Krico's page

Basically my question is what can wield weapons (and for that matter cast spells with verbal or somatic components) and what can't. Undead form spells and monstrous humanoid spells obviously could, assuming they have humanoid hands. Beast shapes can't (against assuming no humanoid hands or ability to speak). Can form of the dragon? Can dragon claws wield a sword or perform somatic components? How about elemental forms? Can a hand made of air or fire swing an axe?

Krico wrote:

So I've read a good chunk of Gods and Magic, the life cycle of the soul, etc. My question is, do dead creatures retain their power when in the river or souls/when they reach Pharasma's court? When they reach their final destination? Could a powerful enough neutral evil warrior who died and wound up in Abaddon fight off the lesser daemons of the plane for a while?

No. They become Petitioners. As Petitioners they can then become lesser and even greater Deamons. (For example)

Perfect! Thank you!

I think souls are divvied up amongst the gods. So at Pharasma's Court that evil soul would be grabbed and dragged off to Abaddon by powerful servants of a fitting evil god. Souls in the lower planes often become building blocks for other things, such as fiends.

You could possibly escape before reaching Pharasma's Court and return to the Material Plane, but as you are dead you would probably return as some type of incorporeal undead like a ghost, wraith or spectre.

It's my understanding that when a person dies, their soul immediately enters the channel in the astral plane going towards Pharasma's bone yard. Some with a strong attachment to the world, who fall into the ethereal plane and become ghosts, usually going insane either in the process or shortly after. In rare circumstances, one of them finds their way back to their body (or at least A body), becoming intelligent corporeal undead (like the first undead who became a goddess in the process).

But that's not what I'm referring to. After they get into the channel, they are sometimes plucked out by hags or deamons, but will often have protectors, especially if associated with a specific deity. I'm guessing while in the channel, souls are pretty well asleep and helpless.

Most of the time they don't even stop in the court though. If their place is clear, they're just shuffled from there into their respective plane, never leaving the channel until they reach their destination. If they have a more duelistic nature, they stop at the court and outsiders from the planes to which they might belong plead their case to that person (with the obvious exception of deamon's who aren't allowed in the spire). They have the choice of where they wind up. The only time Pharasma steps in is when there's a contractual dispute (one example given is a person who sells their soul to a devil, but spends the rest of their life trying to redeem themselves). In this case, Pharasma decides where they wind up, usually in a very complicated and difficult to predict verdict.

My question I suppose is more about their final destination than anything. The ghost template for example, doesn't drop dex, but drops strength and con. They do however gain a number of other abilities depending on how powerful the creature is that becomes a ghost. The problem is a soul is not a ghost. A ghost is created when a soul falls out of the stream and into the ethereal plane (or never makes it to the stream to begin with I suppose).

Some of the plane descriptions talk about people who try to physically perfect themselves, or fight in martial tournaments, so you apparently have some equivalent of a body. The question is...how much does it resemble the original, and how much do you lose?

I really do want to read Death's Heretic. I've read good things about it. Can't afford to pick it up at the moment unfortunately though. -_-

So I've read a good chunk of Gods and Magic, the life cycle of the soul, etc. My question is, do dead creatures retain their power when in the river or souls/when they reach Pharasma's court? When they reach their final destination? Could a powerful enough neutral evil warrior who died and wound up in Abaddon fight off the lesser daemons of the plane for a while?

Having them use 5 foot steps with ranged weapons isn't playing them for maximum effect...it's VERY basic tactics. I'm a melee character. I get into range with one of the enemies. He five foot steps and throws his javelins. I five foot step and full attack. He full withdraws. I charge. It's not hard. It's not remotely complicated. Any character with a ranged weapon that's NOT taking advantage of five foot steps so they don't provoke ao's isn't using common sense, and if an animal isn't using it, they should have gotten taken out of the gene pool before adult-hood due to stupidity in a survival of the fittest environment.

Bump.

Also, are there any adventure paths or campaign setting material that covers magical experimentation? I'd really like to throw in some "mad scientist characters", but I reaaally don't want to just hand pcs and quick and easy way to make themselves cooler either. Maybe make it something along the lines of having to have really hard to get materials (such as elder dragon flesh for the half-dragon example), and a very low survival chance?

