Rikkan's page

I think the most anime feat in PF2 is Sow Rumor.

Since in pretty much every single anime I've watched, there've been people spreading rumors at least once.

Aratorin wrote:

...since Charisma tends to represent physical attractiveness as well...

What other house-rules that a lot of people use for literally no reason and act like it's a rule from the book should we adjust the game to work based on?

I'm not sure if Charisma has ever represented physical attractiveness in D&D (I don't think it has since Comeliness used to be a thing), but I know that there is zero reason to treat it as doing so in Pathfinder 2nd edition.

Charisma measures a character’s personality, personal magnetism, ability to lead, and appearance.

And since we're supposed to be able to tell the same stories in PF1 as PF2, it makes sense for people to use that in PF2 too.

Malk_Content wrote:

The great thing about it bring a sphere and being able to lift creatures up is that any falling damage at all also knocks creatures prone making this spell a potentially amazing action waster.

Oh wow. I hadn't considered that.

Well it would be nice, but sadly it is not able to do that.

All creatures and unsecured objects in the area move towards the center, depending on their Reflex saving throws. This follows the rules for forced movement (Pathfinder Core Rulebook 475).

When an effect forces you to move, or if you start falling, the distance you move is defined by the effect that moved you, not by your Speed. Because you’re not acting to move, this doesn’t trigger reactions that are triggered by movement.

If forced movement would move you into a space you can’t occupy—because objects are in the way or because you lack the movement type needed to reach it, for example—you stop moving in the last space you can occupy. Usually the creature or effect forcing the movement chooses the path the victim takes. If you’re pushed or pulled, you can usually be moved through hazardous terrain, pushed off a ledge, or the like. Abilities that reposition you in some other way can’t put you in such dangerous places unless they specify otherwise. In all cases, the GM makes the final call if there’s doubt on where forced movement can move a creature.

Since the spell does not push or pull people, you can't push them off cliffs / move them in hazardous terrain, and combo'ing it with say a wall of fire doesn't work.

A skilled character can help out less skilled allies who choose to Follow the Expert. This is a good way to help a character with a low Stealth modifier sneak around,

Choose an ally attempting a recurring skill check while exploring, such as climbing, or performing a different exploration tactic that requires a skill check (like Avoiding Notice).

Yet, Follow The Expert, has the auditory and the visual trait. So your party member who is an expert at being sneaky / stealth / avoiding notice, needs to make noise and be seen so you can follow the expert in being unseen.

Jason: “There was a turning point that happened a few weeks in, folks started watching the twitch stream and live posting to the forums.” That’s when it started to break out a little bit.

Yeah, as soon as people started posting about it on the forums, they started reaching a lot more people.

I wonder what they could have done, instead of just barely interacting on the forums and mostly through twitch / facebook .......

Even before 1.6, I felt goblin was the best class for a front-line cleric. +2 Cha is great and a -2 Wis on your dump stat is lovely! And this is patently absurd.

Well that sorta makes sense, no?

perception check wrote:

Not to take away from the current discussion, but one of the larger issues with the upcoming change (at least, given what we know about it) is that enemy saves are too high, such that any reasonable increase to damage won't really matter as enemies will save for half anyway.

Again, this doesn't really matter if the increases to damage are unreasonably high, but I don't think anybody wants that. Enemy saves need to go down across the board, or there needs to be ways for casters to increase their save DCs.

This is a known issue and will be addressed in the full release. Reworking the stats for every monster in the Playtestiary would be too much of an overhaul to do during the playtest period.

Doesn't that mean the playtest is largely useless for spellcasters?

Inflated saving throws make a huge difference in this edition with 4 degrees of success. Having the enemies save / critically save against your 3 relevant spells a day vs having the enemy fail / critically fail their save is huge. It is the difference between a caster feeling useful and powerful vs feeling like a weak nobody who'd be better replaced with a martial who doesn't run out of spell slots.

Lausth, let me give you another example from PF1 play that illustrates not only issues of power but also complexity and RAW vs GM RAI, as the last does.

My 9th level Wizard purchased a scroll of Polymorph Any Object and successfully cast it on himself to become a High Girallon, in the process gaining Resist 20 to acid, cold, fire, electricity, and poison, as well as an extra set of arms and a Climb speed. He then cast Reduce Person and Permanency on Reduce Person so that he would remain medium sized.

