Sage

Penthau's page

Organized Play Member. 101 posts. No reviews. 1 list. 3 wishlists. 2 Organized Play characters.


RSS

1 to 50 of 101 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

Does a paladin with Radiance need to choose the Legendary item mythic ability to get the legendary surge and other legendary item abilities? As I look through the modules, I see that Radiance advances in ability independently from mythic tier. There is no mention of bonding or surges. My guess right now is that the paladin will need to take Radiance as the legendary item if she wants more than the nonmythic abilities of the sword. Does that sound right?


Can Legendary Thievery be used to take weapons from an opponent's hands during combat? If so, does it take 2 manipulate actions like Pickpocket, it's prereq, or does the listed 1 minute duration make it impractical in combat?


The language is a little vague. It says it counters the effects, but all the other curative spells are more explicit about counteracting, like remove disease and neutralize poison.


I am also having this issue. All Paizo feeds show as dead or unreachable.


I have been interpreting the trigger as going to zero, but it seems on closer reading that the trigger means that the target is about to die by going to Dying 4 (for most targets). I was letting my players use it to keep someone on their feet (barely) if they went to zero in the fight, but it looks like it would be more limited than that.

With that interpretation, I would say you could use it on yourself in very limited circumstances, like Wounded 3 and taken to zero. You wouldn't be able to take reactions while unconscious.


I have a rogue player who like to use 4th level invisibility so that he doesn't become visible when he attacks. He claims that he can attack someone several times in the round and is still undetected at the beginning of his opponent's turn. I contend that he is instead hidden, since he clearly isn't being stealthy any more. Even if I perform a seek against him by his adjacent target, technically it uses his stealth DC, even though he is busy hacking away at his target and not trying to hide.

I think that he should have to spend an action sneaking away from the square he was attacking from to become undetected again. I think he should become hidden as soon as he attacks in melee (maybe just on a hit) or makes an obviously visible ranged attack, like a ray of frost. I can't find any rules stating that though, so I may be bringing in things from other systems.


If you buy the Bestiary for Fantasy Grounds, you get a token for almost every monster.


I am not sure the dying condition would be increased by 2 if someone who was dying was hit again while they had the wounded 1 condition also. I think that the creature should have only gone to dying 3.

Quote:
You have been seriously injured. If you lose the dying condition and do not already have the wounded condition, you become wounded 1. If you already have the wounded condition when you lose the dying condition, your wounded condition value increases by 1. If you gain the dying condition while wounded, increase your dying condition value by your wounded value.

I would say that anything with regen is going to have to be hammered until they stay down. They should be much easier to crit though at -4 status for unconscious and -2 circumstance for flat footed. That would allow you to increase their dying by 2 per each crit. Persistent damage would help avoid having to take extra actions to make the dying condition increase.


I was reading a hazard that had a 60' radius that triggered its reaction. Since the furthest Seek is a 30' cone, there doesn't seem to be any way to avoid this hazard short of triggering it and defeating it. Am I missing something?


Aratorin wrote:
What Hazards?

This particular hazard was a haunt. When I read the disable as a GM, I thought that it was a surprising list of skills and wondered how they would know which skills to use.

I didn't want to start a long question and answer session with the players every time they encounter a hazard that is disabled by something other than Disable Device. Having the skills just pop into their head seemed too easy. The only other thing that seemed reasonable was that someone who was an expert in Performance might recognize that Performance would work, same with Religion.

Sometimes though, it is Dispel Magic so what then? A caster knowledge proficiency level or maybe a easy skill check. I have also seen magical traps that seem like Dispel Magic should work, but don't. How would they know they know that other than wasting Dispel Magics?


I was reading a hazard that had a couple of unusual skills used to disable it, Religion(expert) or Performance(expert). I then started wondering how the characters would know to use those skills. Would someone who had those skills at the listed proficiency just know?


Can someone use a short bow while grabbed, especially against the grabber? Would they have to make the manipulate flat check to be able to reload? In other words, is the reloading still a manipulate action even though it takes 0 actions to perform?


