Orett's page

It depends on how long we're talking about. If you wanna go all realistic, you must remember skin is not just an envelope keeping organs from falling out - it's an actual body organ serving a wide range of functions, from basic environmental protection through body temperature control through secondary "breathing" organ. Someone who's had most of their skin flayed off won't be living for long - of course, pending magic. Once you start throwing in magical ointments and balms or baths that protect the body until skin is replaced, you're throwing science out. Again, I'd recommend using this as a roleplaying challenge, rather than "find the caster who can cast the correct spell by the book" nuisance.

I am GMing a homebrew Pathfinder campaign. In this campaign, one of the characters was captured, tortured and ultimately kept alive while he was completely skinned. The rest of the party managed to save the flayed character before he was killed, but he now has no skin.

Would a normal series of healing spells return his skin to him or would something more need to be done in order to heal such a massive wound?

What do you think?

Well, in entirely game mechanic terms, it depends on what kind of effects/consequences flaying had. If all it did was cause damage, series of Cure spells may do. I would however lean towards Restoration & Regeneration type spells as more of a "fix that nasty stuff" approach. Ultimately, question in my book would be "does it make for a fun RP challenge" - if players seem to enjoy figuring out how to fix this, give them a challenge to run with. If players just want to get back on the road, saying "Well, 27 spell levels' worth of healing spells and 5 days of recovery later, you're covered in brand new unblemished baby-soft skin. Sunburn is going to really suck for a while, by the way."

Why bother with Endure Elements? Mage Armor.

Ah, I see what you did - you are 1-level Ranger-dipping only, to get access to Favored Enemies? Still, I'd argue same applies - you still accrue additional Favored Enemies every 5th level, but you don't get +2 bonus increases to one of existing Favored Enemy choices every 5th level...

You don't get full Wild Shape - you get full uses of Wild Shape but as written, you do not get progression of better forms. It's still a fairly juicy feat for those who want to multiclass Druid/Rangers but not without its drawbacks :)

Ok I have the pdf of the core rulebook and some pdfs like we be goblins but I will have to find the gm guide.

OK, first off, unlike traditional D&D approach ( DungeonMaster's Guide for GM, Player's Handbook for Players), Pathfinder does "Core Rules for everyone" approach. There are books that can certainly help GMs, such as Gamemastery Guide, but they're supplemental accessories, not "can't do without".

Secondly, take a look at www.d20pfsrd.com - you'll likely find it to be easily navigable (and free) depository of PF rules and info.

Thirdly, if you want to recommend a comprehensive, compact rules manual for your players, try SORD ( http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/product/81817/Sord-Pf?term=SORD+ )- in my experience, it's more than worth those couple bucks.

I hope these help with keeping your operational costs low!

(Also, I am getting excellent mileage out of Paizo's various token boxes - at 15-30 bucks for boxes with hundreds of creature tokens, they're unbeatable value and good quality to boot.)

Claxon, Zahir is talking Pathfinder Chronicles : Gods & Magic.

http://paizo.com/products/btpy85eh?Pathfinder-Chronicles-Gods-Magic

It's a 3.5 era product, but it is a PF setting sourcebook, so...

An empowered maximized flame blade would would deal 8+0.5*1d8+0.75*caster level. It would use up a 7th level spell slot.

In any event how do you get flame blade which is normally a Druid spell only?

Why 0.75*CL? Shouldn't it be 0.5*CL? Empower affects only variable portion of the spell, not all of it.

And I wasn't assuming Flame Blade with any specific character, I was just using it as an example of mechanics I'm asking about.

So, I've been playing with some character concepts and, while fidgeting with the Forgemaster, I ran into an interesting question:

How do Metamagic Feats affect weapon-enhancing and weapon-emulating spells?

Some are fairly self-explanatory (i.e. double duration from Extend Spell). However, what happens if I use Empower or Maximize with, for example, Flame Blade (or Spiritual Weapon)? Does my Flame Blade suddenly deal 1D8+50%/8 +1/2 CL damage? What if I add Flaring Spell or Sickening Spell to the spell? Will each strike reproduce effects of Flaring or Sickening?

My "GM gut instinct" would be to say these feats probably wouldn't be applicable to this kind of an on-going spell, but I could certainly see the other side of the coin (and I may be slightly salivating at the idea of Dervish of Sarenrae using Maximized Empowered Flaring Flame Blades)...

I always maintained Darth Brothers are nothing but razzle-dazzle and flim-flam. They serve dual purpose of enforcing reputations of Sith and distracting observers so the true agents of Dark side can operate without attracting attention...

