Verse's page

I think it's better to alter the things you don't like for your game but to deal with the technical wording of the spell, why couldn't I use 4 small stone blocks as feet and cast the spell to merge with them and be supported by them. This would allow it to be cast without native stone outcroppings.

I really like this spell and hate to give up the environments that I can use it in. So a bit of rule lawyering..

While I understand the point you're making, your statement here simplistically glosses over points made earlier, seemingly because you just like the spell and want to use it wherever you like.

The spell is worded in such a way for a reason, not as a technicality, and ignoring this as you are results in an already excellent spell in certain circumstances becoming excellent in a staggering number of situations.

Instead of pretending the wording doesn't mean what it does, think of alternatives to create barriers in situations where stone isn't available (and to be sure, were a player of mine to spend a few actions throwing small stone blocks around the battlefield and then try wall of stone, I'd have to ask how a few small bricks are going to "solidly support" a massive stone wall).

To be fair, if that player instead threw a bead of 'dust of dryness' that had sucked up 100 gallons of water into a battle on a grassy field, then used 'transmute mud to rock', I'd let it adversely affect everyone in the area and then let the player go nuts with wall of stone, and probably throw him or her a bonus as well for being awesome.

Now that's an interesting line:

The wall created need not be vertical, nor rest upon any firm foundation; however, it must merge with and be solidly supported by existing stone.

Seriously, who would write a line that, in effect, reads "The wall need not rest upon any firm foundation but must merge with and be solidly supported by existing stone."

That boggles the mind and is painfully confusing.

I rule that there must be existing stone somewhere around that this wall can at least merge with in some way, like a stone pillar, road, etc. As such, the question above about creating a wall of stone in a field of grass wouldn't fly with me (merge with the stone and rock under the ground, really now, that's stretching quite a bit). My general feeling is that if you adjudicate this spell properly as written , it's no longer the incredibly useful spell Treantmonk treats it as in his guide (though still awesome in the proper environment!).

Verse, I am currently playing an Inquisitor and the skill Monster Lore made me very interested in your third point. My GM and I decided that we would be playing with the dc listed in the PFSRD (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/skills/knowledge). The dc, listed there, is 10+CR to know common creatures' abilities and weakness; it increases to 15+CR for uncommon enemies.

I'm glad you mentioned that Telodzrum because the dc on creature knowledge checks is something I find myself having to remind people of often, mainly because the above isn't quite correct and the mistake is a very, very common one.

.
The DC for common monsters (goblins, kobolds, etc) is 5+CR

The general DC for monster knowledge checks is 10+CR

The DC for particularly rare monsters (like the Tarrasque!)is 15+CR
.

I lay it out this way to make clear that in Pathfinder, by far most of your knowledge checks should be 10+CR (p. 100 CRB, same on d20PFSRD). In the early game you'll likely hit some 5+CR types, but you shouldn't be hitting DC 15+CR checks until you're facing incredibly rare, legendary creatures like the tarrasque, princes of hell / demon lords, or other such singular enemies.

The number of times I've tried to identify something like a vampire, purple worm, ice devil, etc and been told the base DC is 15 and had to point this out has resulted in my trying to spread this knowledge far and wide.

I usually find looking at what schools have high level powers I'd want to use does the trick for determining what to oppose, in addition to spells that it would hurt to live without.

I generally oppose divination and then either enchantment or evocation. Reasons for opposing divination have been touched on nicely earlier, and the couple things I would really miss (greater arcane sight and moment of prescience) I will be able to, at that level, fashion a staff so I can have them available (the fact that divination's lone level 9 offering is rather underwhelming does not help its case).

At 10, opposition research is a great idea, especially if you opposed evocation because now you cash in to evocation for some really good benefits, and while enchantment may be stronger earlier on, spells like the dominations, feeblemind, mass charms and suggestions, and irresistible dance are just nice (and overwhelming presence at level 9 is awesome in concept).

Lastly, an argument in defense of necromancy. I never really raise dead, but have still found the school to be incredibly useful with many spells that are not only likely to see use daily, but that don't cut it as scrolls. I'll just list some highlights because to type a reason for each would make for a scary long post:

False life (and greater), spectral hand, vampiric touch, enervation (good luck beating SR if you're using a scroll), fear, magic jar (this spell is just stupid useful), suffocation, temporary resurrection (seriously, this spell is amazing), waves of exhaustion (the fatigue one is ok, but this spell can change an entire combat), clone, horrid wilting (one of the best blasting spells), mass suffocation, and astral projection (opens some amazing possibilities).

Came across a few good ones this weekend I thought I'd relate:

A couple on saving throws first:

1. If you cast targeted spells at your opponents, you know which ones succeeded on their saving throws (and, by extension, which did not), but you haven't got a clue on successful saves against effect and area spells (p. 216-217 CRB).

2. If you are unconscious you are considered a 'willing' target for spells that require such (ie. shadow walk), but you still get a saving throw as normal against negative effects (think dominate person, slow, etc. (p.567 CRB "helpless").

- A reminder that if you ready an action and it goes off, your initiative count changes and for the rest of combat you go right before the character whose action triggered your readied action (p.203 CRB).

- Finally, spells that have been metamagiced up still count as their original spell level (barring heighten spell, of course) when it comes to using metamagic rods to add a further effect (ie. a maximized and widened fireball (level 3, effective level 9) can still be quickened with a lesser rod of quicken spell (odd, I know) (p.113 CRB).

And a question that's always bugged me if any can help - The core books seem to be extremely vague on what information to give when characters make successful knowledge checks to identify monsters, resulting in widely varied GM results. I know there are some 3rd party solutions but are there any solid guidelines provided by Paizo on what knowledge should be related to characters (because I sure can't find it!)?

Very helpful responses

Now that was enlightening, thank you!

Now I understand RD's earlier point, and will not be screwing this up myself with empowered summoning spells.

No, RD was right on the empowered part. Maximized allows you to get the maximum variable =5, Empower spell adds 50% (or 1d4+1/2).

I would have to look superior summon up, but I am guessing it should be just 1.

total : 7-8, still taking a spell of 4 levels higher if you use a maximize meta rod.

I'm afraid I'm not following you here Remco. Let me throw out a couple examples and then you can correct them for me so I can better grasp what you're saying:

For empower spell: I'm applying it as follows: A maximized fireball from a level 10 caster would do 60 points of damage (10d6 maxed) while an empowered fireball from the same caster would do 15-90 points of damage (10d6*1.5). Is this how empower spell works?

In addition to that, my recollection is that if the above caster threw out a maximized AND empowered fireball, one would still roll the damage as normal to calculate the empowered damage, and then add 60 to this total for the final sum of damage for the spell (ie 75-150 damage all told). Correct or have I missed how these two feats interact?

Maximize and Empower spell will net you 5 + (1d4+1)/2, or 6-7. Add 2 more for superior summons and the demon sorcerer. 8-9.

