Saint_Yin's page

This is the poignant section for the buckler:

You can also use your shield arm to wield a weapon (whether you are using an offhand weapon or using your off hand to help wield a two-handed weapon), but you take a –1 penalty on attack rolls while doing so. This penalty stacks with those that may apply for fighting with your off hand and for fighting with two weapons. In any case, if you use a weapon in your off hand, you lose the buckler’s Armor Class bonus until your next turn.

I'm looking into methods of using a buckler without losing its Armor Class bonus when dual-wielding. I am uncertain if my method works, therefore I'm here to collect a second opinion. Below are my questions:

1) A character is wielding a weapon in both hands and has a buckler equipped. If the character does not use the weapon held by the same limb as the buckler, do they still receive the buckler's attack penalty?

2) If a character uses something such as a Kobold Tail Attachment or a Dwarven Boulder Helm to make their off-hand attacks, is the buckler's Armor Class bonus lost?

For those of you that don't know of this item, here's a link, and I'll quote the description:

This simple bronze amulet depicts a mountaintop being shattered by a sword blow. Twice per day, the amulet’s wearer can make a single melee attack against the ground as a standard action. The wearer can choose a point of origin within 100 feet of himself and apply his attack roll against all creatures within a 20-foot radius of that point. The amulet’s wearer rolls his attack’s damage once and applies it to all creatures in the affected area. The damage includes the weapon’s base damage dice, the wearer’s Strength modifier, and damage from feats such as Power Attack and Vital Strike; it doesn’t include damage from other magical sources, such as enhancement bonuses, spells, and magic weapon special abilities.

I've got a large number of questions, since it doesn't seem to clarify in the description:

1) What kinds of damage is the AoE portion of this amulet? Is it weapon damage (and can therefore be ignored by fine/diminuitive swarms)? Is it bludgeoning/piercing/slashing? Does DR apply?

2) What happens when the attack roll crits? What happens if the confirmation only succeeds on some of the targets within the radius, or some of the targets are immune to critical strikes?

3) Do critical feats apply to targets struck by the attack?

4) Do class abilities which add damage apply to it?

5) Would Arcane Strike's damage apply to it? It's a feat, but it's also flavored as magical.

6) Can the point of origin be at any position within 100 feet, including off the ground?

I've been searching high and low for specifics on how manacles interact with a character. There is only one statement that isn't about calculating the price or how to escape manacles, which is:

Manacles can bind a Medium creature.

When looking through conditions, there aren't that many that explicitly state a creature is "bound." To be specific, the two debuffs that include "bound" is Helpless, and Pinned. Since Pinned also states the creature cannot move, I doubt it's that. Since Helpless states the creature is at an opponent's mercy, I doubt it's that either since a manacled creature can run away.

Looking down the line, my strongest suspicion is that manacles are supposed to act as a Grappled effect, but that also mentions the creature cannot move, and there isn't a numeric value for manacles' Grapple CMB. This makes it hard to gauge if/how the manacles would disrupt spellcasting, if at all.

My question is: What exactly do Manacles do to a creature? Are there any penalties, and if so, what are they?

Bit of a simple question. Ranged attacks deal half damage to objects before reducing from hardness. Elemental spells deal half damage to objects before reducing from hardness. Source

If you cast a ranged spell, does it deal a measly 1/4 damage to objects before hardness? Alternatively, if you use a ranged attack that deals only elemental damage, does it get reduced to 1/4, or 1/2? Does the similarity in wording mean it doesn't stack?

I've been in a few discussions with a friend, and we vehemently disagree about this one topic. He claims that "adjacent" means everything within a creature's area along with everything surrounding a creature, while I am fairly certain that it's only the surrounding squares.

From his side of the fence, he uses the following:
1) In the combat section, there is a statement that "Opponents within 5 feet are considered adjacent to you." Therefore, everything 0-5 feet is adjacent to you.

2) Familiars must be considered adjacent to you for a caster to use Alertness, and they are often in the same square as the character.

3) Tiny creatures have to be in the same square as you to attack. If "adjacent" was only surrounding squares, then nobody would be able to attack creatures in their own square.

And here are my answers to each:
1) In the combat section, there is a statement for splash weapons which is "A hit deals direct hit damage to the target, and splash damage to all creatures within 5 feet of the target." Using the same interpretation of "within" means the original target is hit for both base and splash damage, which is clearly not the case.

2) The wording for familiars is that they must be "in arm's reach." Therefore, if a character can reach their familiar, then they benefit from Alertness. Adjacency is not required.

