Telrich's page

I'm actually looking to use a weapon with the monk descriptor instead of unarmed strike. There are several weapons I've been looking at. My unarmed damage is useful from a situational standpoint but not what I'm looking for in the concept.
But yeah there is monastic legacy (I think thats what its called) which treats half your nonmonk levels as more monk levels for purposes of unarmed damage. It would be easier to do that, fewer attacks but more damage to make up for that.
I'm wanting this for mostly style effect. I was strongly tempted to go with a staff magus for the awesome factor but decided to wait on whether I would do that or if I wanted another weapon type. So far I'm thinking nine-section whip but that seemed the more minor conflict about the concept I was going for.

It could have some cheese factor to it, yes. In this case, I'm not looking to increase the bab bonus or anything like that, just the number of bonus attacks.
The biggest issue I could see so far is that it does kinda lend another class a full ability from monk, on the other hand you take monk levels and then spend feat slots on getting that full ability that you would not have to otherwise with a full monk.
Next, theres the fact that you have improved economy with the weapon you choose (I'm looking for a onehanded weapon rather than unarmed) since you dont have to spend gold on that additional weapon... but I think this would be a more minor factor (additional weapons also give you the option for more enchantments like defending).
Plus, I wouldn't be using a weapon in my offhand anyway as a magus.

So I'm looking to make a Magus/Monk multiclass character. While I'm starting off at low level (Magus 1/Monk 2), I'm wondering if I could increase my flurry of blows attacks without taking more levels in Monk. If I need to take a feat per additional attack (just like Imp two weapon fighting and Greater two weapon fighting) I'd be willing to do that. Are there such options?
Would it be all that unbalanced to make those feats if there aren't?

That would be nice. Its also why I was hoping the Paizo developers or someone else in the know of the design process could clear it up by stating the intent.

Or an Errata. Errata is nice too.

That's certainly one way of ruling it. Though my concern is that the darkness is now mobile since it is cast on an object, thus making it an easy "I win" button for those with darkvision. A 50% miss chance is significant, and 50% miss chance in an area and can be mobile has game balance concerns for me. Plus a cleric with the Darkness domain has the ability to see through Darkness effects, bypassing the darkvision shutdown of Deeper Darkness. This has even more serious balance issues and has a certain cheese factor since there are really so few ways to counter such a powerful effect. And thats not to mention the fact that if they put the object down, you then have to GUESS which square they are in to even get the chance, and then you still have a 50% miss chance.
For a second level spell, it should not have such wide ranging power. Situational power is one thing, but effects that can be used in such a powerful way so readily should be a higher level effect.

But as for the descriptions, you see my point as to how it seems very twisty and confusing, when it could have been much more clear?

I still don't get why they bothered to include the light level adjustment part of the spell, and at the beginning of the spell like its the primary effect of the spell. Really its almost like they are talking about two different spells in the same paragraph.

Hmm.... I took a closer look at the other related spells. Deeper Darkness is of course a more powerful and wider radius spell than darkness as well as affecting ambient light by two steps. Then I took a look at Daylight... and now I'm more confused.

Daylight is the same level as Deeper darkness, which according to the write of the darkness spell Deeper Darkness is based off of means daylight cannot affect Deeper darkness. And then I read more the description of Daylight.

"You touch an object when you cast this spell, causing the object to shed bright light in a 60-foot radius. This illumination increases the light level for an additional 60 feet by one step (darkness becomes dim light, dim light becomes normal light, and normal light becomes bright light). Creatures that take penalties in bright light take them while within the 60-foot radius of this magical light. Despite its name, this spell is not the equivalent of daylight for the purposes of creatures that are damaged or destroyed by such light.

If daylight is cast on a small object that is then placed inside or under a light-proof covering, the spell's effects are blocked until the covering is removed.

-->**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.**<--

Daylight counters or dispels any darkness spell of equal or lower level, such as darkness."