I must say, randomly popping onto the board after extended absence to see my own thread zombified is hillarious :)

Also, players in both of my campaigns LOVE Infernal Healing as a dash of RPing spice. It is source of endless amusement to me to watch how characters deal wth brief moments of moral instability, and how they deal with temptation of easy, cheap healing as set against disturbing bits of dark thoughts that come with it.

One of my players (playing a priestess of Pharasma) even took it upon herself to whispe sultry, corruptive temptations at others as they availed themselves of Infernal Healing. A real treat!

As for the good version of the spell, remember debate over Light vs Dark side of the Force: Is the Dark side more powerful? No, no, no! Quicker, easier, more seductive....

As a long-time GM I lean heavily on my linguist and historian background for my GMing 'work'. As a rule, when I need names I reference ancient, dead or remote cultures, civilizations and languages to get basic naming patterns and syllabic constructs. In order to avoid the documentation I will generally standardize all names to phonetic spelling, to which my players seem to get used fairly fast. So hit some reference sites on Asyria, Phoenicia, Mongolia, Inuits, Lap, Azerbeijan and the like and draft name lists. As a test, sit someone down, read tem the list and ask them to write names as you read, then scrap the botches.

If you want to mimic common naming patterns, also try to establish some pattern words and use them. I.e. in many slavic languages, 'grad' is city (or, in older meaning sometimes fort) so you have Stalingrad, Volgograd, Biograd, Dvigrad... In germanic languages 'wald' or variations thereof mean wood or forrest, so you get a Schwartzwald, Buchenwald pattern... Ford suffix was often used for towns on river crossing, port suffix for coastal cities etc - it gives you a naming pattern that is consistent and intuitive. Once your players et used to it, if a Dwarf tells them to look in Garam-Dar and they remember Rogam-Dar And Khorum-Dar were both mountain-peak fortresses, they'll know where they are being sent.

Oh, and stay away from Welsh :)

All rule-talk aside, because what you're trying to do is really holistic and rules simply aren't designed to cover it, here's the problem I have with your approach: You are making assumptions.

Assumption #1: Physics in the make-believe fantasy world where 60' tall giants with human physique do not collapse under their own weight, dragons fly on wings that have nowhere nearly enough lift, and most of the laws of conservation of mass, energy etc are regularly ignored/violated/perverted by both magic and "mundane" effects will, for this particular scenario, function the same way as in our ordered, mundane universe.

Assumption #2: Not only does Assumption #1 hold true, but your character possesses intricate knowledge or innate understanding of the workings of these highly complex laws of physics in the setting where it's unlikely anyone actually penned down Newton's basic F=ma

It's a double-whammy that I witness every now and then, especially in geek-rich gaming groups: Fighter : "I'll mix the sulphur, charcoal and saltpeter and...." Wait a minute. How does your Fighter know what happens when you mix those. And why do you think that what happens on Earth will hold true on Oerth?

So... I probably digressed and didn't provide an actual answer to your question, but if I had to, I'd answer this: Wizards usually study hard looking for ways to bypass or violate mundane laws of physics, not use them for optimal effect. And even if yours was an enlightened Wizard, does he really have the education/knowledge base to reach all the far-fetching conclusions you as the player may be relying on? The way I'd make this work is by RPing the way my character thinks, not McGuyvering my 21st century knowledge of science into a 12th century-esque fantasy setting. :)

Alas, you mis-remember.

In pre-PF days, D&D likewise maintained size category as the component of the race. Gnomes were always Small, Humans were always Medium, Ogres were always Large; what you're (most likely) thinking of is normal size variance within a race - i.e. Human normal height variance would be something like 5' - 7', all within Medium size template.

One solution that may be available to you would be GM permission to apply a different Size trait to your character - i.e. if you're playing a Human, your GM may allow you to make him Small rather than Medium, along with the following modifiers:

Size: Small creatures a +1 size bonus to their AC, a +1 size bonus on attack rolls, a –1 penalty to their Combat Maneuver Bonus and Combat Maneuver Defense, and a +4 size bonus on Stealth checks.

(This, of course, would be a house rule and not acceptable in PFS etc.)

Alternately, you can always for sake of RP claim your Orc is 4' tall, but still treat him as Medium-sized for all rules governing size (As long as you don't try to milk that for odd situational benefits.) and I reckon any GM worth his salt out there would chuckle at it and let it be.

