Zac Bond's page

Hopefully I'm posting this in the right area.

I believe that arrow eruption is castable once acid arrow has killed a creature. I'd like to get some feedback on this. I am aware it is kinda cheesy.

Acid arrow.

Arrow eruption.

Acid arrow isn't enhancing an attack, it is the attack.

While interestingly arguable by RAW, almost certainly this is against RAI.

this spell cannot reproduce any spells or other limited-use magical effects that you used to enhance that particular attack.

I know it seems like "enhance" is the operative word there, but that line, to me, says "no spells."

Anyway, as a GM I'd say "hell, no," and everyone else at my table would likely agree. It's mega-cheese.

A warrior of the holy light does not gain any spells or spellcasting abilities, does not have a caster level, and cannot use spell trigger or spell completion magic items.

In regards to the Use Magic Device skill, does this mean a WotHL is treated as a character who doesn't have a spell list (e.g. rogue with a wand), or does this mean you cannot use spell trigger items, period, ever, even with UMD?

Wooooo, triplock argument again!

Yeah, this thread seems to surface about once a month. I don't know if people are unable to search forums/FAQs or if they just like arguing about it.

First, I would mine some good heist movies for ideas (Rififi, The Italian job, Heist, etc.)

Do you want to run the whole heist in one session, or build it up a bit? If you choose the second route, you have more options for story-building and suspense. The PCs need to case the location and come up with a plan; they need to get someone on the "inside;" they need to track down an expert NPC and convince him/her to help them.

As for the heist itself, First there should be plenty of obstacles that the PCs are able to overcome because they planned well (PCs slipping in between guard shifts & locating a key to an inner area that they've learned a guard leaves in a secret spot so his lover can sneak in; sleeping draughts in the guard dogs' drinking water; disarming magic traps).

Deeper in, there should be some unforseen obstacles that require quick thinking to deal with (a magic lock keyed to a particular voice that the PCs might bluff their way past; a puzzle trap; an important item, perhaps the loot itself, not being in the place it is supposed to be).

Play to your PCs' strengths and give them opportunities to use all their skills and abilities. Check your player's sheets for those skills they've been putting ranks into but rarely come up in the game.

Make sure you have a way for the PCs to pull an inelegant smash-and-grab if they set off an alarm and things go pear-shaped. Likewise, they should have a plan B.

Heists are all about the best laid plans working wonderfully, right up to the point where they don't.

Dog, I love Kurt Vonnegut.

Fixed that for ya.

Have you checked out the Epic spells in 3.5? link.

Sorry, I'm having trouble getting past the name...

With Trapfinding you get a bonus to perception and disable device checks in regard to traps equal to half you rogue level. Additionally can disable magic traps with disable device (Dispel magic or other magic tricks not necessary).

Right. plus "A rogue can use Disable Device to disarm magic traps."

Any class can use disable device, but only a class with Trapfinding can disarm magical traps. Eric and Kaiyanwang assert that spells like alarm and magic mouth are magical traps and should be subject to disable device. The rules however, disagree, and this is the sticking point.

We can all argue until we're blue in the face over what a "trap" really is, but in a gray area like this (and there are many, many gray areas in the PFRPG rules), This stuff should be left for individual GMs to rule.

It's a slippery slope when you start applying hard and fast rules to things. Should one be able to use Disable Device against a magic mouth that's clearly not employed as a trap or alarm, and does that tread on the role of the magic user? Can illusory script be a magical trap?

There are even different rules that govern Perception vs. magical hazards like spike stones and teleportation circle. Wouldn't handling magical alarms in this way be more appropriate? Of course, that would mean that other classes could also deal with them effectively.

This argument seems to be more about some strongly held perceptions about what the Rogue's role in a party really is, and the truth of the matter is that this is completely up to the player and GM to define. The rules are just a guideline.

True - I just feel that in this case.. well, is not a magical trap. I just see that should be doable, for a rogue (or at least, an high level one) undo alarms, mechanical and magical, like should be normal for a barbarian have a chance to beat up and destroy the above statue.

I wouldn't mind too much, but the more i see the Rogue, the more I think that a little more care and love for the class was needed. I DM a large group now (up to 12 players, they switch PC because of the campaign and of all the classes played (18 IIRC) the rogue is the only one that multiclassed. Shadowdancer dip.

