Search Posts
So, I have been eyeballing the Earthbreaker for use with my Sparkling Targe Magus. It has some good utility and versatility which is of use to me. The Keen Rune is for slashing and piercing weapons, but an Earthbreaker can do Bludeoning or Piericng (Versatile P). If I were to put a Keen Rune on it, would the keen effect only apply to the piercing side or would it also work for the bludgeoning side? I'm still kinda new to pf2 and haven't seen anything to prevent it, but I could be missing something somewhere.
Ok, I'm a bit new to pf2 but I've reviewed the rules on focus spells and conflux spells for the Magus. Keeping in mind I'm going off the Remaster version of the rules and the Magus from Demiplane, which has a (offical?) conversion. My confusion lies in whether a focus spell from another class of the same tradition would count as a Conflux spell for the purposes of recharging Spellstrike. My understanding is that focus spells of a different type do not recharge spellstrike. The question is, are focus spells of the same tradition also the same type? I was taking that to mean that a focus spell from another spellcasting tradition would not count, but a focus spell from the same tradition would count. Maybe my searchfu is bad these days, but I couldn't find any info one way or the other. So, what do you think?
So, let's say I cast Hold Person on an eligible target. The target fails its save. It is now paralyzed. In the same round the targets initiative comes up. It takes a full round action to save against the spell. It saves. Now for the question. Is the target still paralyzed until its next turn, thus allowing for a coup de grace? Or, is it no longer paralyzed and has full access to its defensive abilities? Seems like it's a bit unfair if it gets 2 saves in the same round with a net effect of basically being dazed for a round. I have no problem with the target getting a save the next round to end the effect, but 2 saves in the same round seems unfair to me.
As the title asks, how does Improved Outflank actually work? From the reading of the feat, and since your flanking partner would have the feat as well, is flanking calculated for each based on the unoccupied space, or does one need to actually be in the proper space? I contend the feat reads that both can be adjacent to the unoccupied space that would normally flank. What do you guys think?
The text of the spell, Kinetic Reverberation reads:
This spell converts the momentum and force from melee attacks made against the target of the spell, reflecting them back upon the attacker’s weapon. After making a successful melee attack against the target, an attacker must make a Fortitude saving throw for the weapon used. If the weapon fails the save, it takes damage equal to the damage rolled against the target. Creatures using natural attacks or unarmed strikes are unaffected by this spell. The question is, does the original target of the attack take damage when the damage is successfully "reflected" back on the attacker's weapon? The language of the spell implies No, but it doesn't spell it out specifically.
As the title says, is it possible, by feat, ability, or magic item to summon creatures with maximum health? As a Monster Tactician Inquisitor, it would really be nice if my summoned buddies would last more than 1 or 2 hits and getting to attack before returning to the planes. At lower levels, it's not so bad, but at higher levels, say summon monster V, you have Bralani Azatas, 7d10+28 HD (66HP). Seems like it would be enough, but not when you are facing stuff that can chew through that in a single round easy. If they had more HP then even if they die in a couple rounds, they will have at least accomplished something useful. It does me no good to share my teamwork feats with summoned critters if they aren't there to use them.
Have you checked out Kingmaker? It's the sandboxiest AP that they have, and is about as popular as Rise of the Runelords. While it is recommended that you do the things in a certain order (mostly due to level ranges), it isn't a "you must go here before you can go there" type of AP. Yes, I've seen it, haven't yet played in it, but it's a bit of a hybrid. I guess what I'm looking for is a setting where I can play as a con man/professional thief/assassin or guild wizard/university professor or captain of the guard/investigator. I don't want to be roped into long term adventure path deviations outside of the sandbox. The world should be dynamic and your actions should affect the world in a real way. Am I making sense?
I have recently checked out the contents of the Ultimate Intrigue book and I have many ideas for characters. The problem I have is that there aren't any real options for playing, long term the types of characters I want to play. All the adventure paths are theme park style that follow a very scripted timeline and locations. I'd be interested in an adventure path that is more of a sand box style where the players are able to explore, interact, and progress in any order they see fit, without being railroaded by the GM. Is there any serious discussion going on at Paizo for an Adventure Path of this nature?
Can anyone give me some feedback on this please? :( Anyone know the answer to this, or able to show me where this has been definitively settled?
