Moon Pendant

The Penecontemporaneous One's page

79 posts. Alias of CanisDirus.


1 to 50 of 79 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Another local GM suggested an interesting (and possibly elegant) idea: 10 + the target's own KAC, since they're being restrained inside their own armor, after a fashion.

I do like Pantshandshake's idea about the DC being linked to the save DC, but I can't figure out how to get there using the grapple rules as they exist currently.

If/when I use this spell, I may just warn the GM in advance and show them this thread and let them take their pick:

- 10 + Caster's KAC
- 10 + Target's KAC
- 20 + 1.5 Caster's CR (unlikely)
- 10 + Spell DC ?
- Just Spell DC ?

9 times out of 10 I'm the one GMing so at least it shouldn't come up, much! :P

Liking and FAQ'ing for the good argument and the RWBY reference.

I'm a full season behind...I need to catch up if I ever get a breather from GMing so many roll20 games...

Garretmander wrote:
While it might not make much sense, I'd say it's still 10+KAC.

The caster's KAC? I mean, with nothing else to go on, it makes just as much sense as the 20 + 1.5 the caster's CR (and a GM on the fly is more likely to accept that number, too).

Since this is from an AP and not a hardcover, I'm not super hopeful for an official FAQ/reply, but still...

5/5 5/55/55/55/5

Dracomicron wrote:
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:

Honestly, the description for this season sounds like it will be exactly what we need at this point in time.

Considering the season's name, can we now all build super edgy characters?

Everyone's based off of hilariously grimdark 90's comics characters, with more armor pouches than Cable.

And yet, you might still have to enter into a negotiation with your GM to have (2000's technology) pistol-retention cords or single/double/triple-point rifle slings at the table with their interpretation on how a gear-clamp functions :P

2 people marked this as FAQ candidate.
Ectoplasmic Snare wrote:
You launch a writhing tendril of ectoplasm to snare a creature. Make a ranged attack roll against your target’s EAC. If you hit, the target can attempt a Reflex save. On a successful save, the target is entangled for the duration. If the target fails, it is grappled and takes 2d6 bludgeoning damage each round it remains so. If the target escapes the grapple, it remains entangled for the duration. While the target remains grappled, you can move it up to 15 feet each time you concentrate on the spell. If the distance between you and the target ever exceeds the spell’s range, the snare disappears. This spell affects ethereal and incorporeal creatures.

Normally, the DC to escape a grapple is 10 + the grappler's KAC. Alternatively, when restrained by bindings/rope it becomes 20 + 1.5 the opponent's CR.

Any thoughts on how to calculate an escape DC from this spell if a target is hit and fails their initial saving throw? Without further guidance, the tendril of ectoplasm is sort of a "binding" and thus 20 + 1.5 the caster's CR, I guess (which seems a bit high to me in the middle of combat)?

Thanks in advance!

Great points and analysis, all. FAQ clicked.

(And regarding Ego Whip vs. Slice Reality, one of these is SFS legal and one isn't, which does matter to a good subset of people, too)

Came up at a recent game that this also affects the Laugh at Danger feat, which is a bit of a shame (I love that feat, but its usefulness greatly diminishes as PCs level up, and since Starfinder's retraining system is the most restrictive of all of Paizo's RPGs...).

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

Now the other question becomes, how does this theorem interact with the double tap feat?

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Starfinder Casper wrote:
huh, so if i use a biohack it doesn't do acid damage?

No - using the caustoject normally does acid and injection. Biohacks work with any attack from an injection weapon, so you're good there.

However, this weapon has extra language saying that you can optionally choose to load syringes into it (i.e. serums or medicinals) which than deal 0 damage and only inject their substances into their targets. That's what the question here is asking, whether or not a biohack can be used from an injection weapon that deals 0 damage.

(The answer to this question will also carry over to 0 damage injection weapons like the wasp-sting family of sniper weapons, too, which is neat)

Using a caustoject's normal attack would function fine for a biohack, but against an acid-immune target, the syringe option for that weapon does becomes viable, as does the question. FAQ button clicked.

