A. A human has two weapon fighting. They normally wield two long swords. They get 2 attacks per round each at a -4. Now they take the vestigal arms discovery and upgrade those longswords to greatswords. They still get 2 attacks per round each at a -4. Now, because they can't normally make 2 attacks with 2 greatswords this is "more attacks".
B. A tengu has two weapon fighting, improved unarmed strike a bite attack and 2 claws. They normally get 5 attacks per round with the unarmed strikes taking a -2 each and the 3 natural attacks taking a -5 each. Now they take the vestigal arms discovery twice and use a pair of daggers instead of unarmed strikes. They still get 5 attacks with the daggers taking a -2 and the natural weapons taking a -5 each. Now, because they can't normally make 2 attacks with 2 daggers as well as their claw and bite attacks this is "more attacks".
Scenario B is explicitly given as an example of something that is allowed with the vestigal arms discovery in the linked post. It makes no sense to me that A would not be allowed when B is allowed.
Closing your eyes and pretending the big scary thing isn't there is not a realistic defence.
But that's the whole design philosophy behind the "Joo Janta 200 Super-Chromatic Peril Sensitive Sunglasses". If you can't see what might stress you then it won't bother you.
But as to the OP. I don't think you can close or avert your eyes in response to something being scary. Since you would of had to of already seen and/or heard enough to realize that what's going on over there is going to be potentially disturbing to you. If anything it would probably make it worse because you'll end up imagining something instead that truly frightens you.
The only way I can see this helping is if you preemptively close your eyes. Like if you knew the room you were about to enter had a bunch of scary illusions in it so your closed your eyes before entering.
I think it really depends on how it's being handled. Are all trolls vulnerable to cold and sonic or just this particular variety?
If you make changes to monsters that are commonly known in the world then players should be given a heads up to this fact prior to encountering the thing.
"hey, just so you know in my world orcs spit acid."
Also, monsters should be changed in a deliberate manner rather then just having abilities randomly swapped on them. If you're fighting trolls on the side of an active volcano it shouldn't be surprising to the players that fire doesn't work on them.
I don't think it breaks the game world so long as the changes you're making are handled with thoughtfulness. It's when you change things in a way that doesn't make sense to the current environment or spring something on players that their characters would reasonably know about (from growing up in that region/world). That it breaks things and makes players frustrated.
IMO new monsters as a player are always interesting even if behind the screen they're just existing monsters that have been tweeked a bit and given a face lift.
So, rejuvenation is an ability that appears to be common to all blights not just the forest blight. d20pfsrd incorrectly links to ghost rejuvenation which is not what they have.
Rejuvenation (Su): If a blight is slain within its cursed terrain, a new blight of the same type spontaneously forms in 1d10 days at the epicenter of the blight’s cursed domain unless the blight’s corpse is targeted with a remove curse spell (DC = 10 + the blight’s Hit Dice).
as for killing a blight
Blight wrote:
Favored Terrain (Ex): A blight favors a specific type of terrain. Within its favored terrain, a blight gains a +2 bonus on initiative checks and on Knowledge (geography), Perception, Stealth, and Survival checks. A blight in its favored terrain leaves no trail and cannot be tracked (although it can choose to leave a trail). Outside of its favored terrain, a blight loses access to its domain of evil, rejuvenation, spell-like abilities, and telepathy; it also gains the staggered condition.
So, all you have to do to permanently kill any blight is to do as scott suggested. Lure/force it outside of it's favored terrain at which point it loses it's rejuvenation ability among other things. Or you just need to cast remove curse on it after you kill it, as per it's rejuvenation ability.
I'm wondering what stats compound bows would have? Does Starfinder have them?
D20 modern has compound bows. Sadly, in that game all they did was take the composite bow and call it a compound bow. In my experience the primary advantage of a compound bow is that it's substantially easier to draw. This means you get a lot more power for less effort. The only way I can think to translate this in game is for the bow to treat you as having a higher strength for purposes of damage, the same way a masterwork backpack works for carrying capacity. It would probably be something like a +4 to strength.
without knowing the specifics the answer is that no, they probably don't stack.
It doesn't matter what the ability its self is. What matters is the line that follows the ability. If both archetypes affect the same class feature then they don't stack.
For example. If Archetype A makes Stealth, Use Magic Device and Climb class skills and Archetype B Makes Swim a class skill. By RAW the two archetypes do not stack because they both alter your class skills. Even though there's obviously zero conflict between the two archetypes.
There are archetypes like this that by RAW do not stack, but which most DMs would probably allow to stack if you brought it up to them and asked.
I always hated the name "eyebite". Not only does it make zero sense (how could an eye bite someone?) the spell doesn't even have anything to do with either eyes or biting (you'd think they'd have it work like a gaze attack or something to justify the name, but no.)
This spell has been around since the earliest versions of D&D and the spell is named after the historical Irish term.
Lexicon.com wrote:
Definition of eye-bite in English:
VERB
To bewitch with the eye; especially to bring a malign influence to bear upon (a person) by means of one's gaze, to place the ‘evil eye’ upon.
Origin
Late 16th century; earliest use found in Reginald Scot (d. 1599), writer on witchcraft. From eye + bite.
The funny thing is, in pathfinder the witch class can get this ability and it's called Evil Eye.
Glancing through the wizard spells the following jump out at me
The spell Weird has a name that's quite vague. You would have no idea that it kills a bunch of people by scaring them to death.
The spell Blend always makes me think it chops things up into tiny bits, but it actually makes you harder see.