3) There is a notable difference between a tiny creature attacking a target, and a tiny creature hiding in a target's backpack. What's more, tiny creatures do not have adjacency mentioned when their threat range is reduced to zero feet. A valid alternate statement to describe tiny rules is "cannot attack adjacent targets, must occupy the same square as the target to attack."

As a small conclusion, his interpretation of adjacent is everything in your squares and all surrounding squares. My interpretation is everything in surrounding squares only.

In case you're wondering how this disagreement came to be, the other guy wants to abuse the mechanics of Skald's Vigor with a Bloodrager's Tumor Familiar with the Valet Archetype in conjunction with the Amplified Rage feat. He wishes to keep this familiar fused to his back (and hidden entirely) while still getting all the benefits from it as if it was adjacent to him for the purposes of the teamwork feat.

He complains that my interpretation of adjacency is too strict, but also complains that making familiars 24/7 valid targets for AoE spells, attacks of opportunity, and so forth is unfair.

What're the rules on what is adjacent and what isn't? Can you attack creatures in your own square? How would you deal with a player trying to eke out huge bonuses from their familiar being on the battlefield, but not wanting the familiar to be a battlefield target?

I'm looking into an Arcane Trickster, and when I was selecting spells, I became a bit confused.

Sneak attack damage is applied to any spells that deal damage and have an attack roll. Ability damage is considered damage that also gets multiplied on confirmed critical strikes. According to my searches of this forum, sneak attack damage is dealt as whatever form of damage the spell deals. For example, Ray of Frost deals 1d3+2d6 cold damage, not 1d3 cold + 2d6 typeless damage.

So here's my question: What exactly happens to Calcifying Touch? Do you slap a flatfooted guy for 1d4+4d6 dexterity damage? It's an attack roll that deals a type of damage, but that would make it a touch attack that guarantees just about everything gets petrified in a single touch.

Arcane Trickster has clerification for spells without an attack roll that it must be hit-point damage, but I'm just not finding a rule for those that do not fall into Surprise Spells.

I've recently been in a conversation about the rules behind damage reduction when it stacks.

The exact quote from the srd is as follows:

If a creature has damage reduction from more than one source, the two forms of damage reduction do not stack. Instead, the creature gets the benefit of the best damage reduction in a given situation.

In this general rule, it states that damage reduction does not stack. It only uses the most effective type, so if a creature had DR 10/evil and DR 5/-, the 5 would only apply to evil-typed damage, and all other sources would be reduced by 10.

However, there are items and feats which state that they stack with other sources. As two examples, there is the Hero's Hauberk and the feat, Stalwart.

The hauberk has the following statement:

The damage reduction of this dull gray +1 adamantine chain shirt stacks with any other damage reduction the wearer possesses. For example, a wearer with DR 5/magic would reduce damage from non-magical attacks by 6, and magical attacks by 1.

It additionally performs several other effects, but the important part is what has been quoted. So I've got a few questions based on it:

1) Does the DR from Hero's Hauberk act this way for only the Hero's Hauberk, or is this an effect of making armor out of Adamantine? In other words, does adamantine now stack with existing sources of DR?

2) What is the rule for stacking different types of damage reduction? There is a statement for when DR doesn't stack, but there isn't for when it does, with the exception of the example given in Hero's Hauberk.

3) Should Stalwart stack with lesser forms of class-granted DR because of this? Or should it remain in this weird limbo of stacking with typeless DR only?

I've been in a discussion with another individual over this, and would like to see the general consensus on it. The Arcane Bloodline Arcana reads as such:

Whenever you apply a metamagic feat to a spell that increases the slot used by at least one level, increase the spell's DC by +1.

We come to a disagreement based on the sentence's structure when it comes to interactions with stuff such as Magical Lineage or Spell Perfection. I'll try to get the evidence for both in a relatively fair manner.

Event: An arcane-blooded sorcerer has a metamagic feat that increases the spell's level by +1. They have Magical Lineage, and cast the spell attached to said lineage with the metamagic feat applied as well (resulting in a final net change of +0).

Does the Arcane bloodline's Arcana activate in this case or not?

Choice A: No it does not.

Reasoning: The wording of the bloodline arcana states the slot used must be increased by at least one level. Therefore, it does not.

Choice B: Yes, it does.

