Osprey71's page

I think my Skull & Shackles character is very non-stereotypical and blends into the campaign very nicely.

He is an ex-slave of Mwangi descent and is a voodoo witchdoctor of sorts. Witch with the hedgewitch archetype with a monkey familiar. He first started as a cook and is now the ships surgeon. He has cannibalistic tendencies so has made for some great roleplaying when it comes to preparing meals, with the crew not quite sure what is in that stew they are eating.

I based the character of this image I found of a witchdoctor.

I took the prehensile hair hex, just imagine those dreads coming to life and grappling you.

Oh, and here is a link to the custom mini I made for him.

I just made it so the new character was not a Scion. If they proove themselves to be a true ally to Ameiko and the box is opened at a later date I may give them the vision and make them a Scion as well.

Osprey71 wrote:

Has anyone ever found a solid ruling on if flying with the flight hex takes an action?

The wording of several hexes that are broken in to 1-minute increments does seem to suggest that it might take no action to use that ability.
....
Tongues

Rules wrote:

A witch with this hex can understand any spoken language for a number of minutes per day equal to her level, as comprehend languages.

No where in those descriptions does it mention "using" the hex. We know using a hex is normally a standard action. But these wordings seem to suggest you just have that ability available when needed for a limited portion of time during any given day that no use of the hex is required to do so.

The hex is a standard action since it has to be activated. In order for you to break a rule a specific exception such as "this ability does can be used as a free action" needs to be stated. The witch does not have "supernatural flight". It has a supernatual ability which grants flight when it is activated.

But some hexes give you abilities just simply by having the hex. Yes, typically those are Ex abilities not Su. But the wording of them doesn't depict a usage of the hex like most others do or imply by being applied to a target. Tongues is a great example, it says "A witch with this hex can understand any spoken language". It simply says, if you have this hex you can understand any spoken language. It does not say, using this hex allows you to understand any spoken language.

Same with flight. "At 5th level, she can fly ..." not worded the same as other aspects of the hex "At 1st level, the witch can use feather fall...", " At 3rd level, she can cast levitate ..."

I would say, to truly split it in half would be a remarkable thing and it would have to dropped to more than 1/2 its max hit points in the negative. So it would have to be at -263 hit points anything less and the tissue is merely healing enough to rejoin the two halves. At the point that it is separated, one of the halves dies and the other regrows its missing half at the rate of 40 hp per round unless you continue to do damage to it. Once it becomes conscious it has regrown enough to be fully functional. If you keep doing damage until it is at -525 hp, you have essentially disintegrated it, but it will still regenerate from the largest pile of pulp, re-attaching to any available tissue or just re-growing it as necessary.

Has anyone ever found a solid ruling on if flying with the flight hex takes an action?

The wording of several hexes that are broken in to 1-minute increments does seem to suggest that it might take no action to use that ability.

Flight - the fly portion

At 5th level, she can fly, as per the spell, for a number of minutes per day equal to her level

Prehensile Hair

The witch can manipulate her hair a number of minutes each day equal to her level; these minutes do not need to be consecutive, but must be spent in 1-minute increments.

Tongues

A witch with this hex can understand any spoken language for a number of minutes per day equal to her level, as comprehend languages.

No where in those descriptions does it mention "using" the hex. We know using a hex is normally a standard action. But these wordings seem to suggest you just have that ability available when needed for a limited portion of time during any given day that no use of the hex is required to do so.

It is in the Core Rulebook under Common Terms "Stacking". Pg. 13.

Stacking refers to the act of adding together bonuses or penalties that apply to one particular check or statistic. Generally speaking, most bonuses of the same type do not stack. Instead, only the highest bonus applies. Most penalties do stack, meaning that their values are added together. Penalties and bonuses generally stack with one another, meaning that the penalties might negate or exceed part or all of the bonuses, and vice versa.

That's really nice, a lot of work putting that together. I'm past that point in my adventure but I think I'll link it to my players so they can get a refresher.

The link was a bit hard for me to find in your post since it was attached to such a small word, I would recommend making a more obvious link, you may have gotten more feedback.

I'll copy a link to it here:

• Fallyrion Dunegrién's Visions of Jade (youtube)

That's pretty awesome. Thanks for sharing! Glad you guys enjoyed it.

