Nixda's page

Your last statement isn't what is written in the rules - unless you have the spell "in" the wand on your list you have to use the UMD skill.

@OP: Yes.

Meaning both sentences are correct.
Do I miss something or did AS miss the negation in sentence 1?

I think these are the relevant rules:

Cross Narrow Surfaces

First, you can use Acrobatics to move on narrow surfaces and uneven ground without falling. A successful check allows you to move at half speed across such surfaces—only one check is needed per round. Use the following table to determine the base DC, which is then modified by the Acrobatics skill modifiers noted below. While you are using Acrobatics in this way, you are considered flat-footed and lose your Dexterity bonus to your AC (if any). If you take damage while using Acrobatics, you must immediately make another Acrobatics check at the same DC to avoid falling or being knocked prone.

So why would Tilnar be wrong?

A defending weapon allows the wielder to transfer some or all of the weapon's enhancement bonus to his AC as a bonus that stacks with all others. As a free action, the wielder chooses how to allocate the weapon's enhancement bonus at the start of his turn before using the weapon, and the bonus to AC lasts until his next turn.

My emphasis. And while I'm aware that the bolded part doesn't necessarily mean that you really HAVE to use the weapon (just as "look left and right before crossing the road" doesn't force me to actually cross after looking left and right) to get the defending effect I think it still gives a glimpse into what the developers intended.

No "weapon shaped rosary of AC" in my games, anyway. *shrug*

Which is quite annoying at times since light levels are becoming subjective while sometimes in the rules are treated as if they were an objective measure.

EDIT: I'd much prefer that dim light was dim for everyone but creatures with low-light vision saw as if it were normal for 30 feet or something - like a darkvision for dim light (but with colors).

I doubt that ioun stones are meant to give permanent bonuses (only temporary in my games), but that's not really made clear in the rules.

Ok, after posting I decided to do some further experiments, since it's been some time I've actively tried to solve that.

Opening a PDF in LibreOffice Draw (which can take a loooong time depending on the size of the thing, just press "OK" when it'd asking for the PDF password, it's not needed) results in some real quirky and bad pages. But the pictures can be saved just fine and seperate from the backgrounds including transparency.

He shot at him countinously once in round:)

When Happs was 800 ft. from archer, archer roll 20 (but not confirmed)- awesome scene;)

That's one of the absurdities of "nat.20 is always a hit". Any person will hit a snail up to 1100 feet away as long as (s)he is able to perceive it 1 in 20 times ...

Extracting images without transparency is easy, as Adobe Reader X (or Adobe Reader 8, though not 9) allow you to copy an image out of a PDF.

For the (often) used images with transparency (alpha channel) it becomes somewhat harder. I haven't found a cheap way (i.e. not investing heavily into Adobe products) to do that in a Windows environment.

But you can always install Ubuntu (with wubi that's not a problem or risk in any way) and use Evince (the preinstalled document viewer) to "save as" or simply drag and drop the images. With multiple images/layers it can be hard (if not impossible) to target the correct image, though. That's usually only a problem for title pages.

EDIT: Also, you'll get the (command line) tool "pdfimages" which (surprise) extracts images from a PDF (much like the afore mentioned product by SomePDF). It also doesn't handle transparency correctly (unless I've overlooked a parameter), but at least it extracts the alpha information as seperate pictures, so you can recombine them in an image editor like GIMP. Which btw. opens PDFs but creates a raster image of the whole page. Better than screenshots, though.

I'm with Jadeite on this.

Says who?

The rules.

Just El-Kabong them with your bow.

What he said. Use your bow as an improvised melee weapon, -4 on attack roll, I'd go with 1d3 damage and wouldn't allow 1.5 strength bonus due to the fact that you probably won't have time to change your grip.

Hmm, I actually read the blog enrty as restricting some of the ideas floating around before (like gving it int 3 made it more or less act like a cohort). Jason basically stated that your companion stays an animal so handle animal is stille being used.

