WarrenCraftlocke's page

this isnt referring to BEING wayang... its referring to HUNTING wayang! XD
kinda like a dragon hunter doesnt need to be a dragon XD

Invisibility

The ability to move about unseen is not foolproof. While they can't be seen, invisible creatures can be heard, smelled, or felt.

Invisibility makes a creature undetectable by vision, including darkvision.

Invisibility does not, by itself, make a creature immune to critical hits, but it does make the creature immune to extra damage from being a ranger's favored enemy and from sneak attacks.

A creature can generally notice the presence of an active invisible creature within 30 feet with a DC 20 Perception check. The observer gains a hunch that “something's there” but can't see it or target it accurately with an attack. It's practically impossible (+20 DC) to pinpoint an invisible creature's location with a Perception check. Even once a character has pinpointed the square that contains an invisible creature, the creature still benefits from total concealment (50% miss chance). There are a number of modifiers that can be applied to this DC if the invisible creature is moving or engaged in a noisy activity.
Invisible creature is... Perception DC Modifier
In combat or speaking –20
Moving at half speed –5
Moving at full speed –10
Running or charging –20
Not moving +20
Using Stealth Stealth check +20
Some distance away +1 per 10 feet
Behind an obstacle (door) +5
Behind an obstacle (stone wall) +15

A creature can grope about to find an invisible creature. A character can make a touch attack with his hands or a weapon into two adjacent 5-foot squares using a standard action. If an invisible target is in the designated area, there is a 50% miss chance on the touch attack. If successful, the groping character deals no damage but has successfully pinpointed the invisible creature's current location. If the invisible creature moves, its location, obviously, is once again unknown.

If an invisible creature strikes a character, the character struck knows the location of the creature that struck him (until, of course, the invisible creature moves). The only exception is if the invisible creature has a reach greater than 5 feet. In this case, the struck character knows the general location of the creature but has not pinpointed the exact location.

If a character tries to attack an invisible creature whose location he has pinpointed, he attacks normally, but the invisible creature still benefits from full concealment (and thus a 50% miss chance). A particularly large and slow invisible creature might get a smaller miss chance.

If a character tries to attack an invisible creature whose location he has not pinpointed, have the player choose the space where the character will direct the attack. If the invisible creature is there, conduct the attack normally. If the enemy's not there, roll the miss chance as if it were there and tell him that the character has missed, regardless of the result. That way the player doesn't know whether the attack missed because the enemy's not there or because you successfully rolled the miss chance.

If an invisible character picks up a visible object, the object remains visible. An invisible creature can pick up a small visible item and hide it on his person (tucked in a pocket or behind a cloak) and render it effectively invisible. One could coat an invisible object with flour to at least keep track of its position (until the flour falls off or blows away).

Invisible creatures leave tracks. They can be tracked normally. Footprints in sand, mud, or other soft surfaces can give enemies clues to an invisible creature's location.

An invisible creature in the water displaces water, revealing its location. The invisible creature, however, is still hard to see and benefits from concealment.

A creature with the scent ability can detect an invisible creature as it would a visible one.

A creature with the Blind-Fight feat has a better chance to hit an invisible creature. Roll the miss chance twice, and he misses only if both rolls indicate a miss. (Alternatively, make one 25% miss chance roll rather than two 50% miss chance rolls.)

A creature with blindsight can attack (and otherwise interact with) creatures regardless of invisibility.

An invisible burning torch still gives off light, as does an invisible object with a light or similar spell cast upon it.

Ethereal creatures are invisible. Since ethereal creatures are not materially present, Perception checks, scent, Blind-Fight, and blindsight don't help locate them. Incorporeal creatures are often invisible. Scent, Blind-Fight, and blindsight don't help creatures find or attack invisible, incorporeal creatures, but Perception checks can help.

Invisible creatures cannot use gaze attacks.

Invisibility does not thwart divination spells.

Since some creatures can detect or even see invisible creatures, it is helpful to be able to hide even when invisible.

