Wyran's page

Gotcha we kinda thought that but when we re read it over and over it almost made it seem like there was something else.

Thanks guys.

My group is looking into how exactly poisons applied using the lasting poison rogue talent get reduced. The talent is written as:

Lasting Poison (Ex): A rogue with this talent can apply poison to a weapon in such a way that it is effective for two successful attacks instead of one. The poison has a reduced effect, however, and saves made against the poison receive a +2 circumstance bonus. Applying poison in this way requires a full-round action, or a standard action if the rogue has the swift poison talent.

It states the poison has a reduced effect AND saves receive a +2 bonus. We cannot find anything on what gets reduced. Does anyone have insight on this or is this just a DM discretion reduction?

If a tentacle creature grabs a pc at 15 feet, can the pc with a melee weapon strike the creature by attacking his tentacles?

http://www.pathfinderdb.com/gamemaster-tools/game-aids

May help a little, not sure if there is anything in there that your looking for. I just keep the reference doc open on my phone/laptop to quick search anything that comes up that im not 100% on.

If you were to wield a wand in your off-hand for the purposes of, say, two-weapon fighting, you could do so - but you wouldn't be able to cast a spell from it. It would be the equivalent of an improvised weapon at that point, and a poor one at that. You'd be able to attack with whatever weapon you have in your primary hand and then poke them with a stick for a minimal amount of damage.

By RAW, there is no way to use a wand while attacking outside of the magus class. Or... (incoming tangent, probably will start a new thread about this)

That brings up an interesting question: They recently released Mythic Adventures. One of the basic abilities for all mythic characters allows you to take an extra standard action during your turn.

It explicitly states that you cannot use that standard action to cast a spell. However, using a wand is an 'activate magic item - spell trigger' action; a spell trigger action is not explicitly called-out as equivalent to casting a spell (using a spell completion item is, but that's scrolls, not wands).

Yeah on a side note, my next gamer will be using mythic characters, and im really excited about the possibilities and more epic nature. However i cant/wont add those rules in Mid adventure just to solve this problem. So sadly i need another way lol.

Keep in mind i would never use this kind of wand rule to start a game out, just looking for something to continue this games high level of action, danger, and fun.

Im not too worried about devaluing a magus as i dont not have one in the game. The purpose is the party im working with has a very high damage output, which is great for them, except the blow through creatures of their CR in only a couple rounds. So the only way i can extend combat to keep things interesting is to raise the difficulty on their encounters, which results in the party taking more damage and being incredibly easy to hit. This however was offset by the party's cleric who was also now enjoying fights as he loved to be a healer. Bad thing about it though is he had to leave the game because his wife is 8 months pregnant and he can no long spare the time. So im trying to come up with a means of keeping the combat interesting without making the players feel as if they were just weakened because they no long have a healer. And the regular wands and potion rules means they would no longer be putting out damage on their entire round and i dont want them to feel these combats are now too hard, because the only alternative would be to use easier monsters that would thus just die in a few rounds and never really pose a threat to the group. Basically putting everything back to square one and making things more linear, repetitive and thus, somewhat boring.

Would it be possible to dual wield with say one hand weapon in main hand (say a short sword for instance) and a want in an off hand (say cure light), and as a full round swing with your sword and touch yourself with your wand to deal damage and heal yourself in the same round? I understand that activating a wand is a standard action in itself, however so is attacking with a weapon, so in a sense dual wielding two swords would be two standard actions even though it is not worded as such. And for a melee sense it does not seem to be a broken maneuver as your essentially cut your damage in half to perform this. I was thinking of allowing this in my game but would like everyone's thoughts, i however would not allow a dual wield with a wand that would target anyone (friend or foe) other than the one using it, ie self target spells only.

Feedback?

Cool, thanks guys.

If two PCs are attacking a monster. The first pc does 14 damage non lethal. The monster's total hp is 16. The second pc attacks and does 4 lethal damage.

Nonlethal damage states if the nonlethal damage is greater than the targets current hp the target falls unconscious.

So 14 non lethal damage, after the lethal damage the creatures hp is at 12.

So am i correct in saying this monster falls unconscious but is not bleeding out because his wounds are not about his max hp?

I noticed on the online campaigns that groups for this AP are starting at LVL2. Is there a reason behind this or is it just more fun then starting at LVL1?

I got cha, so he was correct, i just read the part that said "to cast a spell you must concentrate" and assumed you had to roll for that. But i see now that is rolling to check to see if you continue to concentrate through these events.

thanks.

I had an argument with a player about concentration. I was under the impression you rolled concentration checks for all spells you try to cast when "in combat". He brought up the chart and said it says nothing about rolling a concentration check if you are standing still and did not move at all.

If in this case the player did not move, has no enemies performing an attack of opportunity, does he still need to roll a DC check? Or is that considered concentrating as nothing is there to break it?

