other classes.

You may want to asterisk your fighter bonus feats on your character sheet so you can easily determine which you can retrain later.

Source, June 2013

These two FAQ responses seem to be at odds. The Myrmidarch FAQ states that "stacking" class abilities like Weapon Training cross class even without explicitly stating that they do so while the Fighter Bonus Feats ability posted a mere 1 month later sets the standard that your character is assumed single-classed and that class abilities do not cross the class boundary unless given explicit permission. These premises are contradictory as they cannot both be correct or incorrect; one and only one of these statements can be true. For reference, this is the same issue that arose with the Racial Heritage/Half-breeds FAQs. Can we get some consistency in these FAQ responses or, alternatively, an explanation of what situations other than being explicitly given permission do we drop the single-class assumption? FAQ it up.

I'm looking to build a cavalier that isn't "optimized", that is to say, not optimized for a Cavalier build, but "optimal" in that, given a few thematic presets, as good as he can be while meeting all these conditions.

Requirements:
1) Order of the Cockatrice.
2) Combines use of Lance and Bastard Sword. General strategy is to charge in first with the lance, but holding his BS at ready to full-attack after he has charged (or in cases where a mounted Lance charge isn't viable). This also allows him to threaten at reach with the Lance and adjacent with BS.
3) Later, will switch to a Large Sunblade. A Sunblade is treated as a shortsword so a Large one would be treated as a Large light weapon which is one-handed for a Medium character. If suggested build utilizes a Small race, shift these sizes down (small character wielding Medium Sunblade).
4) Not much of a team player so an archetype that trades out Tactician class abilities is preferred.
5) Rides an Ostrich.
6) Prefer full Cavalier w/out dips, but if it's really compelling, a 1-2 lvl dip is acceptable.

There's a particular weapon from a particular game with horridly repetitive music that was basically an unassuming shortsword which, when swung, extended a black energy blade which gave it incredible reach, kind of like swinging around a whip. I'd like to recreate that feel with some thematic changes for the PF system so here it goes:

Shadowslayer

What spells would be appropriate for making this? I'm thinking Shadow Weapon + Doom. Also, what kind of cost would be appropriate? General thoughts about the concept?

So the "four horsemen" are a popular concept, taken from mythology and copy-pasted ad nauseum throughout fantasy and popular culture. For those who don't know, the image of the "four horsemen" is taken primarily from the New Testament's 'Book of Revelation'. In Golarion cosmology, the "four horsemen" represent the top four deified entities for the Daemons in Abbadon. However, I recently read Revelation and came upon something... there are actually five horsemen described in Revelation.

I looked, and there was a white horse! Its rider had a bow; a crown was given him, and he came out conquering and to conquer

"The Conqueror"

And out came another horse, bright red; its rider was permitted to take peace from the earth, so that people would slaughter one another; and he was given a great sword.

War

...I looked, and there was a black horse! Its rider held a pair of scales in his hand, and I heard what seemed to be a voice in the midst of the four living creatures saying, "A quart of wheat for a day's pay, and three quarts of barley for a day's pay, but do not damage the olive oil and the wine!"

Famine

I looked and there was a pale green horse! Its rider's name was Death, and Hades followed with him; they were given authority over a fourth of the earth, to kill with sword, famine, and pestilence, and by the wild animals of the earth.

Death (the only one specifically named, btw)

These are the four we're all familiar with. But, much later, there is a fifth horseman described...

Then I saw heaven opened, and there was a white horse! Its rider is called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he judges and makes war. His eyes are like a flame of fire, and on his head are many diadems; and he has a name inscribed that no one knows but himself. He is clothed in a robe dipped in blood, and his name is called The Word of God... 20.16: On his robe and on his thigh he has a name inscribed, "King of kings and Lord of lords".

So, I'm thinking, how exactly would you fit this into a story about a group of people modeled after the "five horsemen"? Maybe a LG Cavalier leading with a group of four NE Cavaliers who do dirty work in his name? The Conqueror would, obviously, be a mounted archer. War uses a Greatsword and Death would, iconically, use a scythe. Famine and Truth, though, I'm not entirely sure what kind of weapon they should use. The four NE cavaliers are evil to the core, but, under the guidance and leadership of Truth, their lust for violence has been directed at other evildoers; evil pitted against greater evil for the sake of good. Brainstorm, GO!

Vicious

This special ability can only be placed on melee weapons. When a vicious weapon strikes an opponent, it creates a flash of disruptive energy that resonates between the opponent and the wielder. This energy deals an extra 2d6 points of damage to the opponent and 1d6 points of damage to the wielder.