Glitterdust

School conjuration (creation); Level bard 2, sorcerer/wizard 2, summoner 2, witch 2

CASTING
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S, M (ground mica)

EFFECT
Range medium (100 ft. + 10 ft./level)
Area creatures and objects within 10-ft.-radius spread
Duration 1 round/level
Saving Throw Will negates (blinding only); Spell Resistance no

DESCRIPTION

A cloud of golden particles covers everyone and everything in the area, causing creatures to become blinded and visibly outlining invisible things for the duration of the spell. All within the area are covered by the dust, which cannot be removed and continues to sparkle until it fades. Each round at the end of their turn blinded creatures may attempt new saving throws to end the blindness effect.

Any creature covered by the dust takes a -40 penalty on Stealth checks.

It may not be entirely clear, but I read (and play) this as everything in the area when the spell is cast is affected for its duration, even when leaving the area afterwards. But there's no glittercloud floating around to affect creatures entering the area after the spell was cast.

EDIT: So I'm siding with Majuba. It's a spread effect, though, which might help to confuse people (making them think of cloud spells).

Each conjuration spell belongs to one of five subschools. Conjurations transport creatures from another plane of existence to your plane (calling); create objects or effects on the spot (creation); heal (healing); bring manifestations of objects, creatures, or forms of energy to you (summoning); or transport creatures or objects over great distances (teleportation). Creatures you conjure usually- but not always- obey your commands.

A creature or object brought into being or transported to your location by a conjuration spell cannot appear inside another creature or object, nor can it appear floating in an empty space. It must arrive in an open location on a surface capable of supporting it.

The creature or object must appear within the spell's range, but it does not have to remain within the range.

I don't see how this excludes the caster teleporting HIMSELF into empty space.

The main question in my eyes is: do your allies have a hard time finishing off the opponents? If not, you're doing everything right.

You may have kind of misunderstood the concept of the "battlefield control god". It's not about pulverizing the enemies yourself. It's about giving your party that much of an advantage that they have an easy time finishing the job. Or, to cater towards your character's superiority complex: "Well, let's help my dumb henchmen out a bit there ... *haste* *glitterdust* *stinking cloud* ... that oughta do it. *Lights pipe*" So you're doing just fine. Maybe toss in some walls to split enemies as well.

But it sounds like you want more bling and mayhem caused directly by you. If that's the case, evocation it is.

My question is this, why is it a higher attack bonus with flurry? Shouldn't it be lower?

Starting with level 9 a monk's highest flurry attack bonus (using his level as BAB) becomes higher than his normal attack bonus (using the 3/4 BAB progression). So that's working as intended.

Animal companions have their own actions, generally handling an animal (ordering it to do a known trick like ordering it to attack) is a move action, but for druids and rangers it's a free action when ordering their companions.

So basically both a druid and its animal companion get their full rounds worth of actions.

I'd say that's an error. Don't really know where the 62 come from - that could be a Rogue 4/Barb 3 putting all his favored class (rogue) boni into skill points.

So don't worry, you understand the system well enough it seems :)

EDIT: Maybe the original example was a Rogue 5/ Barb 2 (also 7 levls) which got changed without changing the sum?

@Prawn:
Please check out the discussion in this thread. It has not yet been clearly resolved via faq, but I don't really want to repeat the discussion either - people's opinions apparently differ on this.

You missed my point, which was that you got to see the quote in context.

Check: You can use Acrobatics to move on narrow surfaces and uneven ground without falling. A successful check allows you to move at half speed across such surfaces—only one check is needed per round. Use the following table to determine the base DC, which is then modified by the Acrobatics skill modifiers noted below. While you are using Acrobatics in this way, you are considered flat-footed and lose your Dexterity bonus to your AC (if any). If you take damage while using Acrobatics, you must immediately make another Acrobatics check at the same DC to avoid falling or being knocked prone.

In addition, you can move through a threatened square without provoking an attack of opportunity from an enemy by using Acrobatics. When moving in this way, you move at half speed. You can move at full speed by increasing the DC of the check by 10. You cannot use Acrobatics to move past foes if your speed is reduced due to carrying a medium or heavy load or wearing medium or heavy armor. If an ability allows you to move at full speed under such conditions, you can use Acrobatics to move past foes. You can use Acrobatics in this way while prone, but doing so requires a full-round action to move 5 feet, and the DC is increased by 5.