The spell Shades. Given it's name and level it must conjure some really premium sunglasses being a 9th level spell. Even if you're aware of the shadow conjuration spells you wouldn't realize without reading it that it's the top tier version of those spells.
The spell Bed of Iron sounds like an offensive curse type spell, not something that provides a beneficial effect.
The spell Transformation you might think by the name that it's a polymorph effect, or it changes one object into a different kind of object. Nope, it isn't any of those. Instead, it effectively strips away your wizard levels and replaces them with fighter levels (but without the class abilities or feats)...uh, what?
edit: I just realized, maybe the real issue is that most of these are spells with 1 word names. Without context these can easily be confusing. Though that being said both wish and miracle pretty much do what you'd expect from their names. Which shows that 1 word names can work just fine.
yeah, I think it's because D20PFSRD doesn't always show derived spell lists. That is, spell lists that are copies other spell lists. Ironbeard is also not listed as a hunter spell. Hunters get everything that rangers and druids get with some modifications. Nethys correctly identifies that Ironbeard would be a 1st level hunter spell.
No, I got you. It's just the flavour oddness. This is who you're going to worship:
** spoiler omitted **
As I said, the mechanics of what you're doing here check out.
To be fair, I could see a low cha character wishing to worship such a deity. The character is going through life being repulsed by everyone they meet, except members of this church who offer them praise and pleasure.
There's nothing to say that such a character may even attempt to compliment others but their words just come out wrong.
"oy! your boils really bring out the puss in yer eyes. You're lovelier then ah slug on a rainy day. Wanna come back to my place? I ken show ye some scabs the likes of which ye never seen"
I was thinking about this perhaps a mythic wish with the DC boosted would be the simplest way "I wish everyone in the world believed magic was real."
I don't think you need something that powerful. Just use the spell modify memory on whoever you want to prove it to.
"Hey, remember when I proved to you without a doubt that magic is real?"
and if they have any objections to what they remember, cast it again where the memory alleviates those concerns. Rinse and repeat until they accept the memory as real.
What states that the rocks are improvised weapons?
If we look at the statblock of a monster with the rockthrowing ability it doesn't seem to be an improvised weapon.
A Treant has a +7 to hit with rocks. This comes from the following:
BAB: +9
Dex: -1
Huge: -2
Rock Throwing: +1
This results in the +7 that we see in the stat block. If it were considered to be an improvised weapon there would be an additional -4. Meaning the Treant would only have +3 to hit with rocks not +7.
For all practical purposes Rock Throwing grants proficiency in throwing rocks in addition to the +1 to hit with them.
As for two weapon fighting with them.
Weapon Size wrote:
A weapon’s size category isn’t the same as its size as an object. Instead, a weapon’s size category is keyed to the size of the intended wielder. In general, a light weapon is an object two size categories smaller than the wielder, a one-handed weapon is an object one size category smaller than the wielder, and a two-handed weapon is an object of the same size category as the wielder.
The thrown rock as defined by the rock throwing ability seems to fall into the light weapon category. So, it can be used with 2 weapon fighting with only a -2 to hit with each attack. However, because the rocks are not identified as being ammunition, it still takes a move action to draw one. So, they would also need the feat Quick Draw in order to continue to make full attacks on a regular basis.
The advantages of having magic and not revealing to others that you have it seem to far out weigh any advantages that might be had by revealing such ability to others.
Can you elaborate your thoughts on the matter further? would like to hear you out...after all as mythic caster, who could stop you?
How do I know that I am unique in the powers I wield?
Even if my power is unrivaled my thoughts remain the same. What does revealing my powers get me that I couldn't get keeping them secret?
If I want things, magic provides many avenues to riches. The fabricate spell alone would allow me to become a one man factory. Wherein I take raw materials and turn them into finished products that could be sold. Of course magic could also facilitate any number of illegal means of producing wealth as well. None of which requires me to reveal much less prove to anyone that I have magical abilities.
Do I want fame? use of the transmutation spells would allow me to create an alternative persona that is of whatever race, gender, overall appearance and physical skill set that I want. If I want all of the benefits of a famous person without any of the downsides I could literally become any famous person I want to be for as long as I want. It brings a whole new meaning to "identity theft".
Do I want Power? The enchantment/charm spells would make me the defacto ruler of the planet. No need to strongarm or blackmail anyone. Liberal use of the dominate and charm person spells means I can make anyone do whatever I want and they won't even get upset about it. I just have to meet with the person in charge and after a short meeting we are now best buds. I don't need to convince anyone that I'm magical or that I have cosmic powers. They like me and will do whatever I want them to do.
Who would stop me? it doesn't really matter. If no one knows I have magical abilities, much less a clue of how extensive they are. Then there won't be any effort made to try and figure out some way to stop me.
I get along just fine in my normal daily life without proving I have magical abilities. If I've figured out a way to cheat the universe what advantage is there to letting other people in on the secret?
Bringing this thread back from the dead, but as an internet user I like keeping all the discussion of a topic in one place....
Question about the wildcard style slots for the master of many styles monk. If the monk has taken the base feat (e.g., snake style or janni style), can he use a wildcard style slot to vault to the final feat in the chain (e.g., Snake Fang, or Janni Rush).
The advantages are obvious. For example, the monk could bypass the 9 ranks in dance required for Janni Rush. The monk could skip over the middling Snake Sidewind feat in the snake style tree.
My read is that this is not possible, but my read seems more strict than how I’ve read some of the online guides to this style type. My read is that a monk with the base style feat could use 2 wildcard slots to climb the ladder to the third feat, but the monk would need to meet the feat prerequisites. For example, a monk with the snake style feat and no other style-related feats needs two wildcard slots before he can climb to snake fang (devoting a wildcard slot to snake sidewind and then snake fang, at least momentarily). Or, for example, a monk with Janni style and no other style feats needs 2 wildcard slots to get to Janni Rush and the Janni Rush’s prerequisite 8 ranks in acrobatics and dance.