Can anyone give me some feedback on this please? :( Shameless thread necro here, but I can't find anywhere that this question has been definitively addressed. Personally, I'd be inclined to go with "C". I also think the Versatile Performance ability should be rewritten so that all that is replaced is the Perform skills ranks and ability used to modify the skill. Every feat/trait/ability that modifies the original skill should be added to the total bonus. The point is to reduce the skill point burden of a bard so they are more flexible in spending skill points, after all they are supposed to be a jack of all trades. It just seems really silly to have an ability like VP and then nullify feat investment to make it convoluted. I think this was the original intent that got lost in the writing.
The close weapon is the fighters weapon group. Why it doesn't include daggers is probably because they wanted the dagger in light blades. You could go with a punch dagger cestus. The point here is to have a weapon that is easy to conceal and synergizes with the Unchained Rogue's Finesse Training ability. Basically, an assassin. The build hinges on the ability to use specialized daggers for assassination. The weapons of the Close Weapon Group just don't fit the bill for what I want to do. Also, Daggers can be used in a grapple which is the primary reason for taking the brawler levels. Essentially, a martial artist/spy/assassin type.
More specifically, for the purposes of the Brawler ability, Close Weapon Mastery, what is a close weapon? I ask because I am building a character to specialize in close quarters fighting with a Dagger and Unarmed Strikes and am confused that Dagger is not included on the Close Weapon Group for Fighters. In almost every fighting style I've studied, the dagger/knife is used as the most common close quarters weapon available. What considerations were made in forming the list? Weight? Close quarters viability? Fiat?
Slightly off topic, but where is this Warlock class that exists in an official capacity for Pathfinder? I haven't been keeping up with all the new stuff, so what have I missed?
That's great for those folks. I'm not at all knocking Starfinder at all, it does look interesting, however I have a very limited budget for RPG's and I only want to invest in 2-3 systems maximum. I've chosen Pathfinder (WotC ruined any chance of me ever returning to them as a customer), Star Wars, and Battletch/Mechwarrior. Basically, Swords and Sorcery, Sci-Fi with magic, and Sci-Fi of a different bent. There are other great games out there, and I do play them with friends, but I won't invest in them.
If I wanted to play a science fiction setting with magic, I'm going to play Star Wars. I much prefer the Knights of the Old Republic era where the Republic, Jedi, Sith, and Mandalorians all clashed for supremacy of the galaxy. Fantasy Flight Games has made, what I believe to be, a great system that captures the cinematic feel of the setting. YMMV
If a skill roll would result in automatic success, why waste time with forcing a roll? Hand waive it and move on. It's not like there are margins of success and failure here...
The problem in the game my GM is currently running for RotRL (anniversary edition) is that we have a fluctuating group of 5-6 and we are currently at the library in chapter 4. I had a character that took craft magic arms and armor and only got to make 1 item for myself, and that was in book 2. We have been routinely behind in wealth and level the whole time. My cleric was killed in 1 shot by the hill giant guarding the townsfolk in the sacrificial pit area. The best weapon in the party was a holy greatsword +1 that I had crafted, everyone else had +2 overall weapons. We have a tank that is good at it and a ranger that is good at damage. Everyone else in the party would basically die in 2 rounds to all the giants and ogres if it weren't for them. We don't get any down time to craft items since we are always on a "timer". I tried to craft enroute but the rules for that make it so you can't complete an item in a timely manner. Plus my cleric died before completing an item for the party so money lost there... To top it off, we are woefully under-leveled for the content. I expect to be 1 level behind with 5-6 players, but we are 3 levels behind! Every encounter is a struggle and it's getting to the absurd level. The only significant damage is coming from our ranger! The grumbling isn't too bad now as long as the ranger lives and pumps out the damage, but the whole campaign has been about 2 players, the rest of us are just there for the ride...
Slight thread necro, but consider the skills that are granted by the headband are not wizard/sorcerer class skills, such as perception or sense motive. Would they be treated as class skills since the headband imparts knowledge of those skills to the wearer? Or would they continue to be cross class skills?
Me thinks you have a fundamental lack of understanding of how the spell works. When an enemy that you threaten attacks an ally, the spell forces them to redirect the attack to you (or your eidolon if you have one). With a successful will save, the compulsion is ignored. Back on topic though, nothing in this thread has yet shot down that spells (that deal damage) are attacks that can apply sneak attack damage should the conditions for a sneak attack be met. Is it RAI? I don't think so; I would not rule so. Is it RAW? It sure appears to be. Any confusion can be rectified with a simple FAQ on the subject...
Read in isolation? Can you explain what that means exactly? Examples please. We are looking for RAW here, not interpretations of RAI.
