Patrick "Varg" Meade's page

Here's another question (that will likely go unanswered as my previous two).
In B7, there are two Guiltspur Hill Giants, with 95HP, and a reference to Page 10 (where the full stat block for the Guiltspur Hill Giant is located).
But Page 10 indicates the GHGs have 117HP.
Now, what I call the "Mutilated Guiltspur Hill Giants" from B5, have the same general stats as the block on Page 10, but have 95HP, attack with a regular club rather than MW Greatclub, and there's an explanation of "Mutilations", explaining they have one arm and have -4 CON damage.

So...are the GHGs in B7 supposed to be the full fledged ones from Page 10, and have 117HP instead? Or...are these GHGs mutilated also like the ones in B5, have the appropriate 95HP, but should also have their Fort save and Attack stats reduced?

I would assume for now that they were meant to be full fledged GHGs with 117HP, as the color text for "Creatures" doesn't indicate anything about the mutilations, like they did in B5. But I don't know what the devs intended for this room.

Curious what the consensus might be on this (or maybe it's a stupid question): Would Yamasoth's Gaze affect Kandamereus?

Being undead, Kanda is immune to "any effect that requires a Fortitude save (unless the effect also works on objects or is harmless)".

Yamasoth's Gaze "has a range of 30 feet, and polymorphs creatures affected by it into giant vermin, animals, or magical beasts (Fortitude DC 37 resists)." And "otherwise functions as polymorph any object (CL 20th), and is a polymorph effect".

So, it initially seems to me that it probably wouldn't affect Kandamereus, because the gaze mentions that it polymorphs creatures. But, it also works like Polymorph Any Object...which would affect a corpse. I'm inclined to rule it doesn't, though I want it to, and could GM fiat make it effective (this of course would be dependent on the party getting Kanda's help, and Kanda failing the save).

Just curious if others ran into this scenario, and how they handled it. Also curious what Yamasoth polymorphed your players into. I'm thinking Ostovites, since they're Magical Beasts from the Abyss. I think that'll take a week to wear off.

Sorry for the thread necro, but this seems to be the closest thread to my question/clarification.

The number noted here is the increase to the phantom’s natural armor bonus when it manifests as an ectoplasmic creature, and its deflection bonus when it manifests as an incorporeal creature.

It gains the incorporeal subtype (Pathfinder RPG Bestiary 301), including a deflection bonus to AC equal to its Charisma modifier.

I just want to be absolutely certain that the number in the table 1-11 adds to (some might claim "stacks") with the Charisma Mod Deflection Bonus to AC. It is not a deflection bonus in-and-of itself. So, assuming you have no other additions to the Phantom's Charisma, at 20th level, the total deflection bonus to AC would be 21 (+5 for a 21 Charisma, +16 increase from the table).

Whatever happened to Ayandamahla after she left the Lady's Light? Did she ever appear in any other PF publications?

According to a Wiki, you may want to check out Demons Revisited.

Perhaps, with New Thassilon in PF2, she could make another appearance...?

Sorry for Necro-ing, but I don't see this question anywhere, and maybe I'm just not picking up an obvious answer (or not finding the answer in the forums).

The Pukwudgie in Bestiary 3, has Command Undead listed as an At Will SLA.

It's description of the Spawn Undead Special Ability says, "...against a pukwudgie’s control undead spell-like ability."

Command Undead and Control Undead are two separate spells. Control Undead is not listed as an SLA for the Pukwudgie. I can *assume* that Command Undead being a 2nd-level spell, is more likely to be an At Will ability for the creature, and default to it since that is what is actually listed as the SLA.

HOWEVER...Spawn Undead creates Zombies, which are unintelligent undead. Unintelligent undead do not get a save against Command Undead. So, there's no point in having zombies spawned by the Pukwudgie suffer a -4 Penalty to their saves. That leads to the assumption that it's supposed to be Control Undead instead.

