Sir Kibblesnbits's page

* Pathfinder Society GM. 19 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 12 Organized Play characters. 1 alias.


Silver Crusade

so i was looking at the magnimar city of monuments, and there seems to be a lot of smuggling going on. at first i thought it was drugs but later i learned that drugs are actually legal in magnimar. magnimar has very few laws and id assume that those contain the essentials,( no murder, no blackmail, no theft, no asmodius, etc) and not much else. which begs the question: what is being smuggled?

Silver Crusade 1/5

Schwarzer Schatten wrote:
This post should clear any ambiguity.

Ah I see. Strange i thought id looked thoroughly, but i guess not, thank you for showing me this.

Silver Crusade 1/5

Cavall wrote:

The thing you're missing is punctuation. That was fantastically hard to read.

The thread you're quoting was the.. 4th (?) Made by the same person to complain about the lore warden. The answer was clear and simple.

"The fully refined version will be Paizo's default version for adventures, NPC compilations, and the like moving forward".

And for PFS they will clarify what's been cleared, as always.

So basically, snowball was too powerful. Now it's about in line with other spells of it's nature and level.

Sorry for the punctuation, ill be sure try to be as punctual (heh heh heh) as can in future posts. my apologies to all who must see it, as i'm unable to edit that post at this point. As for pfs clarifying things: They have not said anything about snowball in either the additional resources or the campaign clarifications, other than that all the spells in "People of the North" on page 26 are legal. And that all The spells in Ultimate Wilderness are legal for play (except forest's sense, grasping vine, and vine strike. but that's not relevant here.) Which leads me to believe that both are legal, because it doesn't state that we need to use one version over another another. or that one replace another.

as far as
"The fully refined version will be Paizo's default version for adventures, NPC compilations, and the like moving forward"
this sounds like they are stating that paizo themselves will be using the updated version for these things from here on out. This, to me, doesn't seem to relate to what pfs should do, that's just what they will do.

Silver Crusade 1/5

Oops i should have put this in the pfs section. My bad. How does one move a thread?

Silver Crusade 1/5

So ive done most of the research already but I just want to make certain that I'm not missing anything
The spell snowball has two iterations 1 in people of the north and the other in Ultimate wilderness the original had stagger and was not affected by spell resistance I recently found a post that basicly states that if there is a new book out that has the same spell name that you would need to consult additional resources or the campaign clarification to see which to use and, if I understand it right, if there is nothing listed about the spell then I could use one or the other provided i had both otherwise id need to use the rules that are provided in the book i have
Am i missing anything? Thank you in advance.

Silver Crusade

I see,my apologies. I see what you mean now. I'll be sure to expect no.

Silver Crusade

So expect table variation, got it. thank you everyone for your feedback!

Silver Crusade

Ascalaphus wrote:

It depends on whether you consider Familiar a similar class feature to Animal Companion/Mount.

I wouldn't, there are very big differences between those two class features. Familiars are very different from animal companions.

so what if the player were to consider that the animal companion or mount class features is similar to the familiar class feature, would the player then would he be able to play with a riding rat familiar or would it be up to someone elses interpretation as to what is similar and who would that be?

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.

so I've been looking around and haven't found a solid awnser to this question. There's probably an obvious awnser I jus cant find. In the riding rat description it states
"A ratfolk with the animal companion, mount, or similar class feature can select a riding rat as her mount."
In pfs, assuming you have the ratfolk boon, is there anything, by raw, that would keep someone from choosing a riding rat as a familiar?

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.

prehensile hair hex allows you to use touch spells at a 10 ft reach

Silver Crusade

in my rougue build I'm about to dip into witch and I don't plan on taking any other levels in witch. I find my self with two permenatly lvl1 spells. witch would be the best which spells to get if they are always going to be at caster lvl 1?

Silver Crusade

sorry bout the necro didnt see the year. oops

Silver Crusade

here's a question say a Shadow Dancer, three turns into combat, wants to disappear makes a stealth check, using hide in plain sight, succeeds and makes a a full attack using melee weapons. Does the enemy become flat-footed from this? If so is this only for the first attack or for all attacks that round? Note that the Shadow dancer is not invisible just hidden.

Silver Crusade

oh... i didnt see that. thank you

Silver Crusade

is there a pfs legal way to get more then 2/day uses from the major magic rogue talent? ive been looking all over and cant seem to find anything. is there even a way?

Silver Crusade

I didn't see that was just a sect of pharasma I was doing that is very good to know. thank you all for your answers

Silver Crusade

im not certian that this is the right place for this question,but i couldnt find a better place for it
so me and my group have decided to play the carrion crown and i have decied to play an inquisitor of pharasma and another player has decided to play a witch. in the discription for carrion crown inquisitors it mentions that inquisitors of pharasma often hunt witches.
from what i have read, pharasma is more intrested in killing undead then witches.
so i guess my question is why are these inquisitors hunting witches and will it be out of character for mine to adventure with a witch?

Silver Crusade

Glorf Fei-Hung wrote:
Claxon wrote:

So this rule is specifically about the full-attack action but:


Full Attack

If you get more than one attack per round because your base attack bonus is high enough (see Base Attack Bonus in Classes), because you fight with two weapons or a double weapon, or for some special reason, you must use a full-round action to get your additional attacks. You do not need to specify the targets of your attacks ahead of time. You can see how the earlier attacks turn out before assigning the later ones.

The only movement you can take during a full attack is a 5-foot step. You may take the step before, after, or between your attacks.

If you get multiple attacks because your base attack bonus is high enough, you must make the attacks in order from highest bonus to lowest. If you are using two weapons, you can strike with either weapon first. If you are using a double weapon, you can strike with either part of the weapon first.

Deciding between an Attack or a Full Attack: After your first attack, you can decide to take a move action instead of making your remaining attacks, depending on how the first attack turns out and assuming you have not already taken a move action this round. If you've already taken a 5-foot step, you can't use your move action to move any distance, but you could still use a different kind of move action.

I would say that since you never actually used the benefits of Spell Combat (but presumably took the penalty to your attack roll) that not only do you not need to cast a spell, but you could actually take a move action.

At the time when the core rules were written since spell combat didn't exist I think it wasn't considered how another type of full-round action attack might interact with this rule, that is specific to the full-attack action which is a specific kind of full round action.

Agreed, in PFS this is really how this should have played out. I'd recommend bringing this to your GM's attention so he can adjust accordingly in the future

thanks this has been very informative, ill be sure to bring this to his attention, thanks everyone :D

Silver Crusade

so in pfs i was playing a magus and had declared that i would be using spell combat. i chose to hit with my sword first, unexpectedly that killed the creature. i decided that would be the end of my turn since the other enemys were too far away but the gm said that because i had declared spell combat that i was required to cast a spell now.
is that true? and if not would i have been able to take a move action if i didnt complete the full round action?