Just so we're on the same page-- the issue here isn't that it is impossible for Rogues to deal with magical alarms, but that they should be able to deal with them specifically through the Trapfinding class ability, because it takes away from the Rogue's sauce when other classes can do his iconic "thing."

That is what this boils down to, yes?

Good point.

Is there some reason these spells shouldn't work on objects? changing that aspect seems like a more elegant solution than shoehorning in a line about specifically ignoring undead immunity. Unless there's some abusive loophole or other reason I'm missing.

I use the PRD almost exclusively when I prepare my sessions. Five days out of the week my books sit on shelves, but I can't imagine playing without books at the table. My group (total of 7) has 3 Core books and it always seems like we could use 1 or 2 more, particularly when it's time to level.

I'm really happy to see stuff like the APG content included. Seems to me like Paizo is going above and beyond with the PRD.

Thank you! Hoping to see more of these in the future!

Disguise yourself. Pay some street urchins to throw a rock through the window and see if an alarm is triggered. If so, you know the dreaded combo is there and can plan accordingly. If not, then you're in like Flynn.

And no UMD needed for rings, potions, or oil of darkness for that matter.

so if you can afford a trap (a possibly significant amount of money) you can afford a 3rd level wizard, no one can ever steal from you. primary ability of a rogue useless, why would it not be everywhere. and the rogue is taken down a notch in usefulness.

You're acting like this is some unstoppable combo that completely nullifies a Rogue. The many ways that magic mouth can be nullified have been pointed out.

You want it done in a way such that a rogue needn't use UMD, multi-classing, or the abilities of allies to do it. This can be done through magic items. Your 20th-level rogue doesn't have a ring, or even potion, of invisibility? Enter, trigger the alarm, find a good hiding place inside, and wait until things die down.

If you think you should be able to take on challenges without having to rely on magic gear, you are playing a different game than the rest of us.

Funny thing is you can in fact replicate the effect with constructs. A door that screams bloody murder whenever it's opened by an unseen force does the exact same thing. You can't "disarm" a construct.

This.

Also, does your Rogue not case the places he's planning on breaking into? In this impenetrable fortress of a thousand magic mouths triggered to windows and doors, are there no chimneys? No way to tunnel in from below? How do the owners enter and leave? Maybe some research is required, disguise yourself if necessary, etc. There's more than one way to skin a cat. Trapfinding is not the end-all, be-all of the Rogue.

In a world where the only way for a Rogue to gain entry to someplace is to come through a door or window, yeah, this combo would be pretty potent.

wesF, I think I didn't explain myself correctly. I'm NOT saying "Rogue is teh Suxx!" or things like that. Actually, I think that a lot of power level discussions are not relevant because assume PCs in a vacuum, thing that does not happen in game.

Nevertheless, I do think that "avoid multiclassing" and "streamline rules" was one of the purposes of the game (and i indeed think that the game is very good, I actually think is the best version played and my players agree).

Nevertheless, I find odd, in the case of the rogues, for these reasons, that features that should be "typcal" of the archetype the class represents, at least in my view, are missing, or you need to multiclass for that.

And UMD is not an answer sorry. Now is far more easy for most class UMD. Rogues are better of a lot of classes, but is no more a "better you are a bard or rogue or not even try to UMD".

Your arguments are valid, I just don't think magic mouth is a trap, and RAW agrees. On the other hand, RAW doesn't think sepia snake sigil is a trap either, which is a bit weird.

But here's a question for you: Should Rogues be able to disarm illusory script with disable device? Because I can definitely see how a clever use of this spell could be used as a trap or trigger for one, sort of like a low-level symbol of persuasion. There's that slippery slope I was talking about earlier.

As for hide in plain sight, I totally agree with you. How Rangers get that and Rogues don't, I'll never know. But that's getting a bit off-topic.

We should just agree to disagree then.

Agreed! And here's another weird thing: sepia snake sigil doesn't appear to be a magical trap, either (although you do get a reflex save)!

Respectfully, I find very, very weird that a symbol trap is a magical trap, but an alarm is not. This is beating a trope to death.

AND yet another case of "spellcasters will manage it". Which is fine, I perfectly see a wizard dispel a magical defense. But IMHO if walks and quacks like a trap, rogues should be able to manage it too.

I see your point, and fully realize that this is pretty much an argument in semantics at this point. But a symbol trap gets triggered and does something directly to the person who triggered it. An alarm does not do this.