So, is the creature supposed to have Control Undead, or Command Undead? Or...is it supposed to have both (Command as an At Will, and Control as x/Day)?

Page 206, 4th-level Alchemical Consumables table, last "Other" entry is labeled "Healing vapor, lesser", but there's already an entry for Healing vapor in that table. The entry I'm referring to references Page 51, for 16 gp. The Healing Vapor is not on that page.

I *think* the table entry is supposed to be referring to the Pink Sprite Apple, which is on Page 51, is a Level 4 item, for 16 gp.

This is perhaps self-evident, and either my player or I am not getting it, but we've had a disagreement on the wording and intent of Spiritual Weapon (and this would likely affect the arcane version, Mage's Sword).

The weapon always strikes from your direction.

I read that as something similar to Interposing Hand. The caster designates a target, and the weapon will place itself between the caster and the target, striking the target "from the caster's direction". Allowances are made if there are other allies/enemies/obstacles in a particular square, but the intent is that it will strike from whatever direction the caster happens to be.

My player, who also DMs on alternating weeks, doesn't agree. He wanted to place the spiritual weapon BEHIND the target (as it related to his actual direction). Which would essentially have the spiritual weapon strike TOWARD the caster's direction, rather than FROM the caster's direction. When arguing his side, he seemed to think that by disallowing his desired placement, that negated the allowance of the Range of the spell (Medium range). I disagreed, as it allows you to direct the weapon to any target within medium range. Just that...it should be placed in a square between the caster and the target.

I suppose the intent could be more in the line of "at your direction", where direction isn't so much a mapped ordinal direction (north, south, etc), but more in the line of it acts as you direct it. If you don't direct it, it doesn't choose a new target for itself, so you must do it yourself. But, to me, that would be "at your direction", not "from your direction".

Another question I've come up with. For F6, the stat blocks state one Gug Savant and four Advanced Gugs. But the text of the Creature paragraph states: "Only four of them dwell here now, but one of those four has developed into a powerful gug savant." So, shouldn't there only be three Advanced Gugs? Or should the paragraph have stated five of them still dwell here?

If not a dev, just a DM, how many Advanced Gugs did you run in this encounter, and would you have added or removed some in hindsight?

A question about the Paradox Box: it mentions having the words CRUEL on one side but there doesn't seem to have any words for the other sides. Do we make up some words?

You can make up words, or no words at all (the other sides are purely ornamental). You could state that the runes on the 5 other faces spell out "Pop goes the weasel." The PDF states, "five of the box’s faces are identical, but on one face, several additional runes appear. These runes spell out the word “CRUEL.” It doesn't particularly matter what is on the other 5 faces, it can be anything, as long as they are identical on all 5 faces. Only the 6th is different, with the runes for "CRUEL" appearing.

It also says the trap goes off regardless of the way it is opened. What is the Disable Device for? Do the PCs open the box without triggering the summon if they are successful in Disable Device?

The PDF states, "since there are no moving parts, it cannot be cracked via Disable Device." From what I've seen, if something can be unlocked or opened via Disable Device in an AP, the AP will have the Disable Device DC listed. This isn't one of those times, Disable Device doesn't apply.

I know it's been a few months, I hope you're doing well running this AP.

Maybe I'm missing something, but I'm confused about the effect of the Waking Nightmare in C13 The Terrible Window. The PDF states, "All creatures in area C12 or on the stairs leading down to area C11 who continue to gaze upon the scene must succeed at a DC 17 Will save or be affected by feeblemind, essentially struck dumb by the horror and scope of what they are looking upon."
How or why would all creatures in C12 be affected, when the window (and the scene it shows) being observed is in C13? Are the creatures/PC's in C13 NOT affected? Should this Waking Nightmare have been built in C12 instead? Or does it only affect those in C13, and the text about C12 and stairs to C11 ignored?