We've been having a discussion in another thread and determined we need to know exactly what category the extra damage from Vicious falls into. It has been narrowed down to the following:

1) Extra damage dice as part of the weapon's damage (ie. Slashing weapon deals 2d6 slashing damage)

2) Untyped Energy damage

3) Negative Energy damage

By a strict reading of RAW, one would presume it's option 2. No mention of Negative Energy is made, but it is explicitly called out as an arc of energy. Some propose that, since Enervation is used in the making, it deals negative energy damage but this has less support as Merciful isn't taken to be positive energy damage just because it uses CLW. But there is, apparently, an AP featuring a BBEG with a Vicious weapon that doesn't harm him because he has sufficient DR, indicating it is option 1; physical damage. Is there an official statement regarding this that someone could link? Lacking that, FAQ it up and provide your support or suggestions for a possibility that wasn't included here.

So, my wife has been making a "Random Plot Generator" that generates a random story plot from various lists of basics (character, conflict, location, etc). She asked me for my opinion on a generated plot that involved "Combat Attorneys". So my mind raced to flesh out this plot involving a land where the justice system is built around dueling and "attorneys" were people you would hire to "represent" you in the duel and also took part in wars by being right there on the battlefield to watch and make sure that everything follows the "rules of engagement" in a heavily litigated society. It was an amazing story... but my wife got confused at what the hell I was talking about. So I looked at the computer screen to see it wasn't, in fact, "Combat Attorneys" but rather "A Combat Tourney (tournament)".

But it was too good of an idea to give up. So how would I built a good Combat Attorney?

Had a brainstorm for a mechanic and a few feats to go along with it that could potentially make charisma (a common go-to dumpstat) more viable even for non-charisma based characters.

Premise: Charisma governs your force of personality and sense of self-confidence. It's a relatively common trope for a hero to hit a "limit-break" point at which they gain extreme power for a period of time. The base mechanic will be intended to be a "death save" that kicks in when a character is in imminent danger of hitting "dying" status.

Fighting Spirit: If an attack would bring you into negative hitpoints, you have a chance to get a burst of spirit and confidence that allows you to keep going for a time. When any damage would result in you having negative hitpoints, roll d% and add your Charisma score. If the total is over 100, regardless of how much damage was dealt, you are only brought down to 1 hit point and gain temporary hit points equal to your Charisma score as well as a +3 morale bonus to AC and all saves. This lasts for (3 + Charisma Bonus) rounds (minimum 1 round, after which you become exhausted for 10 minutes. This effect cannot be triggered if you are exhausted, but it will remove the fatigued status if you have it.

Improved Fighting Spirit
Prerequisites: lvl 4, 13 Cha
Benefit: You gain 50% more temporary hit points from triggering Fighting Spirit and the bonus to AC and saves increases to +5. The exhaustion at the end of the effect is reduced to 5 minutes.

Explosion of Fighting Spirit
Prerequisites: lvl 8, 15 Cha, Improved Fighting Spirit
Benefit: If your current HP is less than the lower of half your max HP or your Charisma score, you may attempt to trigger Fighting Spirit as a standard action. The exhaustion at the end of the effect is replaced by 5 minutes of fatigue unless you were already fatigued before it triggered.

Resilient Fighting Spirit
Prerequisites: lvl 8, 15 Cha, Improved Fighting Spirit
Benefit: The bonus to temporary hit points given by Improved Fighting Spirit is increased to 100%. You are also immune to fatigue for the duration of the Fighting Spirit effect.

Lively Fighting Spirit
Prerequisites: lvl 8, 15 Cha, Improved Fighting Spirit
Benefit: When Fighting Spirit takes effect, you are left at 3 HP. If you still have temporary HP remaining at the end of the effect, you are healed for an amount equal to your temporary HP and all temporary HP are lost.
Special: If you are at least middle-aged, use your Charisma modifier to determine your bonus Hit Points instead of Constitution. The penalty to ability scores from Old and Venerable age categories are reduced by 1 point

Fighting Spirit of the Ages
Prerequisites: lvl 12, 17 Cha, Improved Fighting Spirit, Lively Fighting Spirit, middle-aged or older
Benefit: Use your Charisma modifier to calculate your Fortitude Save instead of Constitution. The penalty to ability scores for all age categories is reduced by 1 (stacks with Lively Fighting Spirit).

Indomitable Fighting Spirit
Prerequisites: lvl 12, 17 Cha, Improved Fighting Spirit, Resilient Fighting Spirit
Benefit: The bonus to AC and Saves increases to +8. You are immune to both fatigue and exhaustion for the duration of the Fighting Spirit effect and will be fatigued when it ends, even if you were fatigued when it came into effect.