You don't get it. It's a d4 negs, not just a negative level. So a range of 1 to 4. Also, it's on saving throws, meaning that you've debuffed them for your other spells. In addition, note the variable dice effects. That caster that's throwing 15 dice at you? I cast enervate. I roll a three. It just dropped to 12 dice. When you can cast higher levels spells or get rods and can throw quicken and maximize into the mix...

First turn. Take 5-8 penalty on pretty much everything. That example above? He's suddenly throwing somewhere between 7 and 10 dice. At minimum a 33% decrease.

Edit: Beat me to it. XD

Need some advice on designing fluff around magical experiments and templates. For example, the half-dragon template states that they are very rarely the result of a dragon's union with another creature, but rather the result of some form of experiments. I really like combining mechanics and fluff, so most of what I try to create scenario wise does just that. I may bend it a bit but I try to stick as close to the printed mechanics as I can when I build my fluff.

So here's the problem. There's no mechanics. There kind of is for lich, in the sense that it mentions that it takes about 120,000 gold and craft wondrous item to build the phylactery, as well as pouring over forbidden tombs obsessiveness to work out your own personal ritual, since what works for one person might not work for another.

What about other templates though? What are some good ways to apply at least generally mechanics that would make sense in altering a creature? Could a first level alchemist give someone a template? I'd think not, at least not without significant expense and help. But where's the line?

Any advice would be appreciated.

I disagree. It says you can create those creatures. It gives examples of those creatures in the beastiery. In fact some of the creatures you can create are almost nothing BUT templates themselves. There's no reason you shouldn't be able to create advanced hit dice versions of undead based off of the base creature. The spell says you can create the following TYPES of creatures. It doesn't say you have to used the examples printed in the beastiary, merely that it creates that type of creature. What sense does it make to cast create undead on a creature with 15 hit dice turning it into a creature with 2? Or what sense does it make to cast it on a creature with 1 hit die and turning it into a creature with 8?. Ultimately it's a gm decision, but reading any source material or adventure path relating to necromancers disagrees with Ichi's statement. Necromancers are about manipulating death, and almost always use undead as minions and protection. Sure they can do other things, and some focus on some aspects more then others, but the creation of undead is what they are most associated with. I see no printed reason why it wouldn't work.

Scratch my last post. It would appear that ghouls also keep class abilities, feats, etc. based off of the level 6 rouge ghoul example. The only thing that doesn't match up are the fact that it's bab is actually one too high for a level 6 rouge (possibly a misprint). So ya, a ghoul seems to be an intelligent undead with all the abilities of the base creature barring the changes made with the undead subtype, and a bite attack with a charisma based injury effect.

Oops, i read the description for false focus wrong.

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/c/create-undead

According to this, at level 11 you create a 2hd ghoul?

Some questions for making a necromancer wizard :

-What opposition schools should i choose?

-Feats? I will probably be taking human.

-Equipment? I only have 500 gp to spend, and some of that went to my skeleton's equipment. -100 gp for creating the skeleton in the first place.

-Spell choices?

-How do i get some form of negative energy to heal my skeleton?

Unless there's a template for it, or it's an unintelligent undead, I would just keep the base creature's hit dice and modify it for the undead creature type as appropriate (d8 hit dice, no con score, cha for hp, 3/4 hit dice for BAB, etc) and give it the spell like abilities etc listed. I'd ask your gm though. Some of the cooler undead have templates, some don't.

Are you referring to animate undead, or create undead?

Animate undead, and it'ls lesser version are very meh. The creatures you can create with them are ok for low levels, but really peter off. A few of the examples of creatures you can create with create undead starting at 11 however...see juju zombie above. Since you can only control the more powerful undead via channel (looked harder at create undead and saw that restriction) or actually convincing them to work with you, they'll be harder to control. That said...holy crap the possibilities.

I would like to point out something. While it's true that you can just use the base undead, that's very boring and doesn't really support what I understand the intention of the spell is.