Thanks, we've really been enjoying the adventure path. I also did a terrain piece for Vegsundvaag's Lair that I just posted in another thread under Jade Regent, "Jade Regent Terrain".

I still use the caravan combat system but any time the group encounters something new I like to handle it as a normal encounter. After the PCs have encountered a certain situation or type of creature, I just use the caravan combat system, it speeds things up and minimizes repetition. Dead Man's Dome seemed like an encounter that needed more embellishment, I did borrow some ideas from earlier posts in this thread. Leading up to it I used the caravan encounter system to determine the starting conditions of the battle at Dead Man's Dome.
My players were terrified at the prospect of fighting so many foes. But then found that they were quite capable at holding them at bay. It is nice to see how far a character has progressed. They were recalling how difficult a small group of skeletons were in the Brinestump Marsh and how they could now take out several times that number in a single round of combat.

I built a few terrain pieces for Jade Regent and was wondering if anyone else had done the same.

My 1st was Vegsundvaag's lair. The imagery of a dragons lair set in the face of a glacial crevasse was too tempting so I Just had to do build it.
I posted a few albums on Google+ to a Warrgaming Terrain group:
Vegsundvaag's Lair Final
Vegsundvaag's Lair WIP

The 2nd was Dead Man's Dome, I just posted this in another thread but will copy here. I still need to get some better photos of this terrain, I mainly just have iPad photos from our play sessions:
Dead Man's Dome

Again, interested to see if anyone else has done some similar stuff. We just crossed the crown of the world so I have 3 more modules to play with, looking for some ideas.

I built a set-piece terrain for this encounter and ran it turn by turn with a horde of undead. It was overwhelming odds but I built in a mechanism for them to locate the site that the Dead Man fell and channel energy into an item that he possessed that would strengthen him and allow him to help protect the site and double the protective spells cast by the PCs. One of the PCs was 8 minutes into casting Symbol of Healing at the center of the site when the horde arrived, so the rest needed to hold off the Horde for 2 minutes by bolstering the defenses of the ruins and also find and empower the dead man. Doubling the effects of the Symbol of Healing was enough to defeat most of the undead that entered the ruins of the tower. I also added in that once the Dead Man was strengthened and he consecrated the site that the spirits, and their ancestors, of the people that he sacrificed himself for rose to help in the battle and stayed on to protect the site so that the Dead Man could finally rest.

Once the horde was dispersed they only had to deal with a boss creature that could make it by the defenses and once he was defeated the storm broke.

It ended up being one of the highlights of the entire module.

Here are some pics from the encounter:

Dead Man's Dome Encounter

We started the encounter before I finished the terrain, it took us 3 play sessions.

I never got around to posting the final images of this. It was a huge hit at the game. I have a couple of pics at the game and several mock-ups afterwards.

Final Vegsundvaag's Lair

Thanks.
For the rough layout, building up the layers, I used a long utility knife. The sculpting was done with a set of cutters from Hot Wire Foam Factory, mainly their Freehand Router which has a shape-able rigid wire. The router makes quick work of the sculpting process and creates a natural ice look with little effort.

For the floor I used the router, shaving off layers, and a sanding block to smooth it out.

I've always been a big fan of detailed battle maps and 3D terrain, but I had always used card stock.

I finally decided to try my hand at a full 3D sculpted terrain and since our group was just coming up to tackling a white dragon in its lair, I just couldn't resist.

Here is my progress so far:
Vegsundvaag's Lair Album

The sculpting work is over half complete, then it will be on to painting.

This has taken way longer than I anticipated and I'm finding I really need more tools to get the job done more efficiently. I've got about 15 hours into the project so far.

Granted, I think this was a little ambitious for my first project.

Interested in feedback and suggestions.

I know this is an old discussion, I was just tickled to run across a link to the Sandpoint 3D images I made a while back. I planned on taking it much further but sadly that is about as far as I got.

Happy to see people are getting some use from them though.

Using Black Lotus Extract as an example, it is a contact poison with an onset time of 1 minute.

The rules mention that contact poisons can be used as injury poisons. Contact poisons generally have an onset time of 1 minute while injury poisons don't usually have an onset time.