This ruling simultaneously answers related questions about Reflecting Armor and the Vampiric Charger, so that's at least three birds with one (magic?) stone!

Your timing is excellent. I was asked two of these by one of my players less than 24 hours ago. FAQ button clicked!

Rysky the Dark Solarion wrote:
As Quidest points out, ghosts are the exception, and look over Undead entries. Pretty much all of them have an innate need to murder for some reason or another.

Except for one ghostly lady on Eox who does color commentary for the undead Howard Cosell (SFS #2-01).

Not to run counter to what Steve wrote, but I rather enjoyed reading the discussion, and am personally with Rysky on this one. I may have even seen the bit of Pharasman lore about harming the cycle of souls, and if I can track it down I'll try to link to it.

Helvellyn wrote:

In the introduction text for Fields of Study it states "Each field’s booster, inhibitor, and breakthrough ability follow the rules for basic biohacks unless specified otherwise".

So with the genetics inhibitor that is (3+key ability modifier) rounds.

I totally missed that. Thank ye kindly!

2 people marked this as FAQ candidate.

Question is in the subject line.

For the Biohacker Genetics Field of Study, the Booster lists a 60 minute duration. But for the inhibitor:

Inhibitor: You deliver a DNA-twisting or material-altering chemical nanite compound into a creature’s body, imparting vulnerability to one type of energy (your choice). If the creature is immune to that energy type, this inhibitor temporarily removes that immunity and gives the creature resistance 20 to that type of energy. If the creature has resistance to that energy type, this effect instead reduces its resistance by 10 (minimum 0). This biohack does not remove a creature’s resistance or immunity to natural hazards or environments, only to damage from energy attacks, spells, and other abilities.

Table-experience suggests that the duration may not matter if this is used by a PC on a monster or enemy. However, for campaigns and longer adventures, knowing the duration could be important.

Thanks very much in advance!

1 person marked this as a favorite.

1 - I could see different GMs ruling each way on that, even though I agree with you.

2 - I was remarking on the coolness that a Biohacker can use a caustoject's normal acid attack in conjunction with a biohack without having to enact the 0 damage syringe option (unless the target is immune to acid).

Here are two odd points that came up when I was discussing this topic with another GM the other day.

1 - Does the weapon target KAC when you load a syringe, or does it stay vs. EAC because the weapon's design is normally to target that?

2 -

Biohacks wrote:
You can deliver any biohack you create with any attack from an injection weapon.

This might be yet another example of poor word choice by Paizo, but that should mean that you don't need to fire a syringe from a Caustoject in order to biohack a target.

Caustoject wrote:
Caustojects create an injectable field that transforms ordinary matter into an acidic compound, disintegrating their targets from the inside.

The weapon (emphasis mine) doesn't lose the injection special property when you're not using a syringe. You just can't use it to fire serums or medicinals without syringes, so it should be good to go for biohackers...just so long as your target isn't immune to acid damage (or if they are, have a backup plan)!

Uchuujin wrote:
I think that is a weapon for proficiency, but not a weapon for runes. An odd corner case.

^ This

CRB p277 wrote:
A shield can be used as a martial weapon for attacks, using the statistics listed for a shield bash on Table 6–7: Melee Weapons (page 280). The shield bash is an option only for shields that weren’t designed to be used as weapons. A shield can’t have runes added to it. You can also buy and attach a shield boss or shield spikes to a shield to make it a more practical weapon. These can be found on Table 6–7. These work like other weapons and can even be etched with runes.

Hope that helps!

Warpriests with martial weapon training are (as far as I can tell) the most straightforward way towards making a Hellknight Signifer in 2nd edition, depending on the choice of Order (requirements: proficiency with heavy armor and your order's favored weapon of the which several are martial).

The barbarian feat "No Escape" reads:

Stride up to your Speed, following the foe and keeping it in reach throughout its movement until it stops moving or you’ve moved your full Speed.

With the trigger:

A foe within reach attempts to move away from you.