Finally, you can use the Acrobatics skill to make jumps or to soften a fall. The base DC to make a jump is equal to the distance to be crossed (if horizontal) or four times the height to be reached (if vertical). These DCs double if you do not have at least 10 feet of space to get a running start. The only Acrobatics modifiers that apply are those concerning the surface you are jumping from. If you fail this check by 4 or less, you can attempt a DC 20 Reflex save to grab hold of the other side after having missed the jump. If you fail by 5 or more, you fail to make the jump and fall (or land prone, in the case of a vertical jump). Creatures with a base land speed above 30 feet receive a +4 racial bonus on Acrobatics checks made to jump for every 10 feet of their speed above 30 feet. Creatures with a base land speed below 30 feet receive a –4 racial bonus on Acrobatics checks made to jump for every 10 feet of their speed below 30 feet. No jump can allow you to exceed your maximum movement for the round. For a running jump, the result of your Acrobatics check indicates the distance traveled in the jump (and if the check fails, the distance at which you actually land and fall prone). Halve this result for a standing long jump to determine where you land.

To me it looks like the authors didn't want to use another "in this way" in the first paragraph for aesthetic reasons. Why have three clearly distinct uses with different rules and writing something that was supposed to be used for all of them in the explanation of the first one? Also note that the jumping part again explains when an acrobat falls prone.

EDIT: Of course there's some interpretation on my side going - namely the authors trying to avoid clumsy formulations and not putting rules in strange places. Considering they didn't succeed in doing so in other places (though mostly they did), this might just be one more example.

EDIT: On rereading my first post I admit that I made missing my point easy with its first sentence. Sorry.

Where can the thing about the possibility "falling prone" when using acrobatics to tumble be found in the rules (besides the opponent using his AoO for a trip CM)?

I remember some discussion about it, but I also remember some consensus that the acrobatics skill description was devided into three distinct parts (narrow or uneven surface, tumbling, jumping) and the "If you take damage while using Acrobatics, you must immediately make another Acrobatics check at the same DC to avoid falling or being knocked prone." therefore only applied to the uses of acrobatics for difficult surfaces and not any acrobatics roll.

So the way I see it:
Moving through threatened square:
Making the check: Everything is fine, keep going
Not making the check: Take the AoO, keep going (if not tripped or "stand stilled".
Moving through opponent's square:
Making the check: Everything fine, keep going.
Not making the check: Take the AoO, stand upright in the square where you strated your try to move through (if not tripped), your move action ends, you can try again if you've got a move action left (unless you are "stand stilled").

EDIT: Some may complain that this makes tumbling an easy option to take (especially to move through a threatened square), but there's still a price to pay: slower moverment (unless you're REALLY good, an then you've earned it) and restrictions on load & armor.

If I remember Kingmaker correctly the players have alle the time in the world (mostly, at least). So if you as a GM want to give them the chance to get their desired upgrades, why not have them go to Restov (I think it's a journey that would probably take 2 or 3 weeks there and back again)? You can savely assume that a larger city can cover all the "usual" lower level adventurer's needs.

And if the party doesn't want to do that or really doesn't have the time, why not go with the scroll? There's no reason the cheapest option should be available anytime and anywhere.

Thanks!

Flurry of Blows (Ex): Starting at 1st level, a monk can make a flurry of blows as a full-attack action. When doing so he may make one additional attack using any combination of unarmed strikes or attacks with a special monk weapon (kama, nunchaku, quarterstaff, sai, shuriken, and siangham) as if using the Two-Weapon Fighting feat (even if the monk does not meet the prerequisites for the feat). For the purpose of these attacks, the monk's base attack bonus is equal to his monk level. For all other purposes, such as qualifying for a feat or a prestige class, the monk uses his normal base attack bonus.

"For the purpose of these attacks, the monk's base attack bonus is equal to his monk level." Good if you are a pure monk, bad if you multiclass. Some might argue that BAB from other classes are added as usual, but that's not what's written in the rules - FoB isn't really TWF.