<Edit : Durned Ninjas :) >

I guess it depends on what reasoning you employ to explain loss of druidic powers.

Scenario 1: Druids are restricted by the rules of the order; breaking their vows makes them "fall from grace" with powers that be. In that case, being forced to wear gauntlets would not cause loss of powers, in my book.

Scenario 2: Worked metal, especially worn close to skin in quantities - i.e. armor or gauntlets - interferes with druid's ability to tap into natural forces that grant him the powers he wields. In that case, intent would have nothing to do with it - gauntlets act as a "lightning rod" and powers cease to function.

I personally favor Scenario 2; however, players should be cautioned, as that bat swings both ways (PC druids would be likewise susceptible).

Motivation and pre-meditated murder aside, a point of RAW:

All rays produced by Scorching Ray spell, even though their attacks are resolved individually, are resolved simultaneously ( http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/s/scorching-ray ). Unless the caster has a solid idea that single ray will drop his target, it'd be reasonable to assume he'd focus his attacks on one enemy to maximize odds of a kill, don'tchathink?

Effect would suck hard if it was 1d4-3...

I think you missed the part where -3 is offset by a +1 from Orange Prism itself :D

The description implies there's a drawback to the item - the possibility of reducing your CL below minimum needed to cast a spell. But D4-2+1 gives you CL modifier range of 0-3, so no penalty possible.

I've just been poking around the Seekers of Secrets, reading on interactions and resonance of Ioun stones in Wayfinders, when I stumbled upon a bit of a discrepancy. To quote:

Orange prism: Every time the bearer casts a spell, roll 1d4–2 and add this (and the +1 caster level granted by the normal power of the ioun stone) to his caster level. If this modified caster level is too low to cast the spell, the spell fails and is lost.

So, let me get this straight; Orange Prism adds +1CL, static. In addition, when embedded in a Wayfinder, it modifies caster's CL by 1D4-2 whenever he casts a spell. Combining 1D4-2 from Resonance with +1 static from stone itself, we get to 1D4-1; so the lowest possible modifier to CL when casting a spell is +0 - evidently not enough to reduce caster level below that needed to cast a spell - or am I missing something?

I'm guessing modifier should be 1D4-3, giving the stone a final range of CL modifiers from -1 to +2, rather than +0 - +3, OR the Orange Prism's static +1 CL should apply ONLY if resonance's change to CL doesn't drop the CL below the minimum needed to cast (so, a 3rd lvl wizard casting 2nd level spell would get that +1CL from Orange Prism only as long as he didn't roll a 1 on that 1D4 beforehand?)

Nitpicky Andro is nitpicky early in the morning.

So, I have a player who wants to slap some light armor - most likely silken cermonial to avoid spell fail chance - on her sorcerer. Of course, she's disinclined to burn a feat on light armor proficiency.

Now, scouring the rules, this is the only thing I found on armor non-proficiency drawbacks:

Nonproficient with Armor Worn: A character who wears armor and/or uses a shield with which he is not proficient takes the armor's (and/or shield's) armor check penalty on attack rolls as well as on all Dex- and Str-based ability and skill checks. The penalty for non-proficiency with armor stacks with the penalty for shields.

If I am reading that right, that'd mean there's no reason for any wizard or sorcerer not to throw on some armored kilt, haramaki or silken ceremonial armor for some free AC, especially on the lower levels when enchated robes are not yet a concern.

Am I missing something?

Ehh, the problem with spell specialization is that, duration aside, things really don't scale with CL with most Enchantment spells :/ When talking Evocation or Conjuration, for example, there are so many spells worth the Specialization it's crazy. Enchantment, not so much. I guess Hideous Laughter may be worth it...

Yes. Situational stats apply if said situation is in place.

edit: Spell Focus does not improve caster level though. It only improves the DC of the spell

Thanks! Re: Spell Focus, I realized that halfway through writing post, forgot yo take it out of title :)

Hey guys,

a quick rules question: Concetration modifier is sum of Caster Level and Casting Stat; do modifiers to caster levels enter into that equation? I.e. a 1st level character with Int of 18 has a +5 to Concetrate; does that increase to +6 when casting spells from a certain school, if he has an ability or trait that increases his CL for that spell school by 1?

Hey guys,

I'm helping a player of mine build a enchantment-based Sorcerer and I got a bit stuck on the choice of a feat; She already has Spell Focus : Enchantment, and I was hoping to set her up with a "follow-up" feat but while I'm finding a lot of flavorful feats based on Spell Focus - Conjuration and Necromancy, Threnodic Spell seems to be only one for Enchantment, and that's really not what we're looking for.