Say an enemy is trying to flee from the barbarian and uses two actions to move, but the barbarian has a higher land speed. Would the barbarian with No Escape:

A) Only be able to pursue for enemy's the first (move) action, because this feat gives the barbarian the ability to "stride" once, or B) be able to pursue for multiple (move) actions by the enemy even beyond a single action (on the enemy's part) so long as the barbarian does not exceed the maximum limitations in the feat?

Thanks in advance!

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I concur with BNW. Translated to an attempt at Captaining a sailing ship (via The Princess Bride) -

"Move the thing!" (2 second repeating video clip)

"And that other thing!" (2 second repeating video clip)

Is the Swift Block Caobochon (p. 569) really supposed to be activated as a free action with a defined trigger, or is that an error and should it instead be activated as a reaction?

Thanks in advance!

Also I second the questions about casting from higher level scrolls and whether scrolls need different formulae at different levels.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Tangential question; will rules for Neutral Champions be in Gods and Magic?

Thanks tons - looking very much forward to this book, regardless!

The implication seems to be that it's Engineering, meaning that you would not ignore the Push label for Mystic Haze (or Eldritch Shot which is also a Push action).

Magic Officer Actions wrote:
These actions can be taken only during the engineering phase.

It would have been nice to have it spelled out more clearly, though.

Luis Loza wrote:
All of the deities showcased in the book will feature the basic information required to worship them and play a champion or cleric of their faith (edicts, anathemas, domains, favored weapon, and so on).

Out of curiosity, does this mean that rules for non-good champions* will be appearing in (or prior) to this release?

*he asketh about his favorite 2E class, hopefully?

Thanks in advance (and even if the answer is no, I'm still very much looking forward to this book)!

There is nothing incorrect in what you said.

However, since this forum is called "rules questions" and I have a question about these particular rules, I felt like asking in the hopes of someone seeing it who knows the answer.

Nyerkh wrote:

My issues are with this whole "consumable weapons" thing.

As in : What does That mean ?

If missiles are consumables, what else qualifies ?
Only one out of five missiles has the explode property, so that's irrelevant - but it brings the arrows into question.
They (can) define the damage, like the missiles, and are single use as well. How do they behave ? And if they behave differently, why?
What about the more "standard" options, like the phasing and explosive projectiles ?

We're only going to get more specialized ammunition as time goes, I'd like to know how to handle them.

I kind of hope for either :
- the removal of the "and other consumable weapons" bit from the rules text - and the addition of missiles to the feat's, (new future weapon types can add similar information in their own description),
- an explanation of what is and isn't a "consumable weapon".
- or hell, just make up a weapon property for it. "weapons with this property never add specialization damage". Built-in future proofing.

I stumbled across this thread out of the blue and found this to be a very good question, having not noticed the difference between only grenades being exempt from weapon specialization versus all "consumable weapons" - so I wanted to bump this thread in the hopes of getting more eyes on it.

(If that doesn't work, maybe we should consider starting a new thread for that question in and of itself?)

Now that the Starwright Archetype exists, we know that Inubrix as a special material for armor is intended, which in turn means the original question from Armory's release has now become relevant again, wondering what it does in the hands (body?) of a non-Starwright.'s been about a month.


Anybody hear anything new on this?

Just fishing for opinions (a truly dangerous catch) -

Create Darkness (Alien Archive) wrote:
As a standard action, the creature can create a 20-foot-radius area of darkness centered on itself, which negates the effects of all nonmagical light sources in that area. This darkness lasts for a number of minutes equal to the creature’s CR, and the creature can dismiss the effect as a standard action. The darkness doesn’t move with the creature. Unless otherwise noted, any magic source of light can increase the light level in the area as normal.

Emphasis mine.

Solar Manifestation (Su) wrote:
...You also choose whether your solar manifestation (in any form) either glows brightly with one color common to stars (including blue, red, white, or yellow) or is the perfect darkness of a black hole. A glowing solar manifestation, regardless of its form, sheds dim light in a 20-foot radius. You can shut off the light or darkness as a standard action in order to blend in or assist in stealth, but whenever you enter a stellar mode (see page 102), the glow or darkness returns immediately.