Reasoning: The metamagic feat is the actual subject of the sentence for the bloodline arcana, not the spell. Removing all prepositional phrases from the first half of the sentence results in the following:

Whenever you apply a metamagic feat (to a spell) that increases the slot used (by (at least) one level), increase the spell's DC by +1.

Therefore, as long as a metamagic feat of at least +1 is applied to a spell, the bloodline's arcana should activate, regardless of whether the character has found a way to reduce the metamagic's actual impact on spell slots.

Since we can both see the other side of the argument being a fair enough one, I'd like to see what this forum generally thinks.

After being between a few different tables, I'd like to see how others prefer to handle feat requirements. To simply put it out there, here's the section I've found on feats:

Some feats have prerequisites. Your character must have the indicated ability score, class feature, feat, skill, base attack bonus, or other quality designated in order to select or use that feat. A character can gain a feat at the same level at which he gains the prerequisite.

A character can't use a feat if he loses a prerequisite, but he does not lose the feat itself. If, at a later time, he regains the lost prerequisite, he immediately regains full use of the feat that prerequisite enables.

So there are two major things I take from it:

Personally, I've seen the first rule smudged more often than not, and for good reason. Characters that use an alternate form or some temporary means of gaining abilities or effects cannot spend feats to improve those abilities without their normal form having them as well.

The most blaring example is a druid. Even if they can sit in Wild shape 24/7, it is their normal form that dictates whether they can pick up weapon focus with claws, or multiattack due to having 3 or more natural attacks available. Alternatively, the alchemist and anything gained through Mutagens do not count toward pre-requisites, even though its effects can be made essentially permanent by 7th level (sort of, not really).

There is a "fix" of sorts, in that the character purchases some item that passively grants a desirable effect for the purpose of meeting the prerequisite. For example, it's common practice to purchase an Anaconda's Coils belt to meet the pre-requisite for the Final Embrace featline, which then grants a stronger constrict effect as a part of the feat. Once the feats are taken, the belt comes off and some better passive is placed on, and the character goes about their day benefiting from the feat where they actually wanted it.

I, and several parties I've ran with, believe this is an archaic way to go about things when there's a simple solution through a shift in wording, by changing segment 1 to the following:

1) A character must be able to consistently meet all pre-requisites to take a given feat.

It goes the path of the Fly skill instead of being some mess to be subverted through purchasing random items to be worn until one levels up. A character obviously wouldn't benefit from the feat while they don't meet its requirements, but they will be able to focus their feats into alternate/semi-permanent forms with greater ease.

Anywho, that's my general way of going about it. What's yours? Would you consider this a fair enough houserule to try using yourself?

I apologize for the clickbait title. Since laundry lists have seemed to fail me for the last 4-5 attempts, I'm going to go with a singular topic. I was looking over the Kobold's favored class bonus for Oracle, and it got me thinking: is it unintentionally really strong, or am I misinterpreting it? For the sake of brevity:

Oracle: Add +1/4 to the armor or natural armor bonus granted by oracle spells she casts on herself.

My main question is: does this bonus affect typed armor or natural armor bonuses, such as enhancement or profane, or does it provide an increase to solely untyped natural/normal armor bonuses?

The reason I ask is because the Oracle gets about 1 spell which adds untyped natural armor, and it's an 8th level spell. This is not including Mysteries, but even Nature takes a while before granting an untyped natural armor bonus.

With that said, my other question is: as written, does this favored class stack with itself?

For example, let's say the Oracle casts Stone Shield (+4 armor bonus) and Divine Vessel (+2 natural armor bonus), and is level 16 having taken only the FCB. Would the result be (4+3) armor and (2+3) natural armor?

I’ve been looking into making an alchemist, but I’ve been getting hit by increasingly confusing wording, such that I’m not sure how some stuff functions.

Q1: Do classes that gain a Mutagen (Mutagenic Fighter) stack with Alchemist levels to calculate the duration?

I know Rogues' talents stack and would assume other classes would as well, but since the wording isn’t there, I’d prefer to get an idea of whether a majority hold the same opinion or if there’s something else.

Q2: Can Unstable Mutagen be used with a Cognatogen?

As written, a cognatogen would not have an effect on a roll of 5 or 6. As intended, I’m not sure.

Q3: Can Mutagenic Touch be used with a Cognatogen?

Again, the wording of the spell assume it’s a physical mutagen, except there would be no benefit whatsoever from using it.

Q4: What “effects” of a mutagen are passed to a target through Mutagenic Touch?

The spell only explicitly states the alchemical bonus, penalty, and effective duration. It’s missing a statement on the natural armor bonus and any attached discoveries.

