Michael Grate's page

The way I understood everything to work with an animal companion is that when you use "Command an Animal" you use a single action with no die roll, giving your Animal Companion 2 actions that they can use freely leaving yourself with 2 more actions. The basic intent is that the horse uses it's support benefit, then strides and you attack using one of your 2 actions.

The way I think this is meant to work then is that the rider uses Command an Animal, the horse uses the support action then the Rider uses their last 2 actions on Cavalier's Charge. However, it feels like a bit of a stretch and I'm not sure it's supported by RAW (plus, going by this interpretation, the horse would get 4 actions with 2 of them being Strides from Cavalier's Charge).

The issue here (in my opinion) is that Cavalier's Charge is a 2 action Flourish feat. While it's hard to say what's an appropriate power level, looking at other actions with the Flourish trait, I don't think just a +1 attack roll bonus and the ability to attack in the middle of the horse's movement (something I thought was already possible to be honest) warrants said trait.

Normally something with this trait can allow for fairly high end actions that either save actions, negate penalties normally present, or both and tends to even include benefits on top of this. In this case and assuming you already couldn't attack while your mount was moving, it does negate a penalty but because of it's required action use, it also removes a benefit which costs 3-9 damage only giving back a +1 attack roll bonus. All things considered, it seems very underwhelming for a Flourish feat so while I don't know if RAW allows for the use of the Cavalier's Charge along with the Horse's support ability, I feel like RAI would.

That could just be my bias opinion though, since my first character from 1E was a cavalier.

All that said, my suggestion is if you're playing a home game, ask the GM if they would allow one of the 2 Strides to be replaced by a Support action.

Just an aside, I have found that often when someone is thinking pf1 class + archetype There is already a path in 2e to do that. It may just mean that you have to think a little differently and really focus on the core end goal.

Theoretically it's possible for the most part although one thing I was thinking was that it could have been used to add back some of the old, similar classes as archetypes rather than new classes. The first one that came to mind was the AntiPaladin which would of course come back as an evil Champion archetype (or you could use one of the alternate alignment rules) but a lot of the similar classes would probably work with this like the Ninja and possibly even some of the less similar ones if set up correctly (IE. the Cavalier/Samurai could maybe be a non-magic Champion archetype with the deity requirements being replaced with devotion to a cause (still granting similar benefits) and only allowing the Divine Ally to be a Steed Ally).

Quote:

Class Archetypes

Source Core Rulebook pg. 219
Archetypes with the class trait represent a fundamental divergence from your class’s specialties, but one that exists within the context of your class. You can select a class archetype only if you are a member of the class of the same name. Class archetypes always alter or replace some of a class’s static class features, in addition to any new feats they offer. It may be possible to take a class archetype at 1st level if it alters or replaces some of the class’s initial class features. In that case, you must take that archetype’s dedication feat at 2nd level, and after that you proceed normally. You can never have more than one class archetype.

I completely missed that. I figured it was dropped in favor of the new Archetype system. Thank you for pointing this out.

The new Archetype/multiclass system is great, don't get me wrong. I don't have a problem with it.

That said, I still enjoyed the old system that replaced class features, rather than feat slots, with different ones to suit playstyle. I think it gave a fair bit of depth and variety to each class beyond feats. That's not to say there's no in class variety now since a fair number of feats seem to more directly interact with class features (IE. choosing Monastic Weaponry for a Monk at level 1 is sort it's own archetype) but I did still enjoy the system.

These bonuses are incorrect even with Flatfooted. It's -3 on your second, and -6 on your third. That's a -4 (and an effective 20% increase in damage per those two attacks).

The bonuses are correct. You're forgetting that the Dogslicer is an Agile weapon and that Flurry further reduces MAP for agile weapons

Your multiple attack penalty for attacks against your hunted prey is –3 (–2 with an agile weapon) on your second attack of the turn instead of –5, and –6 (–4 with an agile weapon) on your third or subsequent attack of the turn, instead of –10.

That means the base MAP (assuming he gets off all 4 attacks) should be 0, -2, -4, -4 and, if flanking, would be +2, 0, -2, -2.

Granted, it's not likely that he will with what else generally needs to be done. At best, he front loads setup by using Hunt Prey, moving into position and commanding his Animal Companion on the first turn to get them into position so no attacks at that point and maybe full attacks after if the enemy is too dumb or unable to leave. The latter can certainly be done if the fighter trips the enemy (assuming that's possible) but it still means they don't attack on their first turn without the fighter going first.

Dear Paizo,

Please prioritize developing rules variants for the following issues.

No. I don't know what they're currently working on but it's almost certainly more beneficial than these changes.

Not only does it improve the game for a sizeable portion of your customer base, it acknowledges that these are real issues for many gamers.

What proportion exactly? How do you know these numbers? Also, why do these changes NEED to be official? Is it because you want to join a game where the GM won't implement your rules unless they're official or you want to GM but the players don't like your houserules?

1) Incapacitation

A rules variant that does away with the incapacitation trait. For some gamers, Incapacitation is fine. For others, it's effectively a hard ban on all spells with the incapacitation trait. Please help this latter category.

Obviously, something needs to be implemented in its place, but that's your job. (And if us gamers discuss it should happen in the Homebrew forum!)

I'll start off by saying that I find it hilarious that you were in such a rush to get this list here that you linked to your post before any replies and now it's just full of people disagreeing with this idea (as is this one actually). I'll also say that you trying to silence any dissent in that topic (which apparently isn't the first time you've done it) doesn't help your case of it being a popular idea.

To the actual point...what's the problem? You don't address why incapacitation effects are a problem here or in the other thread, just that it's bad and needs to go. To that end I can't really help you here although I can say your solutions from the other thread are pretty bad. Reducing the DC by using a lower level spell badly hurts spellcasters in general (outside of focus casters), especially considering you only get 2-3 spell slots at the highest level (outside of class features/feats). After those 2-3 casts, you have a 5% lower chance of succeeding on any kind of debuff spell making them kind of worthless (ironic considering your next point complains about about a lack of variety).

For legendary saves, this isn't DnD. While I haven't played 5E, friends who have don't seem to have an issue with them though I'm not entirely convinced myself. However, 5E was made with those in mind, Pathfinder wasn't, so the balance of encounters will be thrown off pretty badly just because you don't like Incapacitation.

2) Cantrips

Currently, Electric Arc is so much better than the spell attack cantrips it isn't even funny. Please supply a rules variant in an offical published book that fixes this for those of us that find this problematic. (The problem is that in order for variety to happen, the options need to be roughly equal)

Maybe it's because I haven't played a caster yet but it doesn't seem to be that much stronger, if at all. Against 1 enemy, Electric Arc has the lowest potential damage output of the 7 potential damaging Cantrips (those being Electric Arc, Chill Touch, Telekinetic Projectile, Ray of Frost, Produce Flame, Acid Splash and Disrupt Undead). It's secondary effect is essentially saving a turn of doing another spell to hit a different target which assumes there is a second target and assumes that amount of damage will have a huge impact which only really happens from them critically failing and you rolling well on the damage. The only other benefit I can see it having is that you're guaranteed to hit (Chill Touch and Disrupt Undead do as well but they are more specific in use so I'll ignore those) but the other spells don't give the opponent the opportunity to half the damage and I find that increasing your own rolls is a lot easier generally than reducing your opponent's.

Besides that, Cantrips are your weakest spell option and after the first few levels, mainly serve as flavor (IE. "I'm a fire Wizard so I have nothing but fore spells like the first one I learned, Produce Flame") or as a cleanup option so you don't have to waste a spell slot or wait for your fighter to finish off a severely weakened enemy

I should also note that I'm mentioning 7 because I don't know if you're issue is with the Wizard, the Druid or both.

