Svipdag's page

Hi all,

just a post to see how you rule the item Powder

"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."

Invisibility has a bigish thread going on regarding the total bonuses when you stealth and are invisible.

http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2po5i&page=1?Invisibility-fun

The bonus involved could mean that a character with a +8 stealth modifier and a roll of 6 would require a perception check as high as DC74 to pinpoint.

How does this relate to Powder and what the item implies?

Normally a non-magical mundane item will grant a +2 to +5 bonus. In the event of a DC74 check this is almost pointless. However, the alternative, a Perception based Tracking check seems too easy in comparison. Even on a Hard surface this is a full round action with a base DC20. Thats without the powder. If they are walking on a soft surface the DC could be as little as 10 or 5 for a very soft surface.

Hi all,

just a thought I had today while out walking the dog :)

There has been a lot of comment recently on how unarmed strikes interact with other rules. This seems to stem from the fact they fall out of category. That is they are a natural attack that is a weapon attack, but requires specific magic items etc.

For example, there is the thread on two weapon fighting unarmed strike and a two handed weapon. There is the current monk debate.

There is the two weapon fighting with unarmed strike debate.

Just to name a few...

So could Unarmed strike just be a natural attack? A small slam for humans would do 1d3 damage. It would follow all the rules for natural weapons, so it could only be used with weapons as a secondary attack, but would still allow for great cinematic such as booting someone following a weapon attack etc.

Obviously the monk would require a major rework, and this would never make Core Rules in this edition, but what rules problems would this present?

Any thoughts?

Hi all,

I was just over on a Magus discussion and though I would bring my own experience of the new classes from the APG and UM. I'm interested in how others have found the classes "in game". I know on paper they are supposed to balance, but what have your experiences been like? They have been around a good while now, so I'm interested in what you have experienced, not what you think they should be.

Alchemist: The player was not optimised, but they seemed at the "top end" of power. The core equivalent, the bard, is rarely played, but the alchemist was very popular. The bombs did a lot of damage, expecially if the "Explosive bomb" discovery was used, causing ongoing damage. The class has a lot of utility. There were always enough bombs to go round. They get more every level and the damage increases, so I imagine by higher levels they rarely run out.

Cavalier: Nobody will play one. They figure they are better off playing a fighter or paladin.

Inquisitor: I have only played this class at very low levels. It seems to have a lot going for it. Its resource dependent Judgements are encounter based, so were quite limited at low levels. I would imagine once you can roll these out 2/3 times per day things become a lot easier.

Oracle: I have played a stone oracle to mid-levels. It was certainly not overly powerful. I built it around the "throw rock" revelation as I never assumed the game would last beyond 4th level. As a result it began to lose out, being a pure caster it would have been better to focus on the spell casting, but thats life, and the character is in for the long haul. The large number of spells per day compaired to the cleric seemed to balance out with the lack of channels. I would imagine an oracle of life may be a gm's nightmare in terms of available healing, particularly as selective channel feat is charisma based.

Summoner: Nobody has played one, although after the success of the druid in the group with his animal companion, I think it is only a matter of time. The complexity of the eidolon rules put people off and the fact most of the time you are "playing" your summoned creature.

Witch: We have just had a witch player join the group so very limited experience so far. The hexes seem to be a good power boost on other arcane casters. Its too soon to say how they work out.

Magus: Just reached level 5 in our group and is very powerful. Has good utility, good blast and is ok in combat without that. The arcane pool allows weapon enhancement above that of the paladins divine bond. It has as many combat feats as a ranger of the same level. It is the class most likely to cause an "argument phase", with the wording of class abilities. It is probably the most powerful of the new classes in experienced play in our group.

Let me know, I'm interested in your experiences. I expect there will be positive and negative for each class.

Hi all,

in another system similar to Pathfinder, when a critical hit is scored you have the option of doing a number of things depending upon the type of weapon you are using.

In Pathfinder, this might work by substituting the confirmation roll for a maneuver check to perhaps sunder, disarm, grapple etc. The option would be the players, but it might see combat maneuvers see more action.

So if I'm using a x3 damage weapon I may have the option of a free sunder, instead of doing the extra damage. If I'm using a flail, I might get a free disarm attempt.

Many would just go for the confirmation roll, but it would at least add extra options.

Thoughts?

It seems that rogues are no longer the only ones who can disarm magical traps, but who exactly can...

I was looking at the Ninja and they don't have trapfinding. The Trapper Ranger can, The Urban Ranger at level 3 can, The Sandman Bard can, the Archivist Bard can at 2nd level. The Archaeologist Bard can at level 6.