Pasted below is the relevant text on wildcard:
Bonus Feat: At 1st level, 2nd level, and every four levels thereafter, a master of many styles may select a bonus style feat or the Elemental Fist feat (Advanced Player’s Guide 158). He does not need to meet the prerequisites of that feat, except the Elemental Fist feat. Starting at 6th level, a master of many styles can choose to instead gain a wildcard style slot. Whenever he enters one or more styles, he can spend his wildcard style slots to gain feats in those styles’ feat paths (such as Earth Child Topple) as long as he meets the prerequisites. Each time he changes styles, he can also change these wildcard style slots. This ability replaces a monk’s standard bonus feats.
IMO it's always better to create a new thread if you have a question that hasn't been addressed than to tack it on to an existing thread. The longer the thread is the less likely it is that someone will bother to even click on it. A new thread with 1 post, easy read. A "new" thread with a dozen posts.... eh, maybe some other time.
Anyway, I haven't seen the guides you're talking about so they may have been written prior to the Master of Many styles nerf. So, they may be based off of an archetype that's worded differently. IIRC, it just gave you bonus style feats that bypassed pre-reqs instead of this wildcard feat stuff.
The way it's currently written you can either gain the baseline style feat and ignore it's pre-reqs. or you can gain a wildcard feat that allows you to flex into the other feats that chain off of a style feat. These wildcard feats must meet all the pre-reqs of the feat which not only prevents you from skipping a feat in a chain (since feat #3 requires feat #2 in all cases) but it makes so that you can't take the later feats of some chains at all.
For example, lets say you have a human monk with the MOM archetype and you pick up the feat Bloodfrenzy style. Unfortunately, no matter how many wildcard feats or levels you have you'll never be able to take the follow up feats Bloodfrenzy Strike or Blood Frenzy Assault because you have to meet all of the pre-reqs to gain them via wildcard feats. Both of these feats require that you have the aquatic subtype something your human doesn't have, nor has any way to gain.
Edit: If you read the very first post in this thread you can see the the discussion here is of the pre-nerf version of the archetype as the OP quotes the ability which very clearly would allow you to skip.
The OP even provided an update halfway through this thread (Date goes from 2012 to 2015), clarifying that things have changed since they originally posted their question. If you're going to necro a thread you should probably read what it says.
Oh, I got one. An update to sorcerers so they get a list of bloodline powers to pick from like Oracle mysteries have revelation.
On a related note: First level bloodline/school/domain powers like Rays and Claws and stuff not being restricted to a limited amount of uses a day. One reason I heard they got the limit added was because people were(apparently) worried about players burning through doors or powering batteries.
The number of bloodlines with the absolutely useless "get worthless claws" ability is the bigger problem, IMO.
Yeah, I get it- dragons and demons HAVE claws. Why does a full caster want 1d6 melee claws?
It's a complete waste 99% of the time.
yeah, they're worthless in both directions. On the one hand if you're a full caster meleeing something with your D6 claws is suicidal at best. On the other hand, if your character is built to go into melee then you'll want something that hangs around for longer than a few rounds per day.
I had a character built for melee with the serpentine bloodline bite ability. I had to use it really sparingly because I got so few uses and it was horrible when I missed.
It is squishy (half the HP of a d6 HD class which lacks good defensive spells), but the main thing is it's more targetable than a book and more expensive to make backups of. You need a few thousand for a stone familiar.
Sounds like it should have been done the way DD4e did familiars: it's not a real animal, and when killed automatically reforms at some point in the near future.
Given that pathfinder exists as a direct result of the negative blacklash to 4e. I'm sure they wanted to avoid doing anything the way 4e did it.
Vigilante - It's an interesting and flavorable class with lots of options. But for some reason they get a sneak attack that isn't sneak attack. Basically shooting the class in the foot by preventing it from synergizing with things that work with sneak attack. It feels like they did something different for the sake of it being different. Either give them normal sneak attack or give them a sneak attack that works like Knife Master's sneak attack. But make the darn thing count as sneak attack.
It also would of been nice if the abilities had been thought out better with regard to a normal campaign. The class seems like it would be amazing but only in a very specific type of game. Otherwise you're half a class when adventuring and half a different class when you're not.
Even in the perfect game to play a vigilante, the class doesn't really work unless all the players are playing vigilantes. "Why is peter parker hanging out with Thor and Captain America?"
At minimum people will assume that both halves of your character know each other personally since they're both in the same circles. I guess if your alter ego never interacts with the party it could work. But that that means that now you're playing half a class all the time or you're going off by yourself a lot in your non-combat form. Which is a bad idea on two fronts.
I like the flavor of the class and would love to play one but I just don't see it working 99% of the time.
Edit: I just had a thought that makes this work. Instead of being a class it should be a way of doing Gestalt. You pick a hero class and a NPC class and can just change between them. It also means that either everyone is playing one or no one is.
So... you are allowed 1 virtual size increase effect and 1 actual size increase effect.
A Butchering Axe for a Medium Size Creature is 3d6.
A Butchering Axe for a large size creature is 4d6.
Lead Blades applies a single virtual size increase making it 6d6
Enlarge Person applies an actual size increase making it 8d6
this is based on the following chart
Spoiler:
->If the size increases by one step, look up the original damage on the chart and increase the damage by two steps. If the initial size is Small or lower (or is treated as Small or lower) or the initial damage is 1d6 or less, instead increase the damage by one step.
