Thewms's page

Organized Play Member. 291 posts (304 including aliases). No reviews. 3 lists. No wishlists. 8 Organized Play characters. 2 aliases.


1 to 50 of 291 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>
Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Tender Tendrils wrote:
...sweet homebrew-monster goodness...

Excellent! I will be using that goblin snake for sure.

Thank you!

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

This is a level 4 Trailgaunt I needed for my home game. I will try to post any other creatures I make/convert in the future for you lovely folks to use.
Feedback and criticism are always welcome.

The dreaded trailgaunt is a form of undead that plagues regions where travelers have long trod the roads. Legends hold that trailgaunts rise from the remains of seasoned travelers who became lost and then perished from exposure or starvation, suffering great shame and humiliation to have come to such unexpected and lonely ends in addition to their physical torment. Trailgaunts seek travelers to avenge themselves upon and are driven to feast upon the feet of those they slaughter, often leaving the maimed bodies to rise as new trailgaunts with the setting of the next sun. Trailgaunts with intact feet are rare, yet even those fortunate enough to retain all their toes are slow and clumsy.

Trailgaunts are particularly feared in nomadic societies, and stories of how these undead creatures relentlessly stalk those who commit crimes are popular. The most common tales focus on a hunter who abandons a partner in the wild and then prospers on the profits of the hunt for a year before the betrayed partner finally catches up to the traitor and kills him as he sleeps. Many variations on this tale exist, but they inevitably revolve around themes of treachery and relentless pursuit.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------
[Uncommon] [NE] [Medium] [Undead]
Perception +8; Darkvision.
Languages Common.
Skills athletics +12, nature +8 [+12 to follow tracks], society +10, stealth +10
Str +5, Dex -1, Con +3, Int +1, Wis +3, Cha +3
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------
AC 20; Fort +12, Ref +6, Will +12
HP 65, Negative Healing; Immunities death effects, disease, paralyze, poison, unconscious
Weaknesses Loathing; Resistances all damage 5 (except slashing)
Mutter (aura, mental, auditory) 10 feet. See Trailgaunt Abilities; DC 18.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------
Speed 10 feet, climb 10 feet, burrow 10 feet; Sudden Lunge; Sure Stride.
Melee [one-action] Jaws +14 Damage 2d8+5 piercing plus Pain
Melee [one-action] Claws +14 (Agile) Damage 2d6+5 slashing plus Pain
Create Spawn Any humanoid creature killed by a trailgaunt becomes a trailgaunt itself at the next sunset as long as the body is both unburied and not within line of sight of a well-maintained road. Spawn so created are free-willed and do not have any of the abilities they had in life.
Loathing A trailgaunt cannot cross a well maintained road. It can burrow under it or climb over it, but it cannot walk across such a barrier. A trailgaunt forced onto a well maintained road must succeed at a DC 20 Will save at the start of each round or be unable to take any actions.
Mutter (aura, mental, auditory) 10 feet. A trailgaunt’s pain-filled muttering and groaning is distressing to hear. A creature entering the aura or starting its turn within the aura must succeed at a DC 18 Will save or become Frightened 1 for 1 minute.
Pain A creature damaged by a trailgaunt’s bite or claws must succeed at a DC 21 Fortitude save or become Slowed 1 and have its speed reduced by 10 feet by pain in its legs and feet for 1 round. Creatures in contact with the ground take a –1 circumstance penalty on this saving throw.
Sudden Lunge[one-action] Once per 1d4 rounds, a trailgaunt can lurch into a burst of motion. Stride up to 40 feet. (when available to use, twitches more violently)
Sure Stride A trailgaunt’s speed is never reduced by difficult terrain, and it can Step in such conditions.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Thank you thank you thank you! You folks have made my [GMing] life so much easier!

Grand Lodge

BellyBeard wrote:
Thewms wrote:

Do Emanations require Line of Effect?

Inspire courage is an Emanation, so if I round a corner am I no longer inspired?

I am confused on this front.

Spells need line of effect from their origin to a creature to affect it (paragraph 2). So yes, losing line of effect to the bard removes your bonus.

