Reading the PRD, Arcane Surge and Wild Arcana both state "As a swift action" while neither Inspired Spell nor Recalled Blessing state any action type.
The FAQ does say that both Wild Arcana and Inspired Spell should be standard actions, and further restricts the spells usable to those that can only be cast as a standard action or less. Since the other two abilities are of the same variance, any DM would easily be able to say that the RAI is that all of them should be standard actions with the casting time restriction.
However, if one goes strictly by RAW...
Arcane Surge could be read to allow you to cast a spell as a swift action. It does limit it to spells you prepared that day, or know for spontaneous casters, and doesn't allow metamagic feats but it is still unbalanced considering you could swift cast a summon monster spell or something like create demiplane. It could be read that the swift action is what you need to spend the mythic point which grants you the spell to cast, but you still need to spend the action required to cast the spell. That still makes the spell more powerful than the others since you can use it on full round or longer spells.
Recalled Blessing doesn't specify an action (free, swift, move, standard, full round) so you can take it one of two ways. You can say that you have to use the spell's casting time, since no other time is specified or you fall back to the default time for a Supernatural Ability.
Supernatural Abilities (Su): Using a supernatural ability is usually a standard action (unless defined otherwise by the ability's description). Its use cannot be disrupted, does not require concentration, and does not provoke attacks of opportunity.
That does raise an interesting question though. Since you are using a Su to cast that spell does that mean the spell cannot be disrupted, doesn't require concentration and doesn't provoke an AoO or does it follow the normal casting rules since the Su is just to allow you to cast that spell.
Whenever you use Vital Strike, Improved Vital Strike, or Greater Vital Strike, multiply the Strength bonus, magic bonus, and other bonuses that would normally be multiplied on a critical hit by the number of weapon damage dice you roll for that feat.
As you would normally multiply power attack on a critical hit, you would multiply it when using vital strike.
The real tricky part with Mythic Vital Strike is the part that says you multiply it by "the number of weapon damage dice you roll". In this case, you are rolling 6d6 weapon dice, so you could argue that you should be multiplying the bonuses by 6, not 3.
So with the above stats and gear you'll either be doing 8d6+99 or 8d6+198 depending on whether your DM says you multiply by 3 or 6.
I do not believe that a 5 foot step is allowed since Grease reduces a characters speed by half. As it reduces the characters speed, it would count as difficult terrain which would not allow a 5 foot step.
Grease:
A grease spell covers a solid surface with a layer of slippery grease. Any creature in the area when the spell is cast must make a successful Reflex save or fall. A creature can walk within or through the area of grease at half normal speed with a DC 10 Acrobatics check. Failure means it can't move that round (and must then make a Reflex save or fall), while failure by 5 or more means it falls (see the Acrobatics skill for details). Creatures that do not move on their turn do not need to make this check and are not considered flat-footed.
The spell can also be used to create a greasy coating on an item. Material objects not in use are always affected by this spell, while an object wielded or employed by a creature requires its bearer to make a Reflex saving throw to avoid the effect. If the initial saving throw fails, the creature immediately drops the item. A saving throw must be made in each round that the creature attempts to pick up or use the greased item. A creature wearing greased armor or clothing gains a +10 circumstance bonus on Escape Artist checks and combat maneuver checks made to escape a grapple, and to their CMD to avoid being grappled.
5 Foot Step:
You can move 5 feet in any round when you don't perform any other kind of movement. Taking this 5-foot step never provokes an attack of opportunity. You can't take more than one 5-foot step in a round, and you can't take a 5-foot step in the same round that you move any distance.
You can take a 5-foot step before, during, or after your other actions in the round.
You can only take a 5-foot-step if your movement isn't hampered by difficult terrain or darkness. Any creature with a speed of 5 feet or less can't take a 5-foot step, since moving even 5 feet requires a move action for such a slow creature.
You may not take a 5-foot step using a form of movement for which you do not have a listed speed.
Difficult Terrain:
Difficult terrain, such as heavy undergrowth, broken ground, or steep stairs, hampers movement. Each square of difficult terrain counts as 2 squares of movement. Each diagonal move into a difficult terrain square counts as 3 squares. You can't run or charge across difficult terrain.
If you occupy squares with different kinds of terrain, you can move only as fast as the most difficult terrain you occupy will allow.
Flying and incorporeal creatures are not hampered by difficult terrain.
Edit - I have hit FAQ just for official clarification as one could argue that only spells that specifically create difficult terrain create difficult terrain but still believe the answer is no.
I am searching for PFS legal traits that give stealth or handle animal as class skills for a wayang, but I cannot find any... Am I missing something or does such a thing not exist?
You can only identify a given creature once. But if you identify Goblin A, you can still identify Goblin B 1 minute later.