Mighty Fighting Spirit
Prerequisites: Lvl 12, 17 Cha, Improved Fighting Spirit, Explosion of Fighting Spirit
Benefit: While under the effect of Fighting Spirit, you gain a +4 morale bonus to attack and damage rolls as well as the save DCs for any abilities or spells you use.

Heroic Fighting Spirit
Prerequisites: lvl 16, 19 Cha, Explosion of Fighting Spirit, Indomitable Fighting Spirit
Benefit: While under the effect of Fighting Spirit, you gain a +4 morale bonus to all ability scores and DR 5/--. You can also use Explosion of Fighting Spirit as a move action and, when triggered, you deal 3d6+Cha Bonus as force damage (calculated before +4 bonus to ability scores).

Any critique or suggestions on the mechanic and/or feats? Anything that should be changed? Do any of the prerequisites come off as overly steep or do they fit the potential of the feats?

Is the Alchemical Cartridge reduction to reload speed from Metal Cartridges for Advanced Firearms already "baked" into the stated reload speeds (standard for 2-h, move for 1-h actually a standard action brought down to a move action), or are those stated speeds already the "base" reload speeds and using Metal Cartridges (which you must use anyway) cut it by one step further?

Stemming from this thread, we've reached the following conclusions that indicated the original question from that thread (which is 3 years old) probably doesn't meet the more recent FAQ standards.

Logic is as follows:

All advanced firearms use Metal Cartridges as ammo which are a type of alchemical cartridge; they don't get the choice between alchemical or "loose" bullets like early firearms. Naturally, this means that, from using alchemical cartridges, their reload speed is reduced by 1 step. Now, if this were taken as the de facto standard (since you can only use this kind of ammo anyway), it would be perfectly reasonable that this is how they arrived at reload times stated in the rules that are one step lower than those for comparable early firearms they only state a Move action in the rules since it can never be a standard action. This would mean that the "base" reload speed for, say, a Revolver is actually a standard action which is always cut to a move action by alchemical cartridges. If this is the case, then Rapid Reload would cut this base reload speed from a standard to a move action from which it automatically goes down to a free action to reload your revolver. *It would have no effect, however, on an advanced 2-h firearm since Rapid Reload would cut the [actual] reload speed from a standard action to... a standard action because that's what it brings a 2-h firearm down to.*

However, if this shift is not automatically taken into consideration, it needs to be manually done, in which case, the base reload speed of a Revolver is a move action which is cut down to a Free action by use of metal cartridges (which you must use) and Rapid Reload is altogether moot.

Of course, the third option is that Metal Cartridges, despite being alchemical cartridges, don't grant the reload speed bonus to advanced firearms (since you're reloading all the chambers rather than a single barrel), in which case the Revolver caps at a Move action to reload and nothing can change that.

FAQ it up.

Edit(24Jan2014): Changed some incorrect premises and conclusions derived from them.

I don't see very many rules elements that play around with BAB that much so I decided to design a couple of Style chains; one based around increasing BAB and the other around decreasing it.

Thousand Cuts

Heavenly Demon

Any critique, suggestions, or glaring problems?

Can a character wear inappropriately-sized armor (or shields) and, if so, is there a penalty involved?

The rules don't explicitly say that you cannot use wrong-sized armor, but they do imply that armor is sized for certain size-categories. It stands to reason that if you were able to wear wrong-sized armor, there would be some kind of penalty involved. For example, could a Medium character wear a Large-sized chainmail with a penalty to skill checks and dex to AC? It isn't beyond the realm of possibility to imagine a Human draping himself in a Large-sized chainmail. How would this affect shields which are sort of hybrids between weapons and armor? Is it outright impossible to wear/wield a Large Buckler as a Medium character? Can you use it and still treat it as a Buckler? Or would you treat it as a Light Shield? Are there penalties involved similar to inappropriately sized weapons? These questions, in various forms, have been thrown around before, particularly Here but the response was Question Unclear. Would there be any benefit to doing so as well. One would expect that Large Chainmail is thicker and sturdier than Medium Chainmail.

I'm trying to figure out a way to fit "magenta" alignments into the system in a meaningful way. For those unfamiliar with the reference, "magenta" is a color that we can see, but has no real corresponding wavelength of life; it's a trick of the way our eyes perceive color and would be a wavelength of light that is both longer than red light and shorter than blue light (a paradox). "Magenta" alignment would be more lawful than lawful while, at the same time, more chaotic than chaotic (or the analogous version for good and evil). Does anyone know any system or setting that has attempted this and/or terms that were used?

If one were to want to make a Venomancer, how would you make one. I don't want to leverage Alchemist, I want an "actual caster" like wizard or sorc. I'm thinking a 1-3 level dip into Poisoner Rogue archetype, backed up by spells like Accelerate Poison. How would you put this together?