FunkamusPrime wrote:

If I want to scribe a 5th level fireball scroll, which of these is correct?

A) I need a formula called "Level 5 Magic Scroll" (can be used for any 5th level spell)
B) I need a formula called "5th Level Fireball Scroll"
C) I need a formula called "Fireball Scroll" (used for level 3+)

I would say that each level of scroll has its own formula and the spell depends on what the crafter has cast into it. So A) for me.

"If an item has multiple types of different levels, each type has its own formula, and you need the formula for the specific type of item you want to Craft. For example, if you have a formula for a type I bag of holding but not for a type II bag of holding, you must acquire a separate formula to Craft a type II bag of holding."


Mirror Image doesn't have a heightened effect.


Is the settlement level of a city the upper limit to magic item level that you can purchase in the city? The settlement level seems to max out fairly low for campaigns that plan on going to level 20, like Paizo says most APs will do. Requiring characters to find all the magic items they want seems like a bit of a crap shoot too.

I was thinking about making the settlement level the upper limit of magic items that one can find without much difficulty, but anything higher requires finding crafters who can make what you are looking for. You will probably have to pay a small premium and of course wait at least 4 days.

The other option seems to be to have the characters do the crafting themselves, but the problem there seems to be finding the formulas of a higher level to make the things that they want to make.


I have a couple of characters who had the misfortune of encountering a clay golem and getting cursed with Curse Wound. The wording is clear that treat wounds or overnight rest isn't going to help and any spells will have to counteract the curse before being effective. One of the players is insisting that potions are both magic and not spells, so they should work without having to roll. Luckily we were at the end of the session anyway, so I have time to do some research.

I am leaning towards allowing it to bypass the roll, but it does seem to violate the spirit of the curse. Potions aren't clearly spells in a bottle anymore and there is no requirement to use a Heal spell to make a potion.

Cursed Wound (divine, curse, necromancy) A creature hit by the clay golem’s fist must succeed at a DC 29 Fortitude save or be cursed until healed to its maximum HP. The cursed creature can’t regain HP except via magic, and anyone casting a spell to heal the creature must succeed at a DC 29 counteract check or the healing has no effect. The golem’s counteract level is equal to its creature level.


Thanks, that's kind of what I was thinking it meant too. He could change a cantrip, not add more. I will point out Cantrip Expansion to him.


I have a player that has the sorcerer dedication on his rogue and he wants to learn more cantrips. He thinks that the errata allows him to do that, but it isn't clear to me that that is what it is allowing spontaneous dedication casters to do. Can he learn and add more cantrips to his repertoire and if so, how many?

Errata
"In the spellcasting dedication feats, you can prepare or add to your repertoire common cantrips of your spellcasting tradition, whether from this book or other
cantrips of that tradition you learn or discover"


1 person marked this as a favorite.

When a spell has somatic components it gains the manipulate trait, so it would draw ops.


I am seeing this phrase all over the rules and it doesn't seem to fit what I think is the intent. It occurs in the Follow the Expert rules and the latest place I have seen it is the Veil spell.

"...it gives the targets a +4 status bonus to Deception checks to prevent others from seeing through their disguises, and add their level even if untrained."

What that means to me, if read literally, is that everyone gets to add their level to the deception skill whether they are trained or not. If it said "add their level, if they are untrained", it would say to me that only untrained people get to add their level.

Does everyone get to add their level to their Deception check, even if they are a level 20 master in Deception? Or do only untrained people add their level?


I was surprised to discover recently that I couldn't Shove someone with my Shield on a Champion. He is sword and board, so freeing up a hand to Shove is clumsy at best. It seems odd to me that a light mace is better at Shoving than a shield, when it feels like a shield should be among the best item for shoving.


Anguish wrote:
Typically I'd think an enemy would be unwilling unless they were able to identify the spell as it was being cast. Just because the player/DM knows it's heal and beneficial doesn't mean the NPC does.

That is a very good point I had never considered. Does the enemy get any idea of what the spell is when they have to decide if they are willing? Is the default stance "unwilling" to accept spells cast by the other side and you only change to willing if you recognize the spell? Do they have some idea of what is going on since no hostile spells require willing targets?