While unintelligent undead may not be able to retain spellcasting abilities, who says you can't animate that level 10 fighter the party just killed, applying a zombie or skeleton archtype? ANY strength based undead could be nasty. I'm a level 15 cleric or oracle that can channel energy (since a couple of the revelations allow that). I've saved up my money and managed to turn myself into a lich. Between command undead, and my spells, I have 3 level 13 bloody skeleton fighter minions protecting me. Also, I have mass spells that heal them and me, and hurt you. God help you.

Edit: So I went back and looked at it, and realized those types don't retain feats and such.

Then I looked at what you could create at higher levels. Read the description of Juju zombies.

"A juju zombie is an animated corpse of a creature, created to serve as an undead minion, that retains the skills and abilities it possessed in life."

I would take that to mean that you've essentially created a version of the original creature that simply gained the undead subtype.

Edit 2: I just looked at the template. It's better.

Alignment: Evil aligned. Ethics alignment appears to remain unchanged.

+3 nat armor.

Hit dice change to d8s and use charisma score instead of con for hit points

Channel resistance +4 (sucks for controlling them with channel, but YOLO!), DR 5/magic and slashing (10 if it's got at least 11 hit dice)

Flying maneuverability is clumsy, otherwise movement is unchanged.

Attacks are unchanged except it gains a slam attack as if it where a size category larger.

Gains +4 Str and +2 dex, loses con score, fort save, any any abilities based off of con.

Gains improved initiative and toughness as bonus feats.

+8 racial bonus to climb checks.

That's it. It appears to retain all class abilities not based off of con, all ability scores besides con, all feats, spells etc. As an intelligent undead they'll be hard to control via channel, but the ones created from the spell should be fine.

Ya I figured out where I screwed up. Yes, the modifier to stealth is +20 when moving and +40 when still as per the spell when actively trying to stealth based on the spell description, however where I screwed up was not noticing the base perception check on the table...that being the following.

Notice a visible creature: DC 0

When invisible it would be modified by: Creature or object is invisible +20

If the creature is using stealth it's: Opposed by Stealth

Modified by: Creature or object is invisible +20

Now I see where people are getting the stacking bonuses as well, since it's both in the spell description, and a base modifier. That said...I would HOPE they don't stack since that would be insane. I'm not seeing anything that says they wouldn't though unless it's in an errata somewhere...

Edit: Then again, would noticing an invisible creature be the base dc if the creature was invisible? I confused myself again...note that I'm looking at the table under the perception skill atm.

I see your point. I've been thinking of it in the context of you have to move to get somewhere where you can hide, but if you're already somewhere where you are concealed, I guess you wouldn't have to.

The key word there is usually. You can make a stealth check as PART of a movement, meaning you have to be taking a move action to make a stealth check.

I actually think it makes more sense to grapple the grappler. I don't see why you couldn't do this, and success would mean either have to try to maintain their grapple at a -4 (since they can't use both hands), or try to break free of you're grapple. Sure if they succeed in maintaining your buddy is still in trouble, but you've got allot more control over the situation.

http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/advanced/advancedNewRules.html#_hero-poi nts

Act Out of Turn: You can spend a hero point to take your turn immediately. Treat this as a readied action, moving your initiative to just before the currently acting creature. You may only take a move or a standard action on this turn.

If you choose to act out of turn with a hero point, you act just before the last declared action taking ONLY a move OR a standard for that turn as if you had a readied action. If you act out of turn, that is your only action that turn baring spending additional hero points.

Ditto. You can have as many rage powers as you want active at a time as long as it doesn't specifically say otherwise. You can have multiple instances of the same rage power active, you simply cannot have the same bonus from the same effect more than once. Rage powers are simply abilities that modify the rage class ability, not something you have to choose to activate separately.

I don't understand what's in dispute...I don't get where people are getting a 20 DC.

This Page: http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/spells/invisibility.html#_invisibility
indicates that they get a +20 to stealth while moving, and a +40 while still.