There are a large number of possible effects tied to a mutagen, but to list a few: Feral Mutagen, Elemental Mutagen, Ragdoll Mutagen, and most advanced mutagen effects in Master Chymist.

Q5: Can the penalty from a mutagen or Mutagenic Touch reduce a character’s score to 0?

Combining the content of questions 2 and 3, it is legally possible to grant a -8 penalty to one or more mental attributes of a creature by rolling a 5 with Unstable Mutagen. This is significant enough that some creatures can be reduced to zero in a given mental stat.

There is also the corner case of a Duergar PC with dumped Charisma could take Unstable Mutagen, roll a 5, and penalize their charisma to -1.

And now, onto the Master Chymist.

Q6: Does a Master Chymist’s Mutate ability effectively count as having imbibed a mutagen for the purposes of spells and effects?

While a mutagen is stated as “also causing Mutate,” I’m not sure if Mutate counts as a mutagen. This is potentially significant to its interaction with Mutagenic Touch.

Q7: How does Nimble’s bonus to natural armor interact with a Mutagen’s bonus to natural armor?

It comes down to whether the natural armor bonus is just a natural armor bonus, or if it’s an alchemical bonus to natural armor. I’m not entirely sure.

Q8: Is it possible to get the Draconic Mutagen at level 16?

Draconic Mutagen requires a sum total of 16 Alchemist plus MC levels, but also requires the character to know Form of the Dragon I. FotD I is a 6th level extract, which requires an effective alchemist level of 16 to use. Since Master Chymist doesn’t add an Alchemist extract level at 1 and grants a mutagen at 2, does this mean no one can actually get this mutagen at 16?

I know that spells beyond one’s ability to cast can be written into one’s spellbook, but does this mean the spell is “known” for the purposes of this pre-requisite? For the sake of speed, here’s a quote of the pre-reqs:

The character must have an effective alchemist level (alchemist level plus master chymist levels) of at least 16, must know the form of the dragon I extract, and must have the feral mutagen discovery or advanced mutagen to select this ability.

Q9: Would the effects of Furious Mutagen stack with other size-increasing effects?

To start, here’s a comparison between Strong Jaw and Furious Mutagen.

Each natural attack that creature makes deals damage as if the creature were two sizes larger than it actually is.

The damage dice for the feral mutagen’s bite and claw attacks increase by one die step.

The source, target, and wording of effects are different, but would they stack? I’m still of the belief the answer is yes, but I’ve seen repeated results of generally no, usually because it’s asserted to be “similar wording.”

Q10: Should a Master Chymist be able to take Grand Mutagen without taking Greater Mutagen?

The character must have an effective alchemist level (alchemist level plus master chymist levels) of at least 16 and must have the feral mutagen discovery or advanced mutagen to select this ability.

The above is a quotation of what’s required to take Grand Mutagen via Master Chymist. I’ll ignore the Advanced Mutagen statement, since it’s self-qualifying.

...From poorly designed features! This is my list of all questions and declarations on Kobold-related content. I’d prefer to keep away from making suggestions, and I’m focusing more on what’s written correctly and what could use clarification or clearing up. Why am I doing this for Kobolds, you ask? Because they are best race. Honest.

Standard Racial Traits-

Crafty - Why does this racial trait have +2 to Perception? When calculating racial power (RP) and looking at the alternate racial traits, it’s fairly clear this +2 Perception was appended on to artificially inflate the Kobolds’ starting RP. All of the Crafty-replacing alternate racial traits do not account for this shift in RP, and most people are going to replace it anyways (because while it’s nice that Kobolds are better miners than dwarves, that’s not what most adventurers are looking for).

Alternate Racial Traits-

Beast Bond - Is a Crafty replacement, therefore gives a 2 point loss.

Echo Whistler - Ghost Sound 3/day with a circumstance bonus to bluff when used in a specific environment. Why is this even a trait? Shouldn’t anyone be able to bluff to convince someone their voice is coming from a different direction? Pretty sure anyone should be allowed to attempt this unlimited times per day.

Gliding Wings - See Draconic Wings. Also, since Draconic Wings exists, this is worth roughly 2 RP (static bonus feat), yet it’s replacing Crafty, valued at 7 RP.

Jester - Same problem as Beast Bond.

