Mortalis's page

171 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS

1 to 50 of 171 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

Drachasor wrote:
Mortalis wrote:

If it were an attack type, there would be no reason to refer to it as an effect. From this text we can be quite certain that "smite evil attacks" are attacks made while under the effect of smite evil. Otherwise, wouldn't that mean that a paladin using vital strike would lose their smite bonus?

The fact is it is more akin to a supernatural buff then it is its own attack.

Ahh, but my good sir, my argument is that Smite Evil is a (Su) buff that enables a (Su) attack. It indicates this by declaring your attacks to be Smite Evil attacks.

There's no rule that says you can't combine Special Attacks together if they are compatible -- largely this means they'd be enhancing regular attacks or some fashion or work like a regular attack in some fashion.

Ah, then I'm afraid that leaves us at an impasse, as my argument was that the wording "Smite Evil attack" was just a condensed form of "attacks made while Smite Evil is in effect".

We're reading the exact same thing, just interpreting it differently. Admittedly I can't shake the feeling that the wording isn't just something inadvertently carried over from 3.5.

Maybe it does need an FAQ afterall... *shrugs*


Interesting thread concept; not sure something could be found for my character but what the hey.

Thentara, LG female Oread Brawler/Flowing Monk.

Fights wearing Mithral breastplate, open hand panther style & shield.

Heroic System (name? 2d6+6) stats (level 7), so they'll seem out of wack.

STR 20
DEX 16
CON 16
WIS 15
INT 14
CHA 6

I roll extra terrible during combat to make up for it. :/

Flavour Stuff:
Not much else worth mentioning, but for flavour... accidentally killed another monastic student when she was younger. As both penance, and to learn to control her racial strength, she focused on on the flowing monk style.

In addition, she took the vows of honesty & silence as a further testament to her dedication to self-control.


Agreed, bleed damage is additional. Were it not, it would say something along the lines of "... instead deals 1d4 bleed damage" or "this replaces the weapon's regular damage".


I was honestly not expecting this to be still going when I woke up today.

Drachasor wrote:

"Attacks" in the general sense is not a well-defined term. However, what we do have is:

Quote:
...target of smite evil is an outsider with the evil subtype, an evil-aligned dragon, or an undead creature, the bonus to damage on the first successful attack increases to 2 points of damage per level the paladin possesses. Regardless of the target, smite evil attacks automatically bypass any DR the creature might possess.

Which rather explicitly indicates that "smite evil attacks" is indeed a thing. That's a bit more than just a buff. For instance, you wouldn't call attacks made under "Inspire Courage" to be "Inspire Courage Attacks."

So, like I said, I think there's plenty of room here to justify attacks using smite evil as being supernatural attacks.

Actually if we look at the entire description, you'll see this:

PRD wrote:

Smite Evil (Su): Once per day, a paladin can call out to the powers of good to aid her in her struggle against evil. As a swift action, the paladin chooses one target within sight to smite. If this target is evil, the paladin adds her Charisma bonus (if any) to her attack rolls and adds her paladin level to all damage rolls made against the target of her smite. If the target of smite evil is an outsider with the evil subtype, an evil-aligned dragon, or an undead creature, the bonus to damage on the first successful attack increases to 2 points of damage per level the paladin possesses. Regardless of the target, smite evil attacks automatically bypass any DR the creature might possess.

In addition, while smite evil is in effect, the paladin gains a deflection bonus equal to her Charisma modifier (if any) to her AC against attacks made by the target of the smite. If the paladin targets a creature that is not evil, the smite is wasted with no effect.

The smite evil effect remains until the target of the smite is dead or the next time the paladin rests and regains her uses of this ability. At 4th level, and at every three levels thereafter, the paladin may smite evil one additional time per day, as indicated on Table: Paladin, to a maximum of seven times per day at 19th level.