Nixda wrote:

Doc_Outlands wrote:

Per my understanding of the rules, your bow is legal - the Seeking property of the bow is not passed to the arrow, so doesn't count against its +10 limit. I'd let it play at my table.

That's my opinion, too, but I'm not sure it's the same as your's concerning the statement's consequences. As I understand footnote 2, the only time a seeking enchantment for a bow is useful is when using the bow as an improvised thrown weapon. You want a seeking arrow? Enchant the ammunition.

The example in the description of the Seeking property specifically uses a bow. Even though it seems like it's affecting the ammunition, it's really the same thing as Distance in that the bow is firing the arrow differently. I'm pretty sure that's why it is NOT one of the enhancements that is specifically transferred to the ammunition. I understand where you're coming from with that, though. However, I think that by RAW your interpretation would be a houserule (which are fine).

Actually I was trying to give my opinion on the RAW (that "seeking" is a property of the thing propelled at an opponent is the better solution flavorwise is another matter). I'm afraid I cannot find a bow as an example for the seeking property in my rulebook, can you give me a hint? What I find is the (fluff, I guess) discription "The weapon veers towards its target ..." which sounds weird for a bow.

The distance enchantment is different, as ammunition doesn't have a given range at all, that's a property of the bow (and need not be bestowed on the arrows), and "speed" works similarily, as it isn't a property of an arrows how many of them can be shot in a round (personally I don't allow ammunition to be enchanted with "speed", but I'm not backed by the rules on this afaik).

With "brilliant energy" paizo explicitely stated that it only affects melee, thrown and ammunition, with "returning" the stated that only thrown weapons may be enchanted that way, so an argument against my ppint my be: why haven't they written that "seeking" only applied to thrown weapons and ammunition?

Well, at least we can agree that this is all a bit messy, I guess :)

Often times you may not want to slaughter all the opposition but take prisoners. Having every enemy die at 0hp would be a real hassle in such cases, so a corresponding houserule chnages quite a lot in the way a game is played.

EDIT: Generally running around throat-slitting after a victorious combat might pose serious problems for good aligned pcs.

Per my understanding of the rules, your bow is legal - the Seeking property of the bow is not passed to the arrow, so doesn't count against its +10 limit. I'd let it play at my table.

That's my opinion, too, but I'm not sure it's the same as your's concerning the statement's consequences. As I understand footnote 2, the only time a seeking enchantment for a bow is useful is when using the bow as an improvised thrown weapon. You want a seeking arrow? Enchant the ammunition.

Sorry guys no. Arrows are NOT weapons. They are ammo for a weapon. You still only get the +10 total, not +10 for the bow and +10 for the arrow, they act as one unit. That is like saying the left side of my long sword is +5 flaming burst and the right side is +3 icyburst, corrosive, bane. So I get em all.

The rules are clear no weapon can breach the +10 limit.Your weapon is a +5 Seeking Brilliant Energy bow. That is the weapon, ammo is a special case but not a weapon in its own right.{ well it would be if ya used it as a melee weapon at the -4) The bow and the arrow work as one weapon, they have the +10 limit like every other weapon.

You know the rule, we know the rule we have been told this about 40 times now, they do not stack over the Max +10 limit total.

Good rule of thumb is the bow overrules the arrow as the bow is the weapon.

That's how I thought about stacking to break +10 too, but Aelrynth sounds quite certain, so maybe he comes up with something.

As I said, I'd leave the effects to cut to the players, but if a clear rule was necessary I'd rather have the ammunition's properties overrule the weapon's - after all the opponent is hit by the ammunition, and it's generally more useful to be able to use special ammunition with your primary bow to get certain effects (in doubt I tend towards the most player friendly solution).

I've never seen it explicetly stated that in PF a combination of ranged weapon and ammunition could carry magic effects of more than +10 equivalent (apparently with proper choice of enchantments up to +19 total) and would be thankful for a link.

I've never seen an official word on which effects to cut (concerning other weapons as well) when you go over the +10 border. I'd leave it to the players.

I read it the same way. No need for a familiar to waste an action on lowering his spell resistance to benefit form his masters spells.