3) Shields

Some gamers are fine with your current implementation, but others can't stand the notion you would even want to block an attack with your face to save your precious shield. Please supply an rules variant, again in an official published supplement, that fixes this for those of us that find this problematic.

Once again, I'm not really sure what you're talking about. Why would you do this and what circumstance is this a problem? Maybe I'm misunderstanding Shields but the main time you would need to worry about your shield breaking is if you used the Raise a Shield reaction to block some damage, otherwise the shield is either safe or you wouldn't have been able to protect it in the first place. Then, if it does break, you buy a new one. You really want a rules change for such a specific scenario? What would it even be changed to? What is even the problem here?

4) Talismans

Again, not a problem for everyone. However, to some of us, talismans (especially low-level items) are a cruel joke. Being asked by the rules devs to spend all that brain power choosing talismans, constantly deciding to use or not use it, remembering which talisman is affixed where... and all for what? the game's smallest, stingiest and most fleeting of bonuses!

The option to consider every talisman vendor trash just to be sold for cash is a real quality-of-life improvement for many of your...

So...just consider them vendor trash and sell them? In my campaign, we don't even use talismans and there hasn't been any issues. Either write everything down to keep track of things, sell them or don't even bother using them in the campaign, what's the problem here?

MG,

I would suggest checking out the GREAT videos by Basics for Gamers, he has a number of videos pertinent to this discussion.

I looked at the videos and they seemed quite helpful though there were 2 things that I don't think were correct and he didn't cover question 2 so I'm still looking for an answer to that.

The first issue, which they did say was debated online (and I'm not aware of a proper ruling so I could not only be wrong but also be wrong officially) is that the fleeing condition returns each round, even after successfully commanding the animal.

When combat begins, they become frightened 4 and fleeing as long as they’re frightened.

Normally I would agree with it returning each round since it says, "...and fleeing as long as they're frightened" but it also says this

If you successfully Command your Animal using Nature (page 249), you can keep it from fleeing, though this doesn’t remove its frightened condition. If the animal is attacked or damaged, it returns to frightened 4 and fleeing, with the same exceptions.

The extra mention of fleeing being added back as well as saying "with the same exceptions" tells me that the intention is for the animal to be fleeing until it's frightened condition runs down (after 4 turns) or it's successfully commanded and only returns if it's attacked at which point it regains frightened 4 and fleeing. Maybe I'm reading too much into this but I don't see the need for the mention of regaining the fleeing condition if the intention was that they already regain the condition as an additional side effect of being frightened. Again, I could be officially wrong on this so please let me know.

The second issue is in regards to the support ability, specifically it being unable to use the support ability then move (time stamp).

Your animal companion supports you. You gain the benefits listed in the companion type’s Support Benefit entry. If the animal uses the Support action, the only other actions it can use on this turn are basic move actions to get into position to take advantage of the Support benefits; if it has already used any other action this turn, it can’t Support you.

Besides not making sense mechanically (it makes a lot more sense for a horse to use it's support ability, then move), lore/realism wise (what stops a camel from moving after it spits?) or from a balance standpoint (even with the bonuses animal companions have over other animals, they aren't exactly tanks so not keeping them out of harms way just for what ends up being a mediocre benefit in many cases seems awful), it seems like they are reading the rule with a very strict interpretation of the wording. An interpretation which, if used to read the horse's support benefit entry, invalidates itself.

Your horse adds momentum to your charge. Until the start of your next turn, if you moved at least 10 feet on the action before your attack, add a circumstance bonus to damage to that attack equal to twice the number of damage dice.

Reading it as strictly as they read the Support rule, it's not possible to get any benefit at all because the horse's actions would have to be "Stride">"Support" so the action before the attack will always be the support action, not a move action. Also, you could probably say that riding a mount is Forced Movement since the mount is moving and you're just along for the ride and therefore you don't trigger reactions, only the mount does. It would make no sense if read things that deeply and outside of the harshest of GM's, likely wouldn't be ruled that way either (for any of those cases).

The question I have that remains however unanswered is number 2, specifically the first part. Going off of what I now understand, if my first action is Command an Animal, I have 2 actions left and the mount gains 2 actions as well. If my horse strides toward an enemy, can I attack in the middle of that stride since it's the action of a completely different creature acting on my initiative?
I would argue that it should be doable. It makes sense and seems fairly balanced in a number of ways as well as maximizing the overall value of the Jousting trait and support ability but I don't see anywhere that it's covered.

One more question, do I have to use an action to command my animal companion to use it's support benefit or is it able to use one of it's 2 available actions on it's own to do so?

Having started Pathfinder 2E recently, I thought it would be fun to convert some of my character concepts to 2E starting with the first character I made for 1E. He was a Cavalier based around the charge action and was pretty fun. However, the issue I'm running into is that as I'm reading through the rules for Animal Companions, mounts and mounted combat, I'm not sure I'm understanding everything.

It seems like there are a lot of somewhat overlapping "if;then" scenarios so I was hoping to clarify exactly how this worked and make sure I didn't miss anything.

1. Assuming I'm commanding a creature that is friendly toward me, I could use "Command an Animal" to try and get it to do something like stride. I would use an action on my turn to command it, then, if successful, it would use an action on it's turn to follow what I said. If I commanded it to do something that took more than 1 action (Gallop for example), I would have to spend the same number of actions

2. If I have an animal that isn't combat trained (mount or otherwise) and bring it into an encounter, it becomes Frightened 4 and tries to flee unless I successfully command it in which case, it remains frightened but doesn't flee. It it's attacked, it will try to flee again.

3. If I'm riding an animal and/or the creature I'm commanding is my Animal Companion, it acts on my initiative

4. If I'm riding an animal that is not my animal companion, we essentially share the 3 actions for the turn (so I command it to move as my first action and it moves for the first action, I attack for the second action and it does nothing for the second action etc.).

5. If the animal I'm commanding (mount or otherwise) is my animal companion, when I command it it gains 2 of it's own actions for the turn rather than sharing my action pool as per the minion special ability that it gains. This would mean, for example, if I used the horse's advanced maneuver, Gallop, I would use 2 actions to command it, then it would use 2 actions performing leaving me with a 3rd action to use.

6. If I'm mounted, commanding my animal companion or both, we both still share MAP because we act on the same initiative

7. If I command an animal that is my animal companion, I don't need to roll nature to do so essentially meaning I automatically succeed.

8. If I happen to be on a creature that doesn't have the mount special ability, it can't move and use it's support skill in the same turn and it can only use it's land speed if it had any other speed available.

9. Animal Companions are gained as Young Animal Companions. They level with me (so they gain proficiency as normal) and I can advance them by taking certain feats such as Loyal Warhorse if I was a Champion (possibly other ways as well).

Assuming everything above is correct, I still have a few questions:

1. How do I know an animal is combat trained? On this page it says that the Warpony and Warhorse are combat trained but I can't find any actual indication on their bestiary entries of this nor can I find anything indicating that any other animal is combat trained. Do I just assume that an animal companion is combat trained? Do I assume it isn't? If it's the latter, is there a way to do so? 1E specifically had a way to do this but I couldn't find anything for 2E.

2. When it comes to an animal companion's actions, specifically one I'm mounted on, how are our actions timed relative to each other? For example, if I use an action to command my horse to stride towards an enemy that's 15 feet away, can I use my second action to strike the enemy while my horse finishes the rest of it's stride or would I have stop before the strike and use my 3rd action to command it to do another stride? Similarly, if I command my horse to stride, does it immediately do so or could I command it, use a different action, then have it move after?

3. How would something like Tumble Through work if I'm mounted? I assume I would need to command it but would be both work on the same roll or both roll separately? I don't think it's possible for the rider to do since I'm pretty sure the only move action allowed is to dismount. Would I even be able to command the mount to do it? I believe tricks and other actions can be trained so would I have to do so first?