I keep seeing the 50% miss chance for ranged and melee attacks printed over and over with regards to concealment or invisibility... I only see that you need to be able to see a creature to target it with spells once, and right below that it says spells can target things as long as you have a clear line to them with no obstacles. I think the seeing part is a typo that has been reprinted over and over!
im not asking what the rules say... I know what they say... I keep reading it, but I think its wrong. Someone official needs to go over this and either get rid of the contradicting part or change that one "and" to "or".

still scout... what could I have done at level 2 that I cant at level one? the fight isnt so bad... just the mechanic makes it a pain! if we could have cast sleep or command or something on it to stop it for a round all would have been cool.

For a long time ive heard that line of sight is for ranged attacks and line of effect is for spells, but that one little line about needing to see or touch your target messes everything up!
what happens with blindsense and tremorsense and other instances where you can easily single out a target but they cannot actually SEE it?
ill bet somewhere there is a creature that doesnt have normal sight that casts targeted spells...

im not saying the rules arent really clear... its indisputable about what the RAW is... but im saying... it shouldnt be like that! theres several instances of rules contradicting that or not making sense if that is in place.

Ugh fine.

now sure the rules are clear. They are clearly contradictory! XD
ive looked at a few sources now since ive asked this and they all have that whole section cut&pasted word for word. is it that hard to believe that someone made a grammatical error that is the complete opposite of common sense and its just been overlooked for several printings because everyone thinks it was intentional? ive pointed out 2 examples in that same book where that rule doesnt apply and in one of them id even say that you shouldnt be able to target under that condition. oh and those 2 examples of the rule being backwards... both were cut&paste from older books.
im sure invisibility wasnt intended to be THAT powerful, to make one unaffected by half of all possible spells and attacks.

lets look at this from the other angle. one can see through a wall of force and target anyone inside right? so I can finger of death or hold or charm or whatever through a 5th level defensive spell that dispel magic cant touch but not through a 2nd level spell that just by a quirk of game mechanics makes them immune to so much?
I want to hear RAI on this.

Which Adventure Path would that be?

no spoilers. if youve played it youd know.

WarrenCraftlocke wrote:

Shin Bilirubin wrote:

If you think you know where he is, why not cast glitterdust first? Then you'd know for sure and be able to target him.

I am first level. Whole party is first level. Second encounter ever.

If the DM is throwing flying, invisible monsters at level 1, you flip the table and walk away.

Either your DM is a killer (I personally dislike them), a jerk (nobody likes those) or both. Nobody wins in this case.

this encounter is from a a paizo adventure path. no DM manipulation involved.

WarrenCraftlocke wrote:

just because I dont see him does not mean I dont know where he is.

He used a move to draw an item and used his standard to be invisible. he couldnt move anymore that round(had to 5foot out of AOO range too). I knew exactly where he was... but even if I did not... a mind effecting language dependent spell giving one a command could be debated as to being able to work around corners or through windows provided the target hears it.

He's not 5 feet wide. You only know which square he's standing in.

Also, you're trying to use logic to argue about MAGIC. Come on...

dude you want logic? I can master the mystic forces of the universe to bend people to my will but I cant even attempt to affect a guy 5 feet from me that hasnt moved with any spells at all just cause hes invisible when a lowly bowman that pulls on a piece of cord and lets go still has a 50/50 chance of being able to pull off his thing normally? (no discredit to archers! one saved my ass in this battle)

also note with the tower shield I can essentially target a guy on the other side of what is essentially a portable wall with a spell when I cant see him but I cant cast on someone I cant see with nothing in between us.

If you think you know where he is, why not cast glitterdust first? Then you'd know for sure and be able to target him.

am first level. whole party is first level. second encounter ever.