Check the errata:

"An alchemist can draw and drink an extract as a standard action."

Nixda wrote:

I'm afraid that doesn't work, since readying itself is a standard action (though you're explicitely allowed to ready another standard action). Or did I always interpret this wrong?

I read it as the readying itself using up a standard action, not including the readied action.

Move 30 feet (move action)

Ready an action to attack (standard action)

You can make a move action and a standard action in the same turn, where is the problem?

Sorry for the slight off topic again, but my mistake was seeing "ready an action" as a standard action itself in addition to the action being readied. But since it was kind of weird that you could also ready a standard action (which would make two of those if ready and the readied action were treated seperately) and you being 0gre, I thought some more, asked in another thread and am now happily corrected and see readying as being a lot more useful than I had previously thought.

The rules say that "breaking a grapple" is a combat maneuver check against the opponents CMD.

So it's not even a specific grapple check. Nor is there any mentioning that you'd need a free hand. Actually, being armed might be an advantage as well - smash the bow into his teeth and wriggle your way out of the opponents grip would be a possible way to picture it.

Edit: Differently stated: Normally (as a humanoid) you need free hands to effectively grab someone. If you want to tear yourself loose, there's no good reason why a free hand might be needed. Remember that grappled (as opposed to pinned) is not that serious a condition in PF.

Edit 2: Of course that leads to another question - are grappling boni applicable when trying to break a grapple? Apparently not, which sounds strange considering you may also turn the tables (becoming the grappler) instead of breaking loose. Maybe a grappling CM check to break a grapple is RAI after all.

Check the errata - it has already happened. Unfortunately they didn't update the PRD. Demoralize doesn't stack to make shaken into frightened.

Actually movements somehow figures into AC via the dex bonus. A static (usually unaware and therefore flat footed) opponent only gets to use his flat footed AC. During combat people are expected to move violently anyway.

But of course, an unaware running opponent would still only be able to use his/her ff AC, so it doesn't quite work in all scenarios. But them's the rules. In practice I'm not beyond giving boni and penalties to actions. You're aiming at the stationary guard for one round? +4 to attack. Your target is moving violently? ff AC +4.

Some good points.
Qik, I really missed out on the scaling, that comes from just reading the feat description. Thanks.
And the good ref + aasimar's energy restistance could in some cases really be a substitute for evasion. But in most campaigns evasion gets its chance to shine way later than the sacred mountain's +AC and toughness.
And personally I'm all for going for style over power :)

But... but ... he's not a ninja! He's just a burning skull!!

Nixda wrote:

IMO you cannot move (unless it's a 5ft step) and ready an attack, since readying itself is already a standard action.

The act of readying an action counts as a standard action. Since you can typically do one move action and one standard action on your turn, there's nothing preventing you from moving first, and then using your standard action for the turn to ready an action.

Thanks. My mistake was counting the action being readied towards your action limit. So readying just makes you loose a bit of initiative or the action that never triggered. Way better like this. *relieved*

*sigh* What is it these days with all the threads popping up about point buy and not-rolling-HP turning roleplaying into cold minmaxing?

Thanks to Kae Yoss for investing his time in a statement I can fully support.

1: Depends on who your enemies are. Not a lot of help, I know, but against blasting casters evasions helps a lot more than AC and being immovable, against a melee opponent on the other hand... I think the archetype is pretty well balanced compared to the "original".

2: Just core races in my games, but why not have a monk with some charisma for a change? If you want to go "front line battlemonk" the +2 into strength are better, and I share your opinion about the resistance 5, otoh you get 2 times +2 without a -2 as an aasimar.

3: Abundant step IS good, but I cannot comment on the levels you are planning to reach. Stunning fist is a nice resource, but you have to remember to target those not too sturdy looking ("bad fort save" in metagaming) opponents. To me, 1d6 energy damage a few times a day look rather underwhelming, though you are quite felxible in the use of different types.