Of course a cleric can take the Selective Energy class feat (https://2e.aonprd.com/Feats.aspx?ID=283), which seems to imply that 3 action heals do heal enemies or there wouldn't be a feat to avoid it. I didn't see a similar class feat for druids though.


He can use ranged weapons if he isn't raging, but he is going to be hosed if he needs a ranged attack after he has already started. This happened to an animal barbarian player in my game. He raged at the beginning of the fight as usual, then the creatures flew up out of reach. He still had enemies in sight and couldn't end the rage voluntarily. All he could do is stand and watch helplessly, very frustrating.

The group is only 5th level now, so they don't have any means of grounding flying creatures for a while.


The last time I tested it, Fantasy Grounds was not rolling player initiative properly. I have my players roll manually. Also, they have the option of several kinds of skill rolls for initiative (stealth and perception primarily), which can change from combat to combat.


No more holding a charge for a melee touch attack spell.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I have a player that is convinced that because the casting times of spells appears to be based on the components of the spell, that removing the verbal component of a spell with the silent metamagic action would reduce the casting time of the following spell by 1 action. My ruling was that if the metamagic did so, it would explicitly state that it would, so no, you didn't get a silent spell that was the same casting activity as the regular spell. It would take the one action before in addition to the normal casting time.

He wasn't thrilled by my ruling so I promised I would ask here for the general consensus.


No more area of effect spreads. Stinking cloud won't slip around a corner anymore.


Bandw2 wrote:
Penthau wrote:


There is also nothing in the wording of Detect Magic that exempts it from line of effect rules, which apply to all spells unless otherwise stated. It is listed as simply an emanation with a 30' radius.

oh then you can cast it inside a cup and get a cone shaped detect magic. if the source is your hand or something just pull up your sleeve.

hell you can easily use any obstruction then, like casting it from behind an open doorway to easily determine location...

Except the source isn't your hand, the spell is an emanation, which emanates from your square in all directions. https://2e.aonprd.com/Rules.aspx?ID=357 Find a single rule that exempts detection spells or emanations from line of effect. Maybe there can be some disagreement on what constitutes a barrier to line of effect, but if it's a barrier, Detect Magic isn't going through it. So yes, you could stand in the hallway past an open door and restrict the area of effect into the room, assuming the wall is a barrier, which it would be in the vast majority of cases.

So would being in a chest be a barrier to line of effect? How about in a drawer of a desk or a secret compartment in the wall? The rules say that an opening of an square foot stops something from being a barrier to line of effect, none of which would apply to any of the examples above. https://2e.aonprd.com/Rules.aspx?ID=359


3 people marked this as a favorite.
nick1wasd wrote:
Penthau wrote:
Bandw2 wrote:

detect magic isn't stopped by lead anymore only locate is as far as i can tell, its also stopped by running water o-o...

in fact locate, other than lead lined drawers probably does exactly what people want "locate magic item not in my possession" *shrug* i don't see where it outlines what kind of criteria you can and cannot sort by, but it'll probably be up to your GM.

As far as I can tell, protections against detect magic are as simple as the drawer itself. The +1 dagger is out of line of effect in the drawer, so it wouldn't be detected inside it. So putting it under a thin false bottom should protect it from detection. You would have to find it by searching.
There's nothing in the wording to denote light of sight required for DM, it's just a true/false state that's only fooled by an illusion school spell of a spell level higher than that of DM. So if it's in the next room on the bed in the hotel, it'll ding as long as it's close enough. So if you enchant the drawer with some hiding spell, that should do the trick as long as it's not an archmage trying to find it

There is also nothing in the wording of Detect Magic that exempts it from line of effect rules, which apply to all spells unless otherwise stated. It is listed as simply an emanation with a 30' radius.


Bandw2 wrote:

detect magic isn't stopped by lead anymore only locate is as far as i can tell, its also stopped by running water o-o...

in fact locate, other than lead lined drawers probably does exactly what people want "locate magic item not in my possession" *shrug* i don't see where it outlines what kind of criteria you can and cannot sort by, but it'll probably be up to your GM.