Edit to add the similar passage found in the spells chapter which just refers you to the earlier link.

Are there any effects that affect creatures around corners in this edition? is there a difference between an Aura and an Emanation? they seem to be the same. The CRB only describes it as...

"aura An aura is an emanation that continually ebbs out from you, affecting creatures within a certain radius. Aura can also refer to the magical signature of an item or a creature with a strong alignment."

How about the Xulgath (Troglodyte)stench ability? It is an Aura and thus an Emanation but so long as I put a wall in between us I can't smell it?

my braaaaaiiiinnnnn

Grand Lodge

Do Emanations require Line of Effect?

Inspire courage is an Emanation, so if I round a corner am I no longer inspired?

I am confused on this front.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The new PF2 Demo lists conditions and the entry for wounded may give insight to RAI.

"Wounded: You have been badly hurt. Wounded always includes a value. Whenever you fall unconscious, you add your wounded value to your dying value. Whenever you return from unconsciousness, add 1 to your wounded value."

Grand Lodge

I was unsure what to do with the +/- caster level stuff so I left it as is. Any suggestions would be appreciated.

Grand Lodge

5 people marked this as a favorite.

I slaved away for an entire afternoon or two to bring you all a converted version of the beloved sub-system from 1E.

I welcome all criticism and input.

Pathfinder Second Edition Dynamic Item Creation

Grand Lodge

I threw up some alternate versions, including an Iaijutsu you could use every round.

Grand Lodge

Claxon wrote:
He can completely sheath his sword and then attack another target and perform multiple iaijutsu strikes, at least how you have it written now (and I wouldn't change it, because only getting it once per combat makes it basically worthless and there's no good way to balance it IMO).

Actually it's intended to be once per combat and only against a single target.

Iaijutsu only against target of Challenge.
Can only Challenge once per minute.
Can only Iaijutsu a given creature once per day.

so, one target, once per combat.

The Sword Saint archetype in 1E was only able to be used against a single creature once a day and then could only Iaujutsu Strike 3 or so times a day total. It wasn't mechanically very good but it was cool. That's really what I'm shooting for.

Grand Lodge

Tweezer wrote:

I would either reduce the number of added damage dice of the Iajutsu ability by 1, so it starts out as 1d6 and becomes 2d6 at 5th etc. and I would make it a separate feat from “Sword Saint”. Probably both.

Also I would probably reduce Way of the SamuSamurai to “roll 2, take the better”

My reasoning for starting at 2d6 is that Sneak attack starts at 1d6 and scales up the same but can be used many times throughout a combat. Iaijutsu can only be used once per combat so I thought it needed a little more oomph.

Claxon wrote:

Is way of the Samurai rerolling attack or damage? Or both?

In either case I think it should definitely be roll twice take the better.

But I think you should only get to reroll damage, not attack rolls.

I also agree that the status inflicted by Terrifying Iaijutsu is too strong.

Success should probably cause Frightened 1
Failure should be stunned 1
Crit Failure should be stunned 4

I was thinking the reroll was attack because you can only use it once and I wanted to help it avoid those pesky nat 1s. Rerolling damage is a neat concept though. I hadn't thought of that.

I went with Paralyze as a "Paralyzed in fear" sort of angle.

The status inflicted is the same as the Level 3 Paralyze copied exactly with the exception of adding the [Mental] and [Visual] traits. Having the [incapacitation] trait helps with big baddies ignoring the worst of it.

EDIT: I'll lower the roll to x2 instead of x3

Grand Lodge

I am converting a group over from 1E and one of my players loved his Sword Saint archetype Samurai. I threw something together and was looking for some feedback on it. Thanks!

Sword Saint Samurai

Grand Lodge

Does it deal 1 acid damage to adjacent creatures?