Shoulder to Shoulder - I like this alternate racial trait, but a racial +1 to Aid Another? Does that mean regardless of the skill check or attack, you’re getting +1 to the D20 roll, or does it mean the bonus of +2 to whatever is increased to +3? I suspect the former, but then that raises the question on whether this racial bonus would stack with other racial bonuses to a given skill check if it’s used to aid another. Does the +1 racial while aiding in climb get negated by the +2 racial bonus to climb checks from prehensile tail?

Spellcaster Sneak - Why is this a 1/day access to a metamagic feat? There is no stipulation that this Silent Spell doesn’t increase the spell slot taken or cast time if you’re spontaneous, so following the general rules of metamagic, this trait is pretty bad. According to the race creation table, giving access to a static bonus feat is 2 RP, so giving access to a static feat limited to 1 use per day? Must be worth less than 2, and this is replacing Crafty.

Wild Forest Kobold - It’s replacing the perception bonus in Crafty to grant a perception bonus. What?

Wyrmcrowned - Crafty is a 7 RP trait. This is a 2.5 RP racial trait. Why is it “diplomacy or intimidate?” Even if it granted both, it would still be 2 RP under. Is it really important enough to justify a 4.5 RP loss to make sure kobolds can’t both diplomacize and cover part of the penalty from being small while using intimidate in a medium+ world?

Favored Class Bonuses-

Barbarian - What does it mean by “Racial” natural attacks? Kobolds can only get one natural attack from racial traits, unless one considers the tail slap gained from Tail Terror as racial. Even if the tailed is valid, that’s one point of damage to two attacks per full round action at the cost of a feat and 4 skill points or health.

Bard - Why is this a bonus to the Fascinate bardic performance when the kobold racial archetype for Bard (Dragon Herald) removes the Fascinate bardic performance? I know they were created in different books, but one or the other should probably change so there’s some synergy.

Racial Archetypes-

Dragon Herald: Why does this racial archetype specifically state it adds Draconic to the Dragon Herald’s list of languages? Kobolds begin speaking only Draconic, so adding Draconic is meaningless for Kobolds. Even if other races were allowed to select Dragon Herald for whatever reason, who would become a herald for a dragon without learning to speak draconic of their own volition? It’s even a bard, so what excuse is there to not spend 1 skill point between levels 1 and 10 on Linguistics to gain full functionality of the ability granted at 10?

Snare Setter: Trapsmithing is nice and all, but there’s a few problems:
1) It doesn’t have a minimum (1) like Trapfinding, which is minor but still noticeable.
2) It states it uses Craft(Traps) while the kobold racial bonus is to Craft(Trapmaking).

Racial Feats-

General: Overall, these feats are why I enjoy playing Kobolds. In my social circles, they’re the go-to race for Humans and Aasimar to pick up through Racial Heritage.

Draconic Breath: This ability functions once per day in the first description, but then the “Special” states sorcerers of the Draconic or Kobold bloodlines can use their Charisma modifier instead of their Constitution to determine the number of uses per day/DC.

In what way is this an error?
1) The feat actually uses the constitution modifier (minimum 1) to calculate the number of times per day a kobold can use the breath weapon.
2) The feat doesn’t have the constitution modifier in the number of uses per day, therefore a non-existent constitution modifier cannot be replaced by charisma and stays at 1/day regardless of bloodline.
3) The feat used the constitution modifier at one point, but was changed to 1/day and the special effect was not updated to remove the Constitution-to-uses statement.

Additionally, why is this feat’s special effect so exclusive? Eldritch Heritage, Draconic Disciple, Scaled Disciple, and now the Bloodrager are all methods of having some degree of access to the Draconic bloodline, but the player must be a Sorcerer to gain the feat’s full benefits.

Draconic Glide: This feat becomes actually worse than nothing if one has the Gliding Wings racial trait. If one does not have Gliding Wings, it grants +2 to saves versus sleep and paralysis and a Gliding Wings equivalent. If one has Gliding Wings, it increases the kobold’s base speed from 30 feet to...30 feet. It even states in the special “instead of the above abilities,” meaning that +2 to saves is not granted if one has the Gliding Wings racial trait, at least RAW. Why is this feat worded in such a manner? It really needs some fixing.

Draconic Paragon: It’s cool and all to be given a natural fly speed, but by requiring 10th level, no one is going to have access to it until 11th with the exception of Rogues. It has poor synergy with Draconic Breath because it shifts the uses from 1 to 2, meaning Sorcerers would not gain any uses per day since it no longer uses a set number. This could easily be fixed by stating it adds 1 use per day instead.

