Kchaka's page

If you have a Cohort from the Leadership feat, as he levels up, is his equipment supposed to be subtracted from your own wealth (according to the Character Wealth by Level table) or does he gets his own equipment, apart from your wealth, as in the party actually finds more treasure to supply the Cohort's share?

I'm inclined to think the Cohort gets his own wealth apart from yours since he's supposed to be equivalent to any creature 2 levels below yours. If you choose to have a tiger mount as a Cohort, it won't need any equipment to function, and if you get a human fighter instead, he should have his own equipment to also be able to funciton just like any other creature of the same power level that doesn't have equipment.

I know, logically, it doesn't make any sense finding more treasure just because you have another party member, but that is how treasure is determined in this game. Even if a group of level 5 players find a mountain of gold, they are still supposed to only be able to buy 10,500g worth of equipment, each, so even with all that gold they won't be able to find any +10 weapons to buy, only +2.

Who do you think is "The Best" villain of all stories?

Some villains are just better than others, some have petty reasons to do the things they do, some are just bad because the story they are in just don't make much sense. I'm trying to find who would be the Biggest Baddest Evilest Very Greedy, Heartless, Sadistic, Deceptive MF out there, who would be the last one standing if they were all ploting to destroy each other.

I'll list the ones I think are the best, list a few reason, and say a favorite in the end, not necessarily among the best, but just because I like it, and I ask you to do the same.

The Devil - This is just for perspective, but one could say Satan should be the most evil bad guy there is or was right? Although, I do find a lack of motive. The only reason he has to do evil is "just because", and that feels too simplistic.

Very Evil Cruel Sadistic Evil Bad Guy - A regular human, just a very evil one. I can't think of one specifically, but I think a simple very bad guy could be a very good vilain, with simple motives like money, power, pleasure, fun, these are all reason one can understand why somebody would do awfull thing to somebody else. If a simple human finds a way to trample over everybody elses's happyness in order to get some benefit, even if its a little, that should make a good villain, as long as the story makes sense, that the juice is worth the squeeze, unlike Nero from the new Star Trek, who wanted to destroy a bunch of planets to create a safe universe for his home planet, and the crazy crew that thought that was a good idea.

The Joker - Very "good" villain, authentic, his motives are consistent, he just want's to see the circus burn, and his relationship with Batman, where he's always trying to corrupt the Batman, see if he'll snap and try to kill him, and the fact that his crazy scheems are somewhat umpreditable even to the world's greatest detective makes him one of the best villains, in my opinion.

Lex Luthor - Different from the Joker, who's crazy, Luthor is one of the best Evil genious, creating very intelligent plans to achieve his goals. I loved how, in the smallville TV series, most of his conversations would end up with the other guy saying "What do you want, Luther?" and he's say "I want this, this and that.", like, he would always manipulate other to get what he wants. His motives are good too, he see's himself as a god among men, but when a "real god" shows up (superman) he can't accept that and keeps trying to find ways to become better than superman, to show his superiority over him, not just kill him.

Rapunze's Step-Mother - Again, I can't think of anyone better specifically, but I'm thinking of the type of villain that's very deceptive, lying to everybody to get what he wants, and sometimes the hero will even know the villain is lying to his face, but he's the only one who knows that and can't convice everybody else that the villain is lying. I find this type of villain very "true", now all it needs is a good motive for all these lies.

Favorite: T-1000 - I just love this guy. He's not evil, but his motive is simple. He's a machine, his sole purpose is to follow his programing. He has no emotion, no remorse, doubt, fear, no nothing, and he will stop at nothing to kill the poor soul he's after, not to mention he's literally a killing machine. On top of that, he's nearly indestructable, doesn't matter what the hell you try to do with him, he'll just "heal" himself and keep on coming after you, really unstopabble. And, how could we forget, he's made of liquid metal, I mean, how cool is that...

If you hold your breath, you have a 50% chance of not needing to roll a save against inhaled poisons. Stinking Cloud says it's a poison effect, but doesn't specifically states which poison type it is. Anyone knows if there's any reference in some other place that can clarify this?

Is it wrong to be able to avoid by 50% the effects of a 2nd level spell simply by choosing to hold your breath?

I actually have two questsions:

#1 - Do I have to Draw a Metamagic Rod to use it, or can I just hold/touch it?

#2 - How can I use a metamagic rod if I'm fighting with a 2h weapon or TWF some other 2 weapons, not the rods?

Can one voluntarily lower an ongoing spell effect like Mage Armor, Barkskin, Enlarge Person or Shield for a period of time?

I know you can do so with spell resistance, be it from a spell or naturally, as an standard action.

If by RAW you can't, do you think it would be ok to be able to do so? I find it silly that some spells last for hours and yet we can't suppress their effects for a short period of time if we need, forcing us to dispell them entirelly.