Combined with Overland Flight, those resistances make for an interestingly powerful defensive set. You may find a flaw in the magical application, or might rule against as a GM (which would, again, be your right)...but the situation points out just one example of the ways that casters in PF1 may perform in relation to the rule set that some players, GMs, and designers might not prefer.

In addition, other spells that change your size have no effect on you while you are under the effects of a polymorph spell.

So while under the effect of Polymorph any Object, Reduce person has no effect. Also, afaik a High Girallon is a magical beast, so reduce person would be ineligible anyway. And I don't think it actually qualifies for a permanent duration either.

Doesn't seem overtly powerful if you apply the rules correctly (but I agree the polymorph rules have always required some careful reading)

The key thing to remember is that in most cases, a CR6 enemy isn't meant to be equivalent a single CR6 PC - it's meant to be an average challenge to an entire party of 4-5 level 6 PCs (who get way more attacks than it does collectively), so naturally its bonuses and ACs need to be much higher than those of an individual level 6 PC.

edit: I suspect that this is why dead suns throws some relatively high CR encounters at the players pretty frequently, because there is some awareness there that the CR system is a bit wonky.

Nah, a CR6 enemy is supposed to be equivalent to a single CR6 PC. An average encounter is supposed to be really easy.

You can for example see that clearly on Page 389.

Generally, the CR of an NPC equals the level of a PC with the same abilities - for example, an NPC with abilities similar to a 2nd-level technomancer would be CR 2.

These factors often created a race to the bottom, design-wise, spawning tons of these little X-per-day buggers that characters could afford, featuring relatively powerful (and always useful) effects that often became more useful as you gained levels. All of this creates a sort of mini-nova during climactic encounters, as characters spend a handful of swift and immediate actions ramping up to their optimal tactics. This is especially true for classes in the Pathfinder RPG Core Rulebook, since they typically have fewer class-based options competing for the use of swift and immediate actions.

Another problem Resonance Points are trying to address is what is often called the "Christmas Tree" effect of games that impose limits based solely on magic item slots. This goes hand in hand with the cheap consumable (or X-uses-per-day items), as many players rush to fill their slots with items featuring charges or uses per day.

I never encounter this myself in PF1. Players always fill their slots with the stat boosting items (big six etc).

If the players get lots of consumables, they are often hoarded and not used, because they almost always take standard actions to use and are thus not worth using (not to mention the low DCs these items tend to have).

Am I missing something? What are all these swift / immediate action items that dominate the playspace in dev games, that I never encountered, that are one of the main reasons for introducing resonance?

Rob Godfrey wrote:

The 'big 6' and the 'magic utility belt' are a large part of what makes PF mechanically fun, they aren't a 'problem' that needs fixing they are a core and interesting feature. That for me is the disconnect here, Paizo are introducing a system to 'fix' what makes high magic, high fantasy games fun.

You will find this position highly debatable.

Having magic items is fun. Having to have certain magic items so you don’t fall behind which means you’re cut off from using other fun magic items, not so much.

Well, that is even worse in PF2, no?

By merging the cloak of resistance with +armour and making +weapons more powerful, and the new crit system making +bonuses far more important, those items feel far more required than they ever did in PF1.

Changing the math to try and keep you near the 50% mark, also means that if you don't get the upgrades at the exact right levels, you fall behind the expected curve incredibly fast (thanks again to the crit system)

And they even set the skill DCs to include +skill items, making those mandatory too. While there were +skill items already in PF1, those never felt mandatory in actual game play, since you didn't need to absolutely max your skill bonus, but you have to in pf2 to hit the 50% success mark.

It also feels like you'd be running around with far less magical items thanks to resonance and the new WBL system.

-----
And then there is the second part of the post you quoted, the the 'magic utility belt'. It feels like this part was hit incredibly hard by the PF2 changes, even though this was the fun part of magical equipment.

Many of those magical items already weren't very good in PF1, because of the required math items and because the items were usually very overpriced with incredibly low DCs at the levels you could get them at.
Thus the heavy handed nerfs to them in PF2 feel really bad to me.

I dont get something.What exactly martials are having problems with that cant be solved by magical items?

Because they have a gear limit (wbl in pf1). And they need to buy all their basic equipment like +x weapon, get their AC up etc.

Or whatever other problem pops up. Not to mention if they actually want to spend their money on pure background RP things, like building a castle etc.

That is a nice survey. ... Too bad it was up on a third party site that can't be used for PFS reliably. I would think that skewers the results a bit.

Also: 60% of the characters weren't played with Paizo AP's or in PFS, so we can't say if the basic assumptions of races available match with what Paizo has in mind for their setting.

