I'm prepping Burnt Offerings to run, and honestly I'd not make her Cleric 5 because she gets 3d6 channel to blast EVERY party member with as a standard action. It's really one of her best tools, I think, and she probably should be using it. Multiple uses of 3d6 is a potentially problematic difference from 2d6. And 3rd level spells (like dispel magic, prayer, etc.) vs. level 3 or 4 creatures is rough. I'd leave her cleric level alone. If you want possible redemption stories, someone should try and turn Orik V. after he's defeated. He's a decent fighter and could help with Nualia and the hound.
Looking for a player to join a new PF campaign (characters starting at level 2) that will run twice a month, primarily on Saturdays, in the USC area. The hook? The party members are all part of the same newly-formed band -- or support staff (roadies!) -- traveling in an effort to gain fame and fortune ... and maybe a little adventure. Their first stop is at a familiar festival in Golarion ... Roleplaying is important in this game; min/maxing and powergaming are not welcome. Party balance is also important, although we still have numerous roles available (arcane caster, damage dealer, primary healer) with a lot of flexibility given as long as you can actually accomplish that role when the time comes. And naturally, as part of a band, hopefully you can actually play something. ;) If you're interested, drop me a private message and I'll give you my email address so we can talk and hopefully meet in person to discuss things.
If I cast Mirror Image, and then do anything to alter my look significantly -- including don a shield or a whole suit of armor -- do the images look like this now as well? Or do they look how I did when I cast the spell? The spell says they mimic my actions ... but does this include altering my appearance?
Wow. I agree with Mikaze -- I can't get over the decision of "let's immolate innocent people alive, and continue on with our lives as a good-aligned party of adventurers". I think the paladin has at least an outside argument for atoning & getting paladin powers back -- or maybe being on the thinnest of probations for the next few months. BUT ... she can't travel with this group anymore. They're all evil now.
Tempest_Knight wrote: The problem remains, there are two reasonable readings of the rules text This is, of course, your opinion. I think several people have given you what is the standard, accepted, reasonable interpretation of this. It's fine that you don't agree, but does this thread really need to keep going on and on?
TGMaxMaxer wrote:
No. TGMaxMaxer wrote: As well, Bluff to Feint in combat is DC 10+Sense motive, does it make that easier? No. Both of the situations you are listing set a DC for *you* to meet or surpass. For instance, the demoralize section of Intimidate states: Quote:
There is nothing included in this about penalties a creature may be suffering, but I would assume if you reduced a target's actual Wisdom score (like with, say, a curse), this would lower the DC you must meet. But there is a huge difference between a DC you must make (which is something you do on your turn) and a check your enemy must make (which would usually occur on its turn). If a qualmed enemy tries to Intimidate someone on its turn, it's going to take a -10 penalty to this skill check.
I actually played an Oracle of Metal for 9 levels, and lead blades (level 2 mystery spell) + enlarge person from an ally makes him a serious contender for actually getting use out of Vital Strike, or just go to town with multiple attacks for 4d6+strength per day. ;) Versatile Weapon is also an excellent spell for a melee person to have. By the time I was Oracle 7, I was relied upon to be the guy who could dispel magic multiple times per day, and there's a large number of useful buffs a fighting cleric can give himself. I also decided to save myself some money on a weapon and just use Iron Weapon ... you can pick up scrying for numerous rounds per day at level 7, and faster movement & lowered ACP. I was a multithreat. ;) It was good times.
If you had multiple caster levels, I assume you would be free to choose whichever of the two you had ... but there's little point in choosing a lower one. You would cast magic missile at your cleric level. Pathfinder Savant adds (at certain levels) an "increased level of spellcasting", and if you only have one class -- cleric -- then it's added to that. In other words, if you're a Cleric 6 / Pathfinder Savant 3, your cleric caster level is now 8, because you don't gain a caster level at Pathfinder Savant 1. You'd cast magic missile off the scroll as an 8th level caster, and get 4 missiles at 1d4+1 damage each.