I'm working on the idea of a "Determination" system based on a concept from another game. The basics are as follows:

When you fail any d20 roll (ie. miss an attack, fail a rolled save, etc) you earn 1 determination point. Determination points could be leveraged to give you a bonus on subsequent d20 rolls. If you fail, you're more determined to succeed the next time. But I'm not sure which would be the best way to implement it. I have two major concepts:

A) You get a determination bonus equal to your number of determination points on all your d20 rolls. When you succeed at a d20 roll, you lose all saved determination points. To illustrate, say you're rolling d20+10. You fail the roll so you get 1 determination point. On your next attempt at this roll, you roll d20+11 because you have 1 point. Lets say you fail this one as well. Next roll is d20+12. So on and so forth. When you finally succeed at a roll, your determination points are reset to 0.

B) As above, you get 1 determination point when you fail at a task, but these points can be saved and need not be spent right away. You can have intervening successes, but save up your "determination" for one major roll where it counts such as landing a stunning fist. You also don't use nor lose all points when you decide to employ them; if you have 5 points and spend 3 on a particular roll, you will have 2 remaining.

Possible alterations to the system I've thought of include the following:

1) Instead of being a bonus to the roll, the points increase your effective dice roll. In other words, if you rolled a 15 on the dice, you can use 5 points to calculate as if you had rolled a natural 20 for an auto-hit and a crit threat. Likewise, if you roll a botch or a misfire, you could supply additional points to bring it the actual dice roll up so that a botched roll isn't auto-fail if you have enough static bonus or so that it doesn't trigger a misfire on a firearm. For example, if you have +20 on your attack, but roll a natural 1, you'd miss even an AC 10 target because 1 is an auto-miss, but if you put at least 1 determination point it, it's counted as a natural 2 or higher so it will hit because of your static bonus. By this method, you can never increase it higher than a natural 20 and, if you reach that limit using Method A described above, you'll only lose as many points as it takes to boost your roll to 20; ie. you roll 19, and have 5 points, you'll be left with 4, but if you roll 10, you'll take all 5 and only net a roll of 15).

2) "Determination training": By spending some designated period of time (I'm thinking about 30 minutes or so) practicing, you can give yourself a starting determination point if you have none. If you already have at least 1 point, you cannot use this method to give yourself any more. Nice routine for the beginning of the day when casters are preparing their spells, martials can spend time practicing and still have some time left to employ their whetstones.

3) Possible support feats:
- Succeed Better: If you succeed by a margin of 1-2, you earn a determination points (normal: you only earn a determination point if you fail a roll)
- One-Upmanship: If an ally fails a roll by 10 or more, you earn a determination point.

Which method seems best to people and what changes, if any, should be made for a balanced system?

Blade of the Sword Saint

Question: Does the special property of 'Blade of the Sword Saint' count as having a 'free hand'? If not, what limitations are there?

Note the line, "In addition to its more common properties, this weapon can be employed as though the wielder were unarmed: the wielder benefits from feats such as Deflect Arrows or Snatch Arrows..." Then, we look at the Deflect Arrows feat; no where does it mention "while unarmed", but it does say you must have a "free hand" (nothing held in it) in order to qualify. I extrapolate from this that "...as though the wielder were unarmed" equals "as though the wielder has a free hand". It calls out explicitly that this satisfies the use requirement for Deflect/Snatch Arrows. Does it apply for any situations which call for having a "free hand", including, but not limited to:

- Free-hand Fighter archetype's pertinent abilities
- Crane Wing feat
- Somatic Components for Spells
- Spell Combat
- Grappling
- Snapping Turtle Style feat
- Tiger Claws feat
- Sash of Flowing Water wondrous item

Does the "as though the wielder were unarmed" special property of the BotSS allow one to perform all these abilities even while wielding the weapon in two hands and without penalty (ie. Grapple)? If not, what exceptions are there and how should future exceptions be determined?

Wrist Sheath: This is a sheath designed to be strapped to your forearm and hidden under a long sleeve. The sheath can hold one forearm-length item, such as a dagger, dart, or wand, or up to five arrows or crossbow bolts. As a move action, you can bend your wrist to cause some or all of these items to drop into your hand (provoking attacks of opportunity as normal). You have a +2 bonus on Sleight of Hand checks made to oppose the Perception check of someone observing or frisking you to determine items in the sheath. You can only wear one wrist sheath per arm.