So, would using Black Lotus Extract as an injury poison remove the onset time?

My logical interpretation says that contact poisons take longer since they enter your system through the touch of your skin where injury poisons act more quickly since they can enter your bloodstream. The rules, however, don't specifically address this.

The text in the diagram in page 194 doesn't match the written rules for cover. The text:

"#2. [..] The ogre has melee cover from her [Merisiel], but if it attacks her, Merisiel does not have cover from it, as the ogre has reach (so it figures attacks as if attacking with a ranged weapon)."
That's an error, as the the rule doesn't say that you use the ranged rules for cover if you have reach, but only if your enemy is not adjacent to you. So, Merisiek (#2) would have cover; and Kyra (#3) wouldn't.

"When making a melee attack against a target that isn’t adjacent to you (such as with a reach weapon), use the rules for determining cover from ranged attacks."

Sorry for digging up this older post from this thread but I tend to agree with angelroble. While brushing up on cover rules I came across this diagram and it seems to contradict the rules.

The Ogre is adjacent to Merisiel, therefore the Ogre should have to abide by the rule:
"When making a melee attack against an adjacent target, your target has cover if any line from any corner of your square to the target's square goes through a wall (including a low wall)."

The rules for Big Creatures and Cover, don't say anything about reach (and almost all big creatures have a natural reach of over 5ft):
"Any creature with a space larger than 5 feet (1 square) determines cover against melee attacks slightly differently than smaller creatures do. Such a creature can choose any square that it occupies to determine if an opponent has cover against its melee attacks. Similarly, when making a melee attack against such a creature, you can pick any of the squares it occupies to determine if it has cover against you."

It's not like the Ogre is attacking with a reach weapon, just it's natural reach. And just because you are choosing a different square to determine cover doesn't disregard the fact that the target is adjacent. Why would a large creature have an advantage against an adjacent creature on a corner? A corner is still a corner no matter the scale of the creature. If anything, small creatures should benefit more from cover, not less. Large creatures have enough benefits from their reach as it is.

If the diagram is correct the rules need to be clarified further, there is no way I would have came to the conclusion in the diagram from the rules.

Osprey71 wrote:

Weird? If the attacker takes the time to tie up someone and succeeds then they are effectively pinned by the ropes. Remember, you get a -10 to tie someone up while grappling them so the DC of 20+CMB isn't uncalled for.

Yes, it's fair, I was thinking "weird" as "I can't imagine the situation".

If you have your legs bonded (and not bonded to some furniture), you aren't prone and you are alone, I would say that you can move (more or less slow) by small leaps. Uhm.. It would be a bit cartoonish anyway.

Oh, I see you were referring to being tied up and not prone. Well, like I mentioned above. I would allow the grappler to place the defendant prone, similar to a trip as long as they succeed in another grapple or pin attempt.

Also remember, a tied up "bound" creature, is helpless. Even if they could wiggle around to move, if they weren't tied to something. It should take them a full round action to move 5 feet. Once tied up, they are likely to fall prone anyways... unless tied in a way to keep their feet free for walking around.

EDIT: Removed bit about making an additional trip attempt.

Looks like there's general agreement on this.

What do you guys think about the character that gets bonded to himself with a rope and left alone (the grappler leaves him and attacks another foe), if i'm reading it right the bonded guy is pinned and can't move (even with some penalty). Weird?

Weird? If the attacker takes the time to tie up someone and succeeds then they are effectively pinned by the ropes. Remember, you get a -10 to tie someone up while grappling them so the DC of 20+CMB isn't uncalled for.

I don't believe either grappled or pinned implies prone. So you could effectively pin someone while standing. The grappler however should be able to move himself and his opponent prone by succeeding a grapple check after the initial one. It is unclear if this should be an action in itself, so should be up to the DM. I would say that you could move someone prone as part of a pin, or as part of a grapple check made to maintain control.

Is it still valid for use in the Pathfinder game, or do I need to make any changes due to differences in the D&D 3.5/Pathfinder rules?

That calculator won't really work with pathfinder. They've really simplified it to the point of not needing a tool to help you.