Not just that, it is a survey asking people what they played. Which is not exactly the same thing as what people would want to play.

For example, since "We Be Goblins" is a thing and "We Be Orcs" is not, I'd expect goblins to be played more often.
Not to forget about mechanical benefits as well (like the human bonus feat the survey mentions, or favoured class bonuses)

Trigger The redcap drops a creature to 0 Hit Points with a scythe Strike.

Does this mean that if a redcap picks up a different weapon, it can never use its reaction?

Multiclassing is already punished in PF since you won't be getting your favoured class bonus.

But the reason people do it, is because non-casters usually only get numeric increases when they level. Add some actual fun level appropriate abilities / things they can do, and you'll see less dips.

Personally, it feels terrible in starfinder. Going from level 1 to level 3, my spell damage stays exactly the same, and I don't have any better spell slots to prepare better spells, yet enemies have a lot more hit points.
At lvl 1 the damage feels slightly too good, but as I level I start feeling like my character becomes worse instead of better, 'till you get the new spell levels at least.

tldr: I feel like you rate Rattling Presence slightly too high.
Just rolling your expertise die frequently gives you better results (on average) than using this talent.
The math changes significantly if you take Skill Focus (Intimidate) though, since then you'd at least have an insight bonus while giving up your expertise die.

The duration increases by 1 round for every 5 by which the result of your check exceeds the DC.

So if you give up your expertise die you increase the number of rounds a target is demoralized by 1 (or 2) rounds.

If you have a succeed on the check by rolling a 1 on your d20 (a 100% chance of success), rolling your expertise dice gives you this chance on average of getting an additional round (averaging the possibility of more than 1 round):
1d6 = 7/10 vs 1 (expertise talent)
1d6+1 = 9/10 vs 1
1d6+2 = 1 + 1/10 vs 2
1d8+2 = 1 + 3/10 vs 2
1d8+3 = 1 + 1/2 vs 2
1D8+4 = 1 + 7 /10 vs 2

If you actually have a chance of failure, the average amount of additional rounds you get from rattling presence quickly drops off, while the average amount of rounds from rolling your expertise die mostly stay similar.

Thus the benefits from the Expertise Talent are very marginal.

I'm creating a soldier and looking at skills to take. It seems the skill DCs just scale too fast for my character to keep up. Let me give some examples.

As a soldier my class tells me I need Str, Dex and Con. So I figured, I'd have something like 12 int and 20 Cha at high level.

I take a look at the bounty hunter theme:
Jack of all trades [12th level]
Allows me to roll skills untrained and get a +4 if I roll a 20.

#1: Let's say I want to identify what I'm fighting and I meet a DM created Space Goblin King [CR14] at lvl 14.

To identify it, I need 5+ 1½ CR (DC 26). If I roll a 20 +4 (jack of all trades) +1 (int), I have a total of 25, not enough to identify an equal CR space goblin (which should be peanuts imho). Let alone know any facts about it.

Apparently the theme is useless?

#2: I'm [lvl 20] know and put used all my skills ranks for identifying creates. Now I'm meeting the DM created Space Goblin Emperor of Goblin Kind [CR20].
But now I got the skill fully trained, I'm an expert at identifying creatures!

To identify it, I need 5+ 1½ CR (DC 35).
I got 20 ranks +3 class skill + 1 int for a total of 1d20 +24, I need to roll an 11 to recognize the Space Goblin as a Space Goblin.

That seems way too high to identify an equal CR Space Goblin as a fully trained, at identifying creatures character. I can't even identify rare creatures on a natural 20 (DC 45)

#3: Well maybe soldiers have no need to identify creatures and it just doesn't work. Let me try training intimidate instead, it is a class skill after all and I invested a lot to get 20 Cha.
I'm a scary soldier with a big weapon, max ranks in intimidate and 20 Charisma at [lvl 20] and I have a Dwarven buddy who dropped his charisma to 4 for roleplaying reasons.
Should be much harder to intimidate me, a battle hardened soldier, right? DC is Intimidate skill +10.

He, a dwarf with 4 charisma, has a defense vs intimidate of 15+ 1½ CR (DC 45).
Me, I got 20 (ranks) + 3 (class skill) + 5 (20 Cha) = 28 Intimidate
28 + 10 is 38, 7 short of the 45 everybody gets.

Even if I grab skill focus for another +3, I'm still 4 short.

Is there any point in getting skill ranks if you don't get a class based insight bonus in this game?