Traditions: arcane, primal
Cast: [two-actions] somatic, verbal
Range: 30 feet; Targets 1 creature or object
You splash a glob of acid that splatters creatures and objects alike. Make a spell attack. If you hit, you deal 1d6 acid damage plus 1 splash acid damage. On a critical success, the target also takes 1 persistent acid damage.

splash (trait): When you use a thrown weapon with the splash trait, you don’t add your Strength modifier to the damage roll. If an attack with a splash weapon fails, succeeds, or critically succeeds, all creatures within 5 feet of the target (including the target) take the listed splash damage. On a failure (but not a critical failure), the target of the attack still takes the splash damage. Add splash damage together with the initial damage against the target before applying the target’s weaknesses or resistances. You don’t multiply splash damage on a critical hit.

Also, does the 1 acid splash damage not double on a critical hit?

EDIT and does the target still take the 1 acid damage if you miss?

Grand Lodge

Are reactions like attack of opportunity meant to work like 1st edition?

Core Rulebook page 474 diagram ((emphasis mine))
"2. If Valeros approaches this way to position 2, he triggers reactions from both the hobgoblin and the troll. The troll has a reach of 10 feet,
so Valeros triggers reactions from both enemies when he moves out of the second square and into the third.

"3. ...Because of its 10-foot reach, the troll could use its reaction when Seoni left either square.

This diagram is almost identical to the diagram in the 1E CRB on page 181 but with different text. It was my understanding that in 1E when you left a threatened square and provoked an AoO, you would effectively move back to the threatened square and resolve the attack, then carry on with your movement.

The text from the 2E CRB strongly suggests that you have already left the threatened square and are taking a hit as a result afterward. Is this how it is intended to be run?

Page 474 of the 2E CRB goes on to say... ((emphasis mine))
"Each time you exit a square (or move 5 feet if not using a grid) within a creature’s reach, your movement triggers those reactions and free actions (although no more than once per move action for a given reacting creature).If you use a move action but don’t move out of a square, the trigger instead happens at the end of that action or ability."

The second bolded bit is already a difference from first edition in regards to standing from prone. In 1E the AoO from standing would trigger while you were still lying on the ground and thus taking the -4 to AC. In 2E now it seems that you are now standing and are NOT flat-footed for the triggered reaction.

If this is a change from 1E and the way it is meant to be run then some other oddities come up, namely if the reaction knocks the creature unconscious. Do they fall unconscious in a square now out of reach of the creature who took the reaction? Seems odd at first but maybe the momentum of their movement carried them forward and they fell after losing consciousness?

Am I misunderstanding something here? Are reactions like Attack of opportunity meant to function like 1E or is this something new?

Grand Lodge

Melism wrote:

- Fail the recovery check: DON'T add the wounded value to dying condition increment

Where did you read this or where was it clarified?

Grand Lodge

Slamy Mcbiteo wrote:

Remember it works against players also...the first wizard that they meet will block of the healer in a box and lay down the hurt I guess.

The cleric could break one 5x5 square and get out. A large or larger creature could not. Only a single square breaks at a time and with no burst DC and a lack of non-exploration-squeezing rules, it could take a looooong time to get out.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The Wall of Stone spell states that it doesn't need to stand vertically. This led to a player boxing in a Roc. As a GM I was a bit upset that this spell doesn't allow for a save or have verbage about trapping a creature inside as it did in PF1.

Against a large or larger creature this spell is incredibly effect and allows no save.

Any advice on how to handle this spell?

Grand Lodge

Mark Seifter wrote:
They are visible, and we've made that clearer now, so you might want to Sneak afterwards if you cast invisibly in plain sight.

Thank you Mark. You've squished any arguments before they could start!

Grand Lodge

I'd hate to start this up again but...

While invisible, are spell manifestations you create visible and thus making you Hidden until you Sneak to become Undetected?

"When you Cast a Spell, your spellcasting creates visual manifestations of the gathering magic..."

"...material, somatic, and verbal components are usually noticeable and spells normally have sensory manifestations that would make spellcasting obvious to those nearby."

SNEAK p252
"If you speak or make a deliberate loud noise, you become hidden instead of undetected."

As an aside, It looks like per Identifying Spells p305, you can notice a spell and thus identify it "by seeing it's visual manifestations or hearing it's Verbal casting components." I don't know if the latter was possible post-manifestation-FAQ in PF1. Good to know!