4. How does the lesser cover granted by the mount work? If I had to guess it would be something like, if a small and maybe medium creature tried to attack the rider, the mount would be in the way so it grants lesser cover but not against a large creature or something with significant reach but I wanted to clarify.

Captain Morgan wrote:

Krugus wrote:

Krugus wrote:

I could see a house rule that would grant say +1 circumstance bonus damage per 10' thrown but RAW seems to not add any extra damage as pointed out from Siro.

I wouldn't allow it if someone used Whirling Throw to slam someone against a wall due to the damage you take from Whirling Throw is because you where thrown and hit something at the end of the throw otherwise why would you take damage? :)

You'd still have all that momentum needed to launch you said distance when you crashed into the wall though. Honestly, hitting a wall makes more sense emulating the damage dealt than landing on the ground, since the damage dealt isn't fall damage. It doesn't do extra damage if you Chuck them straight up and the target only lands prone on a crit. Having your trajectory interupted makes a certain amount of sense though.

But this also starts getting into nitty gritty physics stuff I don't understand and the rules shouldn't try too hard to emulate.

Actually, that's a great strategy if your GM will allow it. They would take the damage from the Throw, but then separately, they would take fall damage.

I personally think throwing them straight up doesn't make a lot of sense while "Whirling", but there's nothing actually preventing it. The ability doesn't say horizontal distance.

My thought would be that more damage would be done the closer the wall was that the character was thrown into since they'd have the most momentum immediately after the throw and lose it the further they went so if I had to house rule the damage, it would probably be something like, "If the thrown character hits a hard object that doesn't break from the impact (such as a thick, stone wall), they take damage equal to your strength modifier for every 5 feet they would have traveled." You'd essentially trade damage potential for better average damage unless you have 6 strength while having full use of a maneuver that takes 2 actions and at least 1 feat (though I'm looking at 4 just to make it somewhat consistent).

Otherwise, it could just be that full damage is done and they just hit the wall. But those would just be my own house rules.

The Rules for Forced Movement

Generally forced movement does not cause any damage unless specificity stated. Throwing them against a wall would not deal any additional damage though you would still get the damage from Whirlwind Throw based on how far they traveled before they hit the wall.

That's unfortunate but expected, thank you.

Maybe I missed the rule but I wasn't able to find any indication that damage was dealt if a character was thrown against a wall and if so, what the damage calculation would be.

I'm planning a potential Monk build focused on doing a Flurry followed by a grapple followed by throwing the enemy using Whirlwind Throw. However, if I found myself in a smaller room for example (having 30+feet available in every encounter seems unlikely) or I just wanted to throw them into something to force them to use a only single Stride action to get back to me, I wanted to know if doing so would cause damage and if so, what that damage would be.

Whirlwind Throw only deals damage based on how far the creature was thrown and doesn't mention if they hit something so I assume I just lose the damage in that case. I couldn't find any rules about it and the closest I did find were other feats but they were specific to using the Shove action (Improved Knockback, Powerful Shove). The base action of Shove also doesn't mention any damage calculation for a creature hitting a wall which is why I assume those feats do.

While you're in a Stance, unless the Stance limits you to one type of attack like Crane, you can use any attacks you want. Any, though some special attacks require certain traits, mainly unarmed for Monks.

And any unarmed attack counts as an unarmed attack, whether fist, claw, or tentacle. In PF2, there is no "natural attack" classification like in PF1. Those all fall under unarmed (& brawling too, so far), and Monk attacks requiring unarmed attacks work fine with them. So expect some Monk-sters.

These other attacks don't become Stance attacks (except that one you gained by entering that Stance). Some Stance attacks are specific parts of the body, but mechanically that's insignificant unless something specifically effects that portion of your body. For your attacks, like Stunning Fist or Flying Kick, you do not need a fist nor a kick.

Of course you can bite or tail swipe w/o a hand free.

Also of note, unarmed attacks are not weapons (unlike Monk attacks in PF1) so many Fighter feats (et al) don't work w/ them.

Based on what you're saying, it doesn't really matter what I'm using for the stance because it's effectively a new "weapon" being used (IE. there's the fist, the claw and the Stance attacks which are each distinct, unarmed attacks and why they can all be used by Flurry of Blows and each have their own, distinct traits and damage dice).

I guess my final question would be if it's possible to use the Stance attack if both hands are full and I had a tail or bite option as well (maybe because I'm using the medical tools and we get ambushed or something). I would assume that without those it's not (though the RP would be funny, "Don't worry guys, even though my hands are full I can still hit them with my ethereal Tiger Stance limbs") but because I can still make unarmed strikes with my hands full using another attack option like the tail, it seems reasonable that this would be possible in the same way with stances.

I'm building a Lizardfolk Monk. After reading through the feats available, I saw that the Monk can get Brawling Focus in order to get the Critical Specialization for all Unarmed strikes while Lizardfolk gets access to a heritage feat called Iruxi Unarmed Cunning which does the same but just for Lizardfolk natural weapons. I know I can use any unarmed attack for the purpose of Flurry of Blows but I'm wondering how this interacts with stances.

To clarify, I'm not looking to replace or change the actual attack of the stance. The main thing I'm asking is if I have to use fists specifically or if, for the purpose of getting critical specialization, I can say I'm using my claws for the stance attack.

My second question is just about Natural attacks, specifically the Tail Whip attack (though Sharp Fangs could work too). Because this attack doesn't use the hands, can I use this while my hands are full? I'd assume so because it's also an unarmed attack but because it's not a fist it doesn't follow standard free-hand rules.

The Feat answers your question right there. You are in both Stances simultaneously, they just get a neat new name you get to come up with. Any powers or a abilities that require you to be in one of the two Stances will work just fine.

Alright, thank you. I guess I looked too deep into the "single stance all your own" part of the feat.

I'm building a Monk and like to plan my feats. Fuse Stance is supposed to be a strong finishing feat for the Monk but I was wondering how it interacted with the secondary stance feats which require I be in their respective stance to use

For example, if I fused Tangled Forest Stance and any other (save for Crane and Mountain) and used the Lashing Branch attack, would I also gain the benefit of Tangled Forest Rake if I had the feat?

The reason I ask is because Fused Stance says to give the new stance a unique name and the requirements for the secondary stance feats all say you have to be in a particular stance to use. The unique name could either be taken as flavor (you made a thing, have fun naming it) or it could mean that because the new stance is different from the respective parts it's made up of, you aren't technically in those stances so you don't get the benefits of the secondary stance feats.

It also says you get all effects of the stances chosen. I assumed effects referred to the secondary text such as the damage resistance of Ironblood Stance though it feels ambiguous enough that it could also mean the secondary feats (that it, these secondary stance feats become part of the stance so when fused, it includes them as well). Again, I'm not sure.

Fuse Stance
You have combined two stances into a single stance all your own. When you take this feat, choose two stances you know and combine them into a single fused stance. Give your new fused stance a unique name. When you enter your fused stance, you gain all the effects of both stances, including the requirements and restrictions.

Tangled Forest Rake
Requirements: You are in Tangled Forest Stance.

Hard to tell exactly what was going on in the above scenario.

I think it's something like this:

OP was surrounded by 3 Ogres. One of the Ogres was between them and an ally, engaged in combat with said ally. They took a 5 foot step which the GM mistakenly had provoke AoO's and OP (who must have come from another version of the game) thought facing rules would come into effect which they didn't. Then OP attacked. After that, OP was hit by 2 of the 3 Ogres and died by hitting their Con limit (I guess the character had 14 con).

Michael Grate wrote:

do I have to be moving out of or into a threatened area (the requirement to add the +4 from mobility) in order to use the Reflexive Mobility portion of the Armor Trick feat.

Correct.