If you are blinded, can't see at all, no blindsight, blindsense or darkvision either, be it from actual blindness or beeing in total darkness, you can move at half your speed, or at full speed if you succeed on a DC 10 acrobatic check, and if you fail the check you fall prone, but even if you can move how do you know where you are going if you're blind?

If you have a reference point, like if you are touching the wall of a room and you just got blinded, then I can understand if you want to move along the wall, but if you have no point on reference and you are in the middle of combat, I'd say it must be pretty difficult to know which way you're facing, unless you have the blind-fight feat or something.

If the blind player is specifically being attacked, attacking or fall's prone due a trip, it must be almost impossible to remember which way you are facing.

I don't like the idea of players or monster just moving normally at full speed with a simple DC 10 acrobatics check.

I'm thinking of something like rolling a 50% chance of the player moving the way he wants for every 5ft step of the way. If he fails, roll a random 1d8 direction he's moving until he comes across something else he can use as point of reference to start moving right again.

And are there any penalties for fighting with a 2h melee weapon while your hands are bound by handcuffs, manacles or shackles?

If there are any penalties, then not only you Can take your hands off your 2h melee weapon while you fight, but you are also supposed to in order to fight freely and properly.

If you are fighting with 2 weapons, can you temporarelly hold the 2 weapons with the same hand, unabling you to use any of them or that hand, while you use your free arm to draw a thrown weapon and throw it? After the attacks, can change grips as a free action and regrab your weapons back, one on each hand?

I think you can, like you can do with a 2h weapon. If you decide to let go one hand of the 2h weapon to draw and throw throwing knives, at the end of your turn you can still change grips and hold your 2h weapon with 2 hands. Here is the FAQ link for this.

So, it's the same thing for 2 weapons or a 2h weapon? As long as you are holding 2 weapons with one hand or a 2h weapon with one hand, you can't use those weapons, but changing these grips back is basically a free action on your turn?

I would like to use a spell storing weapon to cast a spell on myself, like Lead Blades, when I strike a foe. However, I know that spell storing says it casts the spell on the target, so unless I can persuade my DM to allow this without involving my body orifices, I'll have to find a cheesy way to do this.

Let's say I have Combat Reflexes and DEX 17. If 4 Orcs pass through my dagger's threatened area, I could strike each of them once with an AoO before my turn arrives. If I can do that, I can also leave my guard open just for myself and strike myself four times with AoO, each with a different dagger (free action to drop and quick draw to draw the others). I could do so with -4 penalty and apply only nonlethal damage to myself while also delivering the spell's stored in the daggers, right?

So, is it ok to do that? To use a AoO to attack yourself? I know it looks bad but I blame the strictness of the rules.

Improved Precise Shot ignores the AC bonus granted to targets by anything less than total cover.

A target behind cover gains a +4 cover bonus to AC.

A prone defender gains a +4 bonus to AC against ranged attacks.

It shouldn't be any more difficult for a character with Improved Precise Shot to hit a prone target then it would be to hit a target behind cover. In both cases the area to hit the target get's smaller, and since IPS ignores anything less than total cover, like trying to hit someone's feet beneath a wagon wouldn't incur any penalties to the attack, hiting a prove target underneath the wagon shouldn't be much different.

I'm thinking of leting IPS ignore the -4 penalty to attack to hit prone target if the range is 30ft or less.

Yo.I'm trying to estimate how weapon damages escalate using the basic idea that all weapons damage dice double if they increase by 2 full sizes, so:

1d6 -> 2d6 -> 4d6 -> 8d6 -> 16d6 -> 32d6 -> 64d6 -> 128d6 -> 256d6 (For every 2 FULL SIZE INCREASES!)

This is true, but this progression's formula only works for every other size increase. If you want to increase it just once, it's normaly a 50% damage dice increase, but after that you can't increase it by 50% again. For a double increase you have to go back to the original formula, or you would get an "error", like for example 2d6 x150% = 3d6, x150% = 4.5d6 or 9d6/2, instead of 4d6 as of the original formula.

What I want to know is exactly what would these intemediary size PROPORTIONAL damage dices whould be (using D6s), if they all followed the original formula. So please, help me fill in this chart (for convenience let's say it's a Greatsword Chart):

1d6/4 -> ??? -> ??? -> ??? -> 1d6/2 -> ??? -> ??? -> ??? -> 1d6 -> ??? -> ??? -> ??? -> 2d6 -> ??? -> ??? -> ??? -> 4d6

4d6 -> ??? -> ??? -> ??? -> 8d6 -> ??? -> ??? -> ??? -> 16d6 -> ??? -> ??? -> ??? -> 32d6 -> ??? -> ??? -> ??? -> 64d6

The idea is, for example, if a Greatsword damage dice increases exponentialy as it's size increases, from 2d6 at Medium to 4d6 at Huge and 8d6 at Gargantuan, what would be it's proportial damage (in D6s) if we "stoped" it's growth at half way between Medium and Large size (Large Bastard Sword), at Large size (Large Greatsword) and half way between Large and Huge size (Huge Bastard Sword)?