The bolded section indicates that it's a move action to release the weapon from the wrist sheath and this provokes as normal. The Draw a Weapon action doesn't provoke. Retrieve an Item, on the other hand, does provoke. Furthermore, the sheath is normally worn under a long sleeve which means the weapon isn't "in easy reach" which is a requirement to be able to use "Draw a Weapon" to ready it. So, is retrieving a weapon from a Wrist Sheath supposed to be a "Draw a Weapon" action, or is it supposed to be a "Retrieve an Item" action just like getting it from your backpack? By extension, the Spring-loaded Wrist Sheath states that it functions just like a normal Wrist Sheath, but reduces the action economy from Move to Swift. If using a normal Wrist Sheath is supposed to be Retrieve an Item, does it become a Swift Retrieve an Item? RAW, while not stating explicitly, implies by the statement about the action provoking and the weapon not being "in easy reach" that it's a Retrieve an Item action. But a lot of people seem to be acting on the presumption that this is an error (which may reflect how people acted on the presumption that Spell Combat is erroneously labeled a Full-Round action when it was "supposed to be" a Full-Attack).

So, is the way it's currently written correctly implying that it's a Retrieve an Item action, or does it need a change to explicitly or implicitly say it's a Draw a Weapon action? Given the in-explicit nature of the text and the general confusion these kinds of things cause, FAQs hits seem warranted.

Benefit: You must declare that you are using this feat before you make your attack roll (thus a failed attack roll ruins the attempt). On a successful hit, the attack deals damage normally and you can choose to push your target 5 feet or attempt to knock them prone. If you decide to push the target, it is moved 5 feet directly away from you. This movement does not provoke attacks of opportunity, and the target must end this move in a safe space it can stand in. If you decide to attempt to knock the target prone, the target receives a Fortitude saving throw with a DC of 10 + 1/2 your character level + your Wisdom modifier to avoid the effect. You may attempt a punishing kick attack once per day for every four levels you have attained (but see Special), and no more than once per round.

Nothing in the Benefit block indicates that your 'attack roll' needs to be for an Unarmed Strike. The Fluff line describes it as a kick and the ability requires IUS, but the crunch doesn't bring up what kind of attack is necessary beyond requiring an attack roll. So, was it intended to be limited to Unarmed Strikes? Any melee attack, even with a manufactured weapon? Or any attack involving a roll including ranged weapon attacks, melee touch spells, ranged touch spells and rays? Where is the line supposed to be drawn with this skill? I have a feeling it needs either clarification that any attack roll suffices or an errata to limit the scope. FAQ it all.

Move:

... If you use two move actions in a round (sometimes called a “double move” action), you can move up to double your speed. If you spend the entire round running, you can move up to quadruple your speed (or triple if you are in heavy armor).

Is the "double-move" counted as a single action (ie. provokes once for movement, requires only 1 stealth check, etc) that allows you to move "double your speed", or is it actually two segregated move actions which can provoke independently, must use separate stealth checks, etc. Any existing precedent on the subject?

We've got dagger pistols and axe muskets. In honor of RWBY Yellow, I want a shotgun cestus. Someone needs to get on this ASAP.

What kind of action does a Called Shot require?

Making Called Shots

A called shot is an attack aimed at a particular part of the body, in the hope of gaining some extra effect from the attack. The smaller or better guarded the area, the more difficult the called shot. A called shot is a single attack made as a full-round action, and thus can't be combined with a charge, feats like Vital Strike, or multiple attacks with a full-attack action.

Here, it states that you spend a full-round action to make a single attack as a Called Shot. However;

Called Shot Feats

Improved Called Shot: You are skilled at landing blows right where you want to.
...
Normal: You can make one called shot per round as a standard action.

Greater Called Shot: You can make multiple called shots where others could land but one.
...
Normal: You can make only one called shot in a round as a standard action. A called shot that deals 50 points of damage is a debilitating blow.

Here, the associated feats state that the Normal state for Called Shot is that it takes a Standard Action to perform. There was an old threat started back in 2011 regarding the matter, Here that got 17 FAQ requests but the response, "No reply required". So the contradiction still stands. Now that the FAQ team is addressing these issues in earnest, can we get a more reasonable response?

Alignment debates are something of a point of contention among players of games with such a system, especially when that system has more than fluff-based effects within the game (ie. classes and abilities tied to a specific alignment). One of the biggest points is the situation of "Evil" aligned characters as part of a Heroic party. You've got the Paladin, champion of justice and morality, you've got your disciplined if morally neutral Monk, your morally motivated Cleric who's willing to bend the rules to help people... and your Sorcerer who doesn't care who gets hurt so long as his own goals are met. LG, LN, NG, and NE all in the same party going off to kill the BBEG for the sake of the hapless peasants. How do we, as Roleplayers and from the angle of the mechanical RPG system reconcile the option to have Evil aligned characters in an otherwise good-motivated party? There are many standpoints on the issue. "Just don't do it". Forbid the option of taking an Evil character on a heroic quest. "Let it all play out". Let the Evil character in and it's up to him to hide his alignment from the others. "Evil Party". The whole group is evil and is looking to beat the BBEG just so they can install themselves as the new tyrants. But is all this really necessary? Is Evil destined to be the alignment of Villains while Good be the alignment of Heroes?