It says double the bonus to your AC that you gain from the Mobility, so even if you did gain it the only AoO you can take are movement based.

Thank you for the clarification

There are multiple ways to provoke for movement (like tiny moving into a space of opponent provokes two ways but only one AoO)...

I'm not sure what this has to do with the question.

...so you still need to provoke from a movement AoO to add mobility bonus.

When you provoke an attack of opportunity from an opponent, you can expend one of your own potential attacks of opportunity for that round to double the bonus to your AC that you gain from the Mobility feat against that attack.

My question is do I have to be moving out of or into a threatened area (the requirement to add the +4 from mobility) in order to use the Reflexive Mobility portion of the Armor Trick feat. The feat in question (Armor Trick) does not specify that I have to but it does say I add the bonus from mobility.

So am I using mobility in this case and doubling the bonus from it or can it be applied to and AoO that the character provokes?

Armor Trick

The Light Armor trick, Reflexive Mobility, looks interesting, especially for a ranged based build that may have gotten Combat Reflexes through bonus feat (or selected it for some reason). But I'm not sure if it works the way I think it does.

You have learned to sacrifice an opportunity to wound an opponent in order to avoid being wounded yourself. When you provoke an attack of opportunity from an opponent, you can expend one of your own potential attacks of opportunity for that round to double the bonus to your AC that you gain from the Mobility feat against that attack. This benefit applies to all attacks of opportunity that you provoke with the same action. If you are unable to take any more attacks of opportunity this turn, you cannot use this ability.

The issue I'm having is that while this feat doesn't say you have to provoke because of movement (indicating you can use it on other provokes such as attacking with a bow) but it also specifies the use of the bonus from mobility which is only a movement based provocation.

You get a +4 dodge bonus to Armor Class against attacks of opportunity caused when you move out of or within a threatened area.

So can this bonus from mobility be applied to any AoO that you may provoke or does it just apply to the movement based ones that mobility covers?

I have a Charger mount. I am a level 16 cavalier in the Order of the Cockatrice and have Demanding Challenge.

I was told a while ago that Mounted Challenge does not grant the mount these bonuses (extra damage while threatening alone and dropping enemy AC against others) but I was never told why. It would seem that by RAW the mount should gain these since both are part of the challenge:

When ridden by a cavalier, chargers gain half of the bonuses and penalties granted by the cavalier's challenge class feature.

Each cavalier's challenge also includes another effect which is listed in the section describing the cavalier's order.

And Demanding Challenge is an expansion on the basic Challenge class feature gained through leveling up.

So does the mount gain these features? If not then why? Thank you for the help.

Michael Grate wrote:

Joey Cote wrote:

Mantle of Faith, but its 76000gp for DR5/evil. But its torso, and a lot of classes just don't have good items for that slot. But its one of the only things I can think of.

Perhaps but in general we fight neutral enemies and the team I'm on (save for myself) are Chaotic Evil so if we ever take that into full account then we will be going more after good enemies. Also it's fairly pricey but thanks for the suggestion.

The weapon would need the evil quality to break it. SO unholy weapons would bypass it, neutral stuff would does less damage.

I was always a little confused by that. In either case though, we don't take alignment into much account, in fact the story arch we are going through has us fighting Vampires at the moment so most of our enemies are neutral but a close second is evil.

Thanks for the clarification though.

Defender/Escort mode:

Prerequisites-Must be at least character level 4

Backstory-Your group decides to take a break but still need some in flow of money, your group decides to revisit an old dungeon you’ve previously completed for fun/nostalgia, or you simply go into a dungeon that happens to be of a lower difficulty than your group is used to. When in the dungeon you find another group stuck and unable to advance so you join with them to get them through the dungeon, possibly for a reward.

Setup-First choose how many people will be in the lower level group. To determine how many members are in the other party, a 1:1 system would work the best so each individual has someone to protect If Exp. and other rewards are doled out together to keep everyone at the same level then one should roll a dice based on the amount of party members in the party:
Members in Party Dice
1-4 d-4
4-7 d-6
8-11 d-8
12-16 d-12
Anything above-Roll a d-12 plus a d-4 for every new grouping of up to 4 (for example if the party has 23 member, roll two d-4’s plus the d-12 (initial d-12, 1 d-4 for the 4 over 16 and one d-4 for the 3 over that))
Note-These are just a general suggestion and the GM may opt to add or remove members at their discretion.

The dungeon being entered should be no more than 3 levels lower in difficulty than what your characters can handle and no less than 2 levels higher in difficulty than what the other characters can handle. Though typically done in a lower level dungeon, one on par with your level or higher may be used. (Note-the level of a dungeon can either be gotten from various random dungeon generators or if homebrewed should be determined by the GM)

Making the characters-One could effectively make the characters they wish to use. Fully pre-generated characters will be the quickest but rolling for attributes or even building them from scratch will work as well.

Where they are found-The group should already be in the dungeon when you arrive. Where in the dungeon is up to the GM but should be relatively close to the entrance. Most of the time they would be unable to get passed a relatively (compared to them) tough fight or trap and may already have battle damage. To make things more realistic the GM could keep a mental note of approximately how long the player’s group takes to reach the other group and may opt to kill off one or more of the members of the lower level team and drop the exp. gain as a result. Otherwise the GM can have the other team in a waiting in a safe place or have things begin when the player group gets close enough to save the lower level group.

Who to protect-In a group protection all members of the lower group are protected by the player group collectively.
In a single protection style of play, typically the lower levels would decide who they would be most comfortable with based on the following in this order:
1. If two species have a hatred toward each other (for example Elves and Gnomes, see Commanding for further information) then they should not work together at all.
2. Alignment (the closer in alignment the more comfortable they should be together)
3. Things both have in common such as god/s worshiped (or lack thereof), species, class and major defining features (such as two people with an animal companion or two people with wings.) This category is mainly up to GM discretion and importance should be determined by them.
Protection-You must make your best effort to get the person/people whom you are to protect out to safety.

Commanding-In general the lower level members will act autonomously but if necessary, members of the player party can command the lower level party based on the following.
The closer together the party member/s is/are with the lower level/s they have to protect the easier they are to get along and the more likely they are to listen to commands. To command a lower level character, one needs to perform a diplomacy check unless of the same alignment in which case the lower level character will, in most cases, follow your orders. If not, the DC for making the diplomacy check is 5 times the number of alignment steps away from your characters alignment.
The DC for the command is reduced by 2 for each thing in common your character has with the lower level character.
If a command is given that you or one of your party members will also be performing with them or are already performing (such as assisting in an attack) then the DC is reduced by 1 per your party member. If multiple lower level members will be performing the task then the DC is reduced by 2 for each.
In the case of defining hatred (such as Elves vs Gnomes) the lower level character may still act in accordance with a command if their life is in danger. If their life would not be in danger for ignoring the command then they may listen but the command is rolled at a +20. In this case, things in common and how many player members do the command do not make a difference and the lower level party members doing the same action only reduces the DC by 1.
The character commanding must speak the same language as the one being commanded. Though almost all species learn common, if one cannot learn common and doesn’t know another language the commander does then they must be commanded by non-language based means (DC +15) unless someone else who can translate is available.
If for any reason the commander cannot speak, they may still get their message across. If one tries to issue a non-verbal command, the DC-increases by 10 and those with hatred for one another cannot be commanded and would only follow what the rest of their party does.
If successfully commanded, the lower level character will listen to most things they are told to do as long as they don’t perceive a danger in doing so (EI. the command would lead them into a trap they can see). They also have more loyalty to their own party than your character. As such, they will also not listen to a command that will endanger their own party members. They will not listen to a command that they are incapable of completing.