This is a fairly relaxed game, so there's no need for agressive min-maxing (And I'd prefer to avoid simple number-bonus feats like Greater Spell Focus in favor of flavor) but I'd certainly appreciate suggestions (homebrewed / 3.x feats are acceptable, on my case-to-case judgement.)

Thanks in advance!

Awesome stuff, Tinalles, thanks a lot!

Constitution's HP bonus is "per hit die" - any effect that affects Constitution will increase/decrease target's HP per die (i.e. reducing a 25HD creature's Con by 4 will, effectively, drop its HP by 50).

In case of magical item, the situation is the same. If a lvl 7 character with Con11 puts on a Belt of Con +2 (Con 13) he will add 7HP to his max. When he gains 8th level and increases his Con to 12 (14 with Belt), he'll gain total of 9 bonus HP - 8 for his increased natural Con of 12, and 1 for the 8th HD of the +1 bonus from belt. (Huh, that's some odd phrasing, I should go to bed.)

As far as Headband of Vast Intelligence and skillpoints go, things are slightly different; to quote RAW:

A headband of vast intelligence has one skill associated with it per +2 bonus it grants. After being worn for 24 hours, the headband grants a number of skill ranks in those skills equal to the wearer's total Hit Dice. These ranks do not stack with the ranks a creature already possesses. These skills are chosen when the headband is created. If no skill is listed, the headband is assumed to grant skill ranks in randomly determined Knowledge skills.

So, if your 5th lvl Fighter with Knowledge Arcana 0, Knowledge Nature 3 and Knowledge Dungeoneering 6 finds Headband of Vast Intellect +6 that "includes" Knowledge Arcana, Nature and Dungeoneering, he will gain 5 ranks of Kn: Arcana and 2 ranks of Kn: Nature, putting them both at his HD limit of 5; his Kn: Dungeoneering will not be affected, since it is already at his HD maximum, nor will he get to use the "leftover" skillpoints elsewhere. When he gains next level, all 3 skills will increase by 1 rank.

I hope that helps :)

Do keep in mind that "gold piece" in most RPGs, including Pathfinder, is a unit of value, not unit of currency. Since historically precious metal coins derived their value from the value of the metal itself (for most part), debate on the weight of an actual gold coin is moot - Osirian Gold Scarab may be worth 3gp, while Ustalavic Gold Bit may be worth 1/2gp, with former most likely weighing about 6 times more than the latter.

The rule of 50gp/lb is what gives you value of gold - a pound of gold is worth 50gp. That may turn out to be roughly 17 Osirian Scarabs, or 100 Ustalavic Bits, but in the end value originates from the mass of gold, not the imprint or origin of the coin itself. Likewise, in Osirion a merchant may name price for a 30gold dagger as 10 Scarabs, while in Ustalav innkeep will expect one Bit for a 5sp/night room and dinner.

* In real world, various precious metal coins' values were affected by origins as well, mainly due to the fact some states may have been minting less than pure coins; for example Byzantine gold coins, solidi, were valued for being purer in gold than others; in fact, they contributed to the fairly widespread use of term Bezant in medieval Europe for any gold coin, particularly foreign ones. On the other end, german Rheingulden's gold content kept dropping (from original 98% gold to as low as 77%) which no doubt meant that same weight of Rheinguldens was commonly valued lower than Byzantine Solidi.

** Additionally, value of various gold coins was affected by exchange rates - it was common for local merchants and folk in a town or state to accept preferably or exclusively local coinage; a merchant or traveler from afar with foreign currency had to go to a banker to exchange it. At that point, value of his gold became affected by banker's provision rate, as well as relations between the country issuing the coin and locals, etc etc.

Another question: When looking for animals to Wild Shape into, are Dire animals also options, or does Beast Shape allow only "base" forms?

Hi everyone,
I'm running a game with a wildshape-happy druid, and I wanted to make sure I'm getting this right.