Merciless Magic and Merciless Precision: Why aren’t these tagged as Combat feats? Kobold Ambusher has nothing directly to do with combat, yet it’s tagged as a combat feat. These apply almost exclusively to combat, but they’re general.

Redeemed Kobold: I’ve got to ask, since it only states “for the purposes of channelling positive energy,” does that mean it affects Lay on Hands? I’m a bit confused on the limitations of this feat, other than it must be positive energy and it must have something to do with charisma. If it only affects Channel Positive Energy, then the entry should be fixed from “channelling” to channel.

Race Traits-

Elaborate Trapper: States it’s Craft(trap), which is different from Craft(Traps) and Craft(Trapmaking). Which is it?

Carnation Scales: Is this a trait bonus, or a non-typed? Because it doesn’t say so.

Golden Scales: Again, is this a trait bonus? It’s also one of the few traits I’ve seen give penalties for taking it.

Sneaky Swimmer: Same as Carnation or Golden scales.

Racial Weapons-

Kobold Tail Attachments: The Tail Slap these attachments augment is a secondary natural attack. Once a tail attachment has been equipped, the description states the tail attack is a light weapon. Does this mean with Two-weapon fighting while dual-wielding light weapons, the augmented tail slap will hit at BAB-2 instead of BAB-5?

This thread is to clarify any rules question about how the Primal Companion Hunters works (RAW) or should work (RAI). It has gotten my attention as a relatively more balanced version of Synthesist, and would like to clarify possible imbalances as to whether they're intended or not. To help with future searches, I'm focusing on the specific archetype, which according to my rather generic search does not currently exist in the Rules Questions forum.

Onto the questions!

1) Can/Should the Primal Companion Hunter (PCH) break the maximum number of natural attacks on themselves?

An animal companion transformed in this way cannot exceed the maximum number of attacks available to the eidolon of a summoner whose class level equals that of the hunter.

Assuming the PCH has an Antelope as their companion, this means the companion has 1 natural attack available from itself, and the evolution pool can add attacks until the total reaches the maximum number of attacks for an eidolon of equivalent level. At 20, this is a maximum of 7, so 6 attacks can be added. The abuse comes from this addendum:

If a primal companion hunter's animal companion is dead, she can apply these evolutions to herself instead of to her animal companion.

Since the first quotation states the maximum only applies to the animal companion, limbs permitting, the Hunter should be able to exceed the maximum number normally available to an eidolon, so long as the Hunter is not considered "an animal companion."

2) What is the effect of the large evolution on small, large, or huge creatures?

An eidolon grows in size, becoming Large.

I would assume a small creature would increase two size categories, while a large creature would not change in size. Since the bonuses are not typed as size, I assume those benefits are granted regardless.

The only case I am not sure about is PCH's prestiged into Mammoth Rider activating the effect on their Huge-sized mount. Would it decrease a size category to large? The wording of Large states it "grows," meaning it probably shouldn't shrink to achieve the set size category.

3) Should a PCH be allowed to take the Extra Evolution feat?

The rest are tied to this one:
-What occurs when a PCH multiclasses into Summoner, then takes the Extra Evolution Feat?
-What generally happens with a PCH multiclassed in Synthesist?
-Should evolution pool benefits from different sources consider extra sources at all times?

Example: Player picks PCH, kills companion, then takes Synthesist. Ignoring the natural attacks mess, they devote one evolution pool to stacking an attribute (such as strength), then devote the other evolution pool to increasing their size category. If the pools were tied, they would've had to spend twice as many evolution points for those strength attribute increases because they're benefiting from the Large evolution. However, the two are separate and neither breaks the rules until both are active on the same target.

As the title implies, I'd like to learn more about how "are considered" effects interact with each other.

For example, a Hunter gains access to both Druid and Ranger spell lists, which means at level one they have access to both Shillelagh and Lead Blades. To reduce searching, I'll quote the poignant parts of both.

It deals damage as if it were two size categories larger (a Small club or quarterstaff so transmuted deals 1d8 points of damage, a Medium 2d6, and a Large 3d6), +1 for its enhancement bonus.

All melee weapons you are carrying when the spell is cast deal damage as if one size category larger than they actually are.

For the sake of not quoting every effect, I'll simply list the remaining as if/are considered items/abilities which can increase damage of some type of weapon (generally unarmed strike) that I can remember:

Belt of Thunderous Charging, Impact Weapon enchantment, Strong Jaw, Animal Aspect[Gorilla], Brother of the Seal prestige class (7th), & some mythic items/feats.