Finishing-Gaining exp. is dependent on whether or not the one whom you were charged with protecting survives or how many members of the group survive.
If said character/s survive the dungeon then you would gain the normal amount of exp. for the dungeon times the amount of levels the dungeon is higher than those you were in charge of protecting (for example, if the dungeon was 3 levels higher than the lower level characters then you would multiple the amount of exp. gained by 3) You may use a resurrection type of spell if able and still have the other character count as alive if done before exiting the dungeon. This will work for any method that brings a character back as they were before death.
If protecting as a group, dole the exp. to each player normally. If a lower level player dies then reduce the portion of exp. you would have gained from that character being alive from the total before doling out the exp.
If protecting solo and the character you were protecting (if only 1) died and was not revived, your character gains no exp..
If protecting solo and one of the characters you were protecting (if more than 1) died and was not revived, then find the total amount of exp. you would have normally gained, divide the amount by how many characters you protected and subtract from your total gain by the amount from those who died.
In the case of someone with an animal companion the exp. ratio should be treated as the main character is worth ¾ and the animal companion is worth ¼ if the character has a legitimate connection to the creature (for example, an Anti-paladin Seal Breaker Corps Rider would have no connection to their mount as it is an Undead Quadruped able to be summoned as needed so in this case only the rider would count for exp.). If the animal companion is still alive but the character is dead then ¼ the exp. will be awarded. If only the main character can make it out then ¾ the exp. will be awarded.
The GM may choose to award half experience in any case where the body of the dead character or creature can be brought out of the dungeon to possibly be revived later.
Splitting the wealth-This is entirely up to the GM if the lower level characters will share their wealth/items from the dungeon or through payment for the rescue.

If you have any questions or I may have made a mistake, ask/let me know and I'll answer your question or fix the issue.

Mantle of Faith, but its 76000gp for DR5/evil. But its torso, and a lot of classes just don't have good items for that slot. But its one of the only things I can think of.

Perhaps but in general we fight neutral enemies and the team I'm on (save for myself) are Chaotic Evil so if we ever take that into full account then we will be going more after good enemies. Also it's fairly pricey but thanks for the suggestion.

If you're in a home game and not PFS, you can always just combine magic items into each other.

Magic Items wrote:

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

My GM already ruled against combining item effects like this so unfortunately this won't work.

What items could be bought that do damage reduction?

Currently I know about Adamantine armor but the armor my character uses is Mammoth Hide for the extra charge damage and I have the War lance and I'm not sure if they would allow me to keep the 2 handed damage while 1 handing a lance (some do, some don't, it's an issue I read about)

The Belt of Stoneskin but I'm using the stat boosting belt so I can't use that.

I also couldn't use the Stalwart feat because I'm already feat starved and I don't do total defense actions.

No one on the team can cast iron body.

I like the Juggernaut Pauldrons but those are pretty expensive and we have someone who can cast Deadly Juggernaut but the bonus isn't constant so it's not the best option.

I'm a cavalier so the rage feats won't work.

So, are there any options I missed here?

The Order of the Cockatrice's challenge bonus given extra damage to the cavalier if they are the only one threatening it

Whenever an order of the cockatrice cavalier issues a challenge, he receives a +1 morale bonus on all melee damage rolls made against the target of his challenge as long as he is the only creature threatening the target.

and there was a later errata that stated that the mount does not count against this (I can't find the exact errata but you can see the discrepancies between this site and this site)

Given that, I would say it works in the same way but expect table variation unless there is a ruling on this specific issue.

Given that there are 'regular' (i.e. non-Masterpiece) Bardic Performances which similarly have fixed or variable bardic performance round (BPR) costs other than 'one per round' (e.g. 'Spell Catching' bardic performance of the Sandman archetype burns one BPR per level of the spell the bard attempts to 'catch'), that is really more a question of how/if Shadowbard works with such effects... whether they be masterpieces or not.

This issue isn't limited to Shadowbard. Exquisite Accompaniment, Virtuoso Performance, Tuned Bowstring, Harmonizing Familiar, and every other 'extra bardic performance' type effect I can think of all specify how they operate in relation to the (most common) 'one BPR per round' style of performance, but say nothing about those with different BPR cost patterns.

That's true. I guess this would have be up to GM discretion then to figure it out.

Thank you all for this information

I'm of the mind that shadowbards can not use bardic masterpieces. Naturally, I do not consider Bardic Masterpieces to be bardic performances. That's all I have to say on that.

Based on the wording of the quote I provided from the masterpieces page I would argue that they are Bardic Performances. Plus there are more quotes from the page that indicate they could be considered as such but not as directly:

If it only requires a standard action to activate, being able to activate a bardic performance more quickly (at 7th level, activation is a move action, and at 13th, it becomes a swift action) applies to the masterpiece as well

In some cases, the bard can extend the duration of the masterpiece by expending additional rounds of bardic performance, just as if it were any other use of bardic performance.

That said I also see a case against it, namely when it comes to Masterpieces where the player can expend more performances per round to increase the effect of the spell like Like Budding in Salted Earth which allows the bard to use up to half their level in performances to give fast healing to their allies.

But even still that would be fixed by just having the Shadowbard use the bard stats which would make sense given that it says

...shadowy duplicate of yourself...

It goes to being a full round action as per the rules for metamagic casting with all metamagic other than quickened.

So for sorcerers, quickened metamagic can't be combined with any other.

A spell whose casting time is more than 1 round or 1 full-round action cannot be quickened

but the wording makes it read like the action has to be more than a full-round action casting time to be ineligible to work. This is furthered by the fact that even reading it exactly as is, a full round action casting time is shorter than a 1 round casting time (A full-round action takes the turn but the effect takes place on that turn, a spell with a 1 round casting time takes through to your next turn which is when it immediately effect).

Therefore, such a character must also take more time to cast a metamagic spell (one enhanced by a metamagic feat) than he does to cast a regular spell. If the spell's normal casting time is a standard action, casting a metamagic version is a full-round action for a sorcerer or bard. (This isn't the same as a 1-round casting time.) The only exception is for spells modified by the Quicken Spell metamagic feat, which can be cast as normal using the feat.

A spellcaster can apply multiple metamagic feats to a single spell. Changes to its level are cumulative. You can't apply the same metamagic feat more than once to a single spell.

So if a Bard were to cast a Persistent Hold Person then it would require a full round action using up a 4th level spell the bard can cast.

So what if I cast a Quickened Persistent Hold Person? It would use an 8th level spell the bard can cast (doable with a high enough charisma score unless I'm missing something and it simply isn't possible) but what about the action it takes to cast it? Would it go back to being a Standard action or does it become a swift action?

Exquisite accompaniment makes a bardic performance free for CL/rounds.

It specifically does not say you can break the single performance bardic limitation, as such under its effects you cant.

The shadow bard does not count as you so if you use it your bardic performances need to affect a group to take effect.
It has access to all your bardic songs but nothing that would for example boost your effective bard level like the Banner of Ancient kings or the warhorn three reasons to live.
Which then makes for some interesting questions about if it gets to use your feats or bardic level. Does it just use the song in question at minimum required level to do it?
I quick scan of google results returns no answers to me on this subject. I imagine someone on the forum will know though.

Virtuoso performance allows the bard to personally maintain two songs at once in exchange for burning through performance rounds like mad.
No questions about what abilities do or do not work like Shadowbard.
Secondly bardic classes that are self focused like the Dawnflower dervish would get no benefit from maintaining a shadowbard as the bonus of their song would apply to the shadowbard and not to the bard that cast the spell.

As to your question on the bowstring. No idea what it would do with Virtuoso up.
Were I the GM in question I'd rule that it reduces the costs of maintaining the dual song by 1 per round.
The item saying it removes the cost for a bardic performance not the additional costs of Virtuoso performance's effect and/or the costs of the second song.

So just to make sure I have everything right:

Exquisite accompaniment only gives me free bardic performance rounds and I can't do something like pull out another instrument or start singing while the phantom instrument plays its song.