Druid's Wild Shape emulates Beast Shape series of spells ( http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/b/beast-shape ), as I understand it. Beast Shape suggests that caster retains his original stats, adjusting Str/Dex and Natural Armor based on size, and adding various special senses, movement modes, special attacks etc based on the animal's own abilities. Here are couple of the things I'm unclear on:

1) Movement:

If the form you assume has any of the following abilities, you gain the listed ability: climb 30 feet, fly 30 feet (average maneuverability), swim 30 feet (Beast Shape I); If the form you assume has any of the following abilities, you gain the listed ability: climb 60 feet, fly 60 feet (good maneuverability), swim 60 feet (Beast Shape II) etc

Does that mean that, if Beast whose shape is being taken has, i.e. climb or fly mode -at any speed- you get it at 30' at Beast Shape I / 60' at Beast Shape II, or is that "up to 30/60" - so a Beast Shape II into a creature with Climb 20' wouldn't give caster Climb 60' ? More simply put, which movement stat block takes precedence, animal's own or Beast Shape spell's? My take is that Druid would get the movement mode -up to- base form's speed, but not above it?

2) Attacks:

If the form you assume has any of the following abilities, you gain the listed ability: <snip> grab, pounce, and trip. (Beast Shape II)

This part seems clear to me - if animal form has a special attack, and Beast Shape spell lists it, you get it. However, Beast Shape doesn't say anything about actual natural attacks; am I right in assuming shapeshifter gets the standard array of natural attacks of the form he attains? I.e. Would a Druid using Wild Shape (Beast Shape II) to turn into a Lion, in addition to gaining Pounce, gain Bite (1D8) and 2 Claws (1D4) ?

In addition, related to Wild Shape : If a Druid can shapeshift into a beast with certain abilities, do those count as qualifier for certain monster feats? Here's my read on it:

Druid can shapeshift into a beast with Natural Armor. That qualifies Druid to take Improved Natural Armor, though the feat is only active when Druid is wildshaped into a creature with natural armor score.

Examples of feats impacted by above: Flyby Attack, Hover, Imp. Natural Armor, Imp. Natural Attack, Multiattack...

Thanks in advance for all the input and advice!

It loks to me like your base survivabiity is just fine; if i were you, I would be working on bolstering my spellcasting. Pearls of Power, Metamagic Rods and Staves would all go a long way towards adding firepower and flexibility to your character.

Also, I see your hand and wrist slots are empty. While there aren't that many choices for those slots, items like Bracelet of Second Chances or Raven Bracers are fun stuff (Raven Bracers in particular are sweet for a melee fighter with a potent melee weapon).

You could also upgrade Belt of Strength to Belt of Physical Might, or improve your Wisdom headbabd etc.

It would be easier to make suggestions if we knew more about your character.

Well, the benefit of the feat is actually that Cleric (or other character capable of Channeling) doesn't have to commit all his 5th level spell slots to Breaths of Life, but can rather do the "oh s#$!" response as required (especially since Breath of Life doesn't qualify for spontaneous casting).

Considering Cleric has to be 11th level to qualify for this feat, it's reasonable to assume Cleric likely has -at least- 6 Channel Energy uses a day, possibly as many as 10+. This gives him 2-3+ bonus 5th level spell slots if needed. That, by itself, is a major benefit.

Regarding range: touch, do notice Breath of Life says f cast upon a creature that has died within 1 round - I'll admit that kind of wording drives me bonkers but I'd assume (liberally) that means if Cleric's ally dies, Cleric (hopefully one of last in the initiative order) gets to his ally the same round, and uses Breath of Life the following round. I -Will- grant you that goes into the realm of RAI / freestyle interpretation, and may not be supported by RAW.

Benefit: As a full-round action that provokes attacks of opportunity, you can expend three uses of your channel energy class feature to restore a dead creature to life as if you had cast the breath of life spell (Core Rulebook 251).

Given the lack of any other qualifiers or specific descriptors, I'd say that, as written above, the feat basically allows you to spend three uses of channel energy to cast the Breath of Life spell, and follows all the guidelines of that spell - range of touch, 5D8+CL hit points cured if target creature died the previous round, incur one negative level for a day if raised etc.

Yeah. The fact that Large creatures with Reach weapons fail to threaten first 5' or 10' is one of things that provides somewhat of a balance check on things such as Ogres with polearms. It means that, if your non-reach melee boys get in close enough to the bad dude to hit him, he has to provoke AOOs to get back out to his polearm range, or drop polearm, or burn round for withdrawing. Sure, the reachless combatants will eat those AOOs while closing in - but they'd have similar problems with any polearm-wielding opponent.

Actually, per SRD:

Reach Weapons: A reach weapon is a melee weapon that allows its wielder to strike at targets that aren't adjacent to him. Most reach weapons double the wielder's natural reach, meaning that a typical Small or Medium wielder of such a weapon can attack a creature 10 feet away, but not a creature in an adjacent square. A typical Large character wielding a reach weapon of the appropriate size can attack a creature 15 or 20 feet away, but not adjacent creatures or creatures up to 10 feet away.