Another effect that I've questioned is Muleback Cords in conjunction with a Masterwork Bakcpack.

Long story short:

1) Would Muleback Cords stack with a masterwork Backpack, even though both are worded as "treating strength higher?"

2) Do "are considered" effects stack?
-What can be used to define whether an effect stacks with a different, but similar effect, such as source, targeted object(You vs Your items), activating action (Passive vs on charge), or something else?

I've been wanting to make a build around Shadow Dragon Aspect. While I know that Polymorph effects disable all intrinsic natural attacks of a character, I am not so certain about illusions which "wreath" the caster to grant attacks. I'll list my questions to expedite the process.

1) The attacks are declared primary natural attacks. Does this mean it follows the strength rules of primary natural attacks, in that the caster's strength mod is added to each strike?

2) If a wizard cast this spell while wielding a knife or was carrying a shield, would using the spell's claw attacks disallow them from attacking with the knife or gaining their shield AC for that round?

3) Can attacks the character has available (Tail slap, weapons, etc) be used while Shadow Dragon Aspect is active? If so, can these attacks be used in conjunction with the attacks added by Shadow Dragon Aspect?

Claw Pounce states the following:

When you make a charge, you can make a full attack with your claws.

Assuming that only claws can be used during this full attack charge, I've a few questions:

1) If the Catfolk has Feral Combat Training[claws], would the wording of Claw Pounce result in being able to use Flurry of Blows on a charge? It is considered "a full attack action" and with Feral Combat Training, all attacks can be converted to claws.

2) If the Catfolk is a Synthesist with an eidolon which has more than 2 claw attacks, would Claw Pounce come into play?

3) With a few levels in Alchemist (to acquire Vestigial Limbs x2) and levels in other classes to acquire a second set of claws and enough BAB to get 4 attacks per full attack action, would Claw Pounce allow this character to attack with all four claws in the full attack action?

4) Is the wording of Claw Pounce poor enough to allow a full attack with anything (so long as it includes claw attacks as a part of the full attack action)?

I've gone into a rather heated conversation about the rules behind Natural attacks on the eidolon. To quote the only somewhat relevent section:

(Max Attacks) indicates the maximum number of natural attacks that the eidolon is allowed to possess at the given level. If the eidolon is at its maximum, it cannot take evolutions that grant additional natural attacks. This does not include attacks made with weapons.

If you can find anything else that can be added as evidence, I'll gladly edit it into this post if possible.

My belief is this section is only intended to be used when calculating the maximum number of inherent natural attacks gained through the spending of evolution points.

My primary contender against this line of thinking believes this is an absolute maximum such that if there is a way to gain more natural attacks, they simply can't work.

1) Can an eidolon gain more natural attacks than its maximum through items? To list items of potential impact:
a-Tentacle Cloak (Temporary added attacks, item-based)
b-Helm of the Mammoth Lord (Permanently added attack, item-based)
c-Cloak of the Manta Ray (Permanent pseudo-tail slap[?])

2) Can an eidolon gain more natural attacks than its maximum through temporal effects granted by being merged with the summoner (high-level or Synthesist)? Assuming the Summoner/Synthesist is multiclassing into:
a) Barbarian (While raging [L. Fiend Totem, L. Beast Totem])
b) Alchemist (While Mutagen[Feral Mutagen])
c) Sorcerer/Dragon Disciple (As a free action[Bite + Claws])

This is assuming the eidolon has the necessary magic item slots open or limbs/heads "free" (does not already have a bite/claw attack attached to said extra limbs)

Decided to write out an alternative archetype to naga aspirants designed more to allow any race to pick it up and choose what creature the PC wants to be most often.

It can be found here.

Balance changes from the original:
Aspirant's Bond:
-Instead of a specific list of added spells, the Aspirant may now choose one subschool, and gain access to all arcane spells of that school.

Aspirant's Enlightenment:
-Generalized to affect all saves related to their chosen creature.

Naga Shape:
-Renamed to Alternate Form.
-Size bonuses and penalties now related to starting size of creature and final size. Compared to before: Medium to large gains +2 strength/+2 con (down from +4/+4), small to large loses 4 dexterity (up from 2).
-Now grants druid access to their chosen creature at level 4 (down from 6).

Augmented Form:
-Streamlined to improve uniqueness.
-Number of possible selections has increased from 3 to 5 (Before: 9th, 13th, 17th | After: 6th, 9th, 12th, 15th, 18th). These extra 2 selections can be used to negate the 2str/2con loss from Naga Shape's rebalance.
-Now costs Nature Sense along with previous costs.