Alright, now this is funny. I was originally going to reply that it wouldn't be quite as good because RD included 2 extra critters from superior summoning but, despite applying two metamagic feats, there is still only one spell being cast so you'd only get 1 extra off of superior summoning.

BUT

Then I noticed for empower spell he was dividing by 2 instead of multiplying by 1.5! Being a conjurer more often then not, I'd neglected to consider this, but looking at it, the above example would play out as:

Maximized portion = 5 critters

Empowered portion = 1d4+1*1.5, or 3, 4, 6, or 7 critters. (ie. you roll a 1, add 1, and empower to 3, or roll a 4, add 1, and empower to 7.5 and round down to 7).

Superior Summoning portion = 1 critter

Final total: 9-13 critters...

Wow, yet again, I love summoning. That reminds me it might be time to get a rod of maximize spell and turn an empowered summon monster 5 into a truly terrifying number of lantern archons!

Higher ground does not provide a +1 bonus to ranged attacks, only to melee attacks.

Yet another reason not to lean over the edge of one of the wizard's "create pit" type spells, especially given the oft-overlooked point that ending your turn adjacent to one of these means you have to make a reflex save (at +2) or fall in and suffer the consequences (which generally range from screwed to dead).

Actually, I'd take issue with some of the above. Having recently given the SM spells a close read as well as the celestial/fiendish templates in the Bestiary that might be applied, it seems clear these creatures do NOT gain the good/evil subtype.

I know, this sounds counter-intuitive, but in the CRB there is a clear indication that creatures summoned with the '*' next to them always have an alignment that matches your own, regardless of their usual alignment. This gets a bit complex but basically means a fiendish lion summoned by an evil caster would be hedged out by protection from evil, but the same fiendish lion summoned by a neutral caster would not be hindered by that protection from evil spell.

The real nail in the gaining good/evil subtype idea, though, comes from the Bestiary in that creatures with the celestial/fiendish templates, despite gaining smite good/evil, gain a very different one from paladins, mainly because theirs does NOT automatically bypass DR of ANY kind, even DR/good if the creature is using smite evil! In such a situation, the summoned creature gains the bonus damage against the evil creature equal to its hit dice, but again, does not bypass the DR.

Believe me, I wish it were different given I play a conjurer more often than not, but after looking at both entries closely I see nothing that indicates these summons gain the good/evil subtype and thus the corresponding bonuses and negatives. Last reinforcement to this is that the good/evil subtype applies almost exclusively to outsiders, while the summoned animals are magical beasts.

I didn't choose necromancy as an opposed school just so I could pull off thread necros this bad...

Since the topic is pretty much exactly what I wanted to use, my question is simply one to lay out exactly how the smite good/evil versions granted to summoned monsters in the Bestiary works (specifically, animals with the celestial/fiendish templates making them magical beasts):
-
-
* +cha to hit, +HD to damage (this part is simple, now we reach0.

* No matter what the summoned creature's HD, its natural attacks NEVER count as magic with regard to harming incorporeal creatures.

* Even if it possesses DR good or evil, and even if it is using its smite ability, the creature's natural attacks NEVER bypass DR good/evil, the only benefit of smite is in the bonuses to hit and damage.
-
-
Having not seen a good, clear statement addressing the above in the Bestiary FAQ or on the Paizo blog, I'd like to post it here and see if most of the feedback is in accordance with the above.

This is a recent enough topic that I'll just pop my question in here regarding concentration checks and taking damage while casting.

Situation: Wizard is casting a spell with a 1 round casting time (sleep).

Shortly after he begins, a goblin pops the wizard with an arrow for 4 damage. This part I'm fine on, as it's a concentration check of 10 + damage + spell level, or a total of 15 in this case.

My issue comes in when, let's say shortly after this in the same turn before the wizard completes his spell, another goblin charges him and smacks him with a dogslicer for, say, 6 points of damage. Does the new concentration check occur completely separate from the first (ie 10+6+1 for a total DC of 17) OR is the damage from the first attack added in for 10+4+6+1 and a final DC of 21?

My inclination has always been the latter as it's more challenging to cast if you get repeatedly smacked around while trying to complete your spell, but I've never been able to really solidly back up this opinion.

Any help proving this as the former or latter would be greatly appreciated!

Just wanted to pop in with another vote for the teleportation subschool shift ability. Even if you cannot take dimensional agility as ForgottenRider mentioned earlier, that swift action dim door has saved me many times and also provided many opportunities to get into the thick of the action, wreak havoc, and poof back to safety before suffering a whole lot of wrath.

Also, it's bloody well near a get out of grapple free card, even allowing you to use your actions to mess with your enemy of choice before making your exit.

Honestly, it's just a fantastic ability I use constantly.

Seems legit to me.

That said, I don't generally see people with this trait decide to select one of their level one spells as its focus, but that's simply an observation. If you want to be balling a tricked out level 1 spell, this idea seems like an excellent way to get started!

You can mount or dismount a horse as a free action with a DC 20 ride skill check. If you fail it will take you a move action.

Dead on, with one important caveat. You must have a move action AVAILABLE in order to attempt to mount/dismount as a free action.

To clarify that, you can use a move action to get to your horse, attempt a free action mount (you have a standard left which can be used as a move action), and then use your standard action while mounted (assuming you succeeded on the check).

If you take a double move action to get to your horse, though, you're screwed, you cannot attempt to mount up until your next turn.

Wow, lots of good feedback here!

rkraus2: I did knock around the idea of playing an elf, but since I value skill points so highly for this character, the +1 skill point for being human became a de facto +2 int for him, which thus made swinging the elf option a bit too expensive stat-wise for my taste. I'm very fond of elves (my wizard is one), but it just didn't quite work for this character, and since I'm not spending a feat for longbow proficiency anyway (buying bracers for that), the lost bonus feat for being human would really hurt.

I'm with you on the melee idea, good call, especially since Thalin has me considering arcane strike in place of deadly aim.

On the skill vs. hit points, it's a flavor call, but so you know I'm not getting too crazy, I did keep the 12 con for that bonus hp each level, and will likely pick up a +2 con ioun stone at some point to further fill in the gap.

Oh, and UMD, I'm so with you on that. Like point 2 on other ideas for using a paladin spell (forgot I can simply have a scroll of that as well), I plan on carrying a silly number of scrolls and low level wands to make wide use of this wondrous skill.

Mike:: Dead on about ioun stone slotting, worth getting an ebon wayfinder right there (though I may just slot one so I can keep darkvision, something rkraus2 would approve of as he correctly identified vision being important for archers).

The melee build just isn't my thing for this character. I did get a feel for this type via Treantmonk's very nice bard guide, but it just didn't strike a chord with me (though I appreciate the idea).

Sieylianna: Whew, that's actually about what I was expecting in terms of DC's I'd be looking at, primarily with diplomacy, bluff, and sense motive checks, so guess I'm glad I'll be up in that range at later levels. Thanks for the heads up so I can plan accordingly.