Therefore, a large creature with a reach weapon does not threaten either at 5 ft range ( adjacent square) or at 10 ft ( next square out) but only 15-20 ft out - third and fourth ring of squares.

To return to the original question: both by basic definition of word "lunge" and by RAW (-increase reach-) i think there is no ambiguity or possibility that Lunge is meant to do anything other than add 5 ft to maximum reach of the weapon, rather than cover the blind spot.

if your GM is open to pre-PF 3.5 material, look up the "Short Haft" feat.

Terrain.

Line of sight obstacles will put a serious damper on the Gunslinger - no LOS, no attacks. If your BBEG is a high-mobility bloke waging a running fight among pillars and curtains or trees and bushes or whatever, he may easily be forcing your Gunslinger to reposition every round to clear his LOS, thus losing his full-round attacks. Maybe think about things such as fire or water VS gunpowder - a BBEG's lair that's partially submerged, for example, may get Gunslinger's powder wet, giving him a misfire chance on every shot...

Also keep in mind that both Gunslinger's and BBEG's buddies can potentially present obstacles to ranged attacks (see rules on cover etc).

If you are looking for more "arcane" solutions, there's a plenty of spells that can help without being specifically Anti-Gunslinger - for example Burning Disarm, Black Tentacles, Fear etc :D

Lokie wrote:

I've been seeing allot of threads springing up about crossbows recently. With that in mind I thought it might be fun to have one thread devoted entirely to the use of crossbows for various purposes. This discussion should also include ammo or crossbow accessories. To start things off, let me post an idea I've been pondering that includes both a crossbow and variant crossbow bolts.

One idea that sprung during the playtest was the Mighty crossbow, where you could add your STR to the damage, much as it works for a composite bow. The cost would be way higher, as it is a simple weapon, in part, and the strength would be necessary for the loading.

DW

Aside the fact that it's really hard, even through pure theorycraft, to get the crossbow bolt to break a sound barrier, here's an amusing thought exercise for you:

All of forward momentum and speed crossbow bolt has, it received from the crossbow string that pushed it forward. That means that, if bolt was moving faster than sound, the string had to do it first. Which means that crossbow string broke the sound barrier - along with the accompanying deafening sonic boom and shockwave - something like 6-12" from the shooter's face :D

Well, now you're getting into a far more complex discussion. The part of the sword blade "embedded" in the hilt, commonly called tang, has historically been made more comfortable to grip through a wide variety of approaches. Using a "sheath" made of wood, ivory or other fairly lightweight, easy to work and durable materials was fairly common - but I'll readily agree with you that's nowhere enough for Wyroot's benefits to kick in.

To be reasonable, Wyroot's description specifies weapon has to be "made entirely of wood... or (have) a wooden haft" - this, to me, reads as "must be made of significant amount of wood" so, at least in my book, swords wouldn't work, containing fairly small quantity of wood; neither would whips, as the wooden handle is both small and rather far from the striking areas of the weapon.

Generally, haft and hilt are not synonimous words when it comes to weapon anatomy. A haft usually refers to pole-like, usually wooden weapon "body" commonly found on either polearms or weapons eith striking heads such as axes, maces or hammers. A hilt, on the other hand, is a weapon grip specifically positioned at or near te end of weapon, far from the 'business end' of the weapon, usually protected by a crossguard or the like. While some hafted weapons may have hilts, most do not.

Reading the discussion about staff magus floating around somewhere here made me go and research staff construction rules and, while they seem mostly straightforward, I'm slightly stumped by one small thing:

The materials cost is subsumed in the cost of creation: 400 gp × the level of the highest-level spell × the level of the caster...

and

The minimum caster level of a staff is 8th.

Does that mean that the minimal × CL value when factoring cost of a staff is × 8, or can it go lower? I.e. if there's a Staff that casts Cure Serious Wounds (as its highest level spell), is the minimal cost of that ability 3x5x400g or 3x8x400g (ignoring the discount for using multiple charges)?

Thanks for input!

~Andro

This has just occured to me - it perhaps illustrates the absurdity of the "revealing the results of a roll":

For a number of actions, rolling a 1 is always a failure and rolling a 20 is always a success; so if your enemy rolled a 20 on an attack, you couldn't (by above logic) force him to re-roll since success has already been revealed (likewise for ally rolling a 1)? :)

I guess that would depend on if "the results of the roll" mean success vs failure or the "results of the roll" meant the literal number on the die.