Grand Lodge

Azurespark wrote:

The way I understand it is, if you are at dying 1, and get attacked, your dying value increases by 1 for a total of 2. Now if you also have wounded 1, that would be added to your dying value for a total of 3. And you would be treated as if you had dying 3 for the purposes of determining when you die.

If you have dying 1, wounded 1, and you get attacked, you don't increase the value by 2 unless that attack was a crit.

That is definitely a valid interpretation. Though I am still unsure what the intended interpretation is, especially given the fact that the GM screen says to add the wounded condition to any increases to you dying value.

A dev weigh-in of course would be nice.

Grand Lodge

Bashkinator wrote:
What about failed Recovery Checks? Should we also add wounded value?

I would like to echo this question.

Grand Lodge

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Handy-Dandy Cone Guide

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
ikarinokami wrote:
Bardic Dave wrote:
ikarinokami wrote:
Thewms wrote:
Is someone able to tell me if the Superstitious Barbarian Totem (Instinct?)from the playtest made it into the final version? If so, did the Anathema change in any way?

the instincts are


Did the Witch Hunter Barbarian Feat make it in (free of its association with the Superstition Instinct)? Or did any other similar Feats make it in?
it doesn't look like it. but there are definitely some cool ass barbarian powers.

That's too bad. I hope the anti-magic trope is explored some point in the future. It could be a neat universal archetype.

Grand Lodge

Is someone able to tell me if the Superstitious Barbarian Totem (Instinct?)from the playtest made it into the final version? If so, did the Anathema change in any way?

Grand Lodge

I knew the hardest part about converting Return of the Runelords(1e) over to Pathfinder Second Edition was going to be money and loot, an now with seeing the final Wealth By Level chart in the 2e book I am worried!

The WBL of second edition is quite a bit lower than I thought it would be. I had originally intended to just log all of the loot gained then divide the values by 10 (since silver is now the new standard as opposed to gold in 1e) but this still would put 2e players way way over WBL. 1e APs have always given more wealth than the WBL chart, sometimes even doubling it or more (Return of the Runelords follows this trend) but conversion in this way puts players at 8-9 times over the listed WBL.

am I doomed to just wipe the loot all together and hand pick everything that drops for my players? I was hoping there was a slightly easier way to do this.

LEVEL-----PF1 WBL------PF2 WBL
2---------1,000 gp------30gp
3---------3,000 gp------75 gp
4---------6,000 gp------140 gp
5---------10,500 gp-----270 gp

Any thoughts? I know the GM guide is coming out later this year and will hopefully give some guidance on this matter but I was hoping for something now!

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Link to Golden Road

Grand Lodge

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Chapter 8: The Age of Lost Omens
Page 423: The Golden Road

Trade and travel rule the pathways of the so-called Golden Road, known for its shining sands and economic strength. Much of this region consists of sprawling desert wilderness , but this does not mean that the Golden Road is sparse in population. Coastlines and Rivers serve as the lifeblood of this region, and some caravans brave the heat and dangers of the desert to trade across northern Garund. Some of the oldest nations in the Inner Sea region command this region, and ancient lore and valuable treasures can be found amid the shifting sands and storied cities.

The largest of these cities is the cosmopolitan Katapesh, where mercantilism is overseen by a strange group known as the Pactmasters. Much of the trade in Katapesh in in goods that can be freely exported or imported from throughout the Inner Sea region, but the city does just as much business in avenues normally regulated in the black market of other societies.

Qadira's cities may not be as individually large as Katapesh but the nation's economy is perhaps the strongest. It's certainly the oldest in the region, with support from the long-established Padishah Empire of Kelesh to the east. This, coupled with the church of Serenrae - Perhaps the nation's most successful cultural export to the rest of the Inner Sea region - has secured Qadira's status as one of the most important centers of influence on the Golden Road.

To the west, the five city-states of Thuvia control a legendary artifact called the sun orchid elixir, which grants near-immortality to those who consume it. This treasured commodity is the keystone of Thuvia's place in the Golden Road. Further west, the nation of Rahadoum is perhaps the weakest mercantile link, but the fact that this society has eschewed the worship of gods to place its faith in industry talent of mortals alone gives the nation its own compelling draw.