Thalin: Thalin, I am quite liking some of your ideas. Honeyed tongue is a great looking spell, though I'll debate taking it as a spell known vs. a wand option (depending on what I can fill that slot with vs. having it on hand all the time and being able to enhance it via silent and extend metamagic rods).

Now dropping deadly aim for arcane strike is an idea I find myself quite liking. You are correct that with the -2 already from rapid shot, tacking on another -3 (at BAB 8) is going to really start cutting into my chances to connect. This idea also covers me if I'm later using an Oathbow and mess up slaying an oath foe and the bow then behaves as a masterwork bow for the rest of the scenario so I can still do magical damage. I'm liking that versatility a lot (also applies to spiked gauntlet blows in worst case scenarios).

Now the summoning part you're right on (my wizard is conj specced and adores summons), but with all these bonuses and this gem discordant voice, I'll be giving serious thought to picking up monster summoning 4 as my last level 4 spell as the synergy with all the buffing is just gold.

general thoughts and questions: This topic is proving very valuable to me in terms of both how to develop my bard and things to look forward to, so thank you!

Flipping deadly aim for arcane strike should fit very nicely in here, great addition!

The fighter dip to open up both discordant voice and clustered shots is exactly the sort of idea I was after.

Going to making all kinds of use of UMD, though with my low wisdom I'll be emulating that score for some scrolls which I assume will be a challenge likely all the way through to level 12.

Aside from my ideas on gravity bow and weapon of awe, does anyone have any other ideas for further boosting arrow damage for this guy?

Thalin: Now there are a couple fantastic ideas, and a welcome heads up on discordant voice and clustered shots as I had not noticed them! With that in mind, I'm rather liking dipping fighter at level 11 to take discordant voice and clustered shots, but looking again I'll likely get Bard 11 for level 12 simply because it gains me a couple useful spell castings and I need it to cap inspire courage off at +3 (if only that kicked in at level 10!).

Great advice, though, I thank you for it and please do throw in any more thoughts you have. Actually, given I'm considering being an Animal Speaker and thus will have all the summon natures ally spells, that voice feat will just be icing on the cake!

Hang on, if I don't take Bard 12, I'll miss out on Soothing Performance. I'm not sure about this Thalin, trading out an incredibly circumstantial and very likely worthless ability for two fantastically useful feats, a slew of new class skills, and a fort save bump, you drive a hard bargain, but I might just go for it, grudgingly of course...

Mike: You will, I think, highly approve of how I plan on using those exact items you mentioned!

Lesser Bracers of Archery: The competence bonus is only for bows I can already use, but I'm ditching that short bow and using the bracers to get me free long bow proficiency (no competence bonus then, but as you indicated, that's what inspire courage is for).

Pale Green Ioun Stone (cracked): Forget the competence bonus to attacks, I'm snagging that wondrous cracked beauty for its alternate ability, a +1 competence bonus to saving throws (I really, really hate failing will saves)!

Inspire Courage: Is now clear to buff me like crazy, and with luck toss in a gravity bow enhanced long bow for 2d6 + strength base damage when the stars align.

Luckily just caught you newest post! Good points there, my plan will be acrobatics to keep me out of melee early on, then at 10 acrobatics gets a massive boost courtesy of perform dance plus I'll pick up dimension door as one of my spells. Other then that, though, you are correct in that melee range will be a weakness for me, thus if you have some other good ideas beyond what I laid out earlier please do tell!

Heh, I'm right there with you on magic bows! Little buggers are tough to pick, and as far as special ones go, Oathbow was looking like the one for me as well, specially since it's a +2 composite already!

Good stuff!

Mike: Very right on that, and a lesson I take to heart (lesser bracers of archery for my longbow proficiency instead of blowing a feat on it for example). Yes, the circlet is very much in this character's immediate future.

Thalin: I was considering that build, but in the end the skill points and slightly less tanked will save won out for me (however, I do quite like that build option as well).

Now about the instrument, everything I've read regarding versatile performance indicates that equipment bonuses (ie. masterwork instruments) do NOT apply when using the versatile functions of each perform skill, and that instead equipment modifiers to that skill specifically win out (ie: boots of elven kind for acrobatics via dance, but not the instrument). Is this incorrect?

On skills, I do agree with you (I do feel some skills need ever-higher bonuses, like sense motive, bluff, and acrobatics), though aside from arcane strike I seem to be taking just about all of the archery feats I can really make effective use of. Did you have some recommendations (aside from some of discarded like vital strike, snap shot, far shot, and improved precise (only because I don't have the BAB for it)?

Sieylianna: Now there is a lot of good advice there, thank you! That's tough on skill ranks in versatile performance skills, but such is life, at least I know to expect it!

The heads up on sleight of hand is appreciated, thankfully, I love Qadira and they seem firmly diplomacy / bit of bluff focused.

Ah, now on the longbow I'm a step ahead of you! Check points 1 and 2 under "Other Thoughts" in my original post and see if you approve of my plan for tackling that particular shortcoming!

Oh my, one of my favorite topics, given my wizard is a scroll fiend.

Let's just get right to it shall we (skipping some already mentioned, and a +1 to AmosTrask32 on the cantrip point):

.

Expeditious Retreat - 1 minute of sprinting on demand, saves a slot (good wand option too).

Protection from Evil - Great for aiding a friend's failed save vs. charm or domination (makes a good wand as well).

Comprehend Languages - Good spell, but not worthy of a slot imo.

Shield - Like exped retreat, 1 minute of goodness, on demand.

Gust of Wind - Not something you use often, but when a stinking cloud or cloudkill are coming your way, this is a godsend (works in a pinch on some swarms and little critters).

See Invisibility - 30 minutes at min wiz casting level makes for an effective on demand tool for foiling ambushes and maximizing the benefit of a glitterdust.

Mirror Image - Because if you've spent your prepared ones for the day and get ambushed, this scroll might just save your life.

Command Undead - The key is to remember mindless undead don't even get a save, so having this up your sleeve might just ruin a BBEG's day.

Ant Haul - Cause loot can be heavy man.

Daylight - Prepared every time, no thank you, but when someone drops a deeper darkness on you, get clear and then invoke safety (of course, if you can't get clear, you're in some trouble since reading in the dark is a big no-no).

Stone Call - Wonderful little spell that barely improves at higher caster levels, aka a perfect scroll candidate!

Fly - This one's pretty obvious.

Touch of the Sea - A nice boost if your journey requires getting your feet wet for a short time.

Water Breathing - If the above just isn't going to cut it.

Endure Elements - Fantastic as a wand, but if you're limited on gold, scrolls will suffice.

Teleport - Sometimes, you just need to get outta Dodge fast, and it may not be prepared (also, makes a great staff).

Silent Image - Another good wand candidate, but hey, if you're poor.

Blur - Cause copping a sneak attack to the kidney hurts.