As far as I can tell, protections against detect magic are as simple as the drawer itself. The +1 dagger is out of line of effect in the drawer, so it wouldn't be detected inside it. So putting it under a thin false bottom should protect it from detection. You would have to find it by searching.


I don't think you share the space with the grappled target. Two medium creatures can't share a space and I haven't seen any exception for grappling. Therefore there should always be a preferred direction for "away" from the pusher who is grabbing someone.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

My interpretation is that if they meant you could only push someone directly back they would have used different language. First, they say "push away" not directly back. Then they say the pusher must go the same distance and the same direction. That is also unusual language if they meant directly back only. My main restriction would be that each square must be farther away from the pusher than the previous, limiting you to the 3 squares you mentioned.

There are other pushing effects that I wouldn't allow that with, like hydraulic push, since it would have less control at range.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The big weakness in the Detect Magic spell is that it just tells you if something magical is somewhere in the 30' radius of the spell. In 1e, you could just concentrate for a few rounds and the items in the area became obvious to the caster.

For example, the characters walk into the wizard's research lab and there are 30 scrolls sitting in little shelves around the room. The GM knows that 3 of them are magic scrolls and the other 27 are not. He tells the players after they cast Detect Magic "You detect magic in the room". Now what? How do they find the magic ones, because they are not going to stop once they know there is magic of some kind in the room?

Do you send the caster out in the hallway, bring out 1 scroll at a time and recast the spell 30 times? Do you have him cast Read Aura 30 times over the course of 30 minutes?

Even if you just hand wave it and say they find them over the course of a 10 minute search, the process for the characters is just ridiculously tedious. I agree that the spell needed to be nerfed, it revealed too much, especially working through materials and spotting high level illusions, and ruined encounters unless you explicitly planned around it. I feel that they nerfed it too far.


I was in my first couple of serious fights last night and it seemed to me that the offensive capabilities of monsters/NPCs is quite high. I am playing a Champion with heavy armor and a shield and they were not struggling to hit me. Most of them had hunter's mark so the damage was quite high also.

In PF1, it seemed like players tended to ignore minions and punks and headed straight for the boss or most dangerous looking opponent. Usually the riff raff had trouble hitting and doing enough damage to worry about.

Now in PF2, it seems like it is dangerous to leave them active longer than necessary. If you have to spend a long time beating on a boss while the punks are stabbing you in the back successfully, you could be in trouble. Even a goblin warrior level -1 has a better to hit than everyone but a fighter at level 1.

Is it a viable tactic to focus fire the rabble down early to reduce the number of attacks each round and wait to go after the boss until the numbers are more manageable?


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Thanks for all the good suggestions. I was getting too far in the weeds and treating their search as more of an encounter and less as exploration. I ran Sunday and just had the default search take 10 min, so that people could also be doing treat wounds, etc. at the same time, and assumed that detect magic would be cast at the opportune times.

It does seem odd that a wizard would have designed the Detect Magic spell to work this way. Why make it so hard on yourself when you could have just made the magic auras visible?


In 1e detect magic, and most other detection spells "can penetrate barriers, but 1 foot of stone, 1 inch of common metal, a thin sheet of lead, or 3 feet of wood or dirt blocks it." I am glad they got rid of that.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

When I first read Detect Magic, I thought it was going to be a cool change. Players wouldn't be using it to automatically see through illusions, find hidden magic items behind loose stones in the wall, etc. Now they would have to rely on their skills and more specialized spells.

What has actually happened is that everything grinds to a halt as soon as Detect Magic pings positive. Now they have to go through an elaborate search algorithm to discover which of the 20 items they can see is magical. This involves a combination of moving around the room and moving items around so they are out of line of effect or outside the 30' radius. Then you hide the found magic item and repeat the process to see if there are more.