All you really need is Tables 12-1 and 12-2. Rewarding XP is as simple as dividing the total between all party members.

My sorcerer will soon be leveling up, and plans on taking Rope trick as his first 2nd level spell. Would I be able to do this?

At the beginning of combat, cast Rope Trick on a 10 ft. rope, climb up. Next round, lean out of the Rope Trick, cast something, lean back in.

I would say it is a move action to get into a position to cast a spell through the opening, since spells cannot be cast across the opening you would have to be hanging out of the opening.

This means you wouldn't be able to lean out, cast, and lean back in in the same round since that would be 3 actions total.

Something I missed in the fine print for continuous use. You have to multiply by the duration of the original spell. For 10 mins/level you multiply by 1.5, so your 90,000gp turns into 135,000 gp.

Command word, however, does not have that limitation... and makes a lot of sense for a compass. "Show me the path home."
It would then act for the duration of the spell, as if it were cast.

Then you just have Spell Level x Caster Level x 1800, and if you bump the spell level down a notch you get: 81,000

You could also limit it to 3 times a day or such, taking it down to 48,600 gp

Look at some other items that work similarly... Like a Gem of Seeing and a Lamp of Revealing.

They seem to just use the Spell Level x Caster level x 2000. The compass would be use activated, you have to hold it in your hand to use it, so it wouldn't really count as not taking an item slot.

With that, I come up with 132,000 gp. But you are limiting the use of the spell it is based off of. The spell does not require that you've been to the destination it is guiding you to. I would lower the level of the spell in that case. Even if you lowered it one level that puts your price at around 90,000 gp.

And based on Osprey71's comments, it would appear that reach + combat reflexes + Improved Trip = Epic win.

Oops, I got some 3.5 in my pathfinder. Improved Trip does not grant a free attack. Another sneaky little gotcha.

I just recently switched to pathfinder, looks like I'll need Greater Trip to get close to the 3.5 Improved Trip... It was pretty powerful.

This question seems resolved, I just wanted to chime in.

I have a fighter1/wizard8 that uses a Guisarme, it works really well for him. Also has Improved Trip and Combat Reflexes.

This means, if the trip is successful you get a free attack at them. Also if they try to stand, you get another attack (although you can't trip them with that one).

It is a great way to slow down the enemy from ganking the wizard. I once had 3 enemies rush me, tripped them all. Then on my turn, back up and fireball them.

And, like mentioned above, being a wizard I can cast enlarge on myself to get even more reach... combine that with cat's grace and you have enough attacks of opportunity to keep a small army on their backs.

I think we should take a look at Blindsense and BlindSight. Blindsense should allow an AoO with a 50% miss chance, Blindsight would allow an AoO and normal vision would not allow an AoO at all due only to movement.

Blindsense should not allow AoO's. You can't make an attack of opportunity against a creature you cannot see. Blindsense only allows you to locate the square a creature is in, not see it, and still has the same miss chance, and other penalties, as any other blind creature.

Blindsight, however, allows you to maneuver and fight as well as a sighted creature. It would get an AoO.

Sure, weapons and armor don't automatically re-size, but does anyone know of a spell/effect that lets you re-size them? 4th Ed. has that effect automatically built into the "Enchant Item" ritual, I know. I hate to suggest that Pathfinder take a page from 4th Ed's playbook, but I know that my halfling fighter is going to be very sad when his party comes across that medium-size +2 Flaming longsword...

The Magic Item Compendium from Wizards has a "Sizing" enhancement that can be added to weapons, not sure about armor. It costs about 4000 gp and doesn't affect the weapon bonus.

The effect allows you to re-size the weapon to any other size via command word. Works great for storing reach weapons ;)

I agree with others, keep alignment and all other mental abilities. Remove the racial modifiers to STR, DEX amd CON and add the new ones as per the spell description.

I recently had my 9th level human male wizard die and reincarnated as a female elf. I was a bit miffed about the sex change at first (DM rolled 50-50) but with a bit of roleplay it worked out quite well.

The spell says "A reincarnated creature recalls the majority of its former life and form.". I opted to play this in a way that the new body felt as if it were born this way, it still retained the memories of the previous person, although I roleplayed a transitional period of a few days as the memories slowly took root. This alleviated any issues of my characters sexuality, since this body did not feel foreign to her.