Glitterdust - Worthy of a slot, but if you've run out, it doesn't hurt to have an ace in the hole, especially vs. invisible enemies.

False Life - Another worthy of daily prep, but if they get cut through, having this on hand if there is combat to come is worthwhile.

.

That's a good list of my favorites, and basically, any spell you can see being a great help in certain situations that are at least slightly likely to spells you'd hate to be without if your initial castings had run out make wonderful scroll (wand, staff maybe) options.

Unfortunately, I'd have to come down on the side of you likely not getting a reroll here, simply due to this line on shirt rerolls:

This reroll must happen before the original
result is determined and the player must use the reroll
result, even if it is lower.

I do hate curbing a player's enjoyment, but this does seem pretty clear. Now, I might reconsider, if you tell me the assumption I'm basing this on isn't correct, namely that you figured you were safe in this instance and took 10 on the check, and only after finding out you did not succeed did you wish to use the reroll.

The above thus assumes you did indeed know the original result, thus negating your chance at a reroll (to be honest, now that I think about it I doubt you could ever shirt reroll a take 10 situation since you would almost have to know the result before electing to reroll, the shirt is there more for those times you roll a 1 or 2 on an important save or attack and know that isn't going to cut it).

Actually, technically speaking, rolling a 1 on a save should preclude a reroll since the result would in fact be determined (you're toast), but I think most if not all here would let that slide.

Excellent, I love being able to discuss this with experienced bards!

First on versatile performance, my intent would be to activate the class skill bonus with a rank in some of the later versatile performance skills (like bluff and acrobatics) and retrain those points when I reached the level where VP kicked in. My defense of such rests in this thread.

Should that be shot down, then guess I'll suck it up and tough it out those levels.

Now with Charisma, I actually plan on skipping the Headband of Alluring Charisma (sacrilege, I know). The plan is to kick off with a 14 Charisma, boost it at levels 4 and 8, and then top it off to 18 with a +2 Charisma ioun stone (8k), there by freeing up my headband slot for one of the intelligence variety (likely up to +4) so he really covers a massive variety of skills.

Why would I want to that? Primarily because the 18 gets me a bonus spell at each level through my highest by max level, while staying the most cost effective as there are many other magic items I'd like to buy and I can't be sinking vast amounts of gold into a two-stat headband item. Also, I don't plan on slinging spells at enemies unless I can use them in ways that don't allow saves or are painful on successful saves (a la silence, terrible remorse, stone call scrolls, etc) because even with dirge of doom, getting my DC high enough saps more gold than I'd like to use, hence the focus instead of party buff spells.

As for precise shot, it's a toss up but 2 rolls at -6 (or -2 sometimes) vs. 1 roll at +0 (all before Dex, BAB, etc), since at such low levels I feel luck of the die makes the most difference in connecting or not so might as well roll twice.

Think I'm missing out on much tanking intimidate, sleight of hand, and spell craft (well, somewhat on this last one) or are these alright choices for skills to neglect?

Alright, so I’ve been kicking a bard archer idea around in my head for a bit and wanted to lay out some plans here and get some feedback / learn some new tricks from some of the people here. Remember, we’re dealing with Pathfinder Society here so 20 point buy, max level 12, few other oddities that I’ll address as needed later if I feel a choice needs more explanation.

Basic idea: A very socially adept skill monkey bard with excellent buffing abilities and very respectable ranged damage abilities. What he won’t be is a save-or-die spell slinger or a melee combatant.

Race: While I like Halflings and Elves, given the very limited scope of feats in PFS play, it’s a human for me for the feat and skill point bonus. Floating +2 is always appreciated.

Ability Scores: 20 point buy results in:
Strength: 14
Dexterity: 16 (after racial +2)
Constitution: 12
Intelligence: 14
Wisdom: 8
Charisma: 14

Some explanations: Strength for damage and because I don’t plan to take arcane strike (explained in greater detail later) so I’ll need the damage boost here. Dexterity should be self-evident. Constitution because a bonus to fort saves and hp is always nice (and I plan on taking skill points for the favored class option). Intelligence because he’s a skill monkey. Wisdom I didn’t want to drop below 8 because in Pathfinder, failing will saves pretty much always sucks. Finally, Charisma is 14 because I plan on boosting it at levels four and eight to get a proper 16, then enhance it with a +2 Charisma ioun stone for the 18 I need to keep a bonus level 4 spell (the highest level spells I’ll get to in PFS play).

Skills: With the favored class bonus as a skill point, this character is looking at 10 skill points per level. Over the first four levels, I plan to get at least 1 rank in each knowledge skill, and over time build up to about 6 ranks in Arcana, Nature, Local, and Planes so he will be competent at all knowledge checks and very likely to identify and know something valuable during creature encounters.

Other than that, versatile performances will include Oratory (Diplomacy, Sense Motive)at level 2 and Comedy (Bluff, Disguise) at 6, with Dance (Acrobatics, Fly) kicking in at level 10.

Headband bonuses will cover perception and, eventually, escape artist. Other than that, I intend to follow linguistics (character flavor and forgery for fun), stealth, and UMD closely. Odd choices I intend, skip intimidate, and have only 1 rank in climb (activate class skill) and 1 in spellcraft (with the intention being to have a wand of identify on hand if I need to start doing item identification). Oh, will also have a trait for ride as a class skill and should have a +17 or so modifier to it around level 10.

Feats:
Level 1: Point Blank
Human Bonus: Rapid Shot
3: Precise Shot
5: Deadly Aim

7: Skill Focus (Oratory) – WHAT, I know, I know, why isn’t arcane strike here. Remember, the idea here is a party and skill focused character, and this means +3 to my perform check (nice for distracting song if my party is befuddled by illusion as well as day job rolls) and bonus to two very important PFS skills, diplomacy and sense motive. That this increases to +6 at level 10 just about seals the deal for this concept over a +2 (+3 at level 11) increase in damage on each arrow. If this wasn’t PFS, arcane strike for sure, but that’s the reason I’m skipping strike (also, my BAB isn’t high enough for manyshot yet).

9: Manyshot (duh)

11: Now level 11 has all kinds of interesting options for feats, and I haven’t decided yet. Arcane Strike is of course very tempting, but consider a few other options as well. At this point his UMD skill is +21, so he can make many checks without much difficulty already, but skill focus in this would just seal the deal. Then, I noticed the prodigy feat, which gives +2 (+4 with 10 ranks) in any two craft, profession, or PERFORM skills. …….. oh BABY, another +4 to two perform skills in addition to diplomacy, bluff, sense motive, and disguise? With that you’d be looking at a +31 perform oratory and +25 perform dance at level 11. The extra damage from arcane strike would be sweet, but oh man is that tempting, and please throw out some other ideas I may not have considered (mounted combat is always interesting, and he’ll have a trait to make it a class skill and quite high by level 10 with plans to use a phantom steed).