->If the size decreases by one step, look up the original damage on the chart and decrease the damage by two steps. If the initial size is Medium or lower (or is treated as Medium or lower) or the initial damage is 1d8 or less, instead decrease the damage by one step.
->If the exact number of original dice is not found on this chart, apply the following before adjusting the damage dice. If the damage is a number of d6, find the next lowest number of d6 on the chart and use that number of d8 as the original damage value (for example, 10d6 would instead be treated as 8d8). If the damage is a number of d8, find the next highest number of d8 on the chart and use that number of d6 as the original damage value (for example, 5d8 would instead be treated as 6d6). Once you have the new damage value, adjust by the number of steps noted above.
->If the die type is not referenced on this chart, apply the following rules before adjusting the damage dice. 2d4 counts as 1d8 on the chart, 3d4 counts as 2d6 on the chart, and so on for higher numbers of d4. 1d12 counts as 2d6 on the chart, and so on for higher numbers of d12.
->Finally, 2d10 increases to 4d8 and decreases to 2d8, regardless of the initial size, and so on for higher numbers of d10.
Since spellslinger wizards can't cast other zero level spells no.
Spell Trigger wrote:
Spell trigger items can be used by anyone whose class can cast the corresponding spell.
the archetype modifying your class needs to be taken into account when evaluating what your "class" is. Otherwise it screws over every archetype that lets you cast spells from a different class.
I have never understood why falling damage cap is so low. Maybe a sentence like "If the character should take more than 20d6 from falling she is dead, no save." but it was cut for some reason.
I think its largely because the game simulates action movies not RL. This is why your character's ability to perform tasks/speed isn't affected by how many HP you have left. You can run around and fight just as well at full HP as you can at 1 HP. If it was trying to simulate RL then even taking a single point of damage should impose a penalty on your ability to function, as the pain from your injury is at minimum mildly distracting. Something that's going to get worse the more injured you become.
So, how much are disabled individuals affected when it comes to action movies? Honestly, it depends on the action movie and the type of character. Pathfinder should be no different.
Really simple, is there a first-party way to get either ironskin or barkskin as a spell as a sorcerer or wizard?
If neither is possible, what would be a cheap way to one or both at a decent level a game goes on?
There are a couple of methods that come to mind that all work with levels in sorcerer/wizard. If you just want to flat add the spells to your spell list there are the following methods.
->The Prestige Class Pathfinder Savant can grab spells from any class list.
->A Samsaran can use the racial trait Mystic Past Life to add barkskin and ironskin to their spell list because these spells do appear on the summoner and witch lists respectively, meaning they exist as arcane spells.
->A wizard can gain the Arcane Discovery: Faith Magic to gain Barkskin. Ironskin isn't an option since it isn't a domain spell.
If you just want the ability to cast the spells and don't care if it appears on your actual spell list. There are some ways to gain these as limited use spells.
Edit: I knew there was a guide floating around that talks about getting spells on your list from other classes. I found it here. Though obviously not everything on there is going to work for a sorcerer/wizard.
More than once I've had players ask me if they can do what this feat lets them do and I think my answer was always "ok, no problem", because it seemed like a reasonable thing for the character to be able to do (when the monster in question is using natural attacks). The first time I saw this feat my immediate response was "WTF? that's stupid! It shouldn't cost you a feat to do that." and then I saw it's pre-reqs... "WTF!!!? that's REALLY stupid"
I don't have a problem with one feat being required to unlock another feat. But they should synergize. If I want to be able to do the thing that Feat C lets me do then Feats B and A (Feat C's pre-reqs) should reasonably also be things that I want to do. Combat Expertise is fine as it is, the problem is that it is required to do umptine million other things that are completely un-related to raising your AC.
I presently have a character who uses combat expertise all the time, but only because I ran across this trait that makes its use at low levels completely free.
If you work with your DM you should be able to fill all of them. I always describe my characters the way I want them to look and as long as it's generally in line with what my character is wearing no one has ever had an issue.
The last gnome I played had a permanent continual flame spell cast on her head that she could change the color of using prestidigitation. By RAW that's not how any of that works but it's what I wanted and it didn't provide any mechanical advantage (over having a hat with continual flame on it) and so my DM allowed it. My back up plan if they didn't allow it was to cast it on the headband my character was wearing. Which from a mechanics standpoint did the same thing but wasn't as appealing visually.
So, as long as you aren't trying to gain a mechanical advantage from your gear being non-standard I don't see why any DM would have an issue with it.
If it ever starts to become unbelievable enchanting your armor with glammer, grabbing a set of sleeves or even just getting a hat of disguise automatically solves any and all aesthetics as they specifically let your clothes (and in the case of the hat even your whole character) look however you want them to look.
The armor enchant is essentially slotless and the hat and sleeves only occupy a single slot. So in the worst case scenario you only have to give up a single item slot and that's only if your DM is being difficult.
IMO the best place to start is by doing research on the race in question. Try to understand the race's history/culture and build from that. The danger of having a guide that talks about how to RP a particular race is that you could end up stereotyping the race (like giving all dwarves Scottish accents).,
Its always better to not be a stereotype and if you really want to make your character "feel" like they are their race then knowing about that race's history and culture will allow you to touch upon and use something unique to them.
For example, the last gnome I played was driven to experience new things because she was trying to avoid "The Bleaching". She absolutely came across as being a gnome without me turning her into a stereotype.