If it were an attack type, there would be no reason to refer to it as an effect. From this text we can be quite certain that "smite evil attacks" are attacks made while under the effect of smite evil. Otherwise, wouldn't that mean that a paladin using vital strike would lose their smite bonus?

The fact is it is more akin to a supernatural buff then it is its own attack.


bbangerter wrote:
Darksol the Painbringer wrote:

Incorporeal Creatures have a 50% Miss Chance to all incoming non-damaging hostile effects, and take only 50% of all damage dealt unless the attacking creatures too are incorporeal, or have the Ghost Touch property, and are immune to non-magic weapons.

The incorporeal condition has no such provision as a 50% miss chance for non-damaging spells and effects to take hold.

Try the universal monster rules.

PRD wrote:

Incorporeal (Ex) An incorporeal creature has no physical body. It can be harmed only by other incorporeal creatures, magic weapons or creatures that strike as magic weapons, and spells, spell-like abilities, or supernatural abilities. It is immune to all nonmagical attack forms. Even when hit by spells or magic weapons, it takes only half damage from a corporeal source. Although it is not a magical attack, holy water affects incorporeal undead. Corporeal spells and effects that do not cause damage only have a 50% chance of affecting an incorporeal creature (except for channel energy). Force spells and effects, such as from a magic missile, affect an incorporeal creature normally.

An incorporeal creature has no natural armor bonus but has a deflection bonus equal to its Charisma bonus (minimum +1, even if the creature's Charisma score does not normally provide a bonus).

An incorporeal creature can enter or pass through solid objects, but must remain adjacent to the object's exterior, and so cannot pass entirely through an object whose space is larger than its own. It can sense the presence of creatures or objects within a square adjacent to its current location, but enemies have total concealment (50% miss chance) from an incorporeal creature that is inside an object. In order to see beyond the object it is in and attack normally, the incorporeal creature must emerge. An incorporeal creature inside an object has total cover, but when it attacks a creature outside the object it only has cover, so a creature outside with a readied action could strike at it as it attacks. An incorporeal creature cannot pass through a force effect.

An incorporeal creature's attacks pass through (ignore) natural armor, armor, and shields, although deflection bonuses and force effects (such as mage armor) work normally against it. Incorporeal creatures pass through and operate in water as easily as they do in air. Incorporeal creatures cannot fall or take falling damage. Incorporeal creatures cannot make trip or grapple attacks, nor can they be tripped or grappled. In fact, they cannot take any physical action that would move or manipulate an opponent or its equipment, nor are they subject to such actions. Incorporeal creatures have no weight and do not set off traps that are triggered by weight.

An incorporeal creature moves silently and cannot be heard with Perception checks if it doesn't wish to be. It has no Strength score, so its Dexterity modifier applies to its melee attacks, ranged attacks, and CMB. Nonvisual senses, such as scent and blindsight, are either ineffective or only partly effective with regard to incorporeal creatures. Incorporeal creatures have an innate sense of direction and can move at full speed even when they cannot see.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Drachasor wrote:

The weapon is not magical. Heck, Smite Evil without specific phrasing would be affected by DR since it isn't a magical weapon attack, but adds to weapon damage.

However, a weapon attack WITH Smite Evil would be a supernatural attack, imho. Since you are making a Supernatural Attack, the weapon damage gets counted too before halving.

There's room to disagree here though. Heck, one could argue Smite Evil isn't a damaging attack at all. It's just a Supernatural Buff, and the resulting attacks are normal so long as that buff is active -- ergo, Smite Evil does nothing special against incorporeal creatures. RAW isn't clear.

I'll definitely agree with you there that the RAW isn't clear.

Am I about to make an FAQ request for it? No. Mainly because it's not likely to come up very often, but also because I can't shake the feeling I'd just be wasting the devs time. :)


I partly concur, as it was not something that I had considered. The smite itself counts as magical, the weapon is not. Therefore, it is only the smite itself that should do any damage (1 per class level).