At the center of the Golden Road lies mighty Osirion, one of the oldest nations of the Inner Sea region. While Osirion was for a time ruled by Qadira, the legacies and monuments of its early days still stand tall and are an indisputable and iconic source of pride and identity to its people. The influence of Osirion's artisans, philosophers, and spellcasters has spread far and wide, particularly via the Esoteric Order of the Palatine Eye, far to the north in Ustalav, and the faith of Nethys, whose not-so-humble beginnings as a mortal wizard can be traced to the very beginning of Orision's history during the ancient Age of Destiny.

Grand Lodge

tqomins wrote:
NightTrace wrote:


Where did this come from :o

PF2 Core Rulebook. I transcribed it from an image in the UK Games Expo interview. See my post here.

Thanks, OP, for deciphering the material that was glared-out in the image I was using.

ah, I knew it must have already been posted somewhere but I wasn't sure where. Danke. Did you already transcribe the Golden Road somewhere?

Grand Lodge

6 people marked this as a favorite.

The heart of Avistan has rotted.

This Region is dominated by Lake Encarthan, a large inland sea that was - until recently - a well-traveled hub for trade. To the southwest stands the militaristic nation of Molthune, which had long engaged in an intermittent war against its northern neighbor, Nirmathas, a wooded nation populated by folk who take their freedom seriously. An uprising of hobgoblins took advantage of this conflict, and while hostilities have abated, the two nations now share their borders with a third: the newborn hobgoblin nation of Oprak.

North of these war-torn nations lie two other lands equally forged in the crucible of conflict. Until recently, the paladins and protectors of the small but strong nation of Lastwall stood fast against invasions from orcs, undead, and the like. The wild and rugged Hold of Belkzen, meanwhile, has long been held by those orcs, ever since they were driven up from the Darklands below by the dwarves during their Quest for Sky thousands of years ago,

Still farther to the south is the nation of Ustalav, a collection of counties each beset with its own manifestation of horror and fear, ranging from the nightmarishly cosmic to the dreadfully infernal.

It was from Ustalav that one of the greatest threats to the Inner Sea region emerged. the ancient lich Tar-Baphon - Known as the Whispering Tyrant - has been defeated twice in the distant past- once by Aroden and once by the heroes of the Shining Crusade, but he has never been truly destroyed. When the magical seals that kept him imprisoned below the ominous tower of Gallowspire were finally sundered in 4719AR, Tar-Baphon emerged, bringing with him devastation on such a scale that the one-time nation of Lastwall, which bore the brunt of his return to the world, has been utterly scoured. It exists now only as the Gravelands - the nation that once stood watch over uprisings now consigned to an undeath of its own. While heroes temporarily thwarted the Whispering Tyrants's immediate plans shortly after he emerged, the lich remains an active menace.

The Whispering Tyrant now rules a kingdom of the undead on the aptly named Isle of Terror in the center of Lake Encarthan. The nations lining Lake Encarthan's shores have all suffered to varying degrees under the Whispering Tyrant's renewed influence, and some are pursuing alliances to resist him. The lich is gathering his resources on the Isle of Terror, and none can say where or when he will strike next.

Grand Lodge

10 people marked this as a favorite.
Charlie Brooks wrote:
James Sutter wrote:
Thanks everybody! And sorry for the red herring about the stances...
It's always good to keep the community on its toes...

That sounds like a stance.

The community gets Stances like fighter: Confirmed!

Grand Lodge

Return of the Runelords (which we haven't even started yet) will likely be the last PF1 AP I GM. By the time our group is finished, I'm hoping that a PF2 AP subscription is out.

Thank you!

Grand Lodge

James Jacobs wrote:
Thewms wrote:

Xin - as in Xin Bakrakhan

"Sin"? "Zin"? "Shin"?

Thybidos - as in the former runelord of wrath
"Thib"? "Tib"? "Thigh"? "Tie"?

Much appreciated!

Xin: "ZIN" but with a bit of gutteral to the "Z" sound, like you're slightly trying to clear your throat.