I think, but I cannot remember where I read it, that you have to decide which of your limbs you are using for holding the charge, that would mean that only things that you touched with that limb would count as touched.

It might have been something about the Prehensile Hair hex, because I remember reading it about the time I picked that hex. But I have an awful memory to recall where I read or hear things.

On a related topic, the magus touching his held weapon doesn’t count as “touching anything or anyone” when determining if he discharges the spell. A magus could even use the spellstrike ability, miss with his melee attack to deliver the spell, be disarmed by an opponent (or drop the weapon voluntarily, for whatever reason), and still be holding the charge in his hand, just like a normal spellcaster. Furthermore, the weaponless magus could pick up a weapon (even that same weapon) with that hand without automatically discharging the spell, and then attempt to use the weapon to deliver the spell. However, if the magus touches anything other than a weapon with that hand (such as retrieving a potion), that discharges the spell as normal.

Basically, the spellstrike gives the magus more options when it comes to delivering touch spells; it’s not supposed to make it more difficult for the magus to use touch spells.

Now as to learning Raise Dead, I happen to agree with you. Unless she can find an arcane tutor somehow, every instance of Raise Dead a sorcerer comes across is full of prayers. Not arcane at all. But she might well find a witch with a healing patron who knows and can teach the arcane version of Lesser Restoration. Or a spell witches share with druids like Threefold Aspect. Or one that's purely arcane like Beguiling Gift. All arcane spells not on the sorcerer/wizard list.

Speaking as a GM, I don't think I ought to bar learning arcane but non-list spells as long as in-game there's a reason why the PC had been able to study it. And no one yet has come up with a reason why I shouldn't, other than the same reflexive "you can't" position that I actually started out with in the other thread.

Well, keep in mind Gold Dragons have this bit of text:"A gold dragon can cast cleric spells as arcane spells.". And dragons cast as sorcerers.

Technically though, the FAQ, that prevents you from casting spells that are not on your spell list, also prevents gold dragons from casting the spells that they have in their stat block (and breaks other creatures as well).

Rikkan wrote:

That is why they errata'd Improved Natural Attack, because monk PCs could take it and after crunching the numbers they considered it to be too powerful for monks.

I really, really, really doubt that anyone at Paizo ever crunched numbers in regards to Monk balancing. They probably went the 12-year-old approach of yelling "OMG, monk can haz eh biggest damatch numbah than mah barbarian, NERF IT!!!!!". Becase it is not possibly to have ever played an (unarchetyped) monk in a game together with proper martials* and not realize that cMonk sucks so hard, you could give him Imp Natural Attack for free and he's still be grossly underpowered.

Jason crunched his numbers and the official errata is this—the Improved Natural Attack feat can not be applied to unarmed strike. We'll be issuing an errata for that feat that adds this sentence to the feat:

"Improved Natural Attack can not be applied to unarmed strikes."

Unarmed strikes ARE still treated as natural weapons for most effects (particularly for the spell magic fang and for amulets of magic fang), but the Improved Natural Attack feat is an exception to that rule.

So! There ya go! Official errata! Sorry it took so long to nail it down.

Also, monks aren't supposed to be able to match a barbarian in a straight up fight.

Changing a monk's BAB is not in the cards, just like it is not for any other class. Changing BAB monkey's with a lot of statistics (especially for the monk with flurry). Truth be told, the monk is not a class that is designed specifically to stand up toe-to-toe with a fighter. They serve slightly different roles.

[other post by Jason Bulmahn]

They do not stand up as well in a straight up fight with fighters, barbarians, and paladins. But this limitation is more about their niche than their shortcomings.

Elven Chain is Mithral Chainmail. It's ACP is 3 less than regular Chainmail.

It is not exactly the same thing though. For example Elven chain doesn't require medium armour proficiency, while mithral chainmail does.

I'm in the not in the rules camp.

However if we ruled arrows caused the invisible creature to be seen, there isn't any reason we couldn't also see our blood on it's claws and/or weapons. Possibly Splattered across it's body or face.

Powder: Powdered chalk, flour, and similar materials are popular with adventurers for their utility in pinpointing invisible creatures. Throwing a bag of powder into a square is an attack against AC 5, and momentarily reveals if there is an invisible creature there. A much more effective method is to spread powder on a surface (which takes 1 full round) and look for footprints.

Since covering them in powder only momentarily reveals someone invisible, I'd say most minor things don't reveal them.

Does the rich parent trait allow you to ignore the rules?