Good vs Evil:
At its core, the morality system of games like this comes down to a distinction between a respect for individual life and well being or a fundamental disregard. Respecting life doesn't mean you never take life; we have to eat, of course and that involves killing a living thing (animal or plant) and it's justified to take another life if it's a clear and present danger to yourself or another (after all, respect for life includes respect for your own life). Disregarding life, likewise, doesn't mean you're always out to kill something; preferring a dead enemy over a live one doesn't mean you go out actively seeking conflict for the sake of killing and the belief that people should live or die by their own power rather than rely on others doesn't mean you hope that they die, just that they should try their hardest rather than be so reliant on others for their well being.

Heroism vs Villainy:
This is the thing that always trips people up; they presume that Good = Hero and Evil = Villain. This is the same frame of mind that presumes Light = Good and Dark = Evil. Sure, it's natural for a Good-motivated person, a person who respects the sanctity of life and tries their best not to kill out of hand, to be a Hero. But does that mean that the guy who says, while he doesn't look for a fight, he'll kill dead anyone who challenges him because that's the goal of a fight, is any less a hero? It also works from the other angle; that of the Villain. Sure, the Evil villain who is out for his own power or just to see the world burn is clearly a villain. But what about the villain who wants to end suffering and crime by setting up a totalitarian, martial state or wants to usurp the power of the Gods because he thinks he can do a better job of "herding the flock"? Is he any less a villain for his Good motivations? Was Robin Hood any less heroic for going against the law of the land? Was Darth Vader any less villainous for wanting a galaxy ruled by strict law so the people wouldn't suffer tragedy and loss?

Reconciliation:
How do you reconcile the idea of the Good Villain or the Evil Hero? Well, what, exactly, makes a Hero or a Villain? I think that, in a fantasy universe at least, Heroes and Villains are those who are guided by some sort of destiny; those "picked out" by the universe as focal points for events. The Hero who is a hero just so he can kill and maim without getting in trouble for it is still a Hero. The Villain who thinks he can do better for the people than the Gods is still a Villain. In that sense, just being the PCs establishes you as the "Heroes" and it shouldn't matter what alignment you have; you're in a party pursuing a shared goal. Now certainly, there may be contention when a Paladin bound by oaths has to fight alongside a Barbarian who thinks nothing of cleaving down any in his way, the fact that the Barbarian is a member of this party, fighting towards a Heroic goal means that he's already decided that this is what he "wants" to do and it's too much trouble for him to have a run-in with the Paladin; so even a CE Barbarian who's thirsty for blood will say, "Yeah, I can do that later, right now, I'll just kill the guys the Paladin says are OK to kill" and it's perfectly justified regarding the alignment. That's where responsibility to the player comes in; If you're going to play a Chaotic and/or Evil alignment as a member of a Heroic party, you're kind of obligated to remember that you are a Hero first and foremost. Trying to deny that and falling back on "CE means I can do whatever I want regardless of consequence" is bad role-play because you're failing to remember that you're a Hero and not just a Hapless who somehow got filed into a Heroic party due to a Celestial Bureaucracy error. Again, your failure isn't in acting CE but in not acting Heroically CE. Furthermore, there's no reason for non-Evil or non-Chaotic party members to "automatically distrust you" just because they find out you're "evil" or "chaotic" or even both. Remember, these are terms that we, as players, utilize to categorize aspects of play. Unless they have a specific ability that lets them "see" your alignment, characters don't have signs on their foreheads spelling out their alignment. It's a pretty standard trope that if the players are all in the same party, it's presumed they are all "on the same side" regardless of individual motivations towards sanctity of life and order. Yeah, the Evil guy might decide to stab you in the back if it suits him... but so could the Chaotic guy. Sure, a CG character may not literally injure you, but he could benignly go do his own thing that suits his own goals. And the Evil guy isn't likely to be working with you in the first place if he's just going to double-cross you first opportunity; he would have just attacked you right off. If he does intend to double-cross you, well, that's a plot element right there. It's usually pretty meta-gamey to preempt plot elements just because you know alignment, especially from the mindset of Good doesn't necessarily mean Hero and Evil doesn't necessarily mean Villain.