Thybidos: THIB-e-dos. Thib rhymes with rib.

Thank you Mr. Directorsaur!

Grand Lodge

Xin - as in Xin Bakrakhan
"Sin"? "Zin"? "Shin"?

Thybidos - as in the former runelord of wrath
"Thib"? "Tib"? "Thigh"? "Tie"?

Much appreciated!

Grand Lodge

Are Reactions available to a creature before their first turn in combat?

Page 305, the last point under Step 1: Start Your turn says...

"Regain your 3 actions and 1 reaction. If you have not spent your actions or your reaction from your last turn, you lose them. You can’t hold over actions or reactions from one turn to another turn. Some abilities or conditions (such as the quick and slowed conditions) can change how many actions you regain and whether you regain your reaction. If a condition prevents you from being able to act, you
don’t regain any actions or your reaction."

Perhaps the word "regain" is throwing me off. I can't quite tell if you begin combat with reactions available.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Seems like you're making a chicken out of a feather...but as they say, hard verk pays off!

Grand Lodge

1) Can the trigger for a Readied action be "when someone within range does an activity with the manipulate trait"?
---1.a) Is it too broad?
---1.b) Is it okay for a trigger to rely on something referenced only out-of-character?

I figure this is one of those rules where the specifics are up to your GM but I thought I would ask regardless.


Grand Lodge

Isaac Zephyr wrote:

Whilst my analogy is not perfect for this one feat, I was replying to the complaint of background Lore not auto-leveling. Not the feat and how it functions.

Just to clarify, I don't want the background lore to auto-scale. I want to know if the intention of the feat is to allow the option of selecting the Background skill.

Grand Lodge

David knott 242 wrote:

Note that this thread was started when signature skills still existed. The removal of signature skills may well have rendered this thread moot.

My question has nothing to do with signature skills. Additional Lore feat says...

Additional Lore wrote:

At 3rd, 7th, and 15th levels, you gain an

additional skill increase you can apply only to Lore. When you
select this feat, you gain the skill increases immediately for all
listed levels at or below your current level.

My question is is it intended for these new skill increases to be able to be applied to your background Lore skill and not just the new Lore skill gained from selecting this feat?

If I really want Lore Mercantile for my character should I not select a background that grants it so that I may instead select it with this feat so it auto-increases?

Grand Lodge

it seems bizarre to me that to improve the Lore skill granted by your background (that must have been a big part of your upbringing?) you have to sacrifice your other skills whereas if you take Additional Lore to pick up Lore: Cheese, you will automatically be a Legendary connoisseur of cheddar one day.

Can you select the background skill you already possess for use with this feat? I'd think not :(

Edit: Unless it is purposefully missing the "that" from the sentence to allow you to increase your background Lore in place of the new lore gained?

Grand Lodge

Perhaps it was already mentioned, but Assurance is useful if you are suffering from a number of penalties, right?

Despite the blacksmith...
1. Being terribly sick (you should really be in bed...)
2. Having one eye swollen shut from a bar fight the night before (I told you to put ice on it)
3. Can't for the life of him find his lucky hammer (It's probably still at the bar)
He is still able to accomplish something and not be completely shut down.

Grand Lodge

Thewms wrote:
Culach wrote:

Additional Lore does something else, you get your new Lore subset, but in addition, you get extra skill level ups that you can use to raise ONLY Lore skills to Master or Legendary.

This means that you can basically raise a Lore skill to legendary for a feat, and you can use your other skill level ups to raise something that isn't Lore to legendary.

Can you apply the skill increases to whatever Lore you choose and not just the new lore gained from this feat? The "Special" section suggests it is only applied to the new lore gained, which imo would be lame.


Grand Lodge

Culach wrote:

Additional Lore does something else, you get your new Lore subset, but in addition, you get extra skill level ups that you can use to raise ONLY Lore skills to Master or Legendary.

This means that you can basically raise a Lore skill to legendary for a feat, and you can use your other skill level ups to raise something that isn't Lore to legendary.