Along with the Alignment issue comes learned racial abilities. In my case, an additional feat at level 1 and an elf gets familiarity with certain weapons. None of that effects your character when you reincarnate either, my wizard doesn't loose a feat and suddenly know how to wield a longbow. Also, he doesn't suddenly start speaking elvish. Any learned ability or behavioral trait stays the same when reincarnated.

In all, it was a total benefit to my character, he/she now gets to live much longer and got the benefits of starting life as a human. Reincarnate is a really fun spell, I would use it again.

EDIT: My attitude may have been different if the result were Goblin or Kobold ;) I was really rooting for bugbear though.

...

And since everyone is -4 to hit, but everyone is also -4 AC, it really means nobody is penalized (or more accurately, everyone is equally penalized) so there is really no net effect of all this squeezing.
...

As long as all opponents suffer the same penalties yes, it probably means you can ignore the penalties.

Of course if there is a halfling or a gnome in the party that might change things, you can move through the space of another creature that is three size categories different than you, so they wouldn't be hampered at all.

Though anyone making any movements, even 5' steps, should be generating attacks of opportunity. That said though, it is questionable weather a small creature would provoke an AoO from a 5ft step while inside the space of a larger creature, 5ft step does say "never provokes an Attacks of Opportunity". Though anyone else who attempt to move at all, should have hampered movement and not be able to make a 5ft step, requiring a move action to move any distance.

Square Occupied by Creature Three Sizes Larger or Smaller: Any creature can move through a square occupied by a creature three size categories larger than itself.

A big creature can move through a square occupied by a creature three size categories smaller than it is. Creatures moving through squares occupied by other creatures provoke attacks of opportunity from those creatures.

Under what circumstances would a paladin cast *virtue* rather than *cure light wounds*?

What am I missing?

Ha! yeah, it works as a 0-level spell, but as a 1st level spell it is pretty useless, especially for a 4th level character.

As for the equation, you should be careful about using terms like "exact" and "proper". My function was "exact" but what specifically is "proper" should be in the rule books, and there seems to be some debate on that.

Yes, I should know better than using terms like that ;)

Just as you don't have to move forward then move right to move diagonally rightforward, you can take a diagonal directly upforwardright, rather than rightforward then straight up.

To whit you are moving through just 1 square, not 2.

Likewise traveling along THAT diagonal you would not have to pay more than 2 squares for entering any 1 square (assuming perfect flight here), right?

You would pay 1 square then 2 squares, and rinse repeat as you moved diagonally.

Or do you feel that you should pay 3 squares for entering that square?

-James

Yes, 3.

If you were measuring diagonally forward left and upward it would be like so:

1,1,1 = 1 + 0 + 0 = 1
2,2,2 = 2 + 1 + 1 = 4
3,3,3 = 3 + 1 + 1 = 5
4,4,4 = 4 + 2 + 2 = 8

So every other double diagonal square counts as 3 instead of 1. Since every other normal diagonal counts as +1 square and you are adding an additional diagonal move for an additional +1.

Osprey71 wrote:

Don't drop the third one, that's not a true distance, you are only calculating in 2 dimensions.

Actually this is the distance in D&D rules. It is certainly not the real world euclidean distance, but c'est la vie.

When you look to something that is adjacent but diagonal to you in all 3 dimensions it is still 5' away from you. It's distance does not increase for being raised up 5' vertically even though the euclidean distance does increase.

That's 3.X D&D and pathfinder didn't change it. 4e changed it even more simply (or dumbed down if you prefer) but again c'est la vie.

-James

Yes, if it is adjacent in all three dimensions then I agree, it is only 5 feet away no matter what, but that works with the formula I gave, as long as you are rounding down before adding them up, which you should do (I should have specified that).

That would be:
1 + floor(1/2) + floor(1/2) = 1

drop all fractions before adding.

but you still have to account for all three dimensions to get an accurate range in game terms. It specifies that every other square counts as 2 squares of movement, it doesn't limit that to the 3rd dimension.

Osprey71 wrote:

Don't drop the third one, that's not a true distance, you are only calculating in 2 dimensions.