Rikkan wrote:

Milo v3 wrote:

Why is this stupid? Technically dimension door is interplanar travel, as all forms of teleportation magic pass through the astral plane, should it be able to cross planes?

It should at the very minimum allow for instantaneous travel through the astral plane.

It'd be pretty useless, since you wouldn't have any choice of destination. You'd appear "somewhere" in a plane infinite in size.

Uhmm no. It would actually allow you to appear at a different location on the plane you cast the spell.

Also real life conversion rates for copper to silver and silver to gold are 80-90 to 1, making WoW more accurate in that area.

Just because it is called a gold coin doesn't necessarily mean it is made from pure gold or from gold at all . Currency usually does not have the exact same value as the material it is minted from.

In an area of bright light, all characters can see clearly. Some creatures, such as those with light sensitivity and light blindness, take penalties while in areas of bright light. A creature can't use Stealth in an area of bright light unless it is invisible or has cover. Areas of bright light include outside in direct sunshine and inside the area of a daylight spell.

In areas of darkness, creatures without darkvision are effectively blinded.

Since you can see clearly if you're in an area of bright light, if you're standing in a sun-lit area, you can see perfectly into the pitch dark cave.

Consequences of failure do not affect one's ability to Take 10.

Take 10, is not Take 20.

Contact Other Plane: Can you Take 10 on the Intelligence check for this spell?

Having your Int and Cha blasted down to 8 by an extraplanar entity is a significant and distracting threat, therefore you can't Take 10 on that check.

So of your failures have nasty consequences you can't take 10.

Quote:

Each round at the start of the shaman’s turn, if the bonded creature’s hit points are reduced to –5 or fewer, it heals 5 hit points and the shaman takes 5 points of damage.

Wording is clear enough.

I don't think it is all that clear.

I thought Full attacks don't provoke attacks of opportunity, only standard ranged attacks do (and ranged touch attacks)?

So full attacking with a bow does not provoke at all?

By the rules free actions can not be taken when it is not your turn unless it is called out as an exception so no on the AoO, even though many GM's might allow it.

While you can’t take most free actions off your turn, Grab, Trip, Pull, Push, and Rock Catching’s free actions can all be used off-turn. This will be reflected in future errata.

I hate hydras as written. Way too easy to kill. They're supposed to be nearly epic. In mythology, there was only ONE hydra and it took a demigod to kill it (and even Hercules couldn't do it without an assistant and the use of Athena's magical sword, clearly an artifact in its own right).

Well Hercules is a low level character, so it makes sense that hydras aren't too high on the CR scale.

Keep in mind, oozes are blind. And beast shape can only grant blind sense, not blind sight. Thus you can't target other people with spells (since you have no line of sight to them).

By the way, I sued the word "his"

That is going to be one interesting court case.

Incorporeal (Ex) An incorporeal creature has no physical body. It can be harmed only by other incorporeal creatures, magic weapons or creatures that strike as magic weapons, and spells, spell-like abilities, or supernatural abilities. It is immune to all nonmagical attack forms. Even when hit by spells or magic weapons, it takes only half damage from a corporeal source. Although it is not a magical attack, holy water affects incorporeal undead. Corporeal spells and effects that do not cause damage only have a 50% chance of affecting an incorporeal creature (except for channel energy). Force spells and effects, such as from a magic missile, affect an incorporeal creature normally.

You direct a ray of positive energy. You must make a ranged touch attack to hit, and if the ray hits an undead creature, it deals 1d6 points of damage to it.

Spells from a corporeal source do half damage unless they are force effects or channel energy. Since disrupt undead is neither a force effect nor channel energy, it'll do half damage.

Simultaneously, you must understand that subject is not exactly a valid argument, as the Challenge feature adds equal to Cavalier levels, whereas the Precise Strike adds equal to Swashbuckler levels. Since those are two separate class level statistics and not your character level or the same class, they would stack.

As far as caster level is concerned though, when it comes to Ioun Stones, they don't stack unless otherwise stated, meaning if you had multiple CL-increasing Ioun Stones of the same type (Orange Prism), they won't stack with themselves, since that CL increase is from the same source of Ioun Stone.

So if I understand it correctly, the Panache and Deeds (Ex) the daring champion archtype adds to the cavalier don't do anything, since the cavalier has no swashbuckler levels?

And yes that is one way to look at ioun stones, the other is that each ioun stone is a different source. And thus as untyped bonuses they do stack.

Is this FAQ purely for ability bonuses? Or does it include other referential bonuses as well?