Emphasis also mine.

In a area under the effect of Create Darkness, would a glowing solar manifestation would increase the light level from dark to dim in a 20 foot radius, due to its supernatural source?

The SFS game where this occurred (#2-03) has already passed, and all present at the table agreed on a solution - I'm just curious to see if there are other opinions or things that we didn't take in to account.

Thanks in advance!

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I just wanted to pop in for a second to say thank you to the OP and most of the people commenting on this thread - it has been both educational and entertaining for someone still teaching himself the PF2E rules (since other people are asking him to teach them the PF2E rules...oy).

Thank you for the page reference.
The bedside manner, you can keep.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Thanks for the thoughts on that!

thenobledrake wrote:
I will answer the question with a question: why wouldn't triggers that happen because of a reaction be valid triggers for a reaction?

The crux of the issue that came up in discussion (that prompted the GM to decide to move the game along) was the language of Attack of Opportunity:

Trigger A creature within your reach uses a manipulate action or a move action, makes a ranged attack, or leaves a square during a move action it’s using.

(emphasis mine)

Someone suggested the possibility that using "a reaction" might not be considered the same as using "an action" much in the way that in 1st edition Pathfinder, spells cast as a Swift or Immediate action did not provoke attacks of opportunity, but spells with a casting time of a Standard action or longer did.

Looking at the rules for Investing an Item, it seems clear that if you remove the investiture from an item you previously invested, it still counts against your limit of 10 items per day. Can you reinvest that item if you have not yet reached your limit?

As an example - you invested a Bracers of Missile Deflection (Greater) during your daily preparations, but during your adventuring day, decide that a different party member would benefit from borrowing it, so you remove your investiture and let them take it on. Later that day your party finds a different magical item that does something similar and they return it to you...can you get its benefits back if you invest it like it was a new item (i.e. having the second investment count separately against your limit of 10/day)?

Thanks in advance for any thoughts on this one!

During a PFS game last evening, an interesting situation came up.

PC A (a cleric) was fending off a Skeletal Champion, while PC B (a monk) was fighting two Skeletal Guards. Both PCs were engaged in melee with their opponents. One of the Skeletal Guards rolled a natural 20 in an attack against PC B. PC A declared they were casting the Protector's Sacrifice focus spell as a reaction in order to absorb some of that damage.

The GM, looking at the spell, noted that it had somatic components, giving it the manipulate trait thus meaning that it could provoke the Attack of Opportunity reaction from the Skeletal Champion. However, then the question came up about whether a reaction can trigger another reaction, and whether that reaction could in turn trigger any other the GM decided to let that one go (since the PCs were rolling rather poorly during that encounter anyway).

Doing a search through the forums, I haven't seen a question like this yet (or my search fu is weak). Does anybody happen to know the answer on this one?

Thanks in advance!

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Barsala sounds like a ton of fun. Super wholesome. I'm also picking up more than a little bit of a Mordin Solus (Mass Effect 2-3) vibe, which I love!

I suspect the slight Solus ~ Sui Saolus similarity is likely coincidence, but I'd absolutely love to be wrong about that one!

And that, friends, shows exactly how far I haven't gotten in reading the higher levels of the Operative class! :P

Carry on!

It is likely just an erroneous entry in the chart, but I'm still curious as to What Inubrix does for armor

Fusions seals are still useful under a handful of circumstances.

1 - You find one not attached to anything, and have a weapon with "room" to add it.

2 - You carry a bunch of them with you to hand out to party members for specific purposes (had a Sarenite Priest with several "Merciful" seals of varying item-levels at one of my Gen Con tables because he always wanted to urge the value of defeating enemies without killing them).

Relevant text from Fusion Seals:

It is also possible to place a weapon fusion into a physical object, called a fusion seal, which can then be affixed to a specific weapon and even moved among different weapons.
Removing a fusion seal and transferring it to a new weapon takes only 1 minute and does not require any specific skill training, but the fusion doesn’t function until the seal has been in place on a weapon for 24 hours.