Spells: I won’t go into exhaustive detail here, but some at each level I’m most interested in for skill/party aid benefits include:
Level 1: Grease, Innocence, liberating command, saving finale. Feather step and invigorate (and their mass versions) I like more as a scroll option.

Level 2: Glitterdust (stupid useful spell), honeyed tongue, mirror image, silence.

Level 3: Haste (of course), good hope (remember it stacks with inspire courage for hit and damage though not saves as that’s a moral bonus as well), glibness (oh yeah), phantom steed, and terrible remorse (depending on how cheesy I’m feeling even after the errata).

Level 4: Dimension door (cause rings of freedom are EXPENSIVE), freedom of movement

There are others I’m interested in but this makes up a list of spells I consider central to this character concept. Also, I plan on supplementing this with a freaking battery of scrolls across many classes, wands (mainly level 1 options), and plenty of potions.

Other thoughts: That lays out most of my plans so far, so here I thought I’d toss in some extra tidbits I was thinking of that just seem cool:

1. So I get a composite shortbow early in life, woohoo. Since I’ll likely skip arcane strike, my damage isn’t anything to write home about, but hey, lesser bracers of archery get me that longbow proficiency I’m after, and while that is only a slight bonus to damage output, the icing comes from using UMD to invoke scrolls of gravity bow. Now, instead of 1d6 damage on my shortbow, when I need it I’m rocking 2d6 per arrow damage on my gravitated long bow for a minute at a time. Won’t be always, but that’s a nice damage boost I should be able to swing more often than not.

2. Oil of weapon of awe: 3 minutes of +2 sacred bonus to damage on each arrow and target is auto shaken on a critical hit. Not bad for when I have a moment to prepare for combat.

3. Giving some thought to possibly doing the Animal Speaker archetype from Ultimate Magic since it doesn’t give up inspire courage (though you do lose lore master, inspire competence and well-versed). The gain is quite nice, though, and offers some fun options that might be worth the trade since I’m capped at level 12 here.

Wrapping it up: There are quite a few other ideas I’ll get to later thanks to UMD opening up all kinds of options, but let me leave this garbled mess here for now and see what discussion and ideas come about because I’ve been looking forward to playing a face/skill-based character and am quite interested in new ideas that we generate here.

* I often find myself in games where the GMs think any and all stairs count as difficult terrain, but as per p.415 of the Core Rulebook:

characters can move on stairs with no penalty, though they cannot run. Acrobatic skill checks have an increased DC of +4 on stairs, and some stairs are particularly steep and thus are treated as difficult terrain. Paraphrased slightly there to save time and the last bit is the goblin I believe has resulted in many thinking all stairs are difficult terrain

* Also, and this one is evil but fun when your players are being overly heroic with their mounts, remember that the fast mount/dismount action may only be a DC 20 ride check, but you must still have a move action available that turn to attempt this skill check (p.104). This can result in amusing gobsmacked expressions when players ride in, full-attack, then attempt to fast dismount into the fray ;)

I'd really like to see some official clarification on this to reduce the amount of 'cheese' by considering this action/result is playing by RAW.

What are your thoughts?

While there is some excellent reasoning above (especially since much of it is reasonable in that a druid must willfully use the items as opposed to having a helmet jammed on their head and being sol), your question reminded me a lot of the defending weapon clarification in the core FAQ that might also aid you:

Yes. Merely holding a defending weapon is not sufficient. Unless otherwise specified, you have to use a magic item in the manner it is designed (use a weapon to make attacks, wear a shield on your arm so you can defend with it, and so on) to gain its benefits.
Therefore, if you don't make an attack roll with a defending weapon on your turn, you don't gain its defensive benefit.
Likewise, while you can give a shield the defending property (after you've given it a +1 enhancement bonus to attacks, of course), you wouldn't get the AC bonus from the defending property unless you used the shield to make a shield bash that round--unless you're using the shield as a weapon (to make a shield bash), the defending weapon property has no effect.

SKR

I would focus on the "have to use a magic item in the manner it is designed" as the closest I think you'll find for some official clarification regarding wielding/using vs. simply holding.

While wielding a ranged weapon with which

you have Weapon Focus, you threaten squares within 5
feet of you. You can make attacks of opportunity with
that ranged weapon. You do not provoke attacks of
opportunity when making a ranged attack as an attack
of opportunity.

Improved Snap Shot increases the threatened range by 10.

Cheapy pointed this out earlier in the thread but it has been quickly buried so thought it might help to point it out again to nip this in the bud.

I can't believe this is even being debated. It's like people want the Devs to step in and break things with more "clarifications."

This really cuts to the heart of the matter. A feat exists to allow for multiple attacks of opportunity in a round. Another feat enables one to make these attacks with a bow at 5ft, and yet another extends the range these attacks may be taken at.

Don't parse every paragraph on the various actions for your answer, step back, consider the whole instead of the individual parts, and let your guiding principle be the rules as intended.

It should be abundantly clear that the intended path was for an archer to be able to shoot arrows via their bow with their AoO's for targets in range. Drawing of arrows was very likely not considered as many simply assumed it would happen and didn't think to address it directly.

At worst, mark if for an FAQ and then roll with the above unless a contradictory FAQ answer is released.

If you can look at the above and then make an honest argument that the archer can't draw arrows for the AoO's when it isn't their turn, I'll give it thought but I'll be hard-pressed to not think there is some subversion at work.

I personally stick to the traits that enhance something that comes up often and isn't too situational. I've picked up the additional traits feat in my PFS game because there are enough interesting traits (in different categories) to make me quite happy, those being:

Warrior of Old (elven race trait) - Excellent way to get a +2 trait bonus to all initiative checks while leaving open your other trait categories. I've found this to be fantastically useful.

Focused mind (magic trait) - Knack is of no use to me as a pure wizard and some of the other traits are sweet, but +2 to every concentration check I make (unlike combat casting's threat requirement) comes up a good deal in society games.

Eastern mystery - Another Qadira faction trait (alchemical prodigy was mentioned earlier) - This one is simply excellent for a caster-type as it adds 2 to the DC of any one spell you choose that day. I generally use this with whatever I feel is a critical spell for the adventure, and when used in conjunction with a spell that has been enhanced by the persistent spell metamagic feat, it's just vicious (blindness for me is an 18 fort save, but with persistent and east mystery, it requires two consecutive DC 20 fort saves or be blinded permanently).

The other is a simple +1 will save feat, just because my wisdom is 8 and in Pathfinder, failing a will save usually means you're in deep, deep trouble.

The key point is that, thus far, I've found each trait to be both useful and valuable in every adventure, and at core that's what I find makes for effective choices. For that reason I'm also a huge fan of armor expert, though I don't use it with this character.

There are a couple big recent threads on the subject that I'll link here and here

If you'd like to avoid creating numerous opportunities for abuse (especially with reach, heighten, or many of the APG metamagic feats), you're best off going with applying any metamagic to a cantrip makes it a one-off deal.