Even though we know the official damage of these weapons are;

Large Bastard Sword: 2d8
Large Great Sword: 3d6
Huge Bastard Sword: 3d8

;these are not the proportial damage of weapons of these sizes should have if we were following the original formula, where the damage doubles with every 2 full size increases. I would like to know the real proportional damage according to this formula's curve.

I'm sorry if I'm not beeing clear enough. I belive the final damage dices (in d6s) will be far from round numbers.

Hello. Do dwarfs under the fly spell (or with any other means of flying, aparantly) and wearing medium or heavy armor have their flying speed reduced? I think not.

Here's a post from the 3.5 FAQ, to help: "Can a dwarf wearing medium or heavy armor or carrying a medium or heavy load use the Tumble skill? Yes. Thanks to the dwarven racial ability to move at full speed even when armored or encumbered, the character’s speed hasn’t been “reduced by armor, excess equipment, or loot”, so he’s free to use the Tumble skill. Of course, he still suffers an armor check penalty for either the armor or the load (whichever is worse).

The exact text in the PF rulebook is:"Slow and Steady: Dwarves have a base speed of 20 feet, but their speed is never modified by armor or encumbrance.

If I understand right it's almost as if dwarfs ignore the speed penalties of wearing medium or heavy armor. So, that affects every speed, including flying, right?

For example, a dwarf wearing a Full Plate and under the Fly and Haste spells would have a land speed of 50ft and flying speed of 90ft, with an armor check penaly of -6, right?

If that's right, ironically, this makes dwarfs one of the fastest races, practically speaking.

Hello! How does Iron Body interact with natural fire and fire spells?

Iron Body: "Immunity to electricity. You take only half damage from acid and fire. However, you also become vulnerable to all special attacks that affect iron golems."

Iron Golem: Immunity to Magic(Ex) An iron golem is immune to spells or spell-like abilities that allow spell resistance. Certain spells and effcts function diffrently against it, as noted below.

• An iron golem is affected normally by rust attacks, such as those of a rust monster or a rusting grasp spell.

• So, if you have Iron Body, magical electric attacks Slow you for 3 rounds. Normal electric attacks don't? (like a natural lightning).

• If you are under Slow from a electric attack, does a magical fire attack cancels the effect? What about natural fire? If it does cancel, does the attack have to do "damage", or will a resisted attack also cancel the effect? I think, by RAW, at least the magical ones do. Since electric attacks do no damage but slows, the fire attacks don't need to do damage either to cancel the slow effect.

• Do you take only half damage from natural fire and heal 1/6 of the damage from a magical fire attack?

• Also, if you have Iron Body and Fly spell, you are not considered to be wearing heavy armor, right? (unless you are in fact wearing some medium or heavy armor) Otherwise your speed would be only 20ft (half of 40ft).

Is it just me, or is this example of calculating the cost for adding new abilities to a Ring of Protection +2 in the PRD and core rulebook (and in the DMG 3.0, where they got it from) just wrong?

If the item is one that occupies a specific place on a character’s body, the cost of adding any additional ability to that item increases by 50%. For example, if a character adds the power to confer invisibility to her ring of protection +2, the cost of adding this ability is the same as for creating a ring of invisibility multiplied by 1.5. (pag.553)

By this exemple, the cost for adding invisibility to that ring of protection +2 would be 30,000 gp.

I thought the cost would be 24,000 gp, which is the difference between the old item and the new one as if both were made from scratch.

The problem here is that Invisibility(20,000g) costs more than +2 Protection(8,000g). If you were going to make the item from scratch, you would use the highest price as the base, and multiply the other ones by 1.5. I think they got the order of the abilities in this sentence wrong.

So, is this exemple right? If you add a more expensive ability to a lesser, less expensive sloted magic item you already have, will you have to pay the cost of this more expensive ability x1.5, or should you calculate it with the lowest cost to make, as if you were making the item from scratch? Does the order matter?

I don't understand the math behind the Monk's Unarmed Damage progression. Soon their damage catches up to the damage of regular weapons and at level 10 they start doing Greatsword damage with each "hand", that if they don't do anything to increase that damage before that.

I'm not questioning the pattern of how it increases (btw, it's around 50% with every size category larger), I wanna know why did they make that base damage increase so much, why not stop it before, like at 1d10? TWF with Bastard Swords and only -2 penalty seems pretty good to me.

It makes me feel like a Fighter or Ranger will never be able to have weapon damages as good as those.

AND, the real problem lies with increasing size and using other spells to buff that up to bizzarish 12d8+ base damages.

Also, I always thought the Monk's Unarmed Damage increased because of his "Kung Fu", and I don't see how that adds up to size increase. His Kung Fu skill won't matter much when he's crushing your whole body with his colossal finger.

You should not be able to use that crazy base damage with other size increases spells and other abilities, the math is just broken, and I wanna know why did they do it this way.