So, I'm trying to work something out, and just not finding an answer. How does Zolerim have Hand of the Apprentice (a Universalist ability), and Intense Spells (an Evoker ability). How can a wizard have abilities from two Specialist Schools (yeah, Universalist is the LACK of a school, but you get the meaning)?

Has anyone found a Paizo-official/Pathfinder definition of the Caulborn defensive ability "Premonition"?
I find nothing in Bestiary 3, nor the SRD or PRD/AoN. The closest is a 3rd-party spell in the SRD.

I'm sorry if this is a stupid question, but I can't find the answer (if there is one) anywhere. What are "Iron Rations"?

Gnaeus Gnaru has "1 week of iron rations and water" listed in his Other Gear. Are these just regular trail rations? I tend to doubt it, as otherwise they would probably be called that. I found Dwarven, Elven, Gnome, Halfling, and Orc rations in Ultimate Equipment. But nothing within Pathfinder to describe iron rations. One Google result suggests that Halfling Rations are Iron Rations, but I don't see why. In general, I would assume Dwarven Rations, or even Orc Rations, could be nicknamed Iron Rations.

I'm building stuff out in Fantasy Grounds, and would like to know if there's an actual item for it somewhere, or how to describe them in a custom item.

(BTW, there are hundreds of posts that appear to reference Iron Rations in Paizo forums, but they primarily seem to be in the Play-By-Post area, rather than rules or products...so everyone must know what Iron Rations are but me).

Extremely complicated. As far as I know it, there is no rule about natural decay, and natural decay in RL is very variable. If it really matters, you need to check some RL sources, but it is simpler to evaluate how much treasure you want to give and decide on that basis.

I haven't really thought about it in the context of "how much treasure to give". It's after essentially a TPK (one character ran away and lived, but that player has now completely quit gaming). The dead characters' gear will have been dragged under water (except the Magus' spellbook). The rest of their things will be retrievable by the players' new party, I was just wondering about Leather and Studded Leather. Would it be fine no matter what, would it be damaged but mendable after x amount of time, would it be completely unusable after x amount of time. I can make it up on my own (and it sounds like I'll need to), I was just wondering if there were rules for such things and I just hadn't found them.

You are overthinking it. What value will this add to the gameplay? The system handwaves stuff like this since mending is a cantrip on just about every caster's list.

True, but Mending is good for an object up to 1lb/Caster Level. These are 15lb-20lb sets of armor, and 3rd Level characters. Who knows if they'll even take Make Whole.

I could just not be finding them, or there may not be any. But, are there any rules for damaging/ruining items submerged underwater for an extended period of time?

I know there are rules for combat and movement and such, so I don't mean something on a character who's underwater for a bit. I'm focusing on sets of armor, such as Leather, that have been sitting in 30' of water for days/weeks/months/years. I would imagine metal armor and weapons might be damaged as well, though I think it would take longer.

Am I overthinking things? Is it perfectly fine to say, "you find a set of padded armor. It's been down here for 10 years, but it's perfectly fine"? At what point would it become, "you find what looks like might have been padded armor, but it's become ruined and unusable"?

I didn't think it gave any protection from being turned. But once turned, do you keep your abilities? And Vampire Spawn don't even have the Create Spawn ability.

So there's this choice the Vampire has, turning someone into either a Vampire Spawn, or a full-fledged Vampire, by using their Create Spawn ability. Fine. That still doesn't clear the issue with Undeath Initiate. The implication here is that if you're turned into a "Vampire Spawn", you lose everything. But if you're turned into a full-fledged Vampire, you keep your levels?

By reading the Create Spawn ability, as detailed by the OP, nothing there says you keep your levels. I guess...maybe the OP and I are reading this a bit too literally? As written, it literally says "Unless otherwise noted by the undead creature’s create spawn ability". No Create Spawn ability ever says otherwise. So even full fledged Vampires (that were Undeath Initiates) would lose their class levels. I guess it's supposed to be by implication. If the Create Spawn ability sends you to a template, and that template allows you to keep your class levels, you keep them.