- Deep One. I plan to use Heavy Armor, -5 ft speed nullified
Huh? Is there something official on armor worn by a creature with 25ft base speed? As a GM, I'd definitly reduce that to 15ft.
at the bottom of the page here it shows how much heavy armor reduces your movement by. Essentially any movement 25+ gets rounded up to the nearest 10 before the penalty is applied to determine your final speed.
When it comes to an intimidate build you'll probably want to consider a 1 level dip into rogue(thug) in order to pick up the ability Frightening.
Frightening (Ex) wrote:
Whenever a thug successfully uses Intimidate to demoralize a creature, the duration of the shaken condition is increased by 1 round. In addition, if the target is shaken for 4 or more rounds, the thug can instead decide to make the target frightened for 1 round. This ability replaces trapfinding.
This causes enemies to literally run away from you. Other fun things to consider
This allows you to always take 10 on your checks and if you beat the DC by 5 you can automatically make them frightened instead of demoralized.
I'd also look at the feat Scrutinize Spell. Sure, it only works on spellcasters but then again those are probably the types of creatures you most want to run away from you. It's unclear to me if the free intimidate granted by this feat requires you to be within 30 feet of the target.
am I right or am I wrong? is profession a situation in which the dc scales with your roll? or is there some other answer entirely?
Shinoskay wrote:
Kailas, its not about money. I am running a game using downtime with a home rule where people earn experience based on the skill dc. It seems to be good so far, except I always thought DC was set before the roll. Another player has the same interpretation as java, it seems.
The only time a profession check normally has a set DC is when your character is attempting to answer questions related to the profession (basically acting as a sort of knowledge check)
Profession wrote:
You can also answer questions about your Profession. Basic questions are DC 10, while more complex questions are DC 15 or higher.
Then looking at the definition of Difficulty Class
Difficulty Class wrote:
Whenever a creature attempts to perform an action whose success is not guaranteed, he must make some sort of check (usually a skill check). The result of that check must meet or exceed the Difficulty Class of the action that the creature is attempting to perform in order for the action to be successful. Climbing a slippery wall, dropping prone to avoid dragon breath, and gaining a suspicious guard’s trust all have their own DCs that are determined by the GM. The higher the DC, the more difficult the challenge.
So, the order of operation of all DCs regardless of the skill involved.
1. Player declares action
2. DM sets DC based on action
3. Player makes a check (either by rolling, or taking 10 or taking 20) and then applying any modifiers relevant to the action/situation.
4. If the total check equals or exceeds the set DC then the action is a success otherwise it is a failure.
the profession skill, nor the perform skill gives any indication that the above sequence is disrupted in any way.
What the profession skill does state is that when attempting to use the skill to earn money. The result is not compared against a DC of any sort. Instead the check has math applied to it to determine how much you get, there is no way to "fail" in this scenario.
You are allowing players to use the profession skill to earn xp. This is not a normal application of the skill but if Difficulty Classes are involved you would follow the above procedure meaning its possible for characters to fail the check. If a failed check still yields xp then I can understand why the player would be confused. Perhaps they are under the impression that this profession check works the same way that Monster Lore checks work.
Monster Lore wrote:
You can use this skill to identify monsters and their special powers or vulnerabilities.
Check: In general, the DC of such a check equals 10 + the monster’s CR. For common monsters, such as goblins, the DC of this check equals 5 + the monster’s CR. For particularly rare monsters, such as the tarrasque, the DC of this check equals 15 + the monster’s CR or more. A successful check allows you to remember a bit of useful information about that monster. For every 5 points by which your check result exceeds the DC, you recall another piece of useful information.
In this case there is a minimum DC to beat, failing to make that much of a check means that your character is unable to recognize the creature. However, a very high check not only allows the character to identify the creature but they gain extra knowledge as well. While a person might state.
"I beat a dc 35 with my check."
and while getting a 35 on your check yields more information than getting a 30. It doesn't change that the DC for the monster was a 20. The DC doesn't suddenly change to 35 just because the player got a very high roll. Even though the player actually gets additional benefits for making such a high check.
Because some DMs are not so precise with their language though, they might incorrectly state.
"Since you got a DC 35, you learn that..."
Such loose usage of language could give a player the impression that once they roll, their result gets compared to a list of DCs and that they get whatever the highest DC is on that list they beat. Having this mindset is only re-enforced seeing a DC list similar to the one found for the perform skill.
TLDR: There is no such thing as a scaling DC, there is however such a thing as scaling results and some players might think this is the same thing.