Like say, if I play a daring cavalier, when I use challenge I add my level to damage and if I pick up precise strike I also add my level to damage. Are those considered to be the same source?

And what about orange ioun stones? They add an untyped caster level bonus. If I have multiple ioun stones are they considered to be different sources (different ioun stones) or the same source?

Yeah the FAQ states the synth does increase its hp if affected by Bear's endurance while fused, so I don't see any reason why it wouldn't benefit from a con belt.

Well here is the thread I mentioned : Circlet of Persuasion and Concentration checks

IIRC from the last thread about circlet of persuasion a paladin with divine grace can also apply it to her saving throws.

Quote:

"This doesn't violate the general rule for stacking penalties--each evil eye effect is basically a different source, even though they stem from the evil eye hex (the evil eye hex is much like 5 separate weak hexes under a common umbrella). In the same way that multiple castings of bestow curse on the same target should stack as long as they do different things (penalize Strength, penalize Dex, penalize attack rolls, take no action, and so on), multiple uses of the evil eye hex stack as long as they're targeting different game statistics."

In each case, it is the class feature or specific ability which is the "source" of the bonus. So, bestow curse is a source. The evil eye hex is a source.

I might be misunderstanding it, but the faq says each evil eye effect is a different source. So evil eye is not a source. The effect that is applied appears to be the 'source'?

Combat Maneuver: Alternatively, once per round, you can use telekinesis to perform a bull rush, disarm, grapple (including pin), or trip. Resolve these attempts as normal, except that they don't provoke attacks of opportunity,

If you successfully grapple a creature that is not adjacent to you, move that creature to an adjacent open space (if no space is available, your grapple fails).

Since telekinesis has a range of 400 ft. + 40 ft./level, that can be quite insane.

Other questions.

Independent Research: A wizard can also research a spell independently, duplicating an existing spell or creating an entirely new one. The cost to research a new spell, and the time required, are left up to GM discretion, but it should probably take at least 1 week and cost at least 1,000 gp per level of the spell to be researched. This should also require a number of Spellcraft and Knowledge (arcana) checks.

Adding Spells to a Sorcerer's or Bard's Repertoire: A sorcerer or bard gains spells each time she attains a new level in her class and never gains spells any other way. When your sorcerer or bard gains a new level, consult Table: Bard Spells Known or Table: Sorcerer Spells Known to learn how many spells from the appropriate spell list she now knows. With permission from the GM, sorcerers and bards can also select the spells they gain from new and unusual spells that they come across while adventuring.

If the DM allows me to learn one I encounter, can I cast them even though they aren't explicitly added to my spell list?

It is not just gold dragons. Other dragons have this as well. Umbral dragons for example.

I just assume monsters don't always follow the same rules as players and let it go.

Well they asked for corner cases right? Pointing out that gold dragons don't have cleric spells on the sorcerer spell list but still have them as spells known, seems like just the corner case they'd like to know about.

So it has been pointed out three times (at least) that one needs an attack roll to use Sneak Attack.

Can you quote the rules were it says that sneak attack needs an attack roll?

The only rules I can find, say you can apply sneak attack on attacks. And since spells like fireball are attacks, it would stand to reason you could apply sneak attack damage to those.

Sneak attack requires an attack. Making an attack requires an attack roll. A Fireball (or other aoe spell such as burning hands) does not constitute making an "attack" by the general rules as it requires no attack roll

All offensive combat actions, even those that don't damage opponents, are considered attacks. Attempts to channel energy count as attacks if it would harm any creatures in the area. All spells that opponents resist with saving throws, that deal damage, or that otherwise harm or hamper subjects are attacks. Spells that summon monsters or other allies are not attacks because the spells themselves don't harm anyone.

Fireball is thus definitely an attack and can qualify for sneak attack damage.

Better off with an octopus. Small creature and 10 ft radius ink cloud (while the medium squid only has a 5 ft radius)

I.. ummm.... should read better sometimes. Sorry.

In other words, all PCs of level X with appropriate WBL are the same, no matter how they are built - and equal to CR of X - 1.

Richard

That is not true. PCs of level X with appropriate WBL have a CR of X.

Whenever I see a mod commenting never to do [censored] again, I always really want to know what [censored] actually was.

That isn't an armor bonus, it is an untyped bonus to armor class.

Huh, I should read better, sorry.

If the creature is wearing shoes or other footwear, it gets a +2 armor bonus to AC.

Don't think shoes qualify as armour.