The weapon is really only acting like a smite delivery system, similar to how a Magus casting a touch spell through their weapon doesn't mean that the weapon counts as magical.

I may be completely wrong however, that's just the way I saw it.


Well for one, Incorporeals have no special weakness to positive energy-based (divine) attacks.

Other than attacks from incorporeal sources, about the only thing that affects them regularly is force damage.

EDIT: Apparently channel energy also works normally (positive or negative).


Kazaan wrote:
mplindustries wrote:
It is neither. The action is: "Use Wrist Sheath."
Citation Needed.

I see no reason from the text of the item that you would believe it to use either of the regular actions listed. It explains what type of action it uses, and how it works, word for word.

It is a use activated weapon storage compartment that requires a move action and provokes upon use.

Tada.


Monks aren't auto-proficient in tonfas.


Going from my own perception of the RAW (taken in the most literal sense) this ability works. Main reason being that the ability fails to specify that it is referring exclusively to weapon training groups gained through the Sohei archetype.

Similar to how the Spellslinger Wizard archetype doesn't actually specify wizard spells, so conceivably you could play a Spellslinger 1/any-other-spellcaster 19 and laugh all the way to the bank.

However, I do agree that the RAI is for the Sohei to only be able to flurry using Sohei weapon training groups.


To save you time on your Sohei check, this is what you're after:

PRD wrote:
Weapon Training (Ex): At 6th level, a sohei gains weapon training in one of the following weapon groups, as the fighter class feature: bows, crossbows, monk weapons, polearms, spears, or thrown weapons. He may select an additional group of weapons for every six levels after 6th, to a maximum of three at 18th level. A sohei may use flurry of blows and ki strike with any weapon in which he has weapon training. This ability replaces purity of body, diamond body, quivering palm, timeless body, and tongue of sun and moon.

Three levels of a weapon master (fighter archetype) would automatically give you weapon training in your chosen weapon.

I suspect that Sohei weapon training was intended to only allow you to flurry with weapon training groups gained through the Sohei class specifically, however it never makes that distinction.


Not going to get into the reasons right now as I'm getting ready to sleep, however I will point out that there is an Aasimar race trait "Enlightened Warrior" that allows a neutral or neutral good character to still take monk levels.

In addition, any race can take it by also taking the "Adopted" social trait. So long as the player hasn't taken traits and/or is an Aasimar, it should be no problem to do without GM fiat.

Worst case scenario, they could always take the "Extra Traits" feat.


Glad we were able to help you dupuis. :)

Mortalis wrote:
My take on it is that the terms "worn" & "wielded" are meant to be interchangeable when referring to shields, as you can't wield armor, nor can you wear weapons (barring a few specific exceptions).

More on this, I found another section that supports my hypothesis that wearing a shield means wielding a shield.

PRD wrote:

Ready or Drop a Shield

Strapping a shield to your arm to gain its shield bonus to your AC, or unstrapping and dropping a shield so you can use your shield hand for another purpose, requires a move action. If you have a base attack bonus of +1 or higher, you can ready or drop a shield as a free action combined with a regular move.

Dropping a carried (but not worn) shield is a free action.

Note the specific reference to a shield being worn.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm of the mind that these abilities don't count against the enhancement total, but I don't actually know. I'm curious to see the answer as well.


What Quandary said.


I understood it as situation C personally, but I wouldn't make a ruckus if others treated it as B or A.


PRD wrote:
Backswing (Ex): At 7th level, when a two-handed fighter makes a full attack with a two-handed weapon, he adds double his Strength bonus on damage rolls for all attacks after the first. This ability replaces armor training 2.

Well, going off the wording here I don't believe that the strength bonus would apply to any AoO, as they aren't part of the user's standard full attack action. They just triggered in the middle of it.

Even from a RAI perspective I probably wouldn't allow it, as they aren't part of the PC's attack "rythm". They just happened to create an extra opening in the middle of their sequence.