Weapons/Weapon Enchantments
[Brutal Axe]-> Gain Improved Sunder or Greater Sunder
[Cutthroat's Apprentice]-> Gain Quick Draw (only for the sword)
[Gloom Blade]-> Gain Blind-Fight (only while in supernatural darkness)
[Quarterstaff of Entwined Serpents]-> Gain Eschew Materials
[Rabbit’s Blade]-> Gain Cleave or Great Cleave (with limitations)
[Rod of Flailing]-> Gain Two-weapon fighting (only for the rod)
[Sylvan Scimitar]-> Gain Cleave (temperate climates only)
[Umbral Chain]-> Gain Blind-Fight (only while in supernatural darkness)
Armor/Armor Enchantments
[Arrow Deflection (+2)]-> Gain Pseudo Deflect Arrows
[Elysian Shield]-> Gain Pseudo Turn Undead
Slotted Magic Items
[Blessed Keepsake]-> Gain Alignment Channel (with limitations)
[Blind Man’s Fold]-> Gain Improved Blind-Fight
[Cloak of Daggers]-> Gain Quickdraw (Daggers only)
[Commander's Helm]-> Gain a Teamwork feat, grant it to allies 3/day
[Earth Child Faceguard]-> Gain Earth Child Style
[Hamatulatsu Robe]-> Gain Hamatulatsu
[Ring of Heroes]-> Gain Luck of Heroes
[Ring of Protected Life]-> Gain Pseudo Selective Channel
[Talisman of the Orc Mother's Fury]-> Gain Diehard (orc w/ Orc ferocity only)
[Torc of the Primal Song]-> Gain Diehard (while using raging song)
Unslotted Magic Items
[Demonic Implant: Wicked Wings]-> Gain Deflect Arrows
[Hobgoblin Battle Standard: Iron Resolve]-> Grants Die Hard to all allies in 30 feet
[Ioun Stone: Dark Blue Rhomboid]-> Gain Alertness
[Ioun Stone: Scarlet and Green Cabochon]-> Gain Endurance
[Ioun Stone: Turquoise Sphere]-> Gives a horse or pony ridden the Fleet feat
[Summoning Shackle]-> Apply Extend Spell to all summoning spells <3rd lvl
oozes and plant creatures may go un-noticed as the clockworks might not recognize them as a threat, especially since such creatures may not have any reason to attack an inedible clockwork creature. It's also possible that some portion of the ruins has been "cleaned out" by a powerful creature that decided to make that section it's own personal lair.
Mindless undead are another possible option. A graveyard or similar structure might be filled with corpses that become animate when disturbed by the living. The clockworks are unaware of the situation since they aren't living creatures.
morale used to be a mechanic in the game. Any time something scary happened (25% of the creatures were dead, the leader was killed, etc.) the remaining creatures had to make a morale check that was modified by the situation.
I think a lot of DM's didn't bother using the morale system because it wasn't "as much fun" as just having the monsters fight to the death. Plus, it was additional book keeping for the DM. Besides, it's annoying when the group gets jumped by 8 goblins who then start fleeing as soon as a few of them get killed.
These are the Morale rules from AD&D for those who are interested.
Spoiler:
MORALE
Morale checks are used to determine the amount of will to fight in
non-leader NPCs, and can be applied both to henchmen and hirelings of
character types and groups of intelligent opponent monsters (see also
Loyalty of Henchmen & Hirelings, Obedience and Morale). Base unmodified morale score is 50%.
Morale Checks Made When
Faced by obviously superior force___________check each round
25% of party eliminated or slain____________check at +5%
Leader unconscious__________________________check at +10%
50%+ of party** eliminated or slain_________check at +15%
Leader slain or deserts_____________________check at +30%
Other Morale Check Modifiers
Each enemy deserting__________________________________-5%
Each enemy slain_____________________________________-10%
Inflicting casualties without receiving any__________-20%
Each friend killed___________________________________+10%
Taking casualties without inflicting any_____________+10%
Each friend deserting________________________________+15%
Outnumbered & outclassed by 3 or more to 1___________+20%
MORALE SCORES Henchmen or Associated Creatures:
For each creature take the base morale (loyalty) score and cast percentile dice. Adjust the score for penalties and bonuses, and if the adjusted score is equal to or less than the loyalty score, morale is good. If the number exceeds the loyalty score, the creature will react according to the morale failure table below.
It's confusing but basically if you roll higher than the creature's current morale then they pass the check
Monsters, Intelligent:
Each monster has a base morale of 50%, +5%/hit die above 1, + 1 %/hit
point above any hit dice. If a morale check is required, scoring and
reaction are as stated above for henchmen et al.
MORALE FAILURE
1% to 15% fall back, fighting
16% to 30% disengage-retreat
31% to 50% flee in panic
51 % or greater surrender
The difference between the maximum score needed to retain morale and
the number actually rolled, as adjusted, is the % of morale failure.
Unless the lich was prepared for combat in advance, having Spell Resistance would be a massive impediment to its combat abilities as it would either have to sacrifice a combat round to lower its SR or run the risk of wasting a round on its self-buffs failing.
The rules don't seem to reflect this
Spell Resistence wrote:
A creature’s spell resistance never interferes with its own spells, items, or abilities.
now it does typically become an issue when a PC with SR wants the cleric to heal them since it can accidently block the healing spell, since its an external source
Question: is the damage of natural attacks determined by the attack itself, like a manufactured weapon?
example: a medium longsword deals 1d8 damage. What does a "medium bite" deal?
Yes and no, From This table the default damage for a bite from a medium sized creature is 1d6. That being said the damage for the bite attack may be different depending on where it came from. The trait Tusked for example gives a bite attack that deals 1d4 dmg for a medium sized character.
Well, the feat does allow you to cast a mythic spell without spending any mythic points which is certainly worth something.
Mythic Magic wrote:
Casting Mythic Spells: If you know the mythic version of a spell, any time you cast the spell, you may expend one use of mythic power to convert the spell into its mythic version as you cast it.
Adding to this spell perfection and anything else that might reduce the metamagic cost and you can now effectively cast say mythic fireball without having to spend any mythic points.
as for specific spells. The following seem notable to me, don't know if they are worth a the +5 level though.
Cleric
Cure Series - now heals ability damage in addition to increased healing
Command - affects multiple, targets that make their save are staggered instead.
Silence - affects mental communication and can designate yourself to be immune to the silence effect.
Sacred Bond - Range increases to medium, when a healing spell is cast though the bond, the caster also heals an amount equal to the minimum possible by the spell. This means it effectively doubles any spell that heals a fixed amount of damage. Also, the link can be used for healing abilities (eg. lay on hands).