I really like the Leopard idea, that is some genius in action right there.

^^ lol yes!!!

"Channeling energy causes a burst"

"A burst spell affects whatever it catches in its area, including creatures that you can't see. It can't affect creatures with total cover from its point of origin (in other words, its effects don't extend around corners). The default shape for a burst effect is a sphere, but some burst spells are specifically described as cone-shaped. A burst's area defines how far from the point of origin the spell's effect extends"

Core Rule Book Excerpts.

Keep in mind when it says "ones you cant see" mean invisible or hidden, not ones not in 'line of sight'.

Let the players worry about how rested they will be. Camping in the wilderness is dangerous. If they fire off all their spells at the first sound in te brush, they will have problems when they need it later.

He's right, they will need to learn how to manage resources and save spells in case there is more danger ahead. They wont be able to rest in between every encounter and have all of their spells to go gung ho all day.

I can tell you the first time they enter an encounter with low spells or no spells and are pretty in effective, they will be sure to only use spells when they need to.

Table

They can always go back to sleep after the fight. I have not played with many casters, the only one i know off the top of my head is the witch, and i think, but could be wrong, Sorcerer/wizard.

What ever the case, say they lie down at sun down, have monsters attack 2 hrs later after the camp fire has burned down a bit, have your encounter. Judging on how long your encounter takes, they should have atleast 9 hours left to rest before dawn.

Start with a perception roll if any of the heros are on watch to see if they see your monsters coming.

I wouldnt worry about what classes need a full nights rest when you create one. Monsters arn't going to only attack when the heros are nice and rested.

Any creature that would attack at night would work, spiders, wolves, bears, bandits, goblins, ect. As for how many/how strong, consult the CR table as you would with every other encounter.

If you want a spin on regular encounters you could wait until they wake up and have them encounter highway men that are trying to rob them, or have some bandits pretending to be in trouble and then spring an ambush.

You could also have 2 different sets of wild animals fighting eachother and have the noise wake up your heros and then it would be up to them to check it out or ignore it. (which i hoping they would want to check it out, as they are adventurers....)

I would say if you can buy it, you can sell it. However, a 'Companion' and a 'Mount' are different. Atleast to me, companion is like you trusted animal pet that you adventure with. A mount is just an animal you use as you please, if the mount dies, you just buy a new one. If your companion dies you weep for months and kindly bury it with a nice grave stone and have terrible night mares of how it was your fault.

It does seem ultimately up to a GM.

For the bard it would be cross between Indiana Jones and Dr Who.

......... Best.... Bard.... EVER!

Oh, come on, just cut that page out with some scissors and fold it into a paper airplane. Then write a post thanking Paizo for the free extra paper airplane paper they included with their book!

Quite possible the best thing i have heard in a very long time. Just made my day.

Thoughts??

My only thought is i want one.

Really the only kind of outsider race I can stomach is tiefling. I just don't like them because it's basically 'Ooh! look at me, I'm human but I'm not human so I'm special and unique!'. I can only stomach tieflings because A) there the only way I can technically play a race like ogres or gnolls, and B) because I can be hideously deformed and monstrous i.e. not human.

Just to let you know, Aasimars are not always human. They can also be halfings, orcs, lizardfolk, catfolk, tengus. -- Blood of Angels. However that does not change thier stats in anyway, but asthetically your not a human. Blood of angels also states Aasimar can be born of any Intelligent race, those above are just the more common ones, human being the most common.

Also, just to the west of the Mwangi Expamse is the Pirate City. Tie in as a refugee from the pirate city and you can be what ever race you choose. You just have to up-sell this to you GM. Make a good enough back story and i dont see why I wouldnt allow it.

PS get new friends.

Fair enough, that was kind of a long shot anyways lol.

Reliquary weapons or shields

However promising that is, im looking for a solution that can be done and lvl 1. And my understanding is the tattoo only costs 100 gp, making it able to get at lvl 1, and far cheaper than any other solution.

However i am glad you showed me this, but i have a question.

" If the consecrated area contains an altar, shrine, or other permanent fixture dedicated to your deity, pantheon, or aligned higher power, the modifiers given above are doubled (+6 sacred bonus to positive channeled energy DCs, -2 penalties for undead in the area). "

Would a standard silver Holy Symbol as a permanent fixture, or is that stricly buildings?

Sean K Reynolds wrote:

There's an ad in the back of the Core Rulebook, too.

SCaaaaAAAAAaAAAaaarryyyyy!

This is an extremely flip attitude to take toward the concerns of a paying customer. Actually, pretty poor social skills for a representative of any company to display (audience paying or not.)

I actually prefer his response, i mean what else would he do? Ignore this guy? That seems equally if not more rude. Or perhaps you would like him to give a press release and apology for letting people know that if they like what they bought, they have more stuff to go with it?