I'm certain that's part of it, but why say "wielded" when referring to your allies and "worn" when referring to the HV?

My take on it is that the terms "worn" & "wielded" are meant to be interchangeable when referring to shields, as you can't wield armor, nor can you wear weapons (barring a few specific exceptions).

Anyway this isn't really the place to discuss it as it's the advice thread. Maybe I'll make a new thread for it.


Well aware of that line, but it contradicts the need to mention "wielding" in the later segment as I mentioned earlier. Plus allowing it to work "when worn" instead of "when wielded" turns it into an Ioun stone with a sacred or profane AC bonus.

Far too powerful for a level 1 prestige class ability.

Going by strict RAW you may have a case, however I believe it is a mistake and not RAI.


You think that's bad? You could make an Ioun Stone with the same effect by doubling its price.

I can see what you mean though, I was just citing what was possible according to the magic item rules.


Make a custom magic item, although it would be a little costly.

http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/magicItems/magicItemCreation.html#_magic -item-creation

A ring with a constant Nereid's grace effect would put you back 8k, or 4k to make.

EDIT: Ninja'd.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

1. Make an Inquisitor.
2. Say "Yarrr!" A lot.
3. ????
4. Profit!


Heymitch wrote:
Also, it is not a bonus to your shield AC. It is simply a +8 sacred (or profane) bonus to AC whenever your shield is worn. You don't even have to be holding your shield (it can be slung on your back).

The exact bonus was a miscount on my behalf, but I disagree strongly with the bolded text.

prd wrote:
Vindicator's Shield (Su): A vindicator can channel energy into his shield as a standard action; when worn, the shield gives the vindicator a sacred bonus (if positive energy) or profane bonus (if negative energy) to his Armor Class equal to the number of dice of the vindicator's channel energy. This bonus lasts for 24 hours or until the vindicator is struck in combat, whichever comes first. The shield does not provide this bonus to any other wielder, but the vindicator does not need to be holding the shield for it to retain this power.

This to me says that it does need to be wielded, otherwise why mention that other people wielding it has no effect?

"...but the vindicator does not need to be holding the shield for it to retain this power." Refers to the shield not losing the power if it's dropped or disarmed. So long as they pick up their shield again before being struck or 24 hours passing, the ability will still be in effect.

Kind of like if you dropped a mobile phone that was on, it wouldn't turn off just because you stopped holding it.

EDIT: lots of stuff. Also I realise it isn't a perfect analogy, as your phone wouldn't turn off just because somebody slapped you, but eh.


I'm not certain that in this case "change shape at will" literally means an "at-will" ability, but rather "a creature that has the ability to shape shift under its own power" (the amount of times allowable per day not coming into play).

Of course, this speculation is based more on logic and the lack of a hyphen rather than RAW.


You do not need to roll anything when using the Vindicator's Shield ability. The bonus you gain to your Armor Class is equal to the amount of dice you would roll when using channel.

So, as a level 15 cleric/ level 1 HV you would have a channel of 7d6. You would gain a bonus of +7 to your shield AC.

Empower and Maximise feats have no effect on abilities that aren't spells, let alone abilities that have no dice roll, so they would do nothing here. I hope that sufficiently answers your question. :)


I was speaking more from a sense of practicality. Or should the ability to hold a charge cease to exist if you're playing an underwater campaign?


I'm going to say you can, otherwise casters from marine based races (gillmen, merfolk) would never be able to cast touch spells.

I would also probably errata "anything" to "any solid object". Otherwise the next time you walk through some fog your spell is gone.

EDIT: because I can never get my post the way I want it the first time.


I came up with this concept a while back. 13 point buy.

Artificer
Half-Construct.
+2 DEX, +2 INT, -2 CHA.
Medium, normal speed.
Natural Armour +2.
Dark vision 60".
Skilled - Always treat Craft and Knowledge Arcana as class skills.
Master Tinker - +1 Disable Device & Engineering, they are proficient in any weapon that they personally make.
Mending 1/day.
Cold Vulnerability.
13 RP.