You might make an exception for merciful spell, since it's +0 (odd, I know), but if you want to keep things simple and straightforward, just make plain vanilla cantrips available at will, and any modified ones work like regular level 1-9 spells (ie. one-off casts).

Taken as a purely literal reading, you also cannot breathe, speak, defend yourself (helpless), or do anything else till your next turn. I would rule that an immediate action would be useable, no swift, or greater actions though (that would of course be a house rule, just as allowing the character to defend ones self would technically be :P)

You could take a pure literal reading of this, but I'm assuming you realize that were you to apply such to most if not all of Pathfinder, the game wouldn't work, so let's just bring this back to being reasonable.

Heck, actually, I'll give Paizo credit, they even put a counter in the book for ridiculous interpretations just like this: p. 182 core rpg "Not an Action" Some activities are so minor that they are not even considered free actions. They literally don't take any time at all to do and are considered an inherent part of doing something else, such as nocking an arrow as part of an attack with a bow". I'm going to assume things like breathing, blinking, etc fit nicely into this category.

heh, ninja'd me there RD but glad to throw an actual book reference in to support your point!

But Feather Fall takes an immediate action, which can be done at any time.

I had that same initial impression, but while it is an immediate action, the core RPG is clear on this issue. P. 188 into 189 in the core rpg gives a very detailed explanation of Free, Swift, and Immediate actions, and makes it clear that while it may be immediate, it is still a greater investment of time than a free action, and would thus be clearly barred by the wording of dimension door.

Let's be honest, dimension door has this specific wording in order to prevent abuse like dim dooring into a battle and using an immediate spell to aid the group with something quickened (if it's your turn, that is), or an immediate action spell like liberating command or feather fall. It's there for a good reason, so why fight it?

You'll have trouble casting that feather fall when 'you can't take any other actions until your next turn.'

Excellent point! I'm glad you mentioned it since I can easily see myself making quite a foolish mistake in the future had you not!

I also have a question re: dim door. Can summoned characters/creatures complete full actions after being dim doored, especially eidolons with sumoner's call.

Pretty sure I know the answer, just that this is a very gank-happy spell, summoning 2 melleers right on top of the enemy boss for a double round of full attacks.

Indeed they can, courtesy of the core RPG FAQ:

Dimension door says, "After using this spell, you can't take any other actions until your next turn." If the caster brings other creatures with them when they cast the spell, are the passengers unable to take any other actions until their next turn, or is that just for the caster?

—Sean K Reynolds, 03/15/11

For dimension door, visualizing your destination is in your mind or in sight?

Is it like teleport? If you have seen the place one time you are able to go at this place with dimension door? (in range with the spell)

Thanks

You are correct given your example. Also, keep in mind it is perfectly reasonable to use it to travel up to the spell's range in a direction even if you've never been to the arrived at location.

Example: You are convinced there is a massive cavern 100 feet underneath you. You could simply dim door down 120 feet (despite having never been there and having no clue what it looks like) and, assuming there is open space for you to materialize in, you're good (though I hope you've got a way to see and a feather fall prepared!).

You have to look at what dominate does...it establishes a telepathic link and controls the target's physical actions. It does not control the target's mental activities, as noted by the way the target resists the control.

The summoner and eidolon are linked by a separate telepathic bond, through which the summoner can send separate commands to the eidolon (such as 'I am being dominated, knock me unconscious').

There is a lot of good discussion to be had on this topic, but I do have to say that if one of my players tried to use the above on me, I would ask that they justify that comment from somewhere in the book because I'm quite skeptical of this at first glance.

Ravingdork wrote:

Can't use metamagic rods as there is no such thing as a rod of widen.

You do realize that the list of magic items in the Core Rulebook is not meant to be a comprehensive list of all magical items that could ever exist, right?

That specific exemption has always struck me as odd (at least since I noticed it in 3.5). I would prefer to have some actual fact to base this on, but since I can't dig anything up quickly with a little Goggle-fu, my take is that you can go ahead and have the metamagic rod exist.

Had I read somewhere this was specifically exempted due to being overpowered, I'd feel differently, but heck, if you can quicken ninth level spells with a rod, I say go for gold widening with a rod as well.

A few suggestions, but first and most important:

You appear to have shorted yourself on your stats, assuming I'm correct in the following:

At level 1, before applying any racial stat bonuses/penalties, you had:

Str 8
Dex 14
Con 14
Int 18
Wis 7
Cha 9

Then I work that out to a net point buy value of +20, or 5 short of your limit.

If I'm right there, I'd recommend one of the following:

Bump wisdom to 12, drop charisma to 8, everything else for even 25. My reasoning here is that I agree wizards get lots of will save over time, but, let's face it, in this game, if you fail a will save, you are most often screwed, screwed, screwed.

If the will save deal isn't a big concern, at least bump it to 8, and then reallocate as you like. Just be sure to check your numbers so you don't short yourself out any very valuable ability points.

Also

I'll give this some more thought later, but for the moment I do highly recommend that, as a conjurer, you swap out your acid dart ability for the stupidly useful "Shift" in the teleportation subschool of the APG because it can make a huge difference in many situations.

I sympathize with the frustration here, but I disagree with your proposed remedy. First, and this is just my opinion, but I find the suggested rewrite to be much more confusing than the original. This is likely because I never consider FoM to grant any protection from events like a massive cave-in, being charmed, or getting tripped, but I would find adjudicating what you have proposed to require much more time studying the spell in question.

I suggest you role with this and get creative in dealing with FoM whoring players (such as myself) because if you simply break it as Gansk has suggested, you're not making things fun but just limiting your players options to prevent obvious dangers. As you indicated, later on creatures have stupidly high CMB/CMDs and grapple attacks with extraordinarily perilous consequences. It's the whole reason FoM exists, and why the ring (and 40k ain't cheap) exists and is so valuable because it finally provides one with a defense against so many, many likely attacks (mass hold person, for example).

Get creative, let your party ring up, later have a dragon attempt a fly-by snatch-and-grab, fail, perhaps try again, and then simply fly away. Your party celebrates their savvy style and you then later have said dragon return under the effects of an anti-magic field, grab someone, and fly off with them to do as you please.

Spin this anyway you like (targeted dispel magic on the ring, trip-happy fighters, even a nasty sunder attempt), but remember the vital tenant, you can shape the world however you wish, don't sink to banning a coveted item just because it makes things inconvenient for you, let everyone (yourself included) have their fun.

And there was much rejoicing!

I initially came down on the side of needing a normal rod for the spell in the original example, and while some of the comments here argue against, I fully agreed with Forgotten that this was people looking to split hairs and get a power boost.

BUT

While I was considering it, I thought back to an old "Intelligence Check" article along these lines, and pulled this out:

It’s important to remember that metamagic increases the effective level of a spell, not its actual level; in other words, the size of the spell slot needed to cast it. The game rules lay this down very clearly; spells modified by a metamagic feat don’t use a higher save DC, for example. Hence, this is reflected in-game as well, and spells that use metamagic feats don’t utilize more lerans than they normally do without metamagic.

