To the op. You may find things easier if you drop the idea and was ever about the middle ages. People fixated on find but ignore player armor 2h weapons etc.
A anyhow you need to realize areas of golarion are presented in themes that easily capture players imaginations. For pirates this is the new world pirate. Rather than say 14th century Herman pirates in the Baltic.
Its best to just ignore the parts you don't want. But expect most of your playets will think jack sparrow.
My issue with the "cannot draw wands and move" view is it seems to go against how information is normally presented in English.
You present the general statement followed by the exception that works with the general statement. Then only evercrefer to the general rule because the specific exception tells you it works with the general rules .
So we have the general draw/sheath rule. That tells you there is a draw weapon action and a sheat weapon action. We get an exception yelling us weapon like objects easily at hand can be obtained or put away with these actions.
We then get a new paragraph with a rule that only applies to drawing a weapon.
Its a new paragraph because it does not apply to sheathing a weapon and the game has already said draw weapon can be used with weaponlike objects.
Implying you cannot draw a wand while moving is in my opinion reading it wrong . Its a shame someones character died over it.
The action is called draw or sheath a weapon. It then explains what the action of drawing a weapon is. It then explains this action. An be done withvweapon like objects.
It then explains you can do so with +1 bab. The text has already told you the draw weapon action can be done with weaponlike objects they don't need to be mentioned again.
Sadly I've seen Mob used. For those not aware it stands for mobile object its a Diku Mud term that transfered over to MMORPG. Its supposed to refer to any computer object (ie stuff you can interact with) that moves (mostly monsters but really any computer object that moves that isn't controlled by a player). The problem is the term seems to be shifting as younger players don't actually know what it means and think it just means monster.
Stop.. think clearly about what he wrote and what he said.. He is firing a large arrow from a large bow, when he fires the arrow the Arrow returns to its normal size.. which... is Large.
Ergo it does large damage.
A good rule of thumb I have found is if you need to make up rules to explain how something works it likely doesn't work that way.
Example we can assume Instant enemy grants FE bonus works with any spells that use Fe And gives an AC the Fe benefit.
Anything else require a lot of rules extrapolation not in the spell.
Example I have Fe of 6 vs outsider (water)
It seems obvious to me none of these assumptions are correct as they all require slot of information not in the spell.
Most balance issues don't really exist outside of theorycraft. A few issues to a dress though.
First the message boards seem to give the impression OF is harder than it is. This then confuses the issue as people push optimization as a me wasn't sure for survival. There's nothing wrong with optimization but you only need to be as optimized as the people you play with.
Second it doesn't matter if one class is better than another unless two players are doing identical things in the same group.
First this isn't a somatic issue. Its a polymorph issue. You also make somisunderstandings.
1) polymorph only cares about shape and aether that shape has either an explicit ability to cast spells or an implied pattern.
If you are subject to a polymorph effect and it is humanoid or dragon shaped you are good. For creatures that can speak but do not have limbs polymorph does not convey the ability to make somatic gestures.
The fact that naga may r may not have somatic spells isn't relevant.
The problem with elementals is they are not defined well for manipulative digits. Though I think the consensus is they can wield weapons and cast spells.
I don't think any feudal systems used anything so complex. A lordhad lesser lords under him and they brought their men to his service. The base feudal structure in some ways is counter intuitive to large modern army Co dots.
One thing to keep in mind is much of feudal warfare consisted of the population of a modern high-school going to war with another school.
One lord could have 1500 men in his service and 3 lesser lords with 600 each. The thing is the lesser lords might have zero loyalty to eacother and each would betray their Leicester it he prove weak. None of the men have any loyalty beyond their. Own feudal obligations.
In short they are somewhat counter productive to modern warfare. None of the modern concepts are intuitive to how humans fought wars much of history. Sure there are exceptions but first you need your setting. Then let setting g dictate army style.
standard polymorphic rules cannot be subject to a polymorphic effect and another spell that changes size. Even if the polymorphic changes you into a creature the same size as your normal size.
Basically polymorphic effects don't work with enlarge or reduce person.
Edit reread your question yes it works as brownfur transmuted just says transmutation not poklymorph. If it didn't it wooksnt work with beastsgape either as those are also size bobuses.
Applying old rules for firing into melee or fumble never works. The primary reason is the number of attacks. Between the two systems. In 2ed at the highest levels as an archer I get 4? AttCks with hyper special ializtion. In Pf I can spend 3 feats and I get 6 arrows mid level 7 for haste.
The big thing is it is a burden placed on one type of character in the game which basically ruins the play. Ask yourself this..why play an archer when a wizard never has to make these checks? No one asks a wizard to roll a d20 every 2d6 of fireball to see if he hits a team mate. But essentially an archer has to do this... and more as he gets better.
Its a bad house rule.
Well you can come to two con lusions either is valid.ban eidolon cannot wear armour of any kind.
Either a) the spell fails or b)bit works andvhe recieves no benefit.
The key part is instant armour is explicitly armour. Any conclusion that results in an eidolon receiving benefit from armour is not the correct one.
Just to be clear. If instant armor gives a full plate it applies all normal penalties to the wearer arcane spell failure acp movement.vital is armour which eidolon explicitly cannot wear.
In all honesty reading it mate armour raw has similar issues because it is also expressly armour (we are then told none of the normal penaltiescapply) however the accepted play paradigm is no one treats mate armour as armour.
By raw I dontvthink you can. We have no deific obedience powers for demon lords.cut is easy to extrapolate from the demonic obedience powers but would only work for one of the prc. In the case of empyrean lords I think deific obedience works for one of the prc.
Appologies cannot remember all 3 prc names evangelist one other and a melee one. The "one other" is the easiest to apply the prc.
If you are implying you can twf with a single weapon swapping hands nothing in the rules suggests this.