This Page:http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/skills/perception.html#_perception
states that the base dc to notice a creature using stealth is set using an opposed stealth check, and separately in the modifiers table, a modifier to the dc for an invisible creature is +20. I never interpreted this to mean anything other than a moving stealth check is at a +20 when you're invisible.

As far as the argument of someone not using a stealth check...I don't get it. If you're in a situation where you wouldn't be noticed normally (such as in a dark corner or invisible), simply not moving is enough to call for a stealth check. Keep in mind that perception is spot and listen from 3.5, and stealth is both hide and move silently. The "hide" part is just not moving in a concealed state. If the person does do something that would cause the other person to notice them and makes no attempt to hide, no check is required by either of them. The detecting party knows that they're there, and what square they're in. The person still has total concealment (since they're in line of effect but not line of sight)http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/combat.html#_concealment
and the invisibility condition meaning that the person is still flat footed vs you're attack and you still get the +2 bonus. In other words, the only point of the opposed check is to A) Notice that they're there, and B) Figure out what square they're in. There is no other DC or check. You get the benefits of invisibility because the one perceiving still can't see exactly where you are inside the square, can't see where you are within the 5 foot space, and can't see when, and from which side the attack is coming from.

You can travel to the demi-plane but there are certain restrictions:

1. You must be aware that it exists
2. You must know which plane is its origin plane
3. The demi-plane's creator can bar people from travelling to the plane

I hope this helps. I have played a Psion that has a power that creates a demi-planes, so I have dealt with this before.

Thanks! Is there an opposed caster level check or save involved in baring someone from traveling to your plane?

So powerful casters can create demi-planes. From what I understand, they can either make a permanent gate to the plane, or have use spells to transition to it. My question is, is it possible to travel to someone else's demi-plane? Do you have to know it exists or could you wind up there by chance? Is scrying on the person with a spell that can see into other planes and realizing they aren't in this reality enough to be able to go there at will?

No. If Spell Combat only says it "functions as" TWF, then it does not count as TWF for the purposes of prerequisites.

Not talking pre-reqs. I'm talking about the fact that if you took all the prereqs (combat expertise, two-weapon fighting, etc.) could you use spell combat with two-weapon feint?

Since the spell combat ability says that it functions like two-weapon fighting, does that mean you can take this feet and sac your first melee weapon attack for a feint check?

Lol, seems like I struck a nerve here.

Anyway, I'm quite happy with QS as it is, I was just curious, since it seems that, without any way of avoiding the grapple concentration check, a L. 20 caster can be screwed rather easily. Yes, stay out of danger, avoid front-lines, and all that jazz--but it's not unthinkable for a DM to aim for the mage (or a BBEG to charge towards the caster, after taking a critted polar ray, for example).

Edit: re: SLAs, those still require a standard action, as opposed to Quicken. Again, my question arises from the definition of a swift action: namely, something that requires little effort.

Besides, it's not exactly a free pass: you've invested in two feats and you're using a level 9 spell slot (at least to DD out). Giving up one use of Meteor Swarm/Mage's Disjunction/Gate/etc. seems hardly like a free pass.

So... onto the crux of the matter: what are the more viable strats when a caster is grappled? Contingency a DD and call it a day?

Edit 2: Can a contingency trigger be a thought or some other non-somatic, non-verbal 'state'? So, it will trigger whenever I choose to trigger it with my mind.

Honestly, allot of it comes down the party. In a recent session as an oracle I cast a mass harm spell when we were fighting a bunch of pirates. Thanks to AO's and stand still, most of the ones that tried couldn't even get to me. The couple that did grappled me. The rest of the party didn't like the idea of the caster (me being the only full caster in the party) being CCed, so as soon as they could, they murdered the piss out of the guys on top of me. Teamwork is a huge deal.

Anomander: Agreed, RAW it's not an option, but not ruled out, if you consider Swift Action RAW (minor effort, no Attack of opportunity).

Hence, I said 'it seems like a plausible interpretation'.

Thanks guys!

Well, the reason that it requires a concentration check isn't the same reason casting provokes an AO as far as I understand.

Here's the way I read it. Casting provokes an AO because you're focusing on the spell, not on your surroundings. Casing without an AO requires a concentration check because you're splitting your attention between the spell and not leaving an opening.