I believe the alterations make it relatively balanced for a majority of possible selections, especially existing possible druid shapes. I am concerned it may take slightly too much power out of wild shape, but I digress.

As we all know, kobolds are the race that's far too overpowered when used for any melee class (most notably monks, fighters, and rogues), and I believe I've found the source of the issue: kobolds are breaking several race creation rules. Without a doubt these egregious misappropriations of the race-creation ruleset should be rectified post-haste, for every kobold is simply too strong as it is. In fact, reading any more of this post is valuable time you could be using to agree with me along with the fact that kobolds are mind-bogglingly strong because of these cripplingly over-strong boosts in power level.

1) Kobolds make use of the Greater Weakness attribute allocation. And while it may appear kobolds are hampered by this, in reality they are breaking the rules by having a +2 bonus to dexterity. As proof, I'll quote the exerpt on Greater Weakness:

Greater Weakness (–3 RP)

Prerequisites: Pick either mental or physical ability scores.
Modifiers: Members of this race take a –4 penalty to one of those ability scores, a –2 penalty to another of those ability scores, and a +2 bonus to the other ability score.

As one can see, the rules of Greater Weakness requires the bonus to be a mental stat if the penalties are to physical stats. All kobolds have had far too much physical stats for balance purposes according to this rule clarification, thus why the race has been too strong.

2) Rather than placing the +2 racial bonus to perception outside of Crafty and naming it something strange like Keen Senses, kobolds received this boost as a ninja-buff. It is clearly proof that kobolds are snaking their way into overly high racial power levels through the inclusion of such a broad skill with so many uses, and any dev in their right mind would have made sure that if any buff were to be given to kobolds, it would be a bonus to Profession[dance]. I am not entirely sure how this perception boost made it in, but the primary suspect at this time is hoodoo.

Fortunately, this act did not alter the alternate racial feats which take away Crafty, so as long as a DM makes sure no kobold player keeps Crafty, they can rest easy that this imbalance in the kobold's favor will not affect their game.

3) The final issue I've found with kobolds is in their alternate racial trait known as Dragonmaw. It replaces a measly 2 RP-value trait, but the cost to get such effects puts it through the roof, and in-fact also breaks the rules for bite attacks on a race.

You see, Bite as a natural attack is supposed to start 2 size categories below the base race. It can be taken a second time to increase the bite to 1d3, but after this point it is disallowed from being taken again. This means Dragonmaw must grant Improved Natural Attack(bite) (2 RP cost) after the base (2 RP), but let us not forget it adds 1d6 of any element of damage onto an attack.

The only way to describe this boost would be a 1st level quickened spell with additional power boosts to allow it to be no action and take no save in conjunction with not being considered a spell, so it'd be like 10 RP just for the 1d6 elemental damage.

This totals out at 14 RP for this trait alone, but to be safe I'd consider it 15 because there's so much added by it. This is clearly too strong as it pushes kobolds into the Monstrous Races category, so no GM in their right mind should ever allow a kobold player to get this bite attack until it is properly balanced.

* * *

You can now post your signatures in agreement that these things need to be looked into before kobolds can be considered even somewhat balanced, because clearly they just have too much in their favor as it is.

I am uncertain as to whether this is the correct subforum for this, but I've been working on a sheet to define true RP of various races using a more universal format.

Instead of going case-by-case and allowing potential imbalances to arise, I've been calculating the actual shifts in power from selecting a given attribute. The method which this was accomplished was through cross-comparison of various similar effects found via various sources.

That was something of a mouthful. To put it simply, I compared similar stat boosts, gauged which are most likely to be correct, then compared to similar effects to find any oddities in racial power calculations.

The current sheet can be found here.

Currently, all general discrepancies are listed in the lower right of the first sheet. Later sheets will be audits of races, to which this thread will be updated with suggested fixes (if any).

This thread was mostly to get more minds to work on this normalization effort, along with discussion over the relative balance of racial powers. To start it off, I am currently torn on the calculation for a +4 racial bonus to 1 skill with no limitations (for example, +4 bluff versus +4 bluff only to lie). These are three of the primary examples I used:
Goblin (+4 ride/+4 stealth, 6 RP)
Hobgoblin (+4 stealth, 5 RP)
Tengu (+4 linguistics, 2 RP)

I concluded it is probably 3, since the majority sided on the lower end after dividing the goblin racial trait into its parts.