I am torn about how I want to treat this. One would be to just fast forward through the search process and tell them what is magical and tick off some time. I thought about treating Detect Magic as an imprecise sense and letting them know what square the item is in on an easy perception check. I am reluctant to just make the item glow for the caster, but it does have its attractions. Now they know that the third sword from the left in the rack of eight is the magical one and we can move on without the search routine.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Adding the shove trait to shields seems like the way to go. It is more logical than the shove trait on a light mace. I'll have to see of my GM will buy it.


I am playing a sword and board champion with a good athletics check. I realize that I won't be able to grapple or perform most other maneuvers because I have a shield in my hand, but I thought I might be able to shove using a shield. I have looked everywhere I can think of to find a feat or something that would allow me to shove with a shield to no avail. Any suggestions on how to accomplish this?


Claxon wrote:

That's an interesting take. I'm warm to the idea, but not sure if it would be unbalanced or not.

I think your method makes staves a lot less attractive.

Personally I look at staves at the new spell in a stick alternative.

Good point, I didn't think about how they compare to staves. Maybe instead of giving them a chance to cast more than 1 extra time, they deactivate either way, but a good roll lets you cast once more.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

I am not particularly fond of the idea of destroying a wand just because it was used twice in one day. My change would be to make the overcharge roll before you try to cast the spell each extra time per day after the first. Success allows the spell to be cast and failure doesn't cast the spell and deactivates the wand until daily preparations.

The downside of trying to use a wand more than once per day is that you may waste the spell casting actions in combat and deactivate the wand. A nuisance, but not as negative and extreme as total destruction. The upside is that you may get 1 or more extra uses from the wand before it is deactivated. I thought about making it broken, but that can be fixed in 10 minutes and I figured that was too many potential uses.


22 people marked this as a favorite.

I like the way that Mutants and Masterminds handles complications. They don't give any abilities in return for the flaw. You can take all you want. When the complication causes issues for the character in the game, you get the equivalent of a hero point. If your feeble Aunt June never gets kidnapped, you get nothing.

They explained that allowing people to front load complications with character advantages just gets them avoided or ignored. By having the complication arise during play to give an in game advantage means that if you want the resource, you have to play the complication. Great design move, IMO.


Does Detect Magic work through materials (such as wood and stone) or is it limited by line of effect? I don't see any language about emanations or detection spells ignoring line of effect.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Lay on Hands heightens too. At 10th level you would be healing 30.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

I think that they mean you are not fatigued if the spell lists a maximum duration. Some spells are just "sustained" and you would be fatigued if you sustained them for 10 minutes. If it was "sustained 1 minute", you can't go 10 mins. If it were "sustained 1 hour", you can go that long without becoming fatigued.


Caster goes outside of the room. Group throws out one item at a time and the caster casts Detect Magic. Nothing detected, throw it in the normal pile. Something detected, throw it in your bag for later ID. For finding the hidden stuff, you are stuck with searching, I guess. Since the Line of effect doesn't go into the room, you are just detecting the stuff in the hallway. Tedious, but who said adventuring was exciting?

Also, it just occurred to me, wouldn't most magic armor and weapons have runes on them? I assume they are visible and where they can be easily seen.


I was thinking that this could have huge implications on the way that people search for things in PF2 vs PF1. No more scanning the room to find the magic item behind a hidden panel. No more detect evil through the door to find undead. In my games I am getting rid of the penetrating detection until I hear about it to the contrary. My players are going to miss so much more treasure now.


Maybe a sack was a bad example. I included it because it keeps you from seeing the item inside of it. But let's just say inside a chest with 1 inch thick wooden sides or behind a thin wooden door in another room. 1e gave examples of what detect spells could penetrate (3 feet of wood in this case), but I haven't seen anything like that in 2e. Does 2e Detect Magic sense through an inch of wood? Right now, it seems like to me the answer would be no.


In 1e, there were rules for detect spells that would work through certain amounts of wood, stone, etc. I haven't seen any mention of that in 2e. There don't appear to be any exceptions to Line of Effect for emanations or detect spells. Does that mean that a magic item in a sack or a chest would not be detected by Detect Magic?

1 to 50 of 101 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>