The rationale here is that a spell slot is different from a spell level. While that might sound like splitting hairs, it’s why you can prepare a lower-level spell in a higher-level spell slot, but doing so doesn’t lend it any additional power. You can prepare a fireball in a 4th-level spell slot, for example, but that lesser globe of invulnerability will still stop it cold.

From May 2011 Intelligence check

Bah, I apparently too often come down on the anti-player side, since just a few days ago I would fervently argue that there was just no way you could apply quicken spell to summon monster, and lo and behold the FAQ is altered to explicitly state this is fine.

Apparently, what I consider splitting hairs is becoming standard operating procedure.

Heh, when I was visiting the site I recalled that we forgot to discuss this last night and thought in my head it would be good to bring up here, and lo and behold, you were way ahead of me!

The reasoning I was going to bring up follows along with Howie's above, and a specific from page 180 that "You can perform one or more free actions while taking another action normally." Contrast that with the skinny on immediate actions shortly after (indicating they make be done out of turn) and the specific exemption for speaking and you've got the base I was going to work off of for disallowing dropping items or going prone out of turn (unless forced due to being knocked out / killed).

These two were touched on briefly when discussing lesser restoration earlier, but are missed often enough I figure it's worth pointing them out specifically:

Activating scrolls (p.490): Activating a scroll is a standard action (or the spell's casting time, whichever is longer) and provokes attacks of opportunity just as casting a spell does.

Spell trigger items like wands, staves, etc. (p.496): Casing a spell from a wand is usually a standard action that doesn't provoke attacks of opportunity. (If the spell being cast has a longer casting time than 1 action, however, it takes that long to cast the spell from a wand).

I only focus on these two because I've seen way, way too many BBEGs try to unleash a trap via a wand of summon monster whatever or restore an ally with a wand of restoration (note: not lesser, the normal one) and been very irked to have this pointed out (I actually have the page numbers penned in the front of my book for easy reference, it comes up that much).

When using a ranged weapon, if there is anything blocking line of effect or providing cover, or a creature (enemy OR ALLY) in between you and your target, the target is given a +4 cover (soft in case of creatures) bonus to AC (unless you have certain feats).

This applies to reach weapons as well when used against targets that are not adjacent to you (such as with a spiked chain or with certain class abilities that allow you to use a reach weapon against an adjacent opponent).

I've lost count of the number of times people have been surprised by this, mainly that allies can provide an opponent with soft cover.

Heh, agreed, I couldn't bring myself to drop wisdom to 7 (though I did make it an 8) because, generally speaking, failing will saves really, really sucks.

Very minor quibble, though, because I have thoroughly enjoyed his guides (wizard mainly since I nearly always play them) and am looking forward to his additions for the APG, not so much for the tactics but because I'm looking forward to how he describes the create pit series of spells since I've gotten a silly, silly amount of distance out of that chain in Pathfinder recently (right up there with wall of stone in 3.5).

That and the teleportation subschool that replaces acid dart with the shift ability. That's such a sweet trade-off it nearly feels like cheating taking it, and I've seen more than a couple DM's take a deep breath when the wizard breaks out of a cunning trap due to it.

Interesting, I find I come down on quite the opposite side, encouraging and enjoying the role play and fantasy inherent in this type of gaming whether it involves bringing freedom and hope to country after country or consorting with the princes of hell to orchestrate the fall of a nation and the ensuing torture and agony of its citizens for all eternity.

The critical thing to remember is that it is fantasy, and that those people that can't make the distinction and use it to channel their inherent evil are not twisted by the game, but are already twisted themselves and such desires will always come to the surface somehow, someway.

It's exciting to play the bad guy, to torture the villain into revealing their plot in the nick of time to avert disaster (or perpetrate the disaster yourself but altered to better benefit yourself) and it is exciting because it isn't real, and you can use the fantasy to experience such things vicariously (heck, this is exactly why the word exists).

The game (role play, video, board, etc) is just a set of tools, and like any other it can be put to good or evil. The wonderful thing about role play is you can put it to great evil, enjoy the thrill, and then go back to being a kind, happy, and helpful individual without a second thought.

The people that cannot, while few, are the ones you need to be very careful of, because the game didn't make them that way, that's just a facet of their anima being exposed.

I completely agree with shift being a very powerful ability, especially given your alternative in this case is a somewhat buffed cantrip (acid dart).

That being said, Sylvanite nails a couple important caveats on shift, and there are a few more worth noting:

1. You have to be able to see where you are shifting to, so if you are blindfolded or in someway rendered blind, you ain't shifting nowhere.

2. While it is a swift action, you can only ready it for use during the time before your next turn if you commit your standard action to it, which will limit people stepping up, casting a spell, and then readying a shift in case someone moves in to whack them (though they could move and then ready a shift, or simply move, cast, and then shift back into safety).

To properly answer your question, I find it powerful but legit, yet still a wonderful option to have as a conjurer because I was less than enthused about acid dart and pretty much did a back flip out of sheer joy when I read that shift was an alternative option.

Nice to come back and find some good stuff waiting, let's get right to it:

Ravingdork: I see where you're going with the fireball example, but I disagree with it because you are comparing the effects of a duration instantaneous spell to one with a lasting duration. I would prefer a comparison to web, grease, or zone of truth, because they better align with silence's properties with respect to duration (non-instant) and how creatures entering the affected area after the casting are handled, though in this case all of them allow for a save or check of some sort to negate the negative effect.

Hence my annoyance, because each of the three above are clear on the effects of those entering (especially for zone of truth), but silence is left just vague enough that it is commonly interpreted as a disturbingly potent second level spell. I do appreciate that in Pathfinder it is now 1 round casting time spell, so even if one busts out a scroll or wand of it you can't just auto shut a caster down, but regardless, not allowing a save against silence's effects when one enters the spell's area seems a blatant neglect for the rules as intended for this second level spell (with, you'll recall, a long range (400 feet + 40 per level)).

Good to see where the basis for what I read in the veil spell comes from, I don't think I ever read closely that line you put in and it's good to know. However, we did nail down the SR part a fair bit earlier in the thread, but being that you're pretty active here do you have any insights to share on the saving throw aspect?

I don't follow how the "darkness vs daylight" spells relate to this situation. I understand how "spell #1a vs spell #1b" cancel each other out in their overlapping area, but "spell #1 vs no spell or special ability"... well, spell #1 wins. It's just like "darkness vs nothing" or "darkness vs torch"... the darkness wins. Creatures don't get a chance to making a Saving Throw or SR against the dark, so why should they be able to do it against the quiet? I know these are different schools of magic, but it is magic and all of it doesn't have to work the same and exceptions are spelled (*pun unintentional*) out in spell descriptions.