If that is the case, wouldn't that mean you could use your knowledge checks to learn all about a particular creature instantly? A knowledge check doesn't take an actual action (unless it's untrained and you are using a library), and if you beat the DC you get one piece of knowledge (special abilities, DR, hit die, AC, etc) plus one for every 5 by which you beat the DC. So if there are 4 of the same creature, you could do 4 knowledge checks. Let's say you always beat the DC by 6, that's 8 pieces of information you could learn.
For ease, I have included the Knowledge PRD page here.
Knowledge Page:
Knowledge
(Int; Trained Only)
You are educated in a field of study and can answer both simple and complex questions. Like the Craft, Perform, and Profession skills, Knowledge actually encompasses a number of different specialties. Below are listed typical fields of study.
Arcana (ancient mysteries, magic traditions, arcane symbols, constructs, dragons, magical beasts)
Dungeoneering (aberrations, caverns, oozes, spelunking)
Engineering (buildings, aqueducts, bridges, fortifications)
Geography (lands, terrain, climate, people)
History (wars, colonies, migrations, founding of cities)
Local (legends, personalities, inhabitants, laws, customs, traditions, humanoids)
Nature (animals, fey, monstrous humanoids, plants, seasons and cycles, weather, vermin)
Nobility (lineages, heraldry, personalities, royalty)
Planes (the Inner Planes, the Outer Planes, the Astral Plane, the Ethereal Plane, outsiders, planar magic)
Religion (gods and goddesses, mythic history, ecclesiastic tradition, holy symbols, undead)
Check: Answering a question within your field of study has a DC of 10 (for really easy questions), 15 (for basic questions), or 20 to 30 (for really tough questions).
You can use this skill to identify monsters and their special powers or vulnerabilities. In general, the DC of such a check equals 10 + the monster's CR. For common monsters, such as goblins, the DC of this check equals 5 + the monster's CR. For particularly rare monsters, such as the tarrasque, the DC of this check equals 15 + the monster's CR, or more. A successful check allows you to remember a bit of useful information about that monster. For every 5 points by which your check result exceeds the DC, you recall another piece of useful information. Many of the Knowledge skills have specific uses as noted on Table: Knowledge Skill DCs.
Action: Usually none. In most cases, a Knowledge check doesn't take an action (but see “Untrained,” below).
Try Again: No. The check represents what you know, and thinking about a topic a second time doesn't let you know something that you never learned in the first place.
Untrained: You cannot make an untrained Knowledge check with a DC higher than 10. If you have access to an extensive library that covers a specific skill, this limit is removed. The time to make checks using a library, however, increases to 1d4 hours. Particularly complete libraries might even grant a bonus on Knowledge checks in the fields that they cover.
And as a secondary question, what if you identify a creature in one fight and it flee's and then you see it again in another fight another day?
The knowledge Skill Unlock at 10 ranks states:
10 Ranks: When you successfully identify a creature, you gain a +1 competence bonus on attack rolls, opposed ability checks, skill checks, and caster level checks against creatures of that kind (e.g., glabrezu demons, but not other demons or evil outsiders) for 1 minute. This bonus increases by 1 for every 5 ranks beyond 10 you possess in that Knowledge skill.
In addition, the PRD states that knowledge checks are only made once:
Try Again: No. The check represents what you know, and thinking about a topic a second time doesn't let you know something that you never learned in the first place.
The question I have is:
As you can only make knowledge checks once per creature type, does that mean that the first time you see a creature in battle, if you succeed in identifying it, you get the one minute of bonuses and that's it for the rest of your existence?
If not, what is the limit? Can I 'identify' the same creature again in a fight (Yup, it's still a goblin) or would it be one creature type per battle limit? And if that's the limit, what if the creature were to escape and I ended up fighting it again the next day?
So, I read this as darkness always wins over light unless light is a higher level. The only exception is daylight which always trumps darkness spells but, in the overlap area, only non-magical light sources work. Does that seem to sum up the light vs dark spells portions?
As for the flaming sword, I don't see any text stating that flaming makes the sword give off light as a torch, and none of the spells used to create the flaming enchant are listed as light spells, so I would have to say no. Oddly, all three spells can ignite objects, so you could light a torch from it and the torch would give off light....
OK, I've just spent some time brushing up on 'vice versa' and it seems that this is used for subject-object reversal but not logical reversal. This would lead me to believe that Daylight is negated when it enters an area of Darkness and Darkness is negated when it enters an area of Daylight. But that would mean that the original magical condition, whether Darkness or Daylight, is the dominate condition unless and until it moves into the opposing condition which truly makes no sense.
Edit: When I say "and Darkness is negated" I don't mean that both are negated but that one effect is negated when moving into the opposing effect. I say this because they use "or vice versa" instead of "and vice versa".
Edit2: You know, it would be much easier if they had just said something like "In area's where Daylight and any magical darkness overlap, both effects are negated allowing normal light conditions to prevail."