Also, I think that DGRM44's and Grick's examples from above aren't correct (of course, an equally probable possibility is me having it done wrong all the time - actually, I'm more and more afraid of that being the case, the more I think about it). So just tell me I'm wrong, I won't put up much of a fight:
IMO you cannot move (unless it's a 5ft step) and ready an attack, since readying itself is already a standard action. (Which weirdly enough lets you ready another standard action, so I'm more ror less telling myself I gotta be wrong already.)

Shield Fighter (Ex)

At 5th level, a shielded fighter gains a +1 bonus on attack and damage rolls when making a shield bash. These bonuses increase by +1 every four levels beyond 5th. With a full-attack action, a shielded fighter may alternate between using his weapon or his shield for each attack. This action does not grant additional attacks or incur penalties as two-weapon fighting does.

Never used this myself, but I'm not sure how to read this correctly. To me it sounds as if you could either

• NOT use this ability and use the shield as an offhand weapon with the usual TWF penalties or
  
• (interpretation 1) use this ability with your normal +6/+1 BAB, therefore getting two attacks but being free to choose either your weapon or your shield and no additional offhand attacks or
  
• (interpretation 2) use this ability with your normal +6/+1 BAB, therefore getting two attacks but being free to choose either your weapon or your shield and getting additional offhand attacks with the usual penalties.

How and when do delayed actions prove useful?

When you are waiting for something to happen... for example delay until after you see if the wizard in your party's grease spell worked. I am a much bigger fan of Readying an action. For example if a creature is 40' away you can move 30' and ready an action to attack when it gets in reach.

I'm afraid that doesn't work, since readying itself is a standard action (though you're explicitely allowed to ready another standard action). Or did I always interpret this wrong?

Edit:

Ready

The ready action lets you prepare to take an action later, after your turn is over but before your next one has begun. Readying is a standard action. It does not provoke an attack of opportunity (though the action that you ready might do so).

Readying an Action

You can ready a standard action, a move action, a swift action, or a free action. To do so, specify the action you will take and the conditions under which you will take it. Then, anytime before your next action, you may take the readied action in response to that condition. The action occurs just before the action that triggers it. If the triggered action is part of another character's activities, you interrupt the other character. Assuming he is still capable of doing so, he continues his actions once you complete your readied action. Your initiative result changes. For the rest of the encounter, your initiative result is the count on which you took the readied action, and you act immediately ahead of the character whose action triggered your readied action.

You can take a 5-foot step as part of your readied action, but only if you don't otherwise move any distance during the round.

I read it as the readying itself using up a standard action, not including the readied action.

AFAIK this is not clearly ruled, but it doesn't provoke on my table (no need to aasume you have to let your guard down and become vulnerable to intimidate someone, kind of counter-intuitive).

How well can an alchemist stand in for a rogue? The only thing the class seems to lack is a way of dealing with magical traps, and is that really a big deal?

It depends in which regards you want an alchemist to stand in for a rogue. It's entirely possible to play a party without an uber-trapfinder, easier locks are handled by anyone with decent dex (even without disable device as a class skill), and there are always spells.

For a monk who works best with full attacks it can be a good option to "let them come" and use a "flurry of shuriken" instead. A barbarian not able to charge can take his move action to close in, throw his axe and than quick draw his greatsword.
A halfling rogue should go with a bow or a sling staff, though thrown weapons for ranged sneak attacks (you have to be close anyway for those) are still a valid option.

The rules for cover against ranged attacks and cover vs. melee attacks are different. The rule applying to Seoni's attack is on p.195, right at the beginning of the "cover" paragraph.

I see it in the same light, it's more or less a "hide in plain sight" against flat footes opponents in the first round of combat. So primarily useful when combat starts and your character is NOT hidden.
Your question seems to aim at the possibility of e.g. a rogue being stealthed to start with, get off his sneak attack and "restealth" right away via this feat. The wording of the feat doesn't forbid a stealth check after an attack (even without concealment or the like), but I'm not sure that's the intended reading.

Just take care that Lead Blades doesn't actually double damage, it increases it by one size - so e.g. a medium greatsword would go from 2d6 to 3d6.

^-- meaning you may make all attacks in a flurry with your temple sword without applying any penalties (as long as the monk is proficient with it).

EDIT: The arrow was meant to refer to MD's post.