Alright.. so if daylight is the only spell that can counter darkness, but it emits a Bright light and then 1 step lower radius around it, while Darkness would lower the lighting by 1 step. It would level the effects of darkness of course at its outer rims, except that the lower level darkness spell overcomes the bright light area as well and makes it the prevailing light conditions without the daylight spell.
Not only that, but it also contradicts the aspect of Deeper Darkness, in that only a higher level spell than the Deeper Darkness can affect light within the radius.
Heck, at that point, why include the 1 step lower or 2 steps lower if it blocks all non-magical light, and the daylight spell can only bring the ambient light back to normal... or not affect Deeper Darkness at all for that matter except to counter it in a fashion similar to dispel magic or counter-spelling...

This makes my head hurt...

Well thats the point of this post, to get the actual intent of how the spell is written. What did the developers mean when they wrote it? Because as written, its pretty damn confusing and contradictory in its seeming intent.

Alright, so what I think I'm getting from this is that light that has a source outside the radius still affects the darkness in the normal way, while light sources that enter the magical darkness effectively emit no light;

So say you have a torch and an anti-torch (a stick with darkness on it) that are in a deep cave and are 40 feet from each other. The darkness has no effect on the darkness in the cave. Since a torch emits an area of normal light 20 feet around it and dim light up to 40 feet around it, a patch of the dim light is turned to darkness. Then you move the antitorch 10 feet closer and more of the dim light is now darkness and a small patch of the normal light is now dim. Then you move the antitorch 10 feet closer and the torch light goes out entirely, though it still emits heat and can burn people.

On the other hand, an item with continual flame cast by a cleric is affected as above except it does not go out when it enters the magical darkness.

Have I got it?

"This spell causes an object to radiate darkness out to a 20-foot radius. This darkness causes the illumination level in the area to drop one step, from bright light to normal light, from normal light to dim light, or from dim light to darkness. This spell has no effect in an area that is already dark. Creatures with light vulnerability or sensitivity take no penalties in normal light. All creatures gain concealment (20% miss chance) in dim light. All creatures gain total concealment (50% miss chance) in darkness. Creatures with darkvision can see in an area of dim light or darkness without penalty. **Nonmagical sources of light, such as torches and lanterns, do not increase the light level in an area of darkness. Magical light sources only increase the light level in an area if they are of a higher spell level than darkness.**

If darkness is cast on a small object that is then placed inside or under a lightproof covering, the spell's effect is blocked until the covering is removed.

This spell does not stack with itself. Darkness can be used to counter or dispel any light spell of equal or lower spell level. "

The starred sentences are where I'm confused. It seems to say that torches have no effect inside or outside. Or that no light from torches or even sunlight counts in the area of darkness.

Alright, so I've read over how the spell is described as working. I'm still confused as to how it works.

As written it either reduces the light level by one except that nonmagical light sources that originate inside it might as well not exist for light levels, while ambient light sources outside its radius still affect its light level. And Spells lower level than it are treated the same way.

Or it ignores any nonmagical light source as well as well as any light spell lower than itself and always makes its area pitch black except where higher level spells are involved.

And in either case darkvision functions normally, its cast on an object and therefore mobile, only more powerful light spells counter it and even then only to a limited extent.

If the second interpretation is correct, my concern is that it is in danger of becoming a cheese spell for casters with darkvision... for example any of them who bother to have the spell. In addition, why bother listing the fact that it decreases the light level at the beginning of the spell as if that's the really significant part of the spell? Just say it create a globe of darkness and then list the effects of higher level light spells later.

Not only is does the spell allow a caster (and friends) with darkvision 50% miss chance at no penalty for 10 min per level, but it also makes it hard to solidly target anyone inside it with a melee or ranged attack or spell unless you use area of effect spell, since its an area of solid darkness that grants anyone inside it total concealment.

This seems to be a simple, deadly and horribly unbalanced combination that allows, say, a half-orc cleric with a darkness spell to horribly slaughter anyone in his path (since there are also alot of other penalties applied to a blinded target, ie anyone in total darkness) who does not happen to have a daylight, continual flame, or darkvision spell. Plus the cleric can grant it it any friends with darkvision who stay in the radius the benefits at no penalty as well.

Really, what I'd like is a response from the Paizo team so that I can get what their interpretation of the spell is supposed to be, and maybe reasoning too.