Seltyiel

Siltyn's page

13 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS


Velkyn wrote:
Siltyn wrote:
If said Barbarian is in a clearing surrounded by trees and bushes, and some cut-purses are hidden from the Barb's sight in the trees/bushes, but they can see him clearly...is one to think if Conan starts waving his giant two-handed sword around very adeptly (Dazzling Display)...even though he can't see them, you don't think they will be/could be intimidated?
I fully agree Dazzling Display could be used to intimidate undetected enemies. However, you appear to have implied Demoralize (Intimidate) could be used on undetected enemies. Instead of Dazzling Display, Conan uses Demoralize in this clearing. What's the DC?

Previously, what I meant was the intimidate from Blistering Invective could work against undetected enemies as that spell (at least the intimidate part) works much like Dazzling Display....and AoE intimidate.


The DC is listed right in the rule: 10 + the target’s Hit Dice + the target’s Wisdom modifier. Doesn't matter if he's wandering around town or about to charge into the lair of a ogre. Though he can only do this 1 townsfolk at a time.

The point of Dazzling Display, is to have an area of effect demoralize. BTW, Dazzling Display's description states nothing about having to see anyone...only those within 30 feet have to be able to see you.

If said Barbarian is in a clearing surrounded by trees and bushes, and some cut-purses are hidden from the Barb's sight in the trees/bushes, but they can see him clearly...is one to think if Conan starts waving his giant two-handed sword around very adeptly (Dazzling Display)...even though he can't see them, you don't think they will be/could be intimidated?


Velkyn wrote:


This particular rule has no bearing on whether the mimic (or other undetected creatures) would be affected, however.

True, didn't mean to derail the thread.

Intimidate/demoralize states: "You can only threaten an opponent this way if it is within 30 feet and can clearly see and hear you."

Blistering Invective states: "When you cast this spell, make an Intimidate check to demoralize each enemy within 30 feet of you."

No where I see does it state you must see something to intimidate/demoralize it.

As I think was mentioned earlier, it would be almost like casting a fireball and thinking it wouldn't harm something simply because you don't see it.


Velkyn wrote:


Mind-affecting is a keyword, or descriptor, in Pathfinder. Things that are mind-affecting should be marked as such; many spells and effects are marked that way. You are free to infer whatever markings you choose on abilities and powers, but that is a house rule. I do not disagree with your logic, but not all rules are predicated on logic. Game balance is also a factor.

The bestiary states that "All fear attacks are mind-affecting fear effects."

Intimidate, used to demoralize, causes the Shaken condition, which is a lesser form of fear.

It would seem to me that Intimidate/demoralize is indeed a mind-affecting effect that Undead are immune to.


Velkyn wrote:
Siltyn wrote:
Off topic some, but aren't mummies (and most undead via their undead traits), immune from being intimidated/demoralized?

Undead are immune to mind-affecting effects, like morale effects, but Blistering Invective is not listed as a morale effect, or any other mind-affecting effect. It is tagged as fire and language dependent. Intimidate/Demoralize is likewise not listed as a mind-affecting effect. If the caster and the Mummy share a language, it is affected.

There are several threads about this topic in the Rules forum, like this one and this other one.

Those with Undead Traits have "Immunity to all mind-affecting effects (charms, compulsions, morale effects, patterns, and phantasms)." As such, how could you demoralize something immune to morale effects?


Frytz Bootsmann wrote:

Here is the scenario that spawned this thread.

On my turn, I cast blistering invective, which requires me to make an intimidation check against each enemy within a 30 ft radius. This encompasses both enemies. I truly didn’t know where the mimic was when I cast my spell. I thought the second monster was a golem that was down the hall. It was just dumb luck that the mimic was in range of my spell. Had I succeeded against the mummy it would have been demoralized and would have had to make a reflex save or suffer 1d10 fire damage.

Off topic some, but aren't mummies (and most undead via their undead traits), immune from being intimidated/demoralized?


Read this guide/thread.


I use this to track the various modifiers from buffs, judgements, haste, etc on my Inquistor. Fantastic app!


I've let my group know that I can make them items at 75% of cost, and they are all OK with it. On top of realizing that paying 75% of cost is certainly better than paying 100% of cost, they understand that time I spend creating them items is time I'm not making items for myself. We don't have a lot of downtime in our game, and we don't waive time requirements for crafting.

I'm playing a bladebound kensai and we do loot on a need basis. So I have no need for the high priced armor and weapons(multiple weapons for the dual wielders) they are getting as loot. While others have kept several pieces of gear for their character, I've only just recently got my 2nd piece of loot. Charging them 75% helps to balance the distribution of wealth in our party.

Besides, while we are a group of people that know each other around the table....our characters have only known each other for about a month, and some characters don't really like each other....you don't really do favors for those you don't like. ;)


I'd like a copy of this as well please. Thanks!!

Email:
symmy at cox . net


shallowsoul wrote:
There is nothing wrong with me asking the devs for a ruling on something thats not clear. If you don't like it then don't post, just sit back and see what happens.

How is it not clear? The rules specifically state you make a caster level check. Where in the rules does it say caster level checks fail on a 1?

As others have said, Devs probably aren't going to respond to rules that are plainly stated as to how they work....asking them to is wasting their time.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think this FAQ'd post applies to this question.

FAQ post

"Other than deploying the spell with a melee weapon attack instead of a melee touch attack, the magus spellstrike ability doesn’t change the normal rules for using touch spells in combat (Core Rulebook page 185)"

"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."

Other than the delivering method (melee vs touch), Spellstrike doesn't change the spell. The +3 bonus to hit with shocking grasp applies regardless if it's via touch or spellstrike.


Mathwei ap Niall wrote:
STR Ranger wrote:

Playing Devils advocate here.

I agree with Mathwei that Spell Storing is the Best Enchant a Magus can get on his weapon.

My MOST POWERFUL Magus is actually a straight Hexcrafter with a Familiar (to use wands of Ill Omen) and a Wyroot Scimitar (Made Via Bought Ironwood spell and Masterwork Transformation)upgraded with Spell Storing. Said Magus also has Hair hex to hold rods of Elemental Spell for him.

But I am playing that Magus in a game already. He rules.

So when the opportunity came up to play in a game set in the Worldwound,where energy resistant foes would be the norm, I chose BLADEBOUND HEXCRAFTER for something a bit different and because I knew my spellist would be less useful. Consequently I have a +2 Weapon, that I pump to +4 for fights and extra money that went on getting a higher DC (Headband of Intellect) for my spells AND hexes.

Ranger, HOW are you pumping it to a +4 weapon?

The normal black blade gets an ENHANCEMENT bonus to it based on it's wielders level and the Arcane Pool gives you an ENHANCEMENT bonus as well. Enhancement bonuses don't stack, there is no way to improve that blades bonus without some other class giving you a boost.

The enhancement given from the use of the Arcane Pool does indeed stack:

At 1st level, a magus can expend 1 point from his arcane pool as a swift action to grant any weapon he is holding a +1 enhancement bonus for 1 minute. For every four levels beyond 1st, the weapon gains another +1 enhancement bonus, to a maximum of +5 at 17th level. These bonuses can be added to the weapon, stacking with existing weapon enhancement to a maximum of +5. Multiple uses of this ability do not stack with themselves.