Hell id even be willing to take the miss chance on a targeted spell under this circumstance!
invisibility and a move action should not make one immune to all spells unless you can make a perception check in the 30s. Especially not for anyone that can spend 300 on a potion of invis!
Shouldnt a wizard be able to cast dispel on someones invisibility so they and others can possibly attack them? yes they should.

just because I dont see him does not mean I dont know where he is.
He used a move to draw an item and used his standard to be invisible. he couldnt move anymore that round(had to 5foot out of AOO range too). I knew exactly where he was... but even if I did not... a mind effecting language dependent spell giving one a command could be debated as to being able to work around corners or through windows provided the target hears it.

ok so I was in an encounter with a fairly wide open room and a flying invisible guy. I cast command and used "down". why did my spell not work? he was within range and spoke the language I was using for sure. Im told any spell I attempt to cast on a target I cant see fails. My whole party and some gaming bystanders agreed. Is this right? and if so WHY!?
I want clear definition on what needs line of effect and what needs line of sight.

Is it legal to make a potion of flame blade?
What are some other awkward spells that can be potions?
Most damage spells dont need to be named.

I dont get the headband of int part...?

what does using a temple sword do for me if I dont have flurry?

first thing I did when I thought of this was look through domains, bloodlines, schools, patrons, and of course archetypes and feats to find something to give flame blade or something similar... theres nothing! go figure...

I mentioned that already. why do I want the spell? its supposed to be a freaking jedi! XD I cant imagine why he would have a flaming swordlike ray that cuts like butter! XD im essentially gonna add my wis bonus to damage (from efreet style adding wis to damage with fire attacks) and giving up flurry means more horrid accuracy.

thats... not a bad idea at all... but... ok... im trying to build a mock jedi XD
hmmm let me look through those various feats and see if they serve my purpose...

would you understand if I said I was doing master of many styles with efreeti and dragon?

Lets please stick with flame blade and how I can assemble a monk with it.
or at least a swordlike magic weapon effect or spell of some kind that hits touch.

I wish it were that easy... im on a 15 point buy... as a monk... and I need to maintain my skills for requirements for feats... and I need proficiency... total pain in the butt... needs more weapons that strike as touch.
I could probably do it by level 6-7...

nothing really... just bored and poking holes in some rules an trying to think of how I can get my monk able to cast flame blade XD

All these threads on adding spells from another spell list made me wonder...
What would happen if a Savant or Samsaran or even a command word item were to have a troublesome spell like say... Summon Eidolon? For a character that does not otherwise have one? I am sure there are many examples of similar cases where a spell depends on a class feature.
would it not work? would it let you make your own eidolon for a short time? would it summon the creators eidolon? would your GM just look at you quietly and then stab you? maybe and maybe not XD but it will happen sooner or later so I might as well take the heat for it.

WarrenCraftlocke makes a pretty good/interesting point.

Why can't you TWF with armor spikes? The same kind of logic applies as would apply to TWF with unarmed strikes.

whoo! I got a bump! *immature happy dance*

do you mean summon monster IX(9)? IV(4) as a level 6 apell is worthless.