For example, suppose your party (including a Paladin) come across a Demon's lair. Every encounter they've had leads them to conclude that this Demon is the source of ills for the nearby village which has contracted the party to investigate the source of their problems. So you bust into the Demon's lair, and bust him up. He then pleads that he wasn't the source of the problems and offers to help you find the real source if you let him go. Now, the conventional logic would say, "Demon = Evil = Villain. He's lying, destroy him." However, your party being "chosen out by destiny" to be Heroes, if this Demon really is telling the truth (selfishly motivated, for sure) there will be some indication for you as a party of heroes to know to spare him (This is the GM's responsibility). That is the core of storytelling and roleplay; understanding that it is a story subject to certain tropes and cliches and you are obligated to portray your character in a believable light. It's rather poor behavior as both a gamer and as a person in general to just say, "To hell with anyone else, I'll play the game however I want regardless of who's fun it ruins," and just proceed to vent all your pent up sociopathic behavior on a fantasy world because it, "doesn't really matter." Save that attitude for playing Elder Scrolls and going on a rampage after saving your game; it has no place on an RPG table. Once that attitude of "I'm Chaotic and/or Evil, I can do whatever I want" is removed, it makes room for the idea of separate duality between Good/Evil, Law/Chaos, Hero/Villain to fall into place and see common use.

Is there precedent (or, conversely, prohibition) for "touching" an opponent with a weapon? For example, say I have a longsword and I just want to tap an opponent on the shoulder with it without doing damage. Would that qualify as a touch attack using said weapon? Furthermore, if I have a weapon with, say, the flaming, freezing, or electric enhancement, would touching them with the weapon deliver the bonus energy damage? Lastly, if I'm a Magus, can I use a weapon to administer a touch attack so that I deliver my spell without dealing the weapon damage and still targeting touch AC (ie. deliver a touch spell using a reach weapon and still target touch AC at expense of weapon damage). If so, would the spell still crit on the weapon's crit chance or would it default to normal spell crit rules since I'm not really dealing damage with the weapon?

I'm hammering out a system to "purchase" templates using the point-buy system. I have an idea for the costs, but want a second opinion on how balanced it would be. Basically, you take the CR increase of the template, multiply it by X where X is the balancing factor, then purchasing it is the equivalent of boosting a stat from 10 to (CR * X). For example, if someone wanted a CR+1 template that they qualify for (things like type and subtype restrictions, HD restrictions, etc. would still apply) and we set X at 4, then this is the equivalent of boosting a stat from 10 to 14 which would cost 5 points. Co a CR+1 template costs you 5 points when X = 4. Is 4 a good value for X or would 3 be a better option?

Side rules of the system would involve templates that change when the creature surpasses a certain number of HD. For example, the Resolute template is CR+0 when you have less than 5 HD, but goes to CR+1 when you hit 5 HD. I'm thinking that, for a situation like this, you suffer a negative level when you hit 5 HD. Thematically, it would represent a sort of existential crisis where you have to really look at your values, physicality, whatever and decide if you really live up to what that template demands of you (via Atonement or similar effect).

Also, there might need to be a way to calculate equivalent point-buy that falls outside the normal range. 18 is normally the highest you can boost a stat to at a cost of 17 points. But, if going with X = 4, a CR+5 template would be equivalent to boosting a stat to 20. The rough pattern seems be that the increase of points is i and every even tier starting at +4, i = i + 1. So, with i starting at 1, going from 10 to 11 is 0 + 1; it costs 1 point. 11 to 12, i stays at 1 point so 1 + 1 = 2; it costs 2 points to go from 10 to 12. But 13 to 14, i changes to 2 so it costs 5 points rather than 4. i goes up again to +3 when going from 15 to 16. By this pattern, going from 18 to 19 would cost 21 and 19 to 20 would cost 26.

The last thing that concerns me are outlier templates like Advance. It gives significant benefit for only CR+1. Should it have a special rule like "counts as CR+2" or should it piggyback on the rule for HD-improved templates and when they reach a certain level, they suffer a negative until they've come to terms with themselves?

Had an idea for a thematic weapon and need to know if there's anything already present that allows a Quarterstaff to be finessed and have the Agile property.

So, do I need to start applying houserules or is there already a RAW way to do this?

Ki Throw

Benefit: On a successful unarmed trip attack against a target your size or smaller, you may throw the target prone in any square you threaten rather than its own square. This movement does not provoke attacks of opportunity, and you cannot throw the creature into a space occupied by other creatures.
Special: A monk may gain Ki Throw as a bonus feat at 10th level. A monk with this feat can affect creatures larger than his own size by spending 1 ki point per size category difference.

Source

Now Ki Throw normally allows you to throw a creature up to your own size when you trip them. The bolded section states that a monk with Ki Throw can affect creatures larger than himself by spending 1 ki point per size category difference. You can normally only trip something up to one size category bigger than you. Does this imply that, if I have Ki Throw, my Medium Monk can spend 1 Ki to trip a Huge creature as if it were Large without the reposition or 2 Ki to trip and reposition as if it were a medium?