Um, what is the problem with the ad anyway? Its a full page image of the cover of the NPC Guide in the back of mine which is nice. Its not like its an ad for washing detergent or snacks.

^^ cant say it better than that.

If its the very last page... who cares, just ignore it. Its not like its hindering the book in any way. And its not like they had another page of content to add and decidced to put advertisement instead. They just added it in the back to let other people know more about their other products. Which means they sell more, which means they have more profit, which means they release more content for the rest of us.

Personally, if my players ran a cleric/paladin/oracle that could channel and they fixed a holy symbol to helm, I would happily let them use it. I would also happily sunder it.

Yeah i know the ways monsters/enemies can remove it, or even destroy the tatoo on my had thus making it no longer work which is why i didnt think i was trying ot break the game. Im just the type of person that is going to use every tool at my disposal to win. And in this case its not having to use a move action to pull out of put away the symbol, thus letting me be mobil while keeping the group alive.

Personally, I like "forcing" Clerics to acknowledge the source of their power.

You can take the birthmark trait, but that only works for spells, not channeling.

How would you feel about holding the symbol in hand, and touching the symbol against someone to active a touch spell?

I agree with the GM, and you, that the symbol should be more than just somewhere on me but brought to attention to cast. Which is why i was thinking the tatoo, because i could ignore it when i do spells that done require it, and then just raise my hand in the air when i need to cast with it.

There are some items called channeling foci which can be used as a holy symbol, too. There is a weapon and a shield for example.
channel foci

So mtake the sanctified shield for instance. I already have a shield, and i add sanctifed to it like an enchantment? Or do i have to rebuy a shield and add 100gp to the price for it being sanctified?

Also im a bit cautious about this because ive never heard of the book Adventureres Armory, and i know for a fact the GM does not have it so it seems like that idea could get shot down. We are really just playing off APG, UC, UM, and UE.

So im playing for the first time and i chose an Aasimar Cleric. And i build him to be all Heals in a combat setting and diplomacy/heal/sense motive outside of combat. I find it kind of annoying to have to grab my holy symbol to cast some of my spells, and then put it away to use my touch spells. (sheild in other hand) So i searched through the books and forums for a while and saw someone post about Welding a symbole to a weapon/shield thus making it always presented. My GM shot that down saying he sees presented as holding it up and showing it off, not just having it where it can be seen. Which i agree with that, he makes a valid point. He also through in that im already over powered and shouldnt try to break. Which im not trying to break it, as all i will be doing in combat is making sure my party is alive and smashing faces. I do see his point on the over powered aspect, not only am i an Aasimar which at early levels is quite strong. But my skill rolls when i made the character where 18 18 16 16 14 11. Anyways, i have not pitched this idea yet, but i found where i can tattoo my holy symbol onto the palm of my hand. Its actually in the rule books as a service i can buy. I dont want to pitch it if it seems like im trying to break the game. So what are y'alls thoughts on this?

My GM ran Preludes to all of our characters to tie in everyones BG into eachother. Really neat idea. However a GM could do that same and use it as a chance to obtain a familiar instead of choosing it. Really up to the GM and if he/she feels there is room in his/her timeline/story to put it in there.

You could make a large battlefield map and break off the heroes on special missions during the siege, like stealing ammo caches, poisoning horses, disrupting re-suply routes etc. And have the overall seige be affected by how well they complete these tasks.

*palm to forehead*

Thanks Ice Titan. I see that now. I should have slowed when I was reading that section of the basic rules.

I love when i seethings like this because it makes me feel good about how often it happens to me....

lol

Negative Energy Affinity: How is this ability (Bestiary 2, page 299) supposed to work?
The intent of this ability is that the creature is healed by negative energy (like an undead) and harmed by positive energy (like an undead); this is automatic and has nothing to do with the intent of the target or the energy-wielder. However, as written, the ability is a bit confusing because of the phrase “reacts to,” which doesn’t have a clear definition. This ability will be changed in the next printing of Bestiary 2.

Update: Page 299—In the description of the Negative Energy Affinity ability, replace the current entry with the following:

Negative Energy Affinity (Ex) The creature is alive, but is treated as undead for all effects that affect undead differently than living creatures, such as cure spells and channeled energy. Format: negative energy affinity; Location: Defensive Abilities.

—Sean K Reynolds, 02/07/12

Reference

Bah thats lame, makes my dhampir buddy no longer scared of me. Found it in the faq though. Seems like a cop out for people that cant handle a difficulty in the mix of a party.

"Negative Energy Affinity: Though a living creature, a dhampir reacts to positive and negative energy as if it were undead—positive energy harms it, while negative energy heals it.

Pretty clear racial description page on Dhampirs.

Clearly states Dhampirs are living.
Clearly states what it means by "reacts as if undead".
Clearly states that it is "reacting to" the energy.

Says nothing about changing its Classification as a living or undead target.

Post by MDT is completely accurate.