Daylight brought into an area of magical darkness (or vice versa) is temporarily negated, so that the otherwise prevailing light conditions exist in the overlapping areas of effect.
I still don't see how people get to both being negated in overlapping areas from that.
If both are negated then how are the natural light conditions "otherwise prevailing?" If it meant that then it would say "so that the otherwise existing light conditions prevail."
"otherwise prevailing" means whichever condition was the "other" of the two presented from before the comma prevailed. The use of Prevailing means something had to prevail, and the only that could in this case are Daylight and magical darkness, since they are the only two things that could qualify for the otherwise condition.
That's not what "prevailing" means. It doesn't have to be either the daylight or the magical darkness.
"Otherwise prevailing". The "otherwise" means "if not for this situation we just described". So you're looking for "what was the case before either of these spells got introduced?".
"Prevailing" simply refers to what was the final, net result. It doesn't mean there had to have been some sort of contest with one side failing and the other prevailing. "Prevailing" can simply mean what's currently active, accepted, or in favor. For example, a question without a definitively-resolved answer can still have a "prevailing theory" (the theory most commonly held). In fact, I just looked up "prevailing" on dictionary.com and the top definitions include "predominant" and "generally current".
So no, the "otherwise prevailing light conditions" are not "the light conditions that won this little contest between these two spells". The "otherwise prevailing light conditions" are "the light conditions that would be currently predominant if not for these two spells that just negated each other".
I wonder if perhaps misunderstanding of the term "prevailing" is the...
Okay, lets say the normal light condition is normal light.
Someone casts Darkness, lowering a 15' radius area to Dim Light.
Someone else with Daylight cast upon them then walks into the Darkness.
Daylight is negated by the magical darkness, causing the prevailing light condition to be Dim Light.
I see nothing in the statement that says that Darkness is also negated along with Daylight.
As an aside, even if the Darkness effect is negated, the other, much more potent, portions of Polar Midnight should still be in effect.
Reading this now, but to answer your "why restate the already stated" question. It isn't a restatement. By a reading of Daylight's clause it could be that it's saying that even though I'm higher level than Darkness, I still lose.
And this is the key point of the statement because it seems to give Darkness, a level 2 spell, the ability to negate Daylight
But also allows daylight to negate even a Heightened deeper darkness.
Only if it's a two way negation which it doesn't seem to be from the statement.
As an aside, I don't want Darkness to beat Daylight, and I don't want darkness spells to beat light spells of an equal level but it seems like it was written to be this way.
Reading this now, but to answer your "why restate the already stated" question. It isn't a restatement. By a reading of Daylight's clause it could be that it's saying that even though I'm higher level than Darkness, I still lose.
And this is the key point of the statement because it seems to give Darkness, a level 2 spell, the ability to negate Daylight within it's limited space (20' out of 120' of Daylight). But a clerics Continual Flame would still work in Darkness, or even a mages heightened Continual Flame.
Actually, wait. It can't be the case that both would be dispelled because only one can be brought into the other. Either Daylight must be brought into magical darkness or the magical darkness brought into the Daylight.
Edit: I'm going to sit on this and think a bit, to make sure I'm not being too specific.
Neither is being dispelled. Both are negated where they overlap, regardless of which is moved. That leaves the light in the area of overlap what it would be if neither spell was present.
Where they overlap, they cancel out. That's all.
That would make sense, and it's how I would like them to work, but the wording doesn't seem to state that. I know it's nit-picky but the "or vice versa" along with the "is negated" shows a singularity of effect (one is negated), not a duality (both are negated). The "vice versa" part could mean that magical darkness is negated when brought into Daylight but it most likely means that when magical darkness is brought into an area of Daylight, Daylight is negated. At least in the overlapping area, it's not dispelling Daylight after all.
This interpretation can be further backed up by a portion of the Darkness spell descriptor "Magical light sources only increase the light level in an area if they are of a higher spell level than darkness." This means that a Spell Level 3 Continual Flame would have no effect in an area of Spell Level 3 Deeper Darkness but the Deeper Darkness spell would retain it's full effect.
The more I read, the more it looks like darkness spells were made to trump light spells.
Remember to finish the sentence, as that will help you figure out the meaning:
The whole sentence wrote:
Daylight brought into an area of magical darkness (or vice versa) is temporarily negated, so that the otherwise prevailing light conditions exist in the overlapping areas of effect.
See that? The rules define the result of the situation: the otherwise prevailing light conditions exist in the overlapping areas of effect.
Now, which of your interpretations fits the entirety of the rule?
Answer: neither.
Try this instead: Whenever daylight and an area of magical darkness overlap, BOTH are negated within the area of overlap.
Hope that helps!
EDIT: Ninja'd.
Except that the original statement is that Daylight is negated. It says nothing about the magical darkness being negated which would mean that the prevailing light conditions would be whatever they were due to the darkness spell.