Not necessarily a case of "spellcasters will manage it." I said a solo rogue can handle these situations and I stand by that assertion. If you want to talk about a Rogue with no access to magic items, well, that's another case.

Of course I can houserule it. The problem is, if I have to houserule too many things, there is something wrong. Expecially in the case of stuff that should be a base for the Rogue, and for certain kind of scenarios.

But that's just it. The Rogue can defeat these measures, she just has to use means other than a single specific class ability. I'm still not convinced this is broken.

Trapfinding applies to traps. Spells like alarm and magic mouth are a different type of magical defense, but they aren't traps. A solo rogue has other reasonable ways to deal with these spells. Working as Intended, IMO.

I don't think it's overpowered to rule that these spells count as magical traps, but I'm worried that it may open a door to other interpretive abuses.

Zac Bond wrote:

And speaking of alarms, how is magic mouth worse than the alarm spell (which is also not a magical trap!)?

In fact, alarm is another good example.

I think this is an overestimation of what the Rogue's Trapfinding ability can do. If you disagree and want to house rule it, by all means, go to it, that's what house rules are for!

But the way this works isn't broken. These spells are not traps, because they don't cause direct harm.

A rogue (and his friends) all have a number of other ways of defeating these spells, and if we're really talking about 20th-level heists, a couple of 1st and 2nd level spells are going to be the least of your worries. :)

I fail to see how any of this is a problem for a 20th-level Rogue. Stealth + invisibility or magical darkness and you're done.

Or just get the magic mouth inside an area of magical silence and let the thing go off.

EDIT:
Some more thoughts: Also, magic mouth isn't really a magical trap. It has many functions as a spell beyond serving as a watch dog. It's not like the symbol series, which only do one specific (harmful) thing.

Another tip-off is the fact that nowhere in the description of magic mouth does it say at what volume the mouth speaks, what range it can project its voice to, whether it can be muffled while it is talking, or even if it gets a perception check to detect silent movement-- all of which are your GM's call, and all of which tell me that this spell was never really intended to be a trap.

If some clever person wants to employ the spell as an alarm, that's all well and good, but its limitations don't make it overpowering in this regard.

And speaking of alarms, how is magic mouth worse than the alarm spell (which is also not a magical trap!)?

Would bracers of armor be considered as armor for the purpose of whether a monk's class abilities work or not?

Nope! "When wearing armor, using a shield, or carrying a medium or heavy load" affects those abilities. Bracers of armor are a wondrous item, and are not considered armor.

Any chance that they stack with each other?

It sounds like you're asking if the stat / AC bonuses from multiple stones of the same type stack. Alas, they do not, because a magical bonus never stacks with another bonus of the same type.

In my last campaign, my players left their mounts alone in the forest near a gateway to the Fey realm, and I had a satyr come along and impregnate one of the horses. Sadly, the party druid figured it out before the mare gave birth, and they killed the horse.

But usually, I don't mess with mounts too much.

First, let me say bravo: your house rules are awesome.

I'm thinking about cribbing Battle Fatigue for my current game, but I have a couple of questions pertaining to how the mechanic interacts with "regular" fatigue.

• Do the fatigue descriptors for light wound and heavy wound replace the fatigued and exhausted conditions? If I cast touch of fatigue, does it impart penalties to attacks, damage, AC, saves, checks, spells, etc., or simply -2 to Str & Dex?
  
• Do these conditions stack with other fatigue effects? For example, if a barbarian is reduced to fewer than 50% of her hit points while raging (invoking battle fatigue, the effects of which are suppressed by the rage), and then ends the rage (becoming fatigued), does she immediately become exhausted?
  
• Does battle fatigue end if a character is brought back above the hit point threshold, or must it be dealt with like normal fatigue?
  

Thanks!

I've had great times running a purely evil game. As other have said, it all depends on your players. My campaign ended up running about 3 years and ended at high-level. We all had a blast playing it and recall it fondly, even the PCs who were brutally betrayed and ganked.

The most important thing is finding a plausible way to both keep the party together and keep them from killing one another, or at least for party PvP to have serious repercussions. In my campaign I did this by plopping a crazy-powerful artifact in their midst that gave them all sweet powers and let them come back from the dead, but also drove them all slowly and inevitably insane.

The inevitable PvP did occur, but always with the knowledge that whomever the player screwed over would eventually come back. It ended up pretty adversarial at the end, but the players put a great deal of thought into it, and there was an awesome amount of Machiavellian scheming and backroom-alliance-forging.