Grappling requires a concentration check because someone essentially has you in a headlock giving you a noogie. A still/eschewed spell would allow you to cast in a grapple, but that doesn't mean that it wouldn't still be hard to concentrate in a headlock or bear hug.

That said, divine casters have a simple way to get out of this at mid-higher levels. Freedom of movement before combat, or as soon as it starts. As far as I can tell arcane are either going to have to be really good at avoiding getting into that situation, or invest in the 40k ring.

Gauss wrote:

Bonus languages occur at exactly one time. The start of the game.

CRB p17 wrote:

The number of bonus languages your character knows at the start of the game.

Thus increased intelligence does not result in extra bonus languages.

- Gauss

I was already aware of that passage, Gauss. It means nothing in this context. The game could start at first level or fifteenth. What's more, the rules you quote aren't exclusionary in their reading. Just because you get bonus languages at the start of the game has nothing to do with whether or not you get more bonus languages later.

It's retroactive, else the above two games would produce different characters--obviously not the intent.

I stand by the statements of the developers: EVERYTHING is retroactive.

In any case, I still have an unanswered question in the OP. Can we at least see to that before getting into the off-topic debates?

Check the link in the second post.

actually a great use of Il Omen would be a swift Il Omen followed by either A Hex or Spell so they have to reroll their save and take the worse result

This. I'm playing an Dual Cursed Oracle and I have quicken spell, as well as spell focus and greater spell focus for necromancy. We just hit level 11. So ya, ill omen + make a dc 22 save against bestow curse, roll twice and take the worst. Considering it's got about a 50-70% chance of sticking to anyone in the party that's not a favored will save, I like those odds.

so:

Disruptive (Combat)
Your training makes it difficult for enemy spellcasters to safely cast spells near you.
Prerequisites: 6th-level fighter.
Benefit: The DC to cast spells defensively increases by +4 for all enemies that are within your threatened area. This increase to casting spells defensively only applies if you are aware of the enemy's location and are capable of taking an attack of opportunity. If you can only take one attack of opportunity per round and have already used that attack, this increase does not apply.

I am working on a team of of mage-killers (Inquisitor, Barbarian, Bard (Arcane Duelist), and probably a Monk of some flavor) and realize that there is every chance that a caster might be pinched between two (or more) characters with Disruptive.
Straight gut level reading feels like multiple instances of the feat would stack, but since the wording of the Foil Casting ability of the Spellbreaker Inquisitor archetype specifically calls out that it stacks with Disruptive, I find myself second guessing my gut.

Unless these guys are multi-class it's a moot point for your purposes anyway isn't it? It requires 6th level fighter, and none of your mage killers are fighters.

Another good indicator is if the spell is an offensive spell and dosen't have a saving throw, such spell invariable require an attack roll, with magic missile being the obvious black sheep.

Most spell will say if a ranged or melee touch attack is required.

So Ill Omen from the Witch spell list would require a touch attack since it doesn't have a save? The reason I ask is because it's a pretty potent effect for a first level spell, but the spell doesn't say anything about it one way or the other.

So I'm playing my first caster, and I'm trying to find the rules on what spells require touch attacks. I figure anything that says 'touch' requires a melee touch attack, and I've kind of inferred that anything that targets based on a ray requires a ranged touch attack. Are there any other guidelines? Or am I off?

If you have greater feint and two-weapon feint, you can trade you're highest BAB primary weapon attack for a feint check and they lose their dex bonus until you're next turn. So for the cost of three feats and one attack per round, you can get the rest of your attacks with your sneak attack damage.

Edit: I guess technically 4 feats for two weapon fighting but eh. If you're a rouge chances are you're not two handing or sword and bording anyway.

Krico wrote:

If item takes no item slots, multiply the entire cost by 2.

If you put multiple similar abilities on an item that doesn't take up a slot, the highest costs 100%, the second 75%, and all the rest 50%.

You can decrease the cost by 30% by giving it an alignment restriction.

This isn't 100% right.

