PurpleShirt's page

Not sure the page number, but CRB, magic, aiming a spell, area. That section states that any area effect goes from a grid intersection. So assuming that a torch goes off the same rules as area spells, it would illuminate four squares. Think of it as are you holding the torch in your left or right hand, and in front or behind you? Now pick the intersection that it corresponds to.

If you really want to measure from the center of a square, you have to go to the center of the squares on the edges, otherwise you are adding an extra five feet on each side. And if the effect doesn't cover 100% of the square it doesn't affect it at all, so measuring from the middle of the square you actually lose distance.

The deadly enchantment can only be put on a weapon that normally deals non-lethal damage. If both you and your GM define normally as including current enchantments, then you would be adding 1d6 to the damage.

With double slice and power attack your damage would be Dice+STR+1, you would be getting a damage bonus from power attack exactly equal to your attack penalty.

I just put this character in and on the feats page I have

4 feats to pick from
1 Wizard bonus feat
Eschew Materials
Scribe Scroll
Simple Weapon Proficency
Wizard Weapon Proficiencies

for a total of 9 feats

Chemlak, good information, your answer makes sense thank you.

Snapshot, the fact that it says fighting with two weapons is a full round action does not mean it's an extra full round action on top of the flurry. That would mean I could only flurry with one weapon, because as soon as I add the second one I need another full round action.

Bobson, monks do not have an off-hand with unarmed strikes, and TWF says the penalties are reduced by 2 for your main hand. Flurry already has your penalties at -1/-1 so I don't see how you would get 0/0

Neo2151, Improved TWF specifically says you get a second attack with your offhand weapon, which you already get a second attack, and monks do not have an offhand anyways so you could not benefit from either Improved or Greater TWF

With whatever weapon you put them on, say a whip, on command you would be able to switch from normal damage, but lethal, to normal +1d6, but all nonlethal.

So as a free action you can change between 1d3 + STR lethal damage, and 1d3 + 1d6 + STR non-lethal damage.

PurpleShirt wrote:

Since you chose the trigger to be reading, which takes up the same time as talking, it would be a free action.

Source of "Reading take as much time as talking and is a free action"?

For most of us modern day, fully literate people it is true but even today a good percentage of the population of the developed countries is composed by semi-literate people.
In medieval times it was normal to read aloud from a book, people capable to read without verbalizing the text were an exception, not the norm.

If you chose to rule that way the cloak will be triggered the first time someone look at it. People with that kind of literacy read by reflex anything they see.

Edit: the above assume you mean that it is !a free action that can be done outside of turn, like speaking". If you mean that is a free action that can be done only during your turn I agree.

As it is a free action you can only do it on your turn. The only actions that can be done on another turn are immediate actions.

Placing the symbol out in the open will trigger it way before it is intended to, the symbol of healing is unusual in that it is a benevolent symbol (to most anyway). Reading is quite involuntary, you can not choose not to read a word/symbol you see. If you want to make it work you would have to resort to uncovering and displaying the symbol in some way, or otherwise have them touch it.

I'd judge it to be a move action on your part to retrieve and display the symbol, something what provokes attack of opportunity I think.

If reading were involuntary, there would not need to be a separate choice from looking at it. As far as I would rule it in my games, to count as reading you would have to look at it, see the symbols that make the words, and understand the meaning of whatever words are there.

As if means you are already gaining the benefit of the referenced ability, but do not actually have it. If the monk already had TWF, he could qualify for feats that have it as a prereq. He does not have TWF, he has Flurry, which gives him the benefit of TWF with several distinct exceptions (full strength bonus to off-hand attacks, can substitute unarmed strikes for any attack in the sequence, only useable with certain weapons, etc.)

Flurry is not Two-Weapon Fighting, but gives you extra attacks as though you did have it, so they do not stack, since you are already gaining the benefit of Two-Weapon Fighting when you Flurry.

Would you be able to point out the specific wording that says they do not stack? Also the Two-Weapon Fighting feat does not give you the extra attack, it just lessens the penalty for fighting with two weapons.

The second attack does not come from having two-weapon fighting, the feat only reduces the penalties. As long as each weapon can fit in one hand (shuriken can) then you can dual wield. And two-weapon fighting will reduce the penalties

Any additional energy effects would be because of the weaknesses of the creature being attacked, nothing because of the attacker will affect it.

Vicious says nothing about the type of damage it does, and does not say it is affected by any outside influence. It is not weapon damage so DR would not affect it, but since it is not typed damage it would be healed with regeneration.

From PRD

An unarmed strike is always considered a light weapon. Therefore, you can use the Weapon Finesse feat to apply your Dexterity modifier instead of your Strength modifier to attack rolls with an unarmed strike. Unarmed strikes do not count as natural weapons (see Combat). The damage from an unarmed strike is considered weapon damage for the purposes of effects that give you a bonus on weapon damage rolls.

Unarmed strike is considered a weapon, therefore not natural.

If that were the case would it not have been easier to say you have the Two-Weapon fighting feats but can only use monk weapons? It says as if you have Two-Weapon fighting, but does not actually say you do.

As all the symbol spells refer to symbol of death, here is that description.

As a default, a symbol of death is triggered whenever a creature does one or more of the following, as you select: looks at the rune; reads the rune; touches the rune; passes over the rune; or passes through a portal bearing the rune. Regardless of the trigger method or methods chosen, a creature more than 60 feet from a symbol of death can't trigger it (even if it meets one or more of the triggering conditions, such as reading the rune). Once the spell is cast, a symbol of death's triggering conditions cannot be changed.

Since you chose the trigger to be reading, which takes up the same time as talking, it would be a free action.

Yes, it is within the rules. Also as the GM don't be afraid to bend the rules to make the encounters more interesting. It is worth it.

Does flurry of blows stack with two-weapon fighting for the attack bonuses?
The description for flurry says that you can make attacks as if using TWF, and TWF simply says that the penalties are lessened by 2 for main hand and 6 for off hand, but since monks don’t get an off hand it would both be 2. Neither one says anything about the other. Does this mean that at level one a monk with TWF would Flurry at a total attack bonus of +1/+1?

As far as I can find, there are no rules that say what position you are in when grappled. In a simple wrestling clinch, which would be considered a grapple, the controlling wrestler could easily have one hand free to pull out a small knife, or to punch the other guy as you can frequently see in any MMA event.