Maybe these seem like stupid questions, but I do tend to read rules rather literally. And so if the rule says it should be noted in the Create Spawn ability, and it's not noted there...

This is the exact same question I had. So far, I haven't found any "Create Spawn" ability that positively affirmed-you get to keep previous class levels/abilities. I have seen a few "Create Spawn" abilities that negatively affirmed-you must lose previous class levels/abilities. Many don't say one way or another.

So, an Undeath Initiate never keeps class levels/abilities? Then why is Vampire and Lich more attractive? Does Undeath Initiate need to be reworded in this regard, or do some "Create Spawn" abilities need to be reworded?

I just want to verify that I'm reading/interpreting this correctly.

Grayflame weapon ability: "This weapon responds to channeled positive and negative energy. When the wielder spends a swift action to channel energy through the weapon, it ignites with a strange gray flame that sheds light as a torch, increases the weapon’s enhancement bonus by +1, and deals +1d6 damage (as the divine power from flame strike) to creatures struck by the weapon. This flame lasts for 1 round for every d6 of damage or healing the channeling normally provides.
When charged with positive energy, the flame is a silvery gray, good creatures are immune to the weapon’s extra damage, and the weapon counts as a good and
silver weapon for the purpose of bypassing damage reduction.
When charged with negative energy, the flame is an ashen gray, evil creatures are immune to the weapon’s extra damage, and the weapon counts as an evil and cold iron weapon for the purpose of bypassing damage reduction.
This special ability can only be placed on melee weapons."

Death's Kiss: "You can cause a creature to take on some of the traits of the undead with a melee touch attack. Touched creatures are treated as undead for the purposes of effects that heal or cause damage based on positive and negative energy. This effect lasts for a number of rounds equal to 1/2 your cleric level (minimum 1). It does not apply to the Turn Undead or Command Undead feats. You can use this ability a number of times per day equal to 3 + your Wisdom modifier."

So based on this, an evil cleric of Urgathoa with the Undead subdomain could touch a living opponent, thereby preventing the opponent (or it's allies) from healing it with a Channel Positive Energy or Cure spell. The opponent's party would also have to have an Inflict spell or ability to Channel Negative Energy in order to heal them.

If this cleric also happened to have a Grayflame weapon, and channeled Negative energy into it, and struck that same opponent (who was not evil), would that opponent take the additional 1d6 damage?

I would say "yes". The Grayflame weapon changes the energy somehow, in one of two ways perhaps. One, it changes the determination of effect from living or undead, to good or evil. Whereas naturally, Negative Energy would still harm an Evil Living creature, with Grayflame it would be immune to that damage. Two, with the reference to Flame Strike, the energy is no longer Negative (or Positive), it is simply Divine.

I can just see a question/argument about this, as if you are channeling Negative Energy (into the weapon), and Negative Energy now heals the target, that target shouldn't receive the extra damage.

Just thought I'd get the forum's thoughts.

You are completely overthinking this.

::facepalm:: Not the first time, likely not the last. Thanks Blave.

So then your expectation is that it is more about the attack type than the weapon type.

So, if I intend to throw a hatchet I treat it as if I were 'wielding a ranged weapon' and if I intend to melee I treat it as if I were 'wielding a melee weapon'. I would therefore then qualify for both Point Blank Shot AND Double Slice if I were wielding two hatchets -- however could only use one or the other depending on if I was making melee or ranged attacks.

This is all very reasonable to me -- I just wish it was a little more explicit in the rules.

I don't have any official insight, of course, but I don't think the hatchets would qualify for Point-Blank Shot.

The hatchets are Melee Weapons, that happen to be capable of making Ranged Attacks/Ranged Strikes. I don't think you can treat it as if they are a ranged weapon. So if it says you have to wield a Ranged Weapon, I just don't think the hatchets qualify. For example, I don't think Paizo would consider thrown hatchets qualifying for the Ranger's Penetrating Shot feat, based on the description of shooting clear through a creature.