Essentially they are worker golems created by wizards to craft, repair & enchant equipment while they ponder the mysteries of the universe/sleep/play hookey. They retain large amounts of knowledge so that a wizard doesn't need to keep updating their tasks, and so they can troubleshoot their own obstacles. Because they run off of geothermal absorption, they are susceptible to cold.

Admittedly I cheated slightly, as only outsiders are allowed to have elemental vulnerability, but I find that idea silly. Additionally, construct would have fit better than half construct, but that would have doubled the total RP cost.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Ring of force shield also says it's treated as a heavy shield, so I'm gonna say you can't to that. It's not so much about the weight of the shield, as the amount of control necessary to wield it, and the amount of space in your hand it uses up.

Kind of like if you wanted to hold a sword and carry a platter full of food palm up in the same hand.

You could always drop the longsword as a free action though, and with a leather weapon cord retrieve it as a free action.


prd wrote:
Raging Healer (Su): At 2nd level, a rage prophet is able to cast cure spells on himself while raging, without having to use clarity of mind.

I take this to mean you can, as using Clarity of Mind normally would supersede the superstition drawback.


I may be wrong about this, but I don't believe you can use a ring of force shield and a regular shield simultaneously, as the text states that you have to wield (i.e hold) the force shield.

As for whether or not you can apply shield focus to it, I'm not sure. I'd allow it, because it's not exactly game breaking. If you want to invest two feats and a ring slot to gain a weightless ghost touch shield that is otherwise unenchantable, go right ahead.


RAI they have a single hand free that they can use for attacks, spells, etc.

RAW still prevents you from TWF as they need both hands simultaneously.


Kazumetsa Raijin wrote:

That has been argued a LOT.

"A monk's unarmed strike is treated as both a manufactured weapon and a natural weapon for the purpose of spells and effects that enhance or improve either manufactured weapons or natural weapons."

http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/classes/monk.html#_monk

It in fact does count for the effects of Strong Jaw.

Huh... Oh well; like I said, happy to be proven wrong. Guess I'm off to go make a monk/druid then.

Although now I can't help but wonder why Magic Fang would specify Unarmed Strike, as that could only lead to confusion. Not contesting it further, just verbalising stuff.

Anyway, thanks for the assist. :)


prototype00 wrote:
-spells that affect natural weapons also affect unarmed strike (strong jaw for 2 size increases to unarmed strike damage)

I agree with everything you said but this. Unarmed Strike is not a natural weapon, and is therefore not affected by Strong Jaw.

Strong Jaw:
PRD wrote:

Strong Jaw

School transmutation; Level druid 4, ranger 3
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S
Range touch
Target creature touched
Duration 1 minute/level
Saving Throw Fortitude negates (harmless); Spell Resistance yes (harmless)

Laying a hand upon an allied creature's jaw, claws, tentacles, or other natural weapons, you enhance the power of that creature's natural attacks. Each natural attack that creature makes deals damage as if the creature were two sizes larger than it actually is. If the creature is already Gargantuan or Colossal-sized, double the amount of damage dealt by each of its natural attacks instead. This spell does not actually change the creature's size; all of its statistics except the amount of damage dealt by its natural attacks remain unchanged.

Were this the case, unarmed strikes would use primary and secondary weapon rules, and Magic Fang would have no reason to specify that it affects Unarmed Strikes.

Magic Fang:
PRD wrote:

Magic Fang

School transmutation; Level druid 1, ranger 1
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S, DF
Range touch
Target living creature touched
Duration 1 min./level
Saving Throw Will negates (harmless); Spell Resistance yes (harmless)

Magic fang gives one natural weapon or unarmed strike of the subject a +1 enhancement bonus on attack and damage rolls. The spell can affect a slam attack, fist, bite, or other natural weapon. The spell does not change an unarmed strike's damage from nonlethal damage to lethal damage.