Wizard
Enlarge Person - Increases the target 2 size categories
Floating Disk - lasts 2 hrs per CL, carries up to 200 lbs per level, the caster can ride the disk which moves at a speed of 30 in any direction and all items on the disk are treated as weightless for purposes of teleport spells.
Hold Portal - the spell now forces a will save on anyone attempting to open the door. A failed save prevents the creature from opening the door using any means for the spell's duration.
Blindness/Deafness - the spell causes both blindness and deafness, the creature saves against each effect separately.
Hideous Laughter - creatures of a different type don't get a bonus on the save. The spell also now causes 1d6 subdual damage each round to the creature. It now takes 2 successful saves to end the spell early, if you only pass 1 save it merely ends the subdual damage effect.
Scorching Ray - the first ray bypasses fire resistance and immunity.
Summon Swarm - The swarm leaves behind a trail of slime as per the grease spell (for 1 round). Creatures entering the greased area are subjected to the swarm's poison or disease effect (if it has one). Creatures falling prone in the grease effect take a -4 penalty to said save.
Web - The webbing includes multiple swarms of spiders (1 swarm per 10 foot square) that damage any creature stuck in the webbing or that pass through the square, the swarms are otherwise immobile.
True but the issue there is if you start down that rabbit hole you open yourself up to all sorts of further questions.
1) What order do the various AC components apply in e.g. is Dex factored in before shield bonus or after?
2) Do touch attacks ignore armour bonus from magical barrier shields like mage armour like they do actual physical armour?
3) If touch attacks go through mage armour do they go through walls of force?
4) What is that mysterious base 10 meant to represent?
just to start you...
The answers to all of these feel painfully obvious to me and I've used the apparent order as a DM to describe how close an enemy came to hitting a player. Its never had any game effect. At one time I considered using it to apply the damage dealt to a character's armor and/or shield until I realized that the order I use means that a character's shield almost never gets hit.
The specific order I use is
Base 10
circumstance bonuses
miscellaneous bonuses
dodge bonuses
stat bonuses in standard order (str, dex, con, int, wis, cha)
Shield bonus
Armor bonus
Natural armor bonus
So, to put it in perspective, assume a character has the following
(AC 9 or less)-You miss the square the character is standing in
(AC 10 to 11) -You miss because of lighting conditions
(AC 12 to 13) -You hit the cover they are behind
(AC 14 to 17) -The character dodged the attack
(AC 18) - The character blocked the attack with their shield
(AC 19 to 22) - The attack was deflected by their armor
(AC 23 to 25) - The attack was stopped by the character's thick skin
But to be honest, I don't describe every attack this way as it would bog the game down to much. I only tend to do it when an attack barely misses, missed wildly or the player asks.
So, I'll start with the Trapfinder. Since this is a combat oriented game, while you could just make a rogue they are fairly reliant on sneak attack when it comes to damage output. So, while the trapfinding part may not require a bunch of rules the sneak attack portion might. I would instead recommend Ranger with the Trapper archetype. Now you have a character that really is a "traps expert" as they can not only disarm traps but at higher levels build traps of their own (instead of casting spells which can be very rules heavy). While rangers do get a favored enemy it's not difficult either the enemy qualifies or it doesn't and if it does you get very straight forward bonuses. Additionally, the trapfinder archetype doesn't lock you into any particular combat style so, you could still pick ranged, dual wielding, or whatever ends up making the most sense.
When it comes to a tank, it really depends on how you define "tank". Pathfinder doesn't have an aggro mechanic of any sort at best there's a few feats and spells that will force an enemy to attack you for one turn and these require checks/saves meaning they aren't reliable. So, I can't recommend much in the way of builds for a "tank" until I know what's actually needed. Plenty of classes could fill this role Fighter, Paladin, Cleric, Warpriest, Druid, etc. Basically any of your non-spell casting classes and at least half the spellcasting ones too.
For healer, the most straight forward is just a good aligned cleric as they will get to channel positive energy and can spontaneously cast healing spells. A paladin can also make an effective healer. Oracles with the life mystery are of course extremely powerful healers but their lifelink ability (the bread and butter of such a build) and curse make the character a little more complex, so I don't know how appealing such a character will be.
A utility class is almost counter to wanting something straight forward. Wizards absolutely can fill this role and fill it well but require substantial knowledge of spells. This is fine as a PC but if they are an NPC you'll want to save yourself the headache of running such a character by making them a spontaneous caster like a sorcerer. Now, they have the utility, but you don't have to worry about what got memorized or how many times. If you want the same flexibility as a wizard, an arcanist can also work well since they are basically spontaneous casters that can swap out what spells they "know" each day.
Just like with pyrotechnics, glitter dust says will negates. So, when the spell it cast you immediately get a will save to avoid the blindness effect.
If a creature fails to save against pyrotechnics then they are blinded for the given duration.
If a creature fails to save against glitterdust each round they get to make another saving throw to end the blindness effect early. Otherwise they are blinded for the duration of the spell.
THAT'S why the milkman has a bazillion coins in his milk can! I had completely forgotten that treasure brought in XP. So the message I should be taking from this isn't that the local peasants are bizarrely wealthy, but that the PCs should get story XP from interacting with those NPCs.Thanks Bjorn.
I would also like to point out that money in 2nd edition was basically worthless after a certain level since there was nothing to buy. If you looked at the magic items section in the DMG you'd notice that none of them have any listed prices. This is because you couldn't purchase magic items. They could be crafted but crafting them actually cost your character XP which made it very unappealing to most players. It also meant that crafters didn't just hand out magic items to their party members and became very upset if said items got stolen or destroyed.