Virtuoso performance, at least as you would rule it, when combined with the Tuned bowstring (or Exquisite accompaniment) would just cost a total of two bardic performances per round instead of three.

It specifically does not say you can break the single performance bardic limitation, as such under its effects you cant.

Neither does shadowbard though. Does this mean with it up I can't break the one performance limit or is it different because it's basically a second me and does its own performances (based on what I can do and tell it to do) while exquisite accompaniment is an instrument?

Exquisite Accompaniment
Shadowbard
Virtuoso Performance
I am completely confused on how or if these three spells can interact.

First, what is the difference between Exquisite Accompaniment and Shadowbard. Besides Exquisite Accompaniment expending rounds of Bardic Performance when switching performances, they both read almost the same way. Is that seemingly small difference worth two spell levels or am I missing something?

Second, can I use one or both of these to have multiple bardic performances going at once. If yes then what is the point of Virtuoso Performance and if no then what's the point of the other two spells?
This also might be an obvious answer but if either or both of these spells can allow me to make multiple performances at once, can they interact with Virtuoso Performance? I only ask because technically I'm not making the second performance, a spell entity is but this is likely a stretch.

Third, if both can make extra performances, can they stack together? They don't have the restriction that Virtuoso Performance has so would it be possible to stack them?

Forth, what happens if one uses Virtuoso Performance while doing something that allows you to avoid expending Bardic Performance rounds. If my character uses the Tuned Bowstring or Exquisite Accompaniment (I've read that the use of this spell might only be to allow you to get free performance rounds and that it doesn't allow for anything else which would make sense for a 3rd level spell).

ShadowBard
Bardic Masterpieces

So, as the question says, can the Shadowbard use a masterpiece the bard has? I want to say yes (see quotes below) but I'm not sure and wanted to clarify in case there was some official ruling on this or if I'm just wrong. (I should note, since the shadowbard specifies that it's a phantom singer, assume the Masterpiece uses the sing performance like Life Budding in Salted Earth or Vindictive Soliloquy)

When a shadowbard comes into being, it immediately begins a bardic performance of your choice—it has access to all of the bardic performances that you do.

Talented bards can learn or create masterpieces, unusual applications of the bardic performance ability requiring special training.

A build I have recently taken a liking to is called the Stay at Home Hexer which is built around constantly buffing ones team from far away. Because the Scar hex allows a witch to use their hexes for up to a mile away they can give their team a constant buff with the fortune/cackle combo. Adding in some sneaking and movement spells like invisibility and fly allows them to stay completely away from battle while still being an essential part of the team.

A few buff spells like heroism enhances this further and if you want, some debuff/battle field control spells to really take it to the enemy.

No fortitude or HP needed because the enemy should almost never know you are there or be too distracted by your team to care.

Now I'm thinking about Rap Battles to increase Charisma.

I have a plan in regards to interacting with prisoners like this, namely in that I'll be making a specialized variant of the Leadership feat which will work in a prison setting (Gang Leader or something, I'll be working out the specifics soon) which will require one to influence the prisoners around them using Charisma in various ways.

Plus my main concern with having the skill require people to increase the score is that if people are not around for some reason or don't want to deal with the individual it makes it more difficult or impossible to gain. Then again I guess this is impossible to avoid when the stat is literally about interacting with others...

Wisdom is about listening and learning from the old lifers.

Same issue as above but I am considering adding a mentor type of system which could further decrease the DC of the checks but I'll have to see how well that implements.

Dexterity, put a basketball hoop in the yard.

Would that be a dex check? Honestly, I would consider that an attack roll against the hoop with the ball being a thrown weapon.

This stuff is usually handled through storytelling.

Sense Motive is a WIS-based skill.

Learning to survive in a prison would certainly give one plenty of practice in reading people.

"Take out the toughest guy on your first day in if you don't want people to mess with you." How do you assess who is the toughest guy? Analyze Prowess.

Right, but I'm trying to avoid doing this through a skill check. The main reason is because I don't want someone to be able to pump a skill and gain a stat from that. The way I see it is that the stat controls the skills, the skills don't control the stat. Being good in one area is what gets someone the ability in that area which I see as representative of their increased ability at preforming the task (I am also considering a similar system with specific skill checks). The stat increase that would be gained from doing the skill (let's say strength from climbing) would also be represented by the increase to the skill itself since there is a level of muscle memory and specific muscles being targeted through the task.

Are you looking at quasi-permanent increases here, or are you looking at methods of stacking on circumstantial bonuses on a relatively small time scale?

Permanent, like a level-up bonus.

STR - If goal here is to bulk up short time scales (like two days), then the kind of physical activity needed to build up muscle strength will probably decrease the character's chances to survive the fight to come, rather than increase them.

Bottom line: How are you going to fight effectively when your muscles are already fatigued and worn out from the intense workouts you've been doing? - What's left for the fighting?

However, I probably wouldn't allow the bonus to be considered permanent unless the character spent a reasonable amount of time to maintain the edge.

IE, you do hard work-outs for six months straight to get an edge in strength. That character had better be able to keep up the work-out routine (in a reduced fashion) in order to maintain the edge. If the character gets thrown into solitary confinement shortly after, there is a good chance that a lot of that bulk would go in time, depending on how long he has to go before being allowed access to the exercise equipment again.

While I'm looking for a certain level of accuracy, I'm not going that accurate. Like Pathfinder removing facing rules to simplify things, I'm trying to have something that it mechanically sound without it being ridiculously complex such as requiring a daily routine or something like that.

It's hard to see how to pull this one in two days time unless you plan on having a character rely on the prison black market, and drug up before the fight.

That would be a temporary bonus with consequences.

DEX - This one might be slightly easier to pull off on a short time scale, in that stretches/calisthenics are much lower impact than trying to 'bulk up' - Hard to see this as much more than a circumstance bonus to opposed checks, though, for so short a time frame.

This would work as the dex rep-like workout actually.

CON - Sort of with strength on this one. Black market drugs/get sweet with the prison nurse. (On short time scale). In the long time scale, everyone who survives the prison food is probably having the same advantage.

Same as the strength drugs, temporary bonus with consequences for use.

INT - Six..., no five P's. (Proper Planning Prevents ... Poor Performance). - I could see how boning up on a subject would give you a circumstance bonus to checks related to the subject. - Hard to see this as a permanent thing without continued study.

The permanent bonus will come in after a test is taken. The DC check, if passed will indicate that the character has learned enough to be considered knowledgeable on in a general sense. If I add the skill check variant of this (which is likely) then the subject of the test will be specific to the check (so architecture for dungeneering or something), otherwise it will be general and unspecified. If failed they will have failed the test and wasted their time.

They decrease the DC check of the test by taking time to study and rolling that DC check to try and retain that information.

WIS - Thinking something on the lines of relaxation techniques/medication techniques, etc. Stressed out people don't notice things anywhere near as well as people who aren't completely stressed out. - If the character can somehow displace themselves (for a short time) from the reality of prison, there's a good chance that this would translate to better awareness, even on a short time scale.

That might work as a rep-like check as well though I want to avoid it being doable at all times only because many of these can't be done at all times and it eliminates the time-management portion I'm looking for.

CHA - Bribery? Donate all of your cigarettes to neutral to mildly helpful parties to increase their attitude? - Hard to see how to permanent increase this one, as it tends to be regarded as 'force of personality'. - There's a very good chance that having a too large of an ego to bother caring for others landed the character in prison in the first place. (Given that in most systems, charisma is more of force of personality measurement than an appearance/manners one)

This is the hang up one that is making me reconsider the standard set-up I'd like to have.

I've heard that regular exercise, gradually increased, makes you less fatigued. That's how it works with my walking and lifting things at work. I carry some canvas bags with my metal bottle(for iced coffee) and other things in them. by carrying them every day I have gradually increased my arm strength.