brass knuckles or punch weapons arent comparable weapons for this topic so lets use an analogous: armor spikes. I made a PFS character that tried to mainhand and offhand armor spikes with TWF and they told me to take a hike. Why should I only have to pay 2000g base for my +1 with main and offhand in one while monks need to pay 5000g for AOMF+1? I hate to agree with BBT because his tact is horrible XD but he has a few points.
Quaker I love ya but you an BBT are not talking about the same thing...
so... is armor spikes one weapon? it is usable with different body parts and doesnt need to be drawn and cant be disarmed the same. It is all enchanted as one unit. should I be able to make main and offhand attacks with it applying my holy, shock, frost, elemental touch, greater magic weapon, and several other spells my magus has that I cant think of right now to both attacks without having to empower and cast spells on a second weapon? Probably not. I think my GM would jump over the table and beat me stupid (hes in the military).
Unarmed strikes are the same. a magus can empower weapon on their unarmed strike. the UAS counts as a manufactured weapon normally. If UAS is one weapon then all spells and empowerment I put on my weapon affect all my limbs, but I can only attack with one UAS regardless of number of limbs or 2WF and get those effects. If UAS is multiple weapons, then I have to specify which exact place im empowering or enchanting. That doesnt sound like much, but it starts making answerless questions like... if im grappled what exact position am I being held in? does it prevent me from attacking with my headbutt? or kick?
One would have to declare which is main and which is offhand UAS for strength purposes. One would have to decide what attacks their AOMF (anyone using UAS is likely to have one) affects, and for that matter decide why it costs so much? as BBT says it gets complicated.
In his sarcasm BBT may have been on to something: we should count UAS as a double weapon! XD
Other than noting mainhand and offhand different abilities/numbers it shouldnt be necessary to decide a specific place for each. Just as one can attack with their left weapon as main one turn and their right as main another turn... the UAS should be able to use a foot, knee, fist, head, ass, eyelash, whatever each time as whichever "end" of the weapon they like interchangeably. For many armed creatures and multiweapon fighting this should probably count each offhand as a different weapon... although that could get tedious and overly complicated.
If my magus were to use this setup, I would get my mainhand with holy and shock and frost and elemental touch and etc etc and only be able to use my multitouch spells with this hand once per round. Id have a second UAS that has no bonus and gets no spell effects from spellstrike and no empowerment. All this offhand would get is bonuses from self buffs (as opposed to weapon buffs) and AOMF, which would apply to both but not stacking. it does not matter if my mainhand effects are applied to my head or hand or foot as long as I only use the bonuses that affect the mainhand "weapon" once. Thematically I could even attack with the same arm 2x with 2WF as long as one hit is the mainhand and one is offhand.
If one only uses 1 UAS then the other end of the UAS "double weapon" isnt used and becomes as irrelevant as disarming a sheathed weapon. there are a few double weapons that both ends count as a light weapon, like the kusari-gama and double kama. Monks dont have to bother with this as they dont suffer mainhand offhand distinction(with either UAS or weapons)with flurries (oooh monk/magus idea forming!) so all of their UAS are always main.
This is the best solution I can come up with to a complicated problem with piles of different sets of conflicting rules on the same subject. As it is UAS is one weapon, BUT can be used main and offhand with 2WF (like I said... contradictory). Armor spikes are one weapon and can only be used as one weapon. Making both of these count as double light weapons that have to be enchanted separately but are both in all places on the body at once is a reasonable solution.
Feel free to poke holes in this idea as id like to improve it if it needs it.
Devs consider errating(errataing? airating? XD) this!

I am working on an animal shaman and ive asked several people these and no one has an answer.

1: for example a lion shaman gets beast shape III at level 6 when turning into feline creatures. Does this apply to change into magical beasts that are feline? Like sphinx and griffons and manticores and chimerae?

2: taking #1 a bit further, could one change into an elemental lion and get your +2 wild shape levels? I understand one wouldnt get the stat bonuses for both beast shape and elemental body, just elemental body. But which elemental body spell would you use? what level could you start using it?
I think using plant shape like this is a bit too far. Although... are there any plant creatures that could be considered feline?

3: what makes a creature qualify as feline? or ursine? or simian? or canine? There is no type or subtype for these things.

4: what do we base natural attack damage upon? is it as the creature in the bestiary? or is it according to the table for natural attacks by type and size? do we get a modified crit range/damage from a creatures feats or SQs and whatnot?

5: do we get racial skill modifiers and feats of the form? possibly racial traits of humanoids with 1000 faces?

6: If a druid happened to get barding for their wild shape form would it blend into their normal form upon changing back? (the reverse of normal polymorph/equipment rule) Can a druid wild shaped even wear barding? I would assume nothing metal but otherwise do they have proficiency and such?

7: when wild shaping into a tiny or smaller critter, does one effectively get weapon finesse during that form?

we need to decide whether this item is a shield or a ring that just gives a shield bonus.
If it is a shield then it can be enchanted as one and used to shield bash and use shield feats and other things real shields can do. It also will take up a shield magic item slot and allow one to use 2 other rings while its functioning.
If it is a ring with a shield bonus, then one can hold and use items with that hand and doesnt allow another ring, monks could use it without penalty this way as well.