In the end, evil campaigns aren't that much different than the standard "good" game-- PCs need far-reaching, long-term goals to strive toward, and the DM needs a good reason for the party to stick together, as well as a plausible adversary. Everything else that happens is up to the maturity and comfort level of the group.

I would probably rule to let speak with dead work (of course, having it not work might give the players a valuable clue), and when the players did cast the spell, I would put something (or coach the dead player, if he's going to NPC his own corpse) in the corpse's cryptic answer that indicated that not all was as it should be (apart from being dead!), like complaining that his veins itched or something.

Definitely Privateer Press' Iron Kingdoms, for

- Expanded alchemy rules
- Pain of Healing

Mostly the Pain of Healing, because it's so damn cool. Divine healers get a daily hp threshold for healing, and if they surpass it, it's time to roll randomly for nastiness. This rule led to some awesomely tense moments in my games and really kicks the banality out of healing. If a cleric took Healing as one of his domains he could double the threshold and mostly avoid the badness.

My first thought in response to the title was minotaurs are large.

Then I read that you had medium sized minotaurs as the final encounter. Now I don't feel like such a smartypants for pointing that out. It seemed to be an underwhelming final encounter to take a CR4 creature and possibly put the young template on it to make it smaller and have an even lower CR. That might have had something to do with being passed over.

Well, as stated on p. 35 of the Guide to Absalom, Nuar is a medium-sized minotaur... The title is a pun on his size and the fact that he was/is a spiritual intermediary.

Here is my rejected submission. I welcome your critique!

Introduction
When Nuar Spiritskin decides to take up the craft of spirit-talking for the first time in many years, he is unprepared for the inhabitants of the spirit world. Angry at one who ignored them for so long, the spirits entrap Nuar and escape into the Taurean Embassy. Sealed in a shadowy extra-dimensional prison, the Minotaur Prince's fate will be decided by a group of Pathfinders, who need something very personal from him.

Summary
Venture-captain Horskk has a simple but delicate task for the PCs. The Society needs the final component for an ancient and complex spell: a piece of skin from an albino minotaur. The PCs need to convince the Minotaur Prince to give them a bit of his flesh. Horskk gives the PCs an enchanted surgical blade and instructs that the flesh must be given willingly and no harm should come to Nuar.
The PCs find the Taurean Embassy in disarray and are immediately harassed by a bevy of trickster spirits. After exploring the foyer and surrounding rooms, the PCs emerge in a courtyard hedge maze. A small building in the center of the maze is Nuar's home and is visible over the hedges. The maze is infused with the spirit energy accidentally released by Nuar, and a number of topiary sculptures (now animated by malevolent spirits) attack the PCs after they enter. When the PCs make it through the maze and enter the house, they find no sign of Nuar, but encounter a druid named Iaude hiding in an armoire.
Iaude is a confidante of Nuar. She explains that the minotaur has been kidnapped by wicked spirits and a particular focal item called an Ongwat blade is needed to free him. Unfortunately the minotaur sold his blade several years ago to a broker representing Grandmaster Torch. The PCs go to Grandmaster Torch and, unable to meet his price, must go to the docks and steal the contents of a particular crate for him. Once they complete Torch's task and obtain the blade, the PCs may choose to enter the spirit realm with Iaude to help Nuar face a manifestation of his fears, or they can force the minotaur out, in which case he'll be weakened but possessed by a wrathful spirit, and must be peacefully subdued.

Encounters
#1: Trickster spirits have infested the Embassy foyer and surrounding rooms. The invisible spirits generally annoy and harass the PCs, and use telekinesis to throw plates, drop chandeliers, knock PCs off staircases, etc.

#2: The topiary animals in the hedge maze are animated by the loosed energies of the spirit world. Topiary guardians use the stat blocks of the animals they represent and are vulnerable to fire (reduce HD for large-sized guardians to make it less deadly for Tier 1-2).

#3: The PCs arrive at the docks in time to see their crate taken from a ship and lowered by the great arm of The Beast into the bowels of a warehouse. The PCs will need to get past stubborn warehouse guard Forkmistress Kolz and her clockwork dog Ibix. Kolz has a heart of stone but clearly cares for her mechanical pet with the love of a mother, a fact that clever PCs should use to their advantage. This encounter could be a tough combat but is more rewarding if the PCs avoid a fight.