The FAQ does not contradict the passage in the CRB that Rikkan quoted and bolded. It actually looks like Rikkan is correct and everyone elses understanding is incorrect, by RAW. That may not be RAI, but by RAW Rikkan appears correct to me.
The Underground Railroad was also illegal in the South, but it was the right thing to do... There is a difference between legal and lawful, legal and the right thing to do... Everything the nazis did was within the letter of the law, but it was institutional evil and immoral. Sometimes to do the right thing requires one to ignore an unjust law. You don't have to feel comfortable about stepping outside the law but in the end the paladin's patron will understand.
It is this and other similar scenarios that concern me as well. There needs to be a way to disguise spellcasting. The Dark Sun campaign had rules for this as it was virtually death for any wizard to cast spells in the open.
Slight thread necro here, but with the addition of the Advanced Class Guide, I feel there are additional options to make this style of Blaster more viable. Spoiler:
Assume 20pt buy and Pathfinder only products
Human Ability Scores: STR 7 (Dump) DEX 12 (help a little with Ranged Touch, AC is next to worthless IMO) CON 14 (more hp, increased death threshold, increased time to drown) INT 20 (max it to the hilt!) WIS 8 (with crossblooded your will save will suck anyway, may as well go with it) CHA 12 (helps with UMD, and a bonus spell per day is nice) Favored Class: Wizard use hit point option level Traits: Reactionary (+2 Initiative), Magical Lineage (Fireball) Initiative: +11 (+2 Trait, +4 Improved Initiative, +4 Familiar, +1 Dex) Wiz1 Familiar (greensting scorpion), Evoker (admixture specialist; Opposed - Enchant/Necro), Scribe Scroll, Intense Spells, Versatile Evocation, Spell Focus (Evocation), Mage's Tattoo (Evocation)
Sorcerer Spells: 0 level - Detect Magic, Prestidigitation, Disrupt Undead (since necro is opposed, nice to have) 1st - Heightened Awareness (used correctly will raise initiative to +15, 4/day) Highlights:
Further Assumptions:
Notes:
I can find no record of Elemental Manipulation as a feat or arcane discovery. Is this 3rd party? or 3.x?
Second standard action: (from burning a mythic point, everyone who's mythic gets this at I think 3rd tier or so). Shape Channel at the mass of bad guys in front of me, deselecting the three party members in melee with them. Regardless of whether they save against the channel, they get pushed back thirty feet. So take 10D6/2 damage from the channel, and then get thrown through 4 mythic empowered persistent maximized blade barriers. Roll your saves twice. DC 35 I think is what it was up to. This killed four of the five bad guys in the fight regardless of whether they made every single save. I think it was something like between 400 and 800 damage to all of them, which none of them were surviving even at full health.I can't find Shape Channel anywhere, how are you accomplishing the knockback effect on a failed save exactly? Could you site sources please? Anyone have an answer for this question?
Second standard action: (from burning a mythic point, everyone who's mythic gets this at I think 3rd tier or so). Shape Channel at the mass of bad guys in front of me, deselecting the three party members in melee with them. Regardless of whether they save against the channel, they get pushed back thirty feet. So take 10D6/2 damage from the channel, and then get thrown through 4 mythic empowered persistent maximized blade barriers. Roll your saves twice. DC 35 I think is what it was up to. This killed four of the five bad guys in the fight regardless of whether they made every single save. I think it was something like between 400 and 800 damage to all of them, which none of them were surviving even at full health. I can't find Shape Channel anywhere, how are you accomplishing the knockback effect on a failed save exactly? Could you site sources please?
well you could always ask the GM for a custom monk weapon list. Am I the only one who finds it silly every monk anywhere in every would uses Asian named weapons? I too find it silly, I have custom lists by region for my campaigns. There is considerable cross-over, true, but there are also flavor additions. For example, drow monks from the darklands have access to hand crossbows, varisian monks have access to bladed scarves and star knives, and so on...