--

Therefore, it seems like a Will save or SR can be used to stop the magic from coming into place, but once an area is silenced, it stays silent until it expires, is dispelled, or those in the area have some other means to avoid the magic (i.e. lesser globe of invulnerability). So, a Will save or SR won't let you hear in a location that is already silenced.

Sorry for being vague, I was using the darkness vs. daylight example in response to the above line, my intention being to compare how even though darkness may currently reign in an area, when a same spell level light effects arrives the darkness doesn't win out despite being first. Not a great example, a better one might be made with zone of truth, which just sits in an area, but once a creature enters it immediately gets a save vs. the effects, which is something I see being much more reasonable for how silence should work.

The pebble example doesn't quite cover all the options, though, because sure one can throw it back, but if it is tossed at them as a readied action to interrupt their spell, then under the no-save view that spell is borked and the caster is out a spell and standard action that turn at best. This seems exceedingly unreasonable.

I also don't buy the "just toss it back" line of reasoning because it cherry picks from the list I provided earlier which situations it is reasonable in. Pebble lands at the caster's feet, sure, toss it back, but if a silenced monk comes in to grapple, or a silenced fighter moves nearby and readies an action to follow you if you try to move away, you're toast with no save, and you won't be tossing those two away (unless you are packing a silenced version of the telekinesis spell, which in that situation would be pretty spectacular).

Melissa: I like your example and it sounds like we're on the same page here. I'm not looking for a nerf really, just would like to provide a firm example for people looking this up in the future that silence is excellent, but not so excellent that it is a no-save win spell against a caster. I really like your example with glitterdust, it was OP in 3.5, and the new option for repeat saves for blindness is a nice way to tone it down. In a similar fashion I'm fine with leaving silence as is, as long as it is understood unwilling subjects brought into its area of effect at least receive a saving throw.

Silence is a really good spell. If it became a "In the area of the spell, you must make a Fort save every round. If you make this save, you are unaffected by the silence this round" or something along those lines, that would work. I'd take the SR off of that part though, except there's not really a mechanic for that, and I don't think the SR should apply to the AOE part of the silence.

Now this I could deal with as it would bring it somewhat more in line with other spells like hold person, grease, or glitterdust (for the blinding effect). Also, thanks to reading veil closely I'm on board with nixing SR (though I'd likely keep it for creatures specifically targeted by the spell).

I like the example you bring up, though I don't think it provides the best example of just how nasty a no-save silence spell could be, and I want to bring some of those up again just to be clear:

A: Character moves into caster's range carrying a silenced object, readies action to toss it at caster if they move away and then attempt to cast. Caster is no-save screwed, uses a move action to escape, and gets no-save screwed again and probably loses the spell they were trying to cast.

B: Character with silenced object or silenced itself moves into range of caster, and readies move action to follow caster if they attempt to escape. Caster is shut down with no save.

C: Silenced character grapples caster. A grappled caster is generally already in pretty bad shape (though Ogre did earlier point out some good escape options, though some of the better abilities he mentions aren't available till level 8 and silence kicks in at level 3) but a no-save silenced caster is in an impressively pathetic situation.

Again, I don't see this as attempting to nerf silence (a good spell in its own right), but to end what I consider an entirely too broad acceptance of the spell as only allowing unwilling targets that are the primary target a save, when it seems extraordinarily more reasonable to me that this second level spell would allow any unwilling creature a save upon entering, or having forced upon it, the spell's area of effect.

I'm fine with failing a save resulting in being all kinds of screwed, a la hold person, web, glitterdust, etc like other spells at this level, but no-save screwed seems a nefarious dodge of the rules as intended for the silence spell.

Alright, some good stuff in the last few replies, so not so good, let's see:

Sir Wulf: Let's not go there in this thread, simply because that whole mess is pure GM fiat (I could easily see a player argue that they cast the silence on the goo inside the bag and thus it would still be in effect).

Happler: Really, I did specifically address blur in my post to indicate the exact point you make, while also indicating that as they only allow a saving throw (harmless), they are in a different category than the glamers I'm addressing here.

Reefwood: Now we're talking. Your first point, dead-on, no argument. Your second, though, harkens back to my issue with this spell, that being that I target the individual, they get save/resistance, but if I target a rock near their toe, they're boned with no save/SR. If they move away, I just toss it after them as a readied action and that's another spell ruined. This does not strike me as how silence was intended to work.

Another way to look at this might be darkness vs. daylight, where when one comes into the area of another, the stationary one doesn't simply reign supreme, but the overlapping area is cancelled out and the otherwise existing state of light would exist (my idea being that someone walking into a silenced area isn't automatically silenced (they get a will save), perhaps similar to someone walking onto a pit trap getting a reflex save and not simply getting hammered).

Ogre: I'm glad you're in on this, good thinking. Now invisibility I'd agree with you on, though I would also point out that's another save (harmless) spell (like blur/displacement) and thus operates differently to how saves here would. I, heh, get the feeling you also think the idea of the spell targeting the sounds someone makes and thus not the caster but their voice (an unattended object) is a bit weak, and I'd agree. I do see where you're going with that line of reasoning, but again I don't feel it properly gives silence the ability to affect someone entering its area of effect without allowing a save.

A good sum up would be that I see silence as an excellent spell, but that maintaining that unwilling creatures brought into its area of effect receive no save vs its effects seems a blatant disregard for rules as intended, especially given this is a second level spell.

Let's see, first for Melissa, silence has had some significant changes made to it in Pathfinder, most relevant being it now lasts 1 round per level and takes 1 entire round to cast. Also, I do realize this actually reinforces your argument as these appear to be nerfs to rein in somewhat the negative effects I'm discussing here.

Now for Ogre, while I fully agree with what you say, I don't feel you properly address my primary concern with the spell, which is not the spell's consequences but the method through which one is affected by them, primarily by side-stepping the save/resistance by using an object instead.

Being a glamer effect, one generally would expect a save when interacting with it (a la disguise self, hallucinatory terrain, or veil). I would have written resistance in the previous line as well, but in veil I found a line indicating spell resistance doesn't help with interaction, only if originally targeted by it, so that's one thing down (thanks Melissa for putting me on the right track).

This isn't very clear, though, because blur is also a glamer, but an enemy that attacks you certainly doesn't get a save to cancel your blur effect (of course, blur only allows a harmless save, so different case).

Thus, at the moment I would consider a silenced pebble thrown your way or a silenced monk attempting to put you in a head lock would indicate you are interacting with the glamer, and thus deserving of a saving throw (but not SR).

Relevant rule check:Saving Throws and Illusions (Disbelief)

A failed saving throw indicates that a character fails to notice something is amiss. a character faced with proof that an illusion isn't real needs no saving throw. If any viewer successfully disbelieves an illusion and communicates this fact to others, each such viewer gains a saving throw with a +4 bonus.

By this token, the DC 10 wisdom check to notice the glamer seems a cute house rule, but wrongly applied as I see the rules as intended.