Your starting premise is a bit off. "All other feats which boost AC" do not stack. Dodge is a dodge bonus. Dodge bonuses stack with other dodge bonuses. Snapping Turtle Style is a shield bonus. It does not stack with an already existing shield bonus. Combat Expertise is a dodge bonus, mentioned above. It would stack with Dodge and all other dodge bonuses. What matters is the type of bonus -- some bonuses stack, and most do not. Natural armor does not. If the feat doesn't specifically bypass the standing rule, the standing rule applies. In addition, according to d20pfsrd, the feat says: Quote: Special: If you have the scaled skin racial trait, you instead gain resistance 5 to two of the following energy types that you don't have resistance to already: cold, electricity, and fire. I'm not sure why you would think the natural armor bonuses would stack, when the feat refuses to give you natural armor if you already have it.
My vote's for Sacred Shield paladin (nearby party members taken 50% less damage is beyond awesome) or Invulnerable Rager barbarian (preferably with a dip in alchemist). I'm playing on at the present utilizing Stalwart, for a current DR 7/-- (CL 8). It's come in handy so far. I do plenty enough damage to make it a bad idea to ignore me.
Musk wrote:
Essentially, yes, it's an exception to the rule. There are unfortunately a LOT of exceptions -- there are precious few things you can do (where it's the same thing) TWICE to someone that will drive them higher up on the fear/fatigue/nausea scales. What the 'rule' you are referring to is talking about generally comes into play with MULTIPLE sources that do the same thing. The spell Waves of Fatigue, for instance, says:
Quote: Waves of negative energy render all living creatures in the spell's area fatigued. This spell has no effect on a creature that is already fatigued. If person A in your party cast this spell and affected a target, and then your monk used Stunning Fist on this already fatigued target, that target would NOW be exhausted. Different sources. As you will notice, Waves of Fatigue specifically says it will NOT affect creatures who are already fatigued. So you'd want to be sure to use Stunning Fist after the spell, not before.
It's open to GM interpretation, since "a wall or other surface" doesn't usually apply to people ... Two possibilities I can see: Bad guy X is standing 10' in front of Bad Guy Y. You Shield Slam X, and beat his CMD enough to send him flying back 15'. He hits Bad Guy Y, and your new bull rush combat maneuver roll fails to beat Y's CMD. Possibility #1: X is now standing directly in front of Y, unable to move back further. Possibility #2: X hits an immovable object -- Y -- and falls prone, with a liberal interpretation of the unmoving Y being a "wall or other surface". Personally, I think #2 is a HUGE stretch in terms of RAW, and yet it's the far more fun interpretation.
Is your question actually about whether there will be errata? No way to answer that. There may be and there may not be. For all we know, the intention was for the PrC to be a witch/wizard hybrid. According to the current rules, and RAW, yes only wizards can take Spell Mastery. Try your best to play with a GM who is able to see a bit beyond just RAW.
Umbranus has a good point: most of the level 1 bard spells are not terribly important. The Triple Time performance is quite nice in comparison. Longstrider doesn't work on multiple targets, and can't be cast on others, so unless a character IS a ranger or has crazy good UMD, they won't be able to make use of it. I'd never give up a feat for a performance; I WOULD give up a spell known. Especially if you gain more due to your race... I agree with you that Elysian Heart is one of the best on the list. I wish there were more like that.
Weirdo wrote:
I think this is actually the heart of your problem. Your group needs to be clued in on the fact that they're putting ALL of the burden of keeping everyone alive on one character -- and from a class that's not exactly the best at doing it, either. My group is currently undergoing a reboot (new campaign) brought about by people finally speaking up about their objections, after saying nothing about them for months on end. Communication is key.
I think you're right in general, keeping in mind the proviso of "there appear to be a few exceptions." If the text of the ability/feat/skill does not BAR it from stacking with an already-existing level of fear, then it should probably be allowed to. Unfortunately, this is one of those situations where a GM would have ample leeway to disagree, as there isn't an official ruling on it anywhere.
I don't know of one, but a Theologian cleric can fill any of his spell slots with domain spells ... this may be the next best thing. You could always use Channel the Gift (Gods and Magic) to burn off the domain spell slots you have no need of to give other casters in the party a way to cast what they know without losing the spell... |