Onestep's page

So here's my situation and, eventually, question. In my latest campaign, the party has stumbled across an extremely nice magic ring that grants additional spell slots, among other things. Given that my two ring slots consists of a perfectly functional Ring of Protection +2 and my current Arcane Bond ring (which is this far entirely unenchanted/buffed etc etc), I'm keen to make the new ring my new Arcane Bond.

This seems fairly straightfoward, if awkward. Destroy/lose my current ring, wait a week, ritual bond the new ring. I might ask the DM if we can just skip the week wait and I'll pay extra gold or something.

But this situation caused me to start wondering: Is if there are any real limitations (outside what item types an Arcane Bond can strictly be) to what you can make your bonded item? For example, the new ring is a homebrew magic item. It's fairly nice. But it's basically just a unique wondrous item.

But could I make an artifact my bonded item? A sapient magical item? Strictly speaking, it seems possible, RAW. Given that we're currently pursuing an amulet connected to the Outer Gods, I'm kind of wondering if I could make that my bonded item if we found it. Would that be possible? I'm just wondering if I'm missing something.

If you're attacking a monster with a ridiculously high AC, such that it can only hit on a natural 20, do abilities/spells (such as Weapon Mastery/Bless Weapon) that automatically confirm crits still function, or does the fact that you couldn't confirm a crit mean that they don't?

That is, unless a crit confirmation roll counts as an attack roll and another natural 20 would auto-crit? I'm honestly not sure if that is the case though.

So I saw an interesting question posted the other day. Does Antimagic field suppress the magic and supernatural abilities of beings like Demon Lords and Empyreal Lords?

On the one hand, they're entities capable of granting divine spells, so they are technically deities. On the other hand, it's often made clear, both in lore and expectations of what players should be fighting and killing, that there is a distinct difference between a true deity and a being simply capable of granting divine spells. A player can become the latter, if you're using Mythic rules.

From a gameplay perspective, it's another toss up. If anti magic field does suppress demigods, then it's basically a huge button to remove many of their most powerful traits immediately and render them vulnerable to say, a bunch of NPC's with bows. Which doesn't seem that fun.

If it doesn't, then any given Demon Lord or Empyreal Lord could cast Antimagic field, fly into the air and be functionally immune to 95% of player builds while retaining near full lethality, which also seems kind of unfun.

What are your thoughts?

Background: The party has recovered two rings belonging to a legendary Magic Knight. The first grants an additional 2D6 Force Damage to weapon attacks. The second grants 3d6 additional Force Damage to Spells and Special Abilities. After some discussion, the party decided to split these among the primary damage dealers of the party, a Magus and the Alchemist.

Only we're not sure who get's which, as there's some debate as to what exactly a bomb is. Per RAW, a bomb seems to be a weapon. But it exists almost entirely outside normal weapon rules. Until generated by a supernatural ability, it's just a vial of fluid. It has more in common with Ray attacks than a genuine weapon. Indeed, it is the ability that affects every aspect of the 'bomb' weapon. So would an increase to the abilities damage affect the damage of the produced weapon, if we treat it as such?

Basically, my question is, should the damage of the bomb be increased by the ring that increases weapon damage, the ring that increases ability damage or both?

As per thread name, how tight are alignment restrictions on worship of a Deity, if that worship doesn't provide mechanical benefits?

I was really keen on playing a True Neutral Ascetic Wizard who worshipped Irori, who pursued that which improved himself, while casting away that which did not. But I got into a slight debate with the DM, who said that to worship Irori, said character had to be Lawful Neutral. This didn't really fit with the coldly utilitarian way I envisioned the character pursuing power.

Of course, I originally envisioned said character for a game of 1E, where the one-step alignment rule made this a non-factor.

I was just wondering, when, lorewise, is an appropriate time to play a Thassilonian Specialist? My new group is just starting up a Kingmaker campaign, and I love the aesthetic of playing as a Greed Wizard, but given that the story of Kingmaker happens about two years after Rise of the Runelords, it feels too soon for Sin Magic to have become a thing yet.