Basically- does the PC have to say they want to use the ability before the DM rolls the die or can they see the number (but not the result) and then decide.

-S

I see where you're coming from, but I won't try to debate that, as it leads to an argument on semantics - namely, meaning of word "result".

In my mind, result of a roll is a number on a die, whereas outcome of a roll is success or failure - but I will allow it's possible that's not what ability dev intended when ability was written.

Something you're missing:

Missfortune revelation does not give you ability to "grant rerolls" - it is very clear in its description that you are forcing a reroll -before- the result of original roll is revealed, and forcing the target to use result of second roll, regardless of which roll is higher or lower. Therefore, you cannot use it in response to your ally rolling low or foe rolling high - you must gamble.

I do believe that renders the rest of discussion moot, as you cannot use this revelation in a manner you are trying to.

Also, I've been trying to find the "Tomb-Tainted Soul" (including alternate spellings, dropping hypens etc) feat on SRD, but with no luck; where is this Feat from?

Thanks!

Do notice that, contrary to the simplest common sense interpretation, Channel Energy comes with a target toggle; when you're channeling, you're affecting either undead, or living, but not both. To quote:

"Channeling energy causes a burst that affects all creatures of one type (either undead or living) in a 30-foot radius centered on the cleric."

So an evil cleric channeling negative energy to heal his undead minions -will not- simultaneously deal damage to any living beings in his 30' burst, nor will a good cleric channeling positive energy to blast the undead simultaneously heal his allies.

(I know this is tangential to your original question, but given the phrasing of part of your question, I thought it may be a useful clarification.)

Well, in the nutshell:

From "Skeleton template" entry:

Special Qualities: A skeleton loses most special qualities of the base creature. It retains any extraordinary special qualities that improve its melee or ranged attacks.

From "Ankylosaurus" entry:

Stun (Ex)

The ankylosaurus's tail can deliver a powerful, stunning blow. A creature struck by this attack must make a DC 23 Fortitude save or be dazed for 1 round. If the strike is a critical hit and the target fails its save, it is instead stunned for 1d4 rounds. The save DC is Strength-based.

Also, notice that Owlbear Skeleton retains its Grab special ability.

I suspect that's it for RAW - I couldn't find anything better. RAI, I'd look at it this way: Ankylosaur's stun is function of a tail slam - something skeletal forms would be capable of performing. On the other hand, Imp's poison requires a poison sac and a gland, both of which would be absent from the skeletal form, so they'd be lost.

Not sure my reply is particularly helpful, but....

Based on the fact that it has "Obscuring Mist" as prerequisite, and produces effect similar to Obscuring Mist, and item itself is CL3, I'd treat it as CL3 Obscuring Mist, for duration of (up to) 3 minutes (unless dispersed/countered prematurely)

~Andro

Gilman the Dog wrote:

That's what you want? The personal attention of the devs?

I'd prefer they continue working on developing new products than answer questions other board members have already covered quite nicely.

They haven't covered it. Try reading the spell and the section on Polymorph.

I'd rather the game be cleaned up than to keep piling on questionable rules.

I see; you actually expect devs to go through the full spell list and clarify and specify every possible circumstance or situation involving each spell? Because that'd be quite a tome. With no intent to offend (though I understand this may sound offensive, and for that I apologise), if you need an official rule clarification for things like these instead of just using your common sense and/or immagination, sandboxy roleplaying games may not be for you...

Pack tactics.

You don't really have to add the NPC or PC class levels to them (which would, by the way, affect the CR quite significantly, depending on number of "leveled" critters you use). All you have to do is "think like a pack of goblins". Here are several tactics that my goblins commonly use:

Hit and Run: They will show up, let loose a volley of arrows, bolts or whatever other projectiles they have, then run away.

Cannon Fodder: Groups of goblins will charge in, assume either defensive posture or even go full defense and delay / corner PCs while other Goblins pepper them with ranged attacks, reach attacks with polearms, alchemists fires etc.

Surgical Strike: Goblin gangs will team up to swarm what look like most vulnerable (non-armored, lightly armed) party members, jointly tackle, grapple and bring them down, then stick 'em full of daggerholes.

Traps, Traps Everywhere: If goblins are playing on the home field, they're bound to use the home field advantage. From installing every possible type of trap they can think of to using pre-existing terrain features such as dense overgrowth, low ceilings, slippery or difficult terrain etc, if it's an option, they'll use it.