Same as above, I'm looking to avoid too much complexity like requiring routines to be implemented and such.

Suggestion:
Ability Training
Choose the ability score you wish to increase. The amount of time you need to spend on training that score equals the current score divided by 2 in days [or weeks, depending on how much time they have in the prison]. At the end of the training period, you roll 1d20 with no modifiers (unless you have a trainer, see below) with a DC equal to your current ability score +3. If you succeed, you gain a +1 inherent bonus to that ability. This can't raise a score above 18 unless that score also has a racial bonus, in which case the max is 20 (or 22 for a +4 bonus). [Note: inherent bonuses cap at +5]

Another can attempt to give an aid bonus (+2) by succeeding at an ability check or an appropriate profession check with the same DC. The trainer needs to spend all of the training time with the trainee but can simultaneously aid a number of trainees equal to their modifier in that ability (min 1) or their ranks in profession.

Interesting. This could help making the final product with a few tweaks.

101 Spells of Shadows & Darkness has a spell that lets you cast from nearby shadows, if I remember correctly which should suit your purposes.

You're either referring to Shadow Projection or Shadow Evocation bot both are wizard/sorcerer spells.

Barrow haze is a fog spell that lets you use the spell area to extend the range of hexes.

The Scar Hex takes care of that. Besides, I don't want to restrict the vision of her allies.

Ring gates?

Those would work but I'd like to try to limit the amount of GP her character costs to work to make it fair since she's an NPC.

thats what i was going to say, the main issue with them is that if she wants to cast touch spells she won't be able to pull her hand back through (the gates are only 1 way)

It would still work

A character can reach through to grab things near the other ring, or even stab a weapon through if so desired. Alternatively, a character could stick his head through to look around. A spellcaster could even cast a spell through a ring gate.

101 Spells of Shadows & Darkness has a spell that lets you cast from nearby shadows, if I remember correctly which should suit your purposes.

You're either referring to Shadow Projection or Shadow Evocation bot both are wizard/sorcerer spells.

Barrow haze is a fog spell that lets you use the spell area to extend the range of hexes.

The Scar Hex takes care of that. Besides, I don't want to restrict the vision of her allies.

Ring gates?

Those would work but I'd like to try to limit the amount of GP her character costs to work to make it fair since she's an NPC.

thats what i was going to say, the main issue with them is that if she wants to cast touch spells she won't be able to pull her hand back through (the gates are only 1 way)

It would still work

I'd consider switching Enlarge Spell for Reach Spell. Very similar but I think Reach is the better few overall.

How far away does she need to be?

Reach is a good idea. As for distance, an enlarged medium spell should work but a long range one definitely will.

You could get Spectral Hand as a x times per day-item or as a wand, but that only works on medium range and I assume she would be further away.

It could work if the wand can have a metamagic variant of a spell (Enlarged Spectral Hand) on a wand. I don't know if that's possible since I've never used a wand.

I made an NPC witch whose primary purpose is to buff her team from afar using the cackle, scar and fortune hex (search Stay at Home Hexer for the build).
She is basically Professor X and yes, I did make her paraplegic.
Why?

So she is constantly buffing the team but there are a few spells I like such as Infernal Healing.
The obvious issue is that she's basically immobile without magic so she can't do something like run up and cast this and other spells and because she's also frail (and for flavor) she will stay too far away for her allies to run to her. So I was wondering if there was some way to work it where she could use spells from one location as if she were in another location close enough to her allies or as if they were close enough to her.

If this is possible it would have to be something in a constant effect so she doesn't have to repeatedly cast that spell (cackle is a move action and most spells are standard actions) which would also cost spell slots. Line of sight is already taken care of so that's not a concern.

I know she can deliver touch spells through her familiar but not all of the spells will be touch spells (some might be close range for example) and it's a greensting scorpion (I wanted the boost in perception) which is both frail and having it run back and forth would take too long.
She has the Enlarge Spell metamagic feat but that doesn't help with touch spells and again, with her frailty and flavor she will be pretty far away.

One last note, this isn't a big deal if it doesn't work, it's more just a way to get a little extra out of a specialized NPC if it's possible. Thank you in advance.

Moving at your full speed is a -10 penalty to your Stealth check.

Michael Grate wrote:

Also how does a double move action affect this? Can they take a double move action, each at half of their base speed (up to 30ft of movement) without taking a penalty or is the movement total the only thing that matters whether it's a single or double movement?

Yes, you're taking two separate move actions at half speed, combined into one action and (probably) two Stealth checks (though I can make an argument for just one Stealth check for the whole move), so since you're never moving faster than half speed there should be no penalty.

Michael Grate wrote:

Assuming a double movement is possible, what about moving at 35ft (15ft then 20ft), would this incur a -5 or what?

-5 because at least some of the time you were moving at more than half speed.

Michael Grate wrote:

What happens at 40-45ft (20ft+20-25ft), would this stack to a -10?

Never more than -5, that's the maximum penalty for moving more than half speed but less than full speed.

Michael Grate wrote:

And finally what happens at 55-60 ft (30ft+25-30 ft)?

-10.

Thank you very much.

The issue I'm having is with the following

You can move up to half your normal speed and use Stealth at no penalty. When moving at a speed greater than half but less than your normal speed, you take a –5 penalty.

It doesn't say what happens when moving at your full speed. So if a creature has a speed of 30. They can move up to 15ft without taking a penalty on stealth, they can move 20-25ft and take a -5 on the stealth check but what happens if they move 30ft? Do they take a -10?

That looks like an intentional change to me, comparing d20 and PFS.

EDIT: I note also that incorporeal is an extraordinary ability

Edit the edit - that seemed more relevant when I added it, not sure what my point was now...

Maybe your point was that anti-magic fields only affect spells. spell-like abilities, supernatural abilities and magic items

The space within this barrier is impervious to most magical effects, including spells, spell-like abilities, and supernatural abilities. Likewise, it prevents the functioning of any magic items or spells within its confines.

and because incorporeal is an extraordinary ability it wouldn't be affected?

As it would stand by RAW incorporeal creatures would only be affected in the sense that their powers would not work while in the field but they themselves are fine.

"for the purpose of scrying and similar divination spells"

The cackle hex is not a scrying or similar divination spell, so no dice.

The concept you linked refers to the other part of Scar hex, which extends the range of hexes out to one mile. However, as the Scar Hex makes no mention of the elimination of the LoS requirement, this won't be terribly effective unless you're on a flat, barren wasteland.

(There is another thread which argues that because hexes are supernatural abilities, they get to ignore spell targeting requirements. I wouldn't count on the GM interpreting it this way, but ask your GM if it's a home campaign.)

I really need to start reading things more carefully because I read it as saying that the hex [scar] could be used on targets up to one mile away.

In any case, LoS actually won't be an issue because the purpose of using this build it to have a witch working behind a command center at the home base (she and her team are actually going to be NPC's, I'm the GM building them) in which she has a security system set up including cameras strewn throughout the house. It will be too far away from the action to allow normal casting/hexing which is why I like this build.
Anyway, thanks for the help.

The Stay at Home Hexer was a concept build by StreamOfTheSky. I was looking for a speciality build and this pretty much fit the bill. The issue now is that I really don't understand how it works.

Based on the recent buff Scar...Make sure the entire party and your familiar is scarred. Scar, Fortune, and Cackle are the workhorses of this build...

So, unless the concept is based on old information that has since been changed, my understanding is that the scar hex, because it effectively gives the witch a body part of the target(s) (in this case the team), she is also counted as being within 30ft of them for the purpose of the cackle hex.
Is that how this works? Is it legitimate within the rules? It seems fine but I wanted to confirm to make sure since a hex isn't a spell (or maybe it's a special kind of spell?)
Could it have something to do with the familiar being hexed as well (which is specifically mentioned)?