Magic fang can be made permanent with a permanency spell.

I'd be happily proven wrong however, as this sounds like a fantastic combo, if not a little mean.


2 bandoliers give 16 slots (8 each).


A useful low level spell that can help prevent provoking them is Illusion of Calm.


Thymus Vulgaris wrote:
Mortalis wrote:
Thymus Vulgaris wrote:
Turn it into a pair of boobs. Boobs everywhere!!
You are very true to your name. :)
You think so? ;)

Yep. You're very fresh, with bold flavour.

Totally dodged that bullet.


blackbloodtroll wrote:
Awaken it?

Only works on trees specifically, not all plants.

Thymus Vulgaris wrote:
Turn it into a pair of boobs. Boobs everywhere!!

You are very true to your name. :)


I too would like an answer to this. FAQ bump.


My message was in reference to Tarantula's post, so I meant wear a buckler and wield a huge Klar as your two-handed weapon.


Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:
Mortalis wrote:

This is not an argument for or against, but to be perfectly honest I never realized that autosuccess/autofailure is a house rule. My friends and I just assumed it carried over from 3.5.

Oh well.

It was attack rolls and saving throws only in 3.5 as well.

Never skills.

Correct.

Auto-success/failure is for attack rolls and saving throws, and never for any skill or attribute check, or any other d20 roll.

This is the case in PF, and was also true in 3.0 and 3.5.

Okay now I honestly don't know where I got that idea. Neverwinter Nights maybe? Could have just been a general assumption from the combat rules. Anyway it doesn't matter right now.

On a more serious note:

BBT wrote:

That's the thing.

I never know when the Natural 1 is an auto failure, or when a Natural 20 is an auto success, due to the "discretion clause".

I went from bad, to worse, and the more I fight it, the worse it gets.

This is just plain wrong. Rules shouldn't be so changeable that they are no longer reliable. Otherwise why have them?


This is not an argument for or against, but to be perfectly honest I never realized that autosuccess/autofailure is a house rule. My friends and I just assumed it carried over from 3.5.

Oh well.


A Lantern Archon comes pretty close to what you're asking, although it is admittedly less exotic than Rynjin's suggestion.

It's also small rather than tiny. You know what? Forget I said anything.


I have not read this trait, so my assumptions are based on the wording. That being said:

1. It would affect both.
2. No duration is mentioned, so it would last as long as the effect giving you said luck bonus.
3. Most likely because it only works if you have a luck bonus from somewhere. Otherwise it's completely useless.
4. So long as the entire party wasn't made up of halflings with this trait, I'd probably allow it. Usually luck bonuses are quite rare, and a +1 isn't game breaking.

EDIT: forget what I said about halflings. Didn't realise it was a racial bonus, not luck.

Also Ninja'd.


Orfamay Quest wrote:
Are wrote:

I'm not sure omelette-making is directly related to IQ. I tend to score fairly well on IQ tests, but I failed horribly the last time I attempted to make an omelette :)

Craft (omelet) is an Int-based skill.

Ah, but Profession (Chef) is wisdom. :p

I see what you mean about the omelette, it didn't occur to me they were eaten sweet. I suppose it's the same as how French toast can be eaten sweet in the US, but here in Australia it's almost exclusively savory.


Orfamay Quest wrote:
E.g., if you are practiced at making a ham and cheese omelet, but someone wants an apricot jam and almond omelet instead, how hard would it be to whip one up?

This is off topic I'm sure, but that sounds disgusting.


Seems I've been figuring it out wrong. :)

Thanks for that, although it make me wonder why anyone would intentionally make an item with 5+ charges per day when it costs the same or less for an 'on command' version.


Hahaha!


Drachasor wrote:
A Custom Wondrous Item with Plane Shift usable 1/day might cost something like 20k.

22,500 to craft, double that to buy.

1 to 50 of 171 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>