I see this principle in play everyday I hop on the internet or watch "E" TV, many are the rumors both true and false that are spread by word of mouth or media. Where do these rumors originate? The original rogue (i.e. gossip monger or reporter) of course. For the sake of the example here let's say the reporter had a bluff of +20, every person who hears, believes, and spreads the rumor uses the +20 to convince others of the truth of the bluff. This happens in politics on a daily basis too, just watch any of the pundits on any of the news channels to get a full dose. :)
I think what is not being understood is the principle of transference at play with this ability. You tell the lie to the guard, the guard believes it, but when he tells the captain the same line you told the guard, there is another bluff check needed for the captain to buy the same story you told the guard. Without this ability the above scenario quickly comes to a halt when the guard tells the story to the captain and the captain shakes his head in exasperation at the gullibility of his guards and sounds the alarm. You have the gist of it though :)
I like this, however if this was the primary motivation for the design of this spell, perhaps it should be renamed to "Redo" or "Do Over" or "Take Two, Action!" I really think this needs to be a weaker version of the 2nd Ed spell Forget, that covers the last minute or if you like 1d10 rounds (for that element of randomness). Perhaps the version I suggested could be a 2nd level version?
This is a prime situation where a skill or feat that allows a spellcaster to disguise or hide spellcasting would be a great addition. It works well for Dark Sun. :)
You just have to remember, "What's good for the goose, is good for the gander". Be careful what idea you give your DM because it will rebound on you at some point. :)
Also, barring uncanny dodge or the improved version, the target is also flat-footed as it has not acted in the round yet. Personally, as DM fiat, I rule that an awakening character, monster, NPC, is Staggered the first round it awakens to get the cobwebs out. I have never seen anyone be instantaneously combat ready upon awakening, even with artillery and machine guns going off. There is always that momentary "WTF is happening" interlude.
It works fine. Might want to take an AoO instead of an OoA though. It's a great combo of feats. Even better when you have a high critical range weapon with either keen or improved critical for it. However, once a trip succeeds, he is already prone by that point, so additional criticals will not make him more prone. It just about ensures a trip though. Great thing about the tactic though is attacks against a prone target receive a +4 to hit (as seen in the -4 to AC), so the chances to hit with any iterative attacks are significantly improved. Kick em while they are down! lol :)
Malagant, you seem to be on a crusade to derail this thread. I'm sorry you can't see how my posts in this thread support each other, but derailing? No, not intentionally anyway... You just can't grab a definition of morals and ethics from an online dictionary to prove your point. Explain to me why I can't please. Moral originated from the Latin word morè, which meant something like “the way people are.” Ethics, on the other hand, came from the Greek word ethos, meaning “the way things should be.” The origin of the terms is irrelevant for the discussion at hand. And your explanation of logic is once again wrong. In what way? Please explain. Programing is frontloaded behavior. It doesn’t allow for learning, it doesn’t allow for learning. Granted Humans have some autonomic reflexes, but that’s not logic. It’s not learned. You missed the point. I said they were programmed using logic. What do you think a computer program is? Not every though that goes on in a person’s mind is “critical thought”. That’s reflective thought where you take an action and you measure the outcome from all perspectives, something that can’t be done all the time, day in day out, 24/7. You assume that the application of logic is a conscious effort. I'm not saying that every thought is critical in nature. It is interesting that you should inadvertently agree with me here though (note the bolded section). Philosophers try to use logic and reason to find answers to a wide variety of human questions, from the nature of reality or knowledge to the meaning of truth, to differing conceptions of beauty, much like the discussion we are having now. Logic implies introspection and reflection, it is more than just a reaction. Granted, but somehow you missed the point that ties into the discussion.
I'm tired of debating this, but once again, you missed the point.
Congratulations, you just justified murder via a false flag attack. After all they are guilty of something, right? It was meant as sarcasm, yes. But also to illustrate a point. It may have sounded as if I hold the goblins blameless, and in that particular crime, I do. However, the point trying to be made was the paladin could have investigated prior to going on his crusade. Were the goblins viscous pyromaniacs? Yes, but that does not automatically mean they need to be put down just for existing. I can accept in a game a certain amount of vigilante justice, but when it comes to paladins, I hold them to a much higher standard. :)
Stop your trolling. Real world has nothing to do with this. Had you quoted my whole statement, you'd have noted that I mentioned that spells such as Raise Dead make death a reversible condition.I'd like to propose that killing someone isn't necessarily a big deal. Trolling? I thought we were having a discussion here...
Just ordered the paper copy. I read the words "grippli war painter" from the product description and immediatrly purchased it. It looks super solid.
i added in a family of badgers (knowing that one PC could speak Sylvan) that would not let them pass a certain point. they stayed there, trying to talk to the badgers, for like 30 minutes. after that session, my players freaked out and had like a group message to decipher the badger's secret and hung out for a while every day just posing ideas for it, but in the end, they just intimidated the badgers and walked through to the next corridor of the dungeon |