Actually, any Line segment is only 2-dimensions.

Actually, A line segment is only 1 dimensional... length is a single dimension. But to calculate that length in 3D space you can't just simply ignore the the 3rd positional coordinate, just like you can't ignore the 2nd coordinate (unless you are playing 4e).

The charts are probably correct, but you must 1st calculate your 2d position normally, taking in both the X and Y coordinates. The chart then tells you the lookup based on 3rd dimension, Z.

Osprey71 wrote:

The exact, proper, 3D formula is:

Highest Dimension + 1/2 2nd + 1/2 3rd.

SNIP

I've mapped this out on a computer and it is exact.

That is neither the "exact" nor "proper" formula.

The formula is:

Distance = SQRT ( Height^2 + ( Over^2 + Across^2 ) )

Basically, it's a nested pair of Pythagorean calculations.

R.

Do you use Pythagorean calculations to find distances in 2d using the battlemap? That's not how the RAW defines it.

Have you ever seen a 3D representation of a fireball using 5' cubes? I'm having trouble googling it at the moment, but I've compared my calculations with those volumes and the are identical.

So, in terms of the game, it is exact, and also very simple. If you prefer using a chart, I'm sure those are very effective as well (though I haven't tested it against the formula).

I'd say: Yes and Yes.

I have an amazingly cogent argument that would definitely convince even the the most skeptical, but ....

:)

You mean like the RAW?

Touch Attacks

Some attacks completely disregard armor, including shields and natural armor—the aggressor need only touch a foe for such an attack to take full effect. In these cases, the attacker makes a touch attack roll (either ranged or melee). When you are the target of a touch attack, your AC doesn't include any armor bonus, shield bonus, or natural armor bonus. All other modifiers, such as your size modifier, Dexterity modifier, and deflection bonus (if any) apply normally. Some creatures have the ability to make incorporeal touch attacks. These attacks bypass solid objects, such as armor and shields, by passing through them. Incorporeal touch attacks work similarly to normal touch attacks except that they also ignore cover bonuses. Incorporeal touch attacks do not ignore armor bonuses granted by force effects, such as mage armor and bracers of armor.

I was going to post this originally but when the OP asked for yes/no answers only, and no quotes from the PRD, I didn't. But really, how clear could it be?

So, the OP asked:

Does Mage Armor provide protection from all touch attacks? (Yes/No)

Does Shield provide protection from all touch attacks? (Yes/No)

No/No

Do they protect against some touch attacks?

Yes/Yes

In the case of Incorporeal Touch Attacks, both Shield and Mage Armor protect against them, since they are both force effects. The rules are specifying an exception in the case of the Incorporeal Touch Attacks, meaning that they are normally bypassed by other forms of Touch Attacks.

Figure out the distance for each dimension in squares (i.e. 4 squares forward, 2 squares left, 5 squares up) then take the longest and add half (round down) of the next longest, forget about the third it's for free.

Don't drop the third one, that's not a true distance, you are only calculating in 2 dimensions.

The exact, proper, 3D formula is:

Highest Dimension + 1/2 2nd + 1/2 3rd.

So, given the example of 4, 2, 5

5 + 4/2 + 2/2 = 8

I've mapped this out on a computer and it is exact.

This is for determining ranges and spell effect areas only though. I believe the rules for flying are different. You calculate your flat distance normally, then add any changes in altitude. At least that's how we play it. It makes it easier to determine rates of climb and such which can get really complicated during play otherwise.

As far as I know, nothing about this is any different than the 3.5 edition. So I quote the "Rules of the Game" from the Wizards Website.

Perhaps the most common form of total concealment is the invisibility spell. A regular invisibility effect is broken when you attack. If you begin your turn under such an effect and you're making multiple attacks, you'll be invisible only for the first attack and your opponent will be denied Dexterity bonus to Armor Class (if any) against that first attack.

Number of Sneak Attacks

Provided it is possible for you to make a sneak attack at all, you can make multiple sneak attacks when you use the full attack action. For example, if you have a higher initiative result at the beginning of an encounter, your foe is flat-footed and every attack you make is a sneak attack. The same is true if you flank your foe.