#4: Inside the warehouse, a group of dockworkers (human warriors, plus a half-orc for tier 4-5) have set up an impromptu game of chance right atop the Grandmaster's crate. The PCs might join the gambling as a distraction while one stealthily extracts the contents of the crate. Or the PCs could lie, flirt, or simply smash and grab then run like hell.

The PCs may choose which way to handle the final encounter:

#5: Enter the spirit world with Iaude and help Nuar destroy a terrifying manifestation of his regrets and fears. Tier 1-2: Shadow (CR 3, but PCs get help from Iaude and Nuar). Tier 4-5: Wraith.

Or

#6: Pull Nuar forcefully out of the spirit world, in which case he will be weakened, but disoriented and violent. The PCs will have to subdue him without hurting him. Tier 1-2: medium-sized minotaur, unarmed. Tier 4-5: medium-sized minotaur, armed, plus a swarm of shadowy-looking ravens.

Conclusion
If the PCs rescue Nuar, the minotaur will gladly allow them to take a small piece of his skin in return. If they fail, Nuar will likely remain trapped for some time...

A slam attack is considered a natural weapon and is listed as such in the 3.5 SRD, Here. Not exactly easy to find though!

"a creature can make one bite attack, one attack per claw or tentacle, one gore attack, one sting attack, or one slam attack..."

Given the above points, no I don't think it's overpowered, and a reading of the spell can reasonably do away with the first two abusive situations (PCs "kiting" the victim + the scenario given by The Wraith):

"Any confused character who is attacked automatically attacks its attackers on its next turn."

Any party casting this spell are undoubtedly the "attackers" in question. The Wraith's group of enemies would either seek out their attackers (the party) or fall to the first caveat of the spell:

"A confused character who can’t carry out the indicated action does nothing but babble incoherently."

For questions about who an attacker is in terms of an undetectable party, we can look to the invisibility spell description:

"For purposes of this spell, an attack includes any spell targeting a foe or whose area or effect includes a foe."

As a DM, I'd feel comfortable applying the spirit of the invisibility text and saying that the caster of confusion and any friend of his should be designated as "attackers."

Only you. As the feat says, when you trip an opponent, it provokes an AoO. If your party members don't have Greater Trip, they can't make an AoO, as listed in "Normal". If they do have it, they didn't trip the opponent, so no AoO.

That was my initial impression, but the descriptive text is at odds with the Benefit text. To clarify, it should read:

"Benefit: Whenever you successfully trip an opponent, that opponent provokes an attack of opportunity from you."

To say that the opponent simply "provokes an attack of opportunity" implies that anyone who threatens may take an AoO, and contradicts the descriptive text.

Greater Trip
You can make follow-up attacks on foes that you knock prone.
Prerequisites: Improved Trip, base attack bonus +6.
Benefit: Whenever you successfully trip an opponent, that opponent provokes an attack of opportunity.
Normal:Creatures that are knocked prone do not provoke attacks of opportunity.

Does the opponent provoke an AoO from only the person who performed the trip or from anyone who threatens?

It sounds to me that this Ability can be used against all Foes that the Barbarian Attack that round. If they have 3 attacks, 3 Monsters go flying.

That's what it sounds like to me as well, but I was confused by the last sentence. "this power is used as a swift action before any attacks are made."

any of whose attacks?

What if an enemy attacks on the barbarian's round through a readied action, AoO or immediate action? Can the barbarian still use the power?

Thus the clarification.

Knockback (Ex): Anyone hit by the barbarian’s melee attacks this round is pushed back 5 feet, if possible. This power is used as a swift action before any attacks are made.

Clarification is needed in the language of this power I think, specifically the last sentence. I was puzzled for some time before I sussed out the intention of the description. I think changing the wording of the last sentence like so would clear things up a bit:

"Activating this power is a swift action. The Barbarian must choose whether to use this power before her first attack is made."

Mighty Swing (Ex): The barbarian automatically confirms a critical hit. This power is used as an immediate action once a critical threat has been determined. A barbarian must be at least 8th level before selecting this power. (8 rage points)

The way this power is worded sounds like the barbarian is forced to use it whenever she threatens a critical. Suggest changing the language to something like:

"The barbarian may choose to automatically confirm a critical hit. Activating this power is an immediate action that occurs once a critical threat has been determined. A barbarian must be at least 8th level before selecting this power. (8 rage points)"