...and then you start combining the above. They will taunt and provoke your party to pursue them - through traps and movement-hindering terrain, all the while hitting the party's flanks with volleys of ranged attacks. Then they'll use the cannon fodder to ensure that PCs stay in one place until an inricate, "takes time to go off" trap such as landslide or a cage of rabid beasts goes off. Then, while your fighters are busy dealing with those rabid wombats, they'll sneak up on the party's back and quickly take down the wizard.

If you want to get worse, go with above and start adding in PC class levels; in combination with above, even a 1st level caster can wreak havoc with a couple of Greases, Obscuring Mists or illusions; an alchemist will make party wish GM was dead and boy, wait 'till you see their faces when they get hit by a couple of raging goblin barbarians.

A well-planned and executed attack by a large group of low-CR intelligent monsters could easily be one of biggest nightmares for any group, regardless of CR. Sure, there'll be no massive blows that leave party's AC 25, 75 HP fighter dead in the dust, but the engagement will whittle away at the party, forcing them to waste spells and other resources, bleeding them dry very gradually.

I think root cause of your question (as well as many others) is the tendency of people to cling to the letter of the rulebooks like a drunk clings to a fence, forgetting that these are roleplaying games we play, built to encourage imagination. Rules are here to be a crutch, not a railroad.

What's in a class name? Not much - at least there shouldn't be. Not every barbarian has to be a hulking muscled brute clad in fur loincloth looking to get drunk and start another barfight. He could just as well be a generally nice guy who occasionally has anger management issues - or he could even be played as sort of a Dr. Jeckyll/Mr. Hyde dude, for example. The rules are here to tell you how the game mechanics relating to your character work, not how your character looks like and behaves.

In the same vein, a monk? In my mind, monk is a generally martial character characterized by fighting skills stemming from immense self-discipline and life devoted to practice and perfection, usually coupled with a degree of asketicism (often unintentional, coming from things like "I am practicing, I don't have time to drink and carouse" attitude).

Especially with the aid of archetypes, this kind of character modelling is easier and easier to do: Robin Hood could easily be a Zen Archer. Obi Wan-Kenobi could be a Sensei. Zangief could be a Tetori and so on. Admittedly, due to RAW restrictions of monks to certain weapon types, some creativity and a degree of difficulty are present, depending on what you do. Coming up with an asketic swordmaster may require some negotiating with the GM for monk abilities to work with non-monk weapons, etc, but (In My Very Humble Opinion) RAW should not be rigid like a rebar rod to the point where it hurts the RP.

In the general sense of "How do you deal with Monks being inherently asian-flavored", answer is generally "Use your imagination." Perhaps your character is a life-long pilgrim, sworn to poverty and aiding of other pilgrims; spending his life on the road he has learned to defend himself with unarmed techniques and makeshift weapons and farm implements (which you can re-skin several monk weapons into). Or he's a warrior tired of killing, who embraced the non-lethal ways of dealing with his opponents through evasion and control (combat maneuvers, sort of like judo). Or maybe he's a failed wizard whose mind just wouldn't grasp the structure of arcane magic, but who still innately taps magical flows to enhance his luck in fisticuffs.

I hope this wasn't too long-winded or preachy - it's a Roleplaying game; you own it, you run with it! :)

~Andro

Several spells to consider:

Barkskin (Druid 2) Will give you a natural AC bonus, thus stacking with armor, shield, or enchantment/deflection AC bonuses.

Mage Armor (Wiz/Sorc 1) will give you +4 armor AC, replacing your armor with weight-less one, if you have someone to cast it on you.

I agree, at 500g, Leaf Armor is a bit steep, though important question is, what kind of druid are you playing?

If you're going feral, armor will need some enchants on it anyway to benefit you in wildshape; if you're dominantly a caster, utilizing a Barkskin when extra protection is necessary and using something lightweight, like Lamellar Cuirass (eastern) as a defensive baseline (notice Barkskin and Lamellar Cuirass would stack).

Considering that Lamellar Cuirass gives you 1 less AC than Leaf, at 8lbs compared to 20lbs, and at 15gp compared to 500gp, it means you could pack a Lamellar Cuirass -and- a Heavy Darkwood shield to net you 1 AC more than Leaf, and still save over 200 gold and about 40% encumburance compared.

To quantify:

Lamellar Cuirass + Darkwood Heavy Shield: 290g; +4AC +4Dex ACP 0; 13lbs
Leaf Armor: 500g, +3AC +5Dex ACP 0; 20lbs

(I believe armor/shield weights get halved for small creatures, so that'd be 6-7lbs and 10lbs, comparatively.)