Anything that allows you to make extra attacks during the full attack action gets you extra sneak attacks as well: fighting with two weapons, the haste spell, and the monk's flurry of blows are the most common ways of getting extra attacks.

Remember the earlier note about invisibility effects, however. If you're relying on invisibility to set up a sneak attack, you'll only have the effect for the first attack you make during your turn. You'll still get all your extra attacks, but only the first will be a sneak attack. You don't have this problem if you're using a greaterinvisibility effect.

I think that clears it all up.

So, sneak attacks apply to all attacks made during a full attack action, if you qualify for a sneak attack at all.

Simple invisibility applies to only the 1st attack, for sneak attacks or otherwise.

EDIT: I guess Mynameisjake, beat me to the punch here, but at least these are quotes from a different source and provide additional information.

To make things even more complicated, the spell isn't limited to square shaped areas.

"A glyph can be placed to conform to any shape up to the limitations of your total square footage."

So at 5th level you could make a glyph 1'x25'?

If it is activated by any who pass, what happens if they are flying? How high does it affect?

For objects it makes sense, but for areas I think this spell needs to have a shapeable area similar to the illusion spells.

Since it says, "If the subject attacks directly, however, it immediately becomes visible along with all its gear.", the invisible condition is gone after the 1st attack. Any subsequent attacks are done normally, without the invisible condition modifiers.

Is there any kind of game rule for how fast you fall in a round?

This is the only Pathfinder rule I could find.

A character cannot cast a spell while falling, unless the fall is greater than 500 feet or the spell is an immediate action, such as feather fall.

This seems to suggest that you might fall 500', at least in the 1st round.

The v3.5 Main FAQ on the Wizards site breaks down falling:

• 1st second, 16 feet
  
• 2nd second, 48 feet
  
• 3rd second, 80 feet
  
• 4th second, 112 feet
  
• 5th second, 144 feet
  
• 6th second, 176 feet
  
• 1st Round Total = 576 feet
  
• 2nd Round & Every Round thereafter 1,200 feet
  

By the 2nd round you have reached terminal velocity, hence the 1,200 foot drop.

I would think you could use manacles instead of ropes with no modifications.

Manacles have a set DC for Escape Artists checks. I wouldn't think the material would make a difference for Escaping them, but would make a difference for breaking them, modifying the hit points and hardness as per the material.

Scenario 1: I'm a sorcerer and I ready an action to counterspell the enemy spellcaster. When he casts a spell, I use Spellcraft and find out that I don't have that spell known. Can I still use Dispel Magic to counter it if I've already made the Spellcraft check?

Scenario 2: Same as above, but I failed the Spellcraft check.

Scenario 1: Yes, you can use Dispel Magic to counter.

Scenario 2: Yes... I think. There is tricky and conflicting information.

Under counterspell it says "If the check succeeds, you correctly identify the opponent's spell and can attempt to counter it. If the check fails, you can't do either of these things."
I think this is referring specifically to trying to counter a spell with the same or opposing spell since immediately below under Dispel Magic as a Counterspell is says "You can usually use dispel magic to counterspell another spell being cast without needing to identify the spell being cast."
Since it doesn't need to be identified I would think you could attempt to use Dispel Magic still, under the readied action for counterspell even if the check failed.

Counterspell is rarely used in our games and hard to pull off, I wouldn't punish someone from trying Dispel just because they failed a check. I would hope that is the intention.

Regarding any rule, the specific rule trumps the general rule. Most creatures don't describe the space it occupies other than a single number, they use the general rule. This one specifies the space specifically so the general rule is overridden.

Its purely speculative how high any carried creatures within a whirlwind are when theyre ejected...such rules overcomplicate the ability which is designed to capture, restrict and damage an opponent over time.

It is also purely speculative to derive the intent of a certain ability. Did you design it?

Everything is speculative when the rules aren't clear enough. It simply needs a bit of clarification. It doesn't specifically say it ejects them from the bottom, but in it's "space", you haven't convinced me that the space isn't a forty foot tall tapered cylinder that something could easily be dropped from and take 3d6 of damage do to the fact that it is falling along side of the effect and not within it. The whirlwind says "may be lifted into the air" and "Creatures trapped in the whirlwind cannot move except to go where the whirlwind carries them" it can pick you up, and it can drop you and it is forty feet tall. So why can't it then drop you from height?