So it would seem, we have:

Rogue, the Trapper Ranger, The Sandman Bard from level 1.

There is the Archivist at level 2.

The Urban Ranger at level 3.

The Archaeologist Bard at level 6.

Can anyone add to these?

Hi,

I am considering a half-elf cavalier, oracle of nature with a bonded mount. Both of these classes have mounts. Would the benefits stack, or do I just get two horses to ride round on...

Just started playing an oracle and in our first session I was asked by the DM, when do you get your spells back?

The PRD only has the same info as the APG which is "Unlike a cleric, an oracle need not prepare her spells in advance. She can cast any spell she knows at any time, assuming she has not yet used up her spells per day for that spell level. Oracles do not need to provide a divine focus to cast spells that list divine focus (DF) as part of the components."

Do i regain spells like a sorcerer or bard after 8 hours of rest and 15 mins of preperation? Do the spells just renew at midnight? Do they have a specific time of day just like a Cleric, but you don't need to pray?

Thanks for your help :)

I assume its errata, but why do the Drow warriors in the Bestiary have 1d8 HD?

http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/monsters/drow.html#drow

I notice they also only have a +2 to hit with the rapier, even though they have Weapon Finess, a +2 Dex and +1 BA. This has been changed in my copy of the Bestiary, but the D8 HD still remains and the PRD has both errors...

What are the rules for posession by spirits?

There son't seem to be any in the basic bestiary, or the PRD.

3.5 Hordes of the Abyss had some fairly extensive rules, but I wondered if there were any specific to Pathfinder.

There have been quite a few threads that seem to stray into the area of low stats, particularly when it comes to discussing dump stats and the limits of point buy.

The arguments seem to relate to what it means to have a stat of 7 or less, the lowest you will come accross in point buy.

It is difficult to determine objectively what most stats represent, and how low 7 really is. This is particularly so when you have a braod category such as Charisma, or other mental stats such as intellegence or charisma.

Some have argued that a score of 7 is very low, representing a significant disadvantage, but what does a 7 really represent?

The human range in Pathfinder with point buy rates from 7 to 20. The lowest an NPC gets in an attribute if using a standard array is 8. This would suggest a stat of 7 to be very low, especially when you consider every 4th level you can increase a stat by 1 point, for a maximum of 25 at level 20. You can also add age modifiers into this for mental stats, offering up to a score of 28 for a level 20 human with a maximum mental score. At this point 7 seems pretty bad...

However the average score is 10, and the average NPC, even a powerful one can't get a starting score above 17 using the basic profile (15+2 racial mod). Most people in the world are below level 4 according to the Inner Sea Guide, so the rare (PC classes aren't that common) maxed out NPC is going to have 17 modified by age and at least one stat at 8 modified by age. This gives us a range of 2-17 for physical stats and 8-20 for mental stats for the majority of people in the world.

Pathfinder is based off previous incarnations of D&D which used the 3d6 generation system for most individuals in the world. Thus a 7 would not be particularly low, just a little below average.

But how does this actually reflect in the statistics?

The most objective is Strength. The Carrying capacity table on p171 and gives a good objective measure of what a 7 strength represents. You can lift your maximum load over your head, so a character with 7 strength should be able to lift 70lbs over their head, thats 31.75kgs. There are a lot of people I know who are unable to lift that weight above their head free (not on a machine). To me that suggests a score of 7 is not that low.

On the opposite side, the world record for the clean and jerk is 586lbs or at most a strength of 23. That assumes that specialising for a particular feat of strength does not enter the equasion.

Intelligence is another statistic with a defining feature. If you posses a high intelligence you should be able to speak multiple languages. I see a lot of people talking IQ, suggesting that intelligence x10 makes a good interpretation as 100 is average. An IQ of 50-70 suggest mild leraning disability. However is this really the case? Most people I know don't speak more than one language (I'm English...), which would place them in the 11 or less category. I have an IQ of between 125-130, but no second language so I would suggest in light of the Strength scores above, and the lack of second languages that the x10 IQ is not a realistic representation.

So the most arguamentative of stats, as its most frequently dumped and has no impact upon combat, Charisma. This is the most abstract of the statistics. I have seen it suggested that if you have a charisma of 7 then you are repugnant, hideous to the eye, and provoke hatred on sight. In light of the other statistics I would not see this as the case however.

I don't want this to turn into a purely charisma driven debate however, so bear in mind when posting what that 7 represents in strength. Can you shoulder press free 32KGs? Who do you know who can't? I consider myself pretty strong (above average) and can't easily lift more than 130lbs over my head (I scrape a 12 stat in straight terms).