Wisdom is about willpower and common sense, among other things. Give them things to do focused around this. Let them observe their fellow inmates, see what they're doing, and learn from other people's mistakes. Perhaps they can read through old court cases, point out flaws in what the criminal did, flaws in the prosecution, and so on.

Observing other inmates for this might be difficult to implement but that could be useful in other aspects of the campaign.

Allow the players to tell you how they will increase the ability score. Don't worry about figuring it out ahead of time. As long as it is reasonable, allow it. If building up ability scores in prison is essentially part of the character creation process, don't require a check they can fail, but do require that higher ability scores take more time to increase. Also, put in a cap of some kind.

The cap is meant to come both from their initial ability score allotment and how the players think they should manage their time.

For the latter there will be a number of options for them to do with the time that they would be basically stationary. Because they will be in one place basically and combat won't be as frequent where they are than it would in a standard adventure (especially not balanced combat they can win off the bat) I'm adding other ways to gain exp for the first couple of levels (they can go beyond that but with these methods but they will need to do more to make it worthwhile). They will also need to explore the prison as much as they can (through their prison jobs or stealth, whichever they need) to try and find stuff they can use or ways to escape. If they have multiple stats they want to increase they will have to choose between those. And there will be more of course so the time management aspect will be one restriction factor.

For the former, if they have for example a +5 in strength then with dedicated training they could boost that to +9 but at only +1 they might get it to +2 with training. The same goes for all of the scores. This again goes back to time management and how the player feels they should progress their character given the situation. Should they push strength as high as possible or forgo building the last little bit to increase their lesser scores a little to make them workable?

Finally, I want the failure chance (which would increase as the DC climbs) because if the player comes under time pressure then they will have to decide what to do and how worth it it is.

As an example that I could foresee happening, they have a strength at +6 and a charisma at +2 and have pissed off someone in the prison who has challenged them to a fight in 2 days time. Should they use those two days try to eek a point or two from strength to stand a chance of taking them alone? Should they try their hand at using charisma to convince others to help them out (which would be less likely to work due to a lower charisma score but if it does more it's likely to help them win the fight)? Maybe they should use that time to find someone who can provide them with a weapon? The failure is necessary to keep them thinking about how to get through the situation in the best way possible. Without the failure chance the other two methods are very obviously not worth it because those can fail whereas the training couldn't (unless I extended the training time to reach lengths of days but then that makes that method obviously not worth it because it would be impossible to gain any score in the amount of time they have before the fight).

I'm working on a home-brew campaign in which the players are going to be taken to prison prior to beginning their adventure (reasoning varies as to why).

I'm want to allow the players (when they have access to whatever) to increase their ability scores through various activities.

Strength is easy with a strength check against a bench press weight (the way it would work is that you gain a point in strength by achieving a new max weight, DC increases with weight (I haven't calculated out the exact amount yet). If the player has previously done a rep set (repeated lower strength checks (again, not calculated yet) then they can lower the max weight DC by a certain amount (the numbers and rules get more in depth with this to prevent abuse of the system, see below))

After this I'm not sure of what to do.

I was thinking for Constitution it would be running with a DC check based on the forced march rules to stave off taking the nonlethal damage and fatigue for a number of rounds to gain the bonus.
The issue I have here is I can't think of a secondary system to drop the max DC like the rep set does for the strength check (it's necessary to allow those with a +0 or +1 to gain a couple of points (see below for specifics)).

For dexterity I'm not sure. Maybe pullups or something but I don't think that would be a dex check and it has the same issue as the constitution check

For Charisma the only thing I can think of is having positive interactions with people but I don't want it to be a system where you rack up stuff to gain the benefit like the exp system, I want it to be the check similar to the strength check to gain the benefit.

For intelligence it could be reading books but I foresee similar issues to charisma (maybe they can try progressively harder books or something but then this would be a skill check which I don't want). I guess there could be a testing system the prison library offers like in Shawshank Redemption though not a GDP.

And I can't think of anything for wisdom.

I want to avoid skill checks and have it be raw score checks so the players don't have excess bonuses from pumping a single skill and just doing that activity constantly (that doesn't represent the overall score just the specific skill associated with the score).
I would also like to avoid it requiring other people to complete the activity so those less charismatic characters can still get their main scores up (though if having a second character would help in another way that's fine (IE in the strength check, failing means you drop the bar on yourself and must take some damage from it until you can get the bar off (lower check to tip it off) but having a spotter would prevent this))

Any advice on this issue would be appreciated greatly.

Just to clarify the rule system I'm going with is like the strength one.
There will be a maximum DC needed to get the higher score and this will increase as the player wants to go higher (by a certain amount). If the player does some secondary training (like the rep sets for strength) they can lower the DC of the maximum (it's to make things achievable for those with average scores and require near total focus on the score for those with higher scores who want to just pump that score). This will decrease the DC by a certain amount and can only be done once per secondary DC level (IE if the max is 25 and the rep is 10 reps of 10 then they can decrease the 25 once at the DC of 10 and then once at a higher DC (this also has diminishing returns so this can't be abused (finally all exact numbers are to be determined so those aren't what I'm going to use))). I can work with variations on this but this is the overall system I'd like to use.

If you have any questions because I didn't explain something well enough or left something out just ask.
Thank you in advance.

Fortification does not provide you with immunity to critical hits. It provides a chance to negate a critical hit

Core Rulebook wrote:

This suit of armor or shield produces a magical force that protects vital areas of the wearer more effectively. When a critical hit or sneak attack is scored on the wearer, there is a chance that the critical hit or sneak attack is negated and damage is instead rolled normally.

Therefore even if the attack is negated you are not immune to it so effects would still work on you. Note that this specifies Sneak Attack and Critical Hits but not precision damage as well, so you can't use fortification versus a Swashbuckler precise strike or other sources of precision damage that are not Critical Hits or Sneak Attacks.

You are still vulnerable to Critical Hits you just don't always get hit by them.

...any item or ability that protects a creature from critical hits also protects a creature from a precise strike

so I think fortification still applies regardless of other rulings (unless this is a bad carryover or something).

A number of abilities as well as most things that cause bleed damage say that something immune to critical hits are immune to the effect. So how does fortification affect these types of things?

Precise Strike is the only one (that I could find) that calls out that items protecting a creature from critical hits apply here

Any creature that is immune to critical hits is also immune to a precise strike, and any item or ability that protects a creature from critical hits also protects a creature from a precise strike

But then there are:

Creatures immune to critical hits (such as plants and constructs) are immune to the bleed damage dealt by this weapon

Wounding Weapons

Creatures immune to critical hits are immune to the bleed damage dealt by this weapon.

and Quivering Palm

Creatures immune to critical hits cannot be affected

How does this work exactly? Is the percent dice to ignore the extra damage still rolled in these instances or does the defender have to be naturally/magically immune for the rules above to take affect?

Michael Grate wrote:

I notice on many weapons feats and the like that there will be in the description saying something to the effect of

example wrote:

If the creature is immune to precision damage (such as critical hits) then it is unaffected by this

.

Can you point me to the source of this example? Critical hits are not based on precision damage (and precision damage doesn't multiple on a critical hit), so I'm confused by example.

I might be mixing up terms here (I thought critical hits were precision based attacks) but here are some examples of what I am actually talking about for the original question.

The example I used Bleeding Arrows
and here are a few more
Precise strike (though this one does call out that any item protecting the defender from critical hits apply)
Bleed damage in general seems to work this way
Wounding

Creatures immune to critical hits are immune to the bleed damage dealt by this weapon.

Quovering Palm

Creatures immune to critical hits cannot be affected

So as it stands with critical hits, how does fortification affect these types of instances (bleed, quivering palm, etc.)?