Poorly written/phrased? No doubt. But there are now numerous published adventures where Paizo has fusion seals attached/bolted onto PC weapons (after being taken out of a satchel of off a shelf in a shop) and the seals take effect immediately. The 24-hour restriction (again, poorly worded) only appears in the sentence that discusses removing a seal from weapon A and then placing it onto weapon B. A "fresh" seal, by precedent, appears to function immediately when placed on a viable weapon.

BigNorseWolf wrote:

By the time you have the cloaking field aren't you taking 10 to stealth things and thus auto succeed on any stealth check to trick attack against cr +7 or lower?

Core Rulebook, p. 133 wrote:
Unless you have an ability that states otherwise, you cannot take 10 during a combat encounter. Also, you can’t take 10 when the GM rules that a situation is too hectic or that you are distracted, and taking 10 is almost never an option for a check that requires some sort of crucial effect as a key part of the adventure’s story.

At lower levels (especially given the 10% sell-back value in SF vs. the 50% in PF), cost is a limiting factor. If I recall correctly, this was a level 1 mystic wearing level 1 flight suit armor who had "something" (that I don't recall) occupying one of his hands and wanted to have the option to shoot/cast/cover/etc. with the other.

Apparently I am a dummy sometimes, and with the lead-up to Gen Con, had forgotten that I asked this question here.

The original question came up when a PC spellcaster at my table was wondering whether he could have a hand free to cast spells while still possibly providing harrying/cover fire without having to drop/draw firearms every other round, or if he could just use a 0th-level spell and stop micromanaging his action economy.

Thank you all for your thoughts (and thanks to most of you for keeping it civil).

At first glance, I figured this was super easy - just use the normal DC process for a grenade (10 + half item level + dex mod), but the more I looked at some of them (in this case, the rather neat holo grenade), I began to wonder if the fact that some of these list specific spell and caster levels might affect that.

As such, here I am, wondering if anyone knows for sure or heard any rulings on this sort of thing, since for Society play, individual GM opinions might not hold water at every port-of-call.

Thanks in advance for your thoughts!

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I was, at the time of writing, thinking about the Death domain spell (Death's Call) when asking.

You gain temporary Hit Points equal to the triggering creature's level plus your Wisdom modifier. If the triggering creature was undead, double the number of temporary Hit Points you gain.

The other question with the "Deity's Domain" feat becomes whether variables that normally use Wisdom for a cleric instead use Charisma for a Champion or not.

The subject sort of says it all, here. Because this spell makes "a ranged attack," can the caster choose to try and perform either harrying or covering fire rather than dealing damage with the spell?

Thanks in advance for any thoughts.

I was looking for this rule, too, but couldn't find it. The best I could find was the implication that you can based on how spellcasting classes are listed (level 1 class feats are listed but they don't get class feats until level 2, barring gaining a bonus feat from being a human or somesuch).

If someone knows an actual rule on this, though, I'd love to see it!

6 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite.

Page 67 of Armory lists Inubrix as a special material that can be added to ammo, armor, and weapons. Its full description details what it does for weapons and ammo, but not armor (unless I'm very blind). Does anybody know what it does when woven into armor?

Thanks in advance!

Android (Core) wrote:
Androids have a single armor upgrade slot in their bodies. Regardless of whether androids are wearing physical armor, they can use this slot to install any one armor upgrade that could be installed into light armor.
Integrated (Armory) wrote:
An integrated weapon can be wielded normally or installed in an armor upgrade slot. When properly installed, the weapon is considered to be wielded without needing to assign a number of hands to wield it. An integrated weapon requires the listed number of armor slots for proper installation. An android or any other creature with the upgrade slot racial ability cannot combine its racial upgrade slot with armor upgrade slots to install an integrated weapon. Installing, removing, or replacing an integrated weapon in a suit of armor takes 10 minutes, as if it were an armor upgrade.

Emphasis mine.

Nothing in Armory says that an android can't have an integrated weapon installed into their body's single armor upgrade slot. It just says that an android can't have an integrated weapon that takes 2+ slots by combining their body's slot and a suit of armor's slot.

1 to 50 of 79 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>