Can you apply the skill increases to whatever Lore you choose and not just the new lore gained from this feat? The "Special" section suggests it is only applied to the new lore gained, which imo would be lame.

Grand Lodge

(2 Actions)Ready
"You prepare to use an action that will occur outside your turn. Choose a single action you can use and designate a trigger. Your turn then ends. If the trigger you choose occurs before the start of your next turn, you can use the chosen action as a reaction (provided you still meet the requirements to use it).
If you have a multiple attack penalty and your readied action is an attack action, your readied attack takes the multiple attack penalty as if you had spent your readied attack on your turn. This is one of the few times the multiple attack penalty applies when it’s not your turn. For more information about multiple attack penalties, see page 305."

Can a Monk Ready his Flurry of Blows?

I am bit confused on what is an "Action" vs an "Activity" and if there is even a distinction between the two.

Grand Lodge

Thank you, Diego and Sam! You folks rock!

Grand Lodge

A refund to the original payment method is preferred.
I received the confirmation email. Thank you so much for your help!

One other thing, though. I see that War for the Crown book 6 of 6 is listed in My Downloads. I don't want to download it seeing as I will be refunded for the purchase! Is it possible for you to remove it from the list?

Grand Lodge

I just started the AP subscription and wanted to start my sub with the Return of the Runelords: Secret's of Roderick's Cove but it appears to have swapped back over to WftC at some point during the ordering process.

May I have this changed swapped, please?

Thank you for your help!

Grand Lodge

Eliandra Giltessan wrote:
Dying is very different. No negative hit points. Instead you get the dying condition at 0 hp. If you reach dying 4, you are dead. Even if you are healed to positive hp, you need to make a save to get back up, and you maintain the dying condition.

and another important distinction!

Hit Points and Healing wrote:
When you're reduced to 0 Hit Points, you get knocked out...You immediately move your initiative position to directly before the creature or effect that reduced you to 0 HP.

so even if brought to dying 3 (somehow) your party gets a full turn to get to you to help! This avoids those rare, but crummy situations in PF1 where someone brought you to one point away from negative and your turn was up next. with how high the DCs were, it often became a "roll a Nat 20 or you're dead".

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Fuzzypaws wrote:
As I read it, and I believe was mentioned on the prerelease forum...

I believe you are referring to the exchange below, found in the Sorcerer Class Preview blog.

Captain Morgan wrote:
I hope blasting damage is looking all right. I've been optimistic, but those feats leave me a little underwhelmed at first glance. (Though, if Dangerous Sorcery works off each seperate "hit" for a spell, Heightened Magic Missile is gonna be awesome.)
Logan Bonner wrote:
That's definitely one we're planning to keep a close eye on!
Captain Morgan wrote:

AAAAW HEEELL YEAAAH. If Dangerous Sorcery gives damage to each missile, that spell is gonna be a popular Spontaneous Heighten Choice.

1st level: 3d4+3+3 =13.5
3rd level: 6d4+6+18 = 39
5th level: 9d4+9+45 = 76.5
7th level: 12d4+12+84 = 126
9th level 15d4+15+135 = 187.5
Those numbers are significantly better than what we were seeing for the AoE damage, as I predicted. Especially when you consider it is there's no save
That means a 5th level Dangerous Sorcerer probably won't be one shotting a Red Cap, but if that thing has taken even a single greatsword hit, it is dead. And those higher level numbers.... Mmmf.
Mark Seifter wrote:
Yeah, the wording right now is technically ambiguous on multi-"particle" effects in general, since the entire spell gets the bonus damage. It certainly should not apply to every particle, and I think the best close reading doesn't cause it to do so (though still leaves you questioning exactly where it goes), but I imagine some people are going to be running it the problematic way, which will provide a useful test of both unless we want to just errata it to avoid that variation. This is not just something for the sorcerer feat, it's an issue with any +damage or -damage source (since -3 to all damage is definitely something that can happen and would pretty much render magic missile useless if you applied per missile), as well as resistances and weaknesses. I think it will be clear to most that if a spell 52.5 damage and a feat seems to increase that by 135 damage, something is not working properly.

1 to 50 of 291 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>