In the course of a discussion, we came against the following situation:

Point: You can trip someone with a reach weapon, take a 5' step up, and perform a Vicious Stomp AoO against the now adjacent opponent.

Counter-point: AoOs resolve before the triggering action and interrupt the normal flow of combat so can't benefit from the AoO granted by VS because the opportunity was already lost due to being too far away when it happened.

Which is correct, officially?

If I took, for example, Master of Many Styles and Unarmed Fighter levels to get fast completion on a style tree, I'd get Improved Unarmed Strike from each one. Does this mean I have two Improved Unarmed Strike feats? If so, can I use Fighter's ability to re-train feats every 4 levels to swap out the redundant one?

Reference

How would you go about making "White" in PF? For bonus points, how would you design "Red"?

Spells like Light and Darkness must be cast on an object (ie. can't cast it on a living creature). How integral does something have to be before it's considered part of a living creature? Could I cast it on a prosthetic like a glass eye or a false tooth? What about non-living parts of a creature like natural tooth enamel, hair, or finger nail? What about non-awakened plants?

Is there any clarification on whether the Empyreal Sorc's Sacred Cistern ability allows you to channel positive energy regardless of actual alignment (a la Oracle of Life) or if it should be taken at face value and follows standard Cleric rules for channeling? Additionally, if it's positive only, can you use the Variant Channeling rules or is it a hard and strict "Positive and nothing else"? I presume that if it actually was intended to be positive or negative, Variant Channeling is a non-issue. If there's no official clarification on the subject, I suggest we FAQ it.

Discussing how Dervish Dance can be expanded to other weapons in another thread made me think of martial arts movies (and the Dynasty Warriors series) where characters would employ dance-like combat using spears or other piercing-type polearms. So, it got me thinking... a variant feat similar to Dervish Dance for Polearms? Here's what I'm thinking:

Pre-reqs: Dex 13, Weapon Finesse, Perform (dance) 2, proficiency with a 2-h piercing weapon with reach.

Benefit: When wielding a 2-handed piercing weapon with reach that you are proficient with, you may chose to use your Dexterity modifier in place of your Strength modifier on melee attack and damage rolls. You treat the weapon as dealing slashing damage for all applicable feats and class abilities. When applying this benefit, you may not use the reach special ability on the weapon (you may threaten adjacent squares and apply Dex to those attacks but to threaten squares in your reach range, you must use Str).

Now we just need a name for it... Poledancing?

After 600+ posts figuring out whether Sunder requires a standard action or not, we find that the root of the problem is a lack of a clear definition of 'The Attack Action'.

Here is what's written:
Under Standard Actions in the combat section are a list of available actions. One of these is, Attack, 'the attack action'. Devs are on record regarding the Vital Strike fiasco as saying that 'the attack action' is a Standard Action and this is why Vital Strike can't be used in a Full-Attack action since Full-Attack requires a Full-Round action. Therefore, it has to consume a standard action to be considered an attack action.

The result is that Sunder, Vital Strike, Gaze, and the like which are written to require 'the attack action' must be performed as a Standard Action and cannot be made as an AoO or part of a Full-Attack.

However,
In private communication, JJ declared that it's actually the other way around; you perform the Attack Action and it "consumes" your standard action for the round. You could also perform multiple Attack Actions and they, collectively, "consume" your full-round action. This would mean that 'attack action' abilities as those mentioned above can be used in Full-Attacks, AoOs, and possibly even Charges depending on whether the melee attack performed in Charge counts as an Attack Action.

To the developers, I think we deserve some official, Paizo-approved input here to corroborate JJ's offered definition. To readers, I strongly suggest hitting FAQ for this post. Discuss the pros and cons of each side if you want, but my primary purpose for this thread is an officially recognized and explicit definition on exactly what an 'attack action' is to the devs and how it works.

Divine casters have the option to either worship a pre-established deity and be subject to their domains, tenants, and preferred weapon or be deity agnostic and hold to the domains directly and establish their own personal tenants. But how does preferred weapon fit in for an agnostic divine class? Do you forfeit that benefit or do you select a preferred weapon when you roll the character? Any official rules and/or unofficial guidelines on the matter?

Non-lethal damage that exceeds the target's total HP is converted into lethal damage. In the case of a very low HP target, this lethal damage can be enough to outright kill on a good roll with the right weapons. Is there any way to "pull your punch" and deal less than the total damage you roll for? Because sometimes, you just want to knock the target out without killing them outright but if you happen to have 1d6 base damage with +5 str bonus and you roll a natural 6 vs a target with 4 HP... you just caved his head in with a finger flick.