So do you think a stat of 7 is a real outstanding disadvantage or is it simply a -2 penalty to a stat?

Hi,

I was creating a half orc barbarian/ bard/ dragon disciple and was wondering how the Natural Armor would work out.

The character is a 4th level Dragon disciple. This gives a natural armour of:
+1 Natural armour bonus from Draconic bloodline level 3
+2 Natural Armour increase from levels 1 and 4 of Dragon Disciple.

What if I take the Iron Hide feat. This gives a +1 Natural Armour Bonus. Would this then qualify the character for Improved Natural Armour Monster Feat?

If I take the Savage Barbarian Archetype do the bonuses from Natural Toughness at 7th level stack to this?

All these bonuses seem untyped suggesting they would stack (unlike the spell Barkskin that gives an Enhancement Bonus to Natural Armour), however the wording of the Dragon Disciple Natural Armour Increase specifically state that the natural armour stacks, suggesting other types of natural armour may not...

Hi

I was going to include a few 3.5 undead to my homebrew adventure. I was planning on the Bloodhulk and Boneclaw.

The usual changes need to take place, the Hit die drop from D12 to D8, the Base Attack improves from poor to average. The problem is with the special abilities...

Bloodhulks are basically HP monsters. They have the following special abilities.

Fragile (Ex) A bloodhulk fighter takes an extra 1d6 points of damage whenever it takes at least 1 point of damage from a piercing or slashing weapon.
Blood Bloated (Ex) A bloodhulk fighter always gains the maximum hit points possible per Hit Die. In addition, it gains 2 bonus hit points per Hit Die.

With the HP change they lose 40 HP! The trade off for +2 BA seems a little low. They have a Cha of 1...

So I was proposing upping their Cha to 15. This would offset half the HP loss. I was also thinking of dropping the Fragile damage to 1d4 additional for slashing or piercing attacks.

Its not really in the spirit however, as other unintellegent undead such as skeletons or zombies have a flat 10 CHA.

Boneclaws have the following problem ability:
Unholy Toughness(Ex): A boneclaw gains a bonus to its hit points equal to its Charisma modifier to its Hit Dice.

This is either no ability at all as all undead do this in Pathfinder, or rather good if you double its +4 Cha bonus hp giving it an extra 20HP over all. With its bonus to BA of +2 this makes it somewhat tougher.

Otherwise they are pretty simple conversions...

Look forward to your suggestions, but I won't pick them up until tomorrow.

Just one of those annoying pedantic questions...

I was looking at the ogre stats as I was making my own variant race. Looking at the class skills for giant and humanoid you get the following list:

Giant: Intimidate and Perception (bestiary p312)
Humanoid: Climb, Craft, Handle Animal, Heal, Profession, Ride, and Survival. (bestiary p308)

The Ogre has 4 levels of humanoid, with its poor int score this gives it 4 skill points.

The only skills listed with the ogre are climb +7 and perception +2.

Climb works out just fine: 2 ranks, +5 str, +3 trained, -3 armour =7
Perception however is just listed as 2.

Assuming the Ogre spent the other 2 points in perception, it should get the trained bonus from being a giant, thus giving it a bonus of +5.

This assumes 2 points are spent in each, but I can't think of ant other modifiers that could give an ogre a skill of 2.

It could just be ogres don't get perception as a trained skill like other giants, but I'm curious if it is errata.

Hi,

I'm trying to convert my existing campaign to Pathfinder. One of the clerics has war and elf as domains. While War is present, Elf is not. Looking at the other domains there seems to be a pattern.

Level 1- Low power at-will supernatural ability
Level 2- 1st level 3.5 domain spell list level/per day
Level 4- 2nd level 3.5 domain spell list 1/day
Level 8- Higher Power supernatural ability
Level 12- 5th Level 3.5 domain spell list 1/day?
Level 16- 6th Level 3.5 domain spell list 3/day?
Level 20- 9th Level 3.5 domain spell list 1/day

So the elf cleric of War and Elf will not get weapon focus or point blank shot. He will get the War domain and a domain that might look like this

Level 1- ???
Level 2- True Strike level/per day
Level 4- Cats Grace 1/day
Level 8- ???
Level 12- Commune with nature 1/day
Level 16- Find the path 3/day
Level 20- Antipathy 1/day

Any ideas what the 1st and 8th powers should be?
Also I see that 12th and 16th level spells can be 1/day or 3/day...

Help will be much appreciated :)
Thanks