IIRC in 2nd edition everyone got xp for killing monsters. But each class had a short list of other activities that could get them XP. Thieves got xp for getting gold, fighters got xp per HD of monster they killed, wizards got XP for casting useful spells Etc.
This of course encouraged thieves to steal everything that wasn't nailed down, fighters to make sure they "got credit" for every kill and for wizards to blow all of their spells and were highly motivated to get every spell in the game. This also meant that while the game made it very clear that wizards were supposed to be extremely protective of their spellbooks. The reality was that the very 1st thing that would happen when two PC wizards met is they would swap spellbooks so they could learn each other's spells.
So, yeah. the mantra was very much "If it has stats we can kill it". This meant that if you didn't want PCs killing certain individuals you didn't give them stats. Women and children probably weren't statted in the module because the author didn't want to encourage players to kill them.
Personally, I disagree with this. I'd rather have the hard rules clearly defined and RAI clarified, then I can make my own house rules easier and understand "why" I'm deviating from the hard rules.
I completely agree. I would much rather know what the rule is and then decide if its a rule that I want to use or not. Then if a disagreement comes up it's very straight forward to say "I don't like that rule and therefore don't use it"
It's much more frustrating when two people interpret the same vague rule to mean wildly different things since it makes both the player and DM wonder what else is being interpreted differently.
I'm all for having cool things happen in a game. But I can't remember the last time I ever used "the rule of cool" as a DM. You can do cool things and follow the rules. If a player wants to use a spell in a non-traditional way that is only vaguely covered in the rules, I have them make a spellcraft check with a DC in my head. You passed the check? cool you're able to make it work this time. I didn't ignore the rules, I just added additional rules that allow the player to do the thing they wanted to do.
Alternatively, as a DM I try to plan out encouters to have some idea of what is "supposed" to happen and will even modify monsters by giving them non-standard abilities that allow them to do the thing I want them to be able to do. A knowledge check will give you the default monster and a higher one would let you realize these are non-standard. I've not really had complaints that my monsters don't follow the rules as a result. And if the PCs figure out some way to break the encounter I let them. I think it's cool when players twart the enemies this way. If it's not something I want the players to continue to exploit I plan future encounters in such a way as to dampen the effect of whatever they're doing instead of just outright blocking it.
That being said, certainly my groups have run across certain combinations that are wildly unbalanced and so those combinations just get banned as a house rule so that neither the players nor the DM are allowed to use them.
I've always made characters for fun. I've probably only played 5% of the characters I've put together and I can only think of a few that I stopped playing because I became disinterested in playing them.
When I make a character for fun I build them around a particular concept that sounds interesting to me. It could be something very general like "a necromancer" or it could be highly specific "a character that maximizes jumping". Usually at this stage I'm just making the character to see if the final result is something I would want to actually play or not. I would then have a binder that character would get put into that I could reference.
Then, when I get involved in a campaign I try to find out what class/niche/role etc. the group needs (based on what other players are making). Using this information I'm able to go over the characters I've made that could fill that role and pick out something that sounds like fun to me in that moment.
Once I've made the character I will look at all of the details related to that character and see what I can glean about their personality. What are their high stats? what are their low stats? what gender are they?(almost every character I make is intentionally the opposite gender of the last character I made) what is their alignment? what do their feats/traits/abilities say about what the character cares about?
In this way even though I have played many necromancers no two of them have had the same personality.
I do find that building a character "blind" and trying to play them doesn't always work out. Since, sometimes they just don't come together in a way that's satisfying. For this reason I recreated the binder I used to have into a digital document I can easily reference. My character concepts document organizes builds and boils them down to the basics so I can more easily make satisfying characters when a new campaign starts.
As for my favorites?
I had fun with Draethlyn, he was a LE necromancer of Zon Kuthon. Whose goal was create a new race of creatures powered by negative energy. All of the undead and constructs he made thoughout the course of the campaign were just part of his "research" into this goal. He was incredibly charismatic and was mainly evil because he was willing to use whatever dark magic was necessary to achieve his goals. He had no desire to screw over his allies because well, they're his allies. As a result he was known in other kingdoms as the "good necromancer". He made sure to do the more questionable things in private (no need to tell the party I've recruited a hag to run my orphanages for example).
I also fondly remember playing Wildflower. She was a NG Druid(with chaotic tendencies) that had a large black wolf named midnight. She had a very high wisdom and charisma but a below average intelligence. So, while she wasn't particularly bright she was friendly and listened to people who seemed to know better. Early on in the campaign my druid got the group lost in the woods because she picked a random direction and said "lets go this way". Thanks to her charisma the group was perfectly happy to follow. There was a ranger in the group who made his check and knew we were going the wrong way but assumed that since my character was a druid she knew something he didn't.
Hey something else tangentially related: if two or more people roll the exact same result on intiative, how do you decide who goes first?
In our group everyone's initiative is given as a decimal value with the number after the decimal being equal to the character's modifier.
So, if I have a 16 dex and roll a 12, I would tell the DM my initiative is 15.03.
In the unlikely event that two characters/creatures still have the same init value then there is simply a roll off as per the rules.
Initiative Checks wrote:
If two or more combatants have the same initiative check result, the combatants who are tied act in order of total initiative modifier (highest first). If there is still a tie, the tied characters should roll to determine which one of them goes before the other.
No, it states that you are only treated as having those feats for purposes of creating magic armor. Since armor can not receive weapon enchantments they are not something you would be able to add. In the same way that you wouldn't be able to enhance armor spikes, shield spikes, or spiked gauntlets. Since these are enchanted separate from the armor as weapons. Shields are the same way, its weapon enchantments are tracked separately from it's armor enchantments.