I do think you can absolutely throw both hatchets for Double Slice, for the reasons you suggest.

If you specialize in an arcane school, rather than studying each school equally (as universalists do), you gain an extra spell slot for each level of spell you can cast. You can prepare only spells of your chosen arcane school in these extra slots. In addition, you can prepare an extra cantrip of your chosen school. You also add another arcane spell of your chosen school to your spellbook.

- Page 207 2E CRB "Arcane Schools"

I'd like to check my understanding of the extra spell you get in your book for specialists of a school. Is this a single spell during character creation? Or a single spell at any time? A spell each time you level? Or a spell each time you get a new level of spell? I think what would have been clearer is:

You also add a 6th 1st level arcane spell, which must be of your chosen school, to your spellbook."

-or-

You also add a 3rd arcane spell, which must be of your chosen school, to your spellbook each time you level."

-or-

You also add another arcane spell of your chosen school to your spellbook for each level of spell you can cast."

-or even-

You may add a single arcane spell of your chosen school to your spellbook , of a spell level you can cast, but this spell may be chosen at any level (you could save this until 17th level to gain an extra 9th level spell)."

In support of one of the middle two options (more than just a single additional spell, whether 1st level or any level), the first sentence on Page 204 states:

You gain additional spells and spell slots for spells of your school.

So, it should be multiple extra spells, I'm just not sure how many. Does a 20th level Specialist Wizard get 9 or 10 extra spells? Or 20?

CraziFuzzy wrote:

What does the Barbarian Animal Instinct "Deer" do? The 'CHARGE' weapon trait is not defined anywhere in Core Rulebook or Bestiary.

$80 for my deluxe CRB and it's already obsolete needing errata? :-(

Yeah it’s the chemicals in the ink nowadays, it makes the typos mature faster.

Yep, no sooner do you take a book off the lot, it depreciates 50%.

Sorry if this has been answered, but I can't find it if it has. In Ultimate Combat, "Magic Siege Engine, Greater" has a Range of Close, but a Target of one siege engine touched. So I'm confused. Is it a Touch spell, or is it a Ranged spell?

Based on Magic Siege Engine, I would say it's a Touch spell, but sometimes details like this change when going from the base to the improved or greater versions.

Oh, I've just come across what I think is an even "more wrong" ruling of Toughness.

My GM and I just got in an argument about this feat, with my other two players wishing I would just shut the hell up. He runs Toughness as +3 HP for levels 1, 2, and 3 (each). And then +1 HP for each level after.

So a character reaching 4th level will have a total of 10 extra HP, whereas my reading of the Feat would give the character 4 extra HP (the first 3 frontloaded).

And so I thought this was a house rule, but he's convinced that's the legitimate reading of the Feat. And he has played PF as a player under several other GMs who have run it the same way.

I mean, I'll take all the HP he'll give...

Ok, since this thread is about rules questions for Deadly Sniper, I have one (maybe it's clearly obvious to everyone else, but it's puzzling me).

Deadly Sniper is gained at 2nd Level, and gives a range bonus and damage bonus to a specific use of Sneak Attack (as described in the first post).

However...Slayers don't get Sneak Attack until 3rd. I suppose this is applicable to dualclassed Rogues/Slayers. But otherwise, why give a Sniper a benefit that they can't use (yet)? The commentators above mention this should perhaps have been a replacement for the Talent chosen at 2nd. But why then? Why not replace the talent at 4th? Or if it's not a replacement for a talent, why not award this at 3rd?

Does this mean that a Sniper gets a limited use of Sneak Attack? Meaning, once the whole party is in combat, the Sniper can't flank an enemy and get a Sneak Attack that he normally would at 3rd. However, if he can get that first shot off before the enemies are aware of his presence, that one attack does get the Sneak Attack (and Deadly Sniper) benefit.