The only magic item that cascades added ability costs in this way (100%, 175%, 150%) are staves. ALL other magical items (including Wondrous Items, which is definitely what you are making) simply increase added ability costs by 50%.

Also, technically speaking, you shouldn't use the alignment restriction discount on an item where it doesn't make sense. For example... if you were creating an slotless item that offered only a Sacred bonus to AC and/or saves, then yes, an alignment restriction discount makes sense. But if you're just throwing regular bonuses on (Resistance, Deflection, etc), then alignment restriction does not make sense without additional backstory/lore to the item.

Also, there's no set rule for Wondrous Items to limit how high the bonus goes. Yes, for Magic Weapons/Armor you can have a max of +5 enhancement & +5 equivalent in bonuses, but that restriction is not ever mentioned for any other items.

Ya, it took me a while but I caught most of that. Current GM is likely to go with non-epic can't go higher than a +5. The problem is I'm still confused as to what bonuses you can apply to what. Would I just have to find precedent for a particular kind of bonus? If so, I suppose other than enhancement, deflection, and natch armor I could only apply divine/infernal, and insight bonuses to AC, and with saves resistance and luck?

You cannot grant Dodge bonuses by item.

However, sacred and/or profane bonuses work just fine.

If you can't slap on more than a total of +10 on any single item (or if your GM states you have to calculate the cost for the total item bonus, not per bonus type)... why not create several slotless items, one for each type of bonus to AC?

True enough, which is what I was thinking of after that post. I'm assuming that what's listed in and under the chart, ie. Deflection, Natural Armor, (Resistance in place of these two for saves), Luck, Insight, Profane, and Divine are the only type of bonuses that can apply to AC and Saves?

I wouldn't endorse it, by RAW, it can be done.

Ya, I realize it gets a little silly, but I'm dealing with a GM that likes to min-max enemies so we kinda have to do the same thing to live. His attitude is, "just keep in mind if I allow it, I'll probably use it against you."

Your math looks right, but;

Dodge bonuses are not available as magic enhancements.

I'm not 100% sure but, luck bonuses would require Wish or Miracle as components. There used to be a Bard spell that gave a luck bonus to AC but that was pre-PFRPG.

Wheres the Insight bonus come from? It seems like it would be similar to the Dodge.

The caster level for this would be? 20, 25, 30?

The Craft DC would be staggering.

How many bonuses can go on a single item?
Weapons and Armor get maxed at +10 for enhancements.
Bracers and Amulets get +5.

There is more to this than price, you'd need to actually be of a level to pull this off; If it's even possible.

I knew it was +5 for a single type, but I didn't know what the rules where for what you could put on what, what kind of bonuses could be used for what, etc. I can't find anything on that.

As a side note, the crafter would have access to wish.

Ok, I want to make sure I understand this correctly. From the core book:

AC Item (Deflection) = Bonus squared x 2000
Natural armor = Bonus squared x 2000
AC (Other) = Bonus squared x 2500

If item takes no item slots, multiply the entire cost by 2.

If you put multiple similar abilities on an item that doesn't take up a slot, the highest costs 100%, the second 75%, and all the rest 50%.

You can decrease the cost by 30% by giving it an alignment restriction.

So for a no slot item with the following bonuses to AC at +5:

Deflection (5x5) x 2,000 = 50,000
Natural Armor (5x5) x 2,000 = 50,000
Luck (5x5) x 2,500 = 62,500
Insight x 2,500 = 62,500
Dodge x 2,500 = 62,500

We take:
100% of 62,500
75% of 62,500 or 46,850
50% of 62,500 or 31,250
50% of 50,000 or 25,000 and
50% of 50,000 or 25,000 to give us a total of

190,600

Multiply this by 2 for no item slot, giving us

381,200

Decrease by 30% due to alignment restriction and we get

266,840

as the market value of a no slot item that gives a total of 25 to AC, with the crafting price being

133,420.

Is this correct?

Also, I've found lists of the various kinds of bonuses, but are there restriction on what kinds can be permanently put on an item, or what they could apply to? For example, I wouldn't think you could apply a racial bonus to an item XD.