It is unclear, but there is more supporting evidence for dropping than for gently placing the subject on the ground without damaging it.

Can you do it? in the Bestiary is states that the advanced template adds +4 to all the creatures stats. The animal type says that an animal cannot have an intelligence higher than 2.

So can you still do this? Can this yield an advanced animal with a higher intellienge?

Speaking of templates, has anyone heard if there will be any new ones in the second Bestiary?

Thanks!

Yes, I believe the Heavy Horse uses the advanced template. You just don't increase the Intelligence. To remain an animal it must have no more than a 2 intelligence.

In this case the type limits the advancement.

So, my questions: If I use a bow and a buckler, do I lose the buckler's defense bonus when I use my bow? And any suggestions for improving either mobility or defense?

Yes, you loose the AC bonus from the buckler for any round in which you use the bow.

As for improving your defense, you can look at various magic items. Find ones with different bonuses to AC so they work together.

In that case it is up to you. Look at the Bestow Curse spell for ideas. Once the curse is removed the condition goes away.

The curse could persist until some condition is met or be removed normally.

I need to know how long does the Staggard Condition last and the ways to get rid of the condition.

I know the Restoration spells will remove the condition, but is that the only way? Does it remain indefinately until removed or can rest remove it?

Thanks for the help.

Usually, whatever triggered the condition will let you know how long it lasts. If you are staggered from being at 0 hit points the condition goes away as soon as you no longer have 0 hit points.

The big things stand out as quite apparent, it's the little things that have changed slightly that get us tripped up during a game.

• Darkness spell, dims existing light down one level.
  
• -10 no longer a hard limit for death, it's now your constitution score and determining Stabilization is different.
  
• Polymorph big and subtle differences.
  
• No more cross class skills.
  
• 0-level spell slots don't get used up when cast. This is constantly confusing some of my players. And gets annoying with the detect magic sometimes.
  
• Some feats work slightly different, like Cleave.
  

These are just the few I can remember right now. So the biggest change to me is all the subtle little changes. Most of which, I like, it's just hard to keep the differences straight. Especially since I play in a 3.5 game and GM a Pathfinder game.

I think we may move to Pathfinder for many of the gameplay mechanics even in our 3.5 game though, which might help. The reason we don't switch all together is not all of our classes are Pathfinder compatible yet, the pathfinder ones tend to outclass the 3.5 ones.

hogarth wrote:

d20pfsrd.com wrote:

Ugh. Grapple still sucks.

I kind of liked 3.5 grappling. It might have had too much die rolling, but they overall framework was not bad.

+1.

The "move the character to any adjacent square" is really rife for abuse.

So for example.. take a large, creature with reach.

...

Fighter walks into square a, the invisible large creature whacks it, grapples it, and moves it to square 2, where the punk thieves sneak attack it...

Roll initiative....

I, as GM and Player, interpret that as the closest adjacent square. When initiating a grapple you just drag the opponent closer to you. Of course that is not RAW but you can't otherwise move an adjacent opponent to any space you want when initiating a grapple so why would you be able to if you aren't adjecent when the grapple starts.

Now, on a successful attempt to maintain the grapple you can move a creature to any adjacent space, so next turn he could expose you to the thieves.

Ugh... off topic.

Ugh. Grapple still sucks.

lol.

New Grapple! Same as the old grapple but with less rolls!

Osprey71 wrote:

So a Grizzly Bear against a Tiger, both large animals, could not use the grab tactic against each other even to start a grapple.

Well, take two behirs as an example, then:

"A behir's grab attack works against creatures of any size category."

In that case, either one could get a free grapple attempt on any successful strike. But once they are grappling, the ability no longer grants a free attempt to start a grapple. You can't start something that is already happening.

It explicitly says it can be used to "start a grapple" not during a grapple.

That said, the ability also grants a +4 bonus when starting or maintaining a grapple. So the controller gets the +4 bonus when he starts the grapple and maintaining it, the other would not get the bonus unless it gains control of the grapple and then tries to maintain it.