Odinsonnah's page

Organized Play Member. 5 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 3 Organized Play characters.


RSS


I just found out about the ranger spell Allfood from the APG, and it seems kind of complicated.

My first question is, can you use Mending to repair your Allfood after you've eaten part of it?
There are a few sub-questions I am considering for this. Is the Allfood item still considered an object (is there even a formal definition of what counts as an object in pathfinder)?
The last line of Mending says, "This spell has no effect on objects that have been warped or otherwise transmuted, but it can still repair damage done to such items." How does this apply?
The two halves of this sentence seem to contradict each other. All I want mending to do is repair the damage to the transmuted item, but I would see that as having an effect. Is it just repairing the broken condition that doesn't work when the object has been transmuted?
I guess that question is more about Mending than Allfood really.

What properties does an Allfood item have? The spell description says that it retains the hardness, sunder/break resistance, and energy producing capabilities of the original object. This leads me to believe that until you try to eat it, an Allfood object might be just like a normal object of it's type. Does it's appearance change? Can you still fight and do damage with a weapon that has been turned to Allfood? If so, what about bite attacks against Allfood weapons? Are they sufficiently enough like eating the object to reduce it's hardness to zero? After an object is Allfood, do you need to use Purify Food and Drink to keep it fresh, or does it retain it's previous object properties for things like spoiling? Assuming you can do damage with it, do you need any additional proficiency to wield an Allfood weapon?
Does Allfood armor still protect you the same as ever? If so, would formerly metal Allfood armor still be susceptible to a rust monster (even if not, trading one creature not being able to eat it for a multitude who now can still might not be a good trade)? Could a druid wear formerly metal Allfood armor without penalty?

In general, it's just not very clear how the Allfood spell works unless you are just going to cast the spell and then immediately eat the object. I want to know how to deal with the situations where the character is just trying to keep using the object as what it was before, and maybe see it there's any way to take advantage of it's new new half-food state.

I'm really looking for RAW answers, since I play PFS a lot, but for many of these question that's probably impossible. If you think it's just up to the GM to decide, then I guess you can tell me how you would rule it.


kyrt-ryder wrote:
Odinsonnah wrote:
kyrt-ryder wrote:
Ironwood is also permanent, it's a special material you can find in the special materials section of the PRD.
I've looked for it, but I can't seem to find it, could you provide a link?
Just scroll down

Sorry to tell you but there's no reference to ironwood on the page you linked to . . .


kyrt-ryder wrote:
Ironwood is also permanent, it's a special material you can find in the special materials section of the PRD.

I've looked for it, but I can't seem to find it, could you provide a link?


Ok, I only have one question/clarification so far. In the armor recommendations you suggest ironwood armor enchanted with the wild special ability, but as far as I can tell that's impossible.
I see no way to make ironwood armor have anything more than a single +1 bonus from the spell and also no way to make the spell permanent and therefore suitable for enchanting.
Even if you could further enchant your ironwood armor wouldn't it all be wasted when the spell duration expires?
Maybe I overlooked something that makes this work (if so please tell me what I missed), but if not my suggestion would be to use dragonhide armor instead of ironwood, it’s more expensive but it’s permanent.


Kolokotroni wrote:

Given the change that has been made to natural attacks in pathfinder, does anyone else think the multi attack feature of animal companions and now eidolons needs to be reworded. It used to make sense in 3.5, if you had 3 natural weapons one or two were secondary attacks. If you didnt you got the iterative attack at -5. In pathfinders it is distinctly possible to have 3 or more natural attacks and none of them be secondary. A bite and 2 claws for instance which is not an uncommon setup gains nothing from the multiattack feature.

I am not sure if its neccessary, but it seems like its a holdover from 3.5 that just got missed.

I'm not sure I understand this, myself. What exactly is the benefit of getting Multiattack at 9th level for, example, a Big Cat (Lion or Tiger) animal companion?