So, I'm kind of looking for a definitive answer on this topic. Let's say I'm a Rogue, with the True Professional archetype and the Magical Expertise sub-ability. Say I take Greater Magical Talent (Cure Light Wounds), because the Magical Expertise sub-ability lets me take from any spell list, not just the wizard/sorcerer list.
According to a 2011 FAQ ruling, I *can't* use a wand of cure light wounds without a dc 20 UMD check, but according to a 2015 FAQ ruling I can actually (help) create one. Is this still the case, or am I missing a more recent ruling?
Well, while there are some great suggestions here, the level two part is the big catch on many of these. Even the lowest accessible level Improved Familiar is a level 3 minimum requirement, starting level 2s have a grand, so both the wand and the circlet are problematic.
That Ring of Eloquence is the best bet, I might be able to convince my GM to go with a stripped down version of that. One language for a reduced price kind of thing. She's waffling hard on that Pearl, which would be the best option based on the pricing.
Any other suggestions?
So, I've got a concept for a character, and I'm missing a key element. The core of it is a Kitsune Sorcerer with the psychic bloodline feat who stays in Fox shape (hence the Psychic bloodline). The key problem, of course, is communicating with the party. I'm looking for a spell, or an item, or similar that would allow what is essentially an intelligent animal to communicate with the rest of the party? Preferably NOT via writing. I already thought of mage hand and chalk, but that's not helpful in combat. Should mention that it's for a party of level 2s.
You are not, yourself, casting the spell and, as such, yes. You can use them while in armor, yes, if you are capable of activating the item.
Name Violation wrote:
Put it on a cestus.
So, this question has roots in some third party. Basically, the conflict here comes up that the Training enchantment is relatively unique among enchantments, being that it explicitly states that you CAN put it on a weapon multiple times, and spells out that you simply don't gain the benefits of feats you can't qualify for without them - meaning you COULD put the whole Two Weapon Fighting chain on one sword, but you'd only get the lowest one you qualify for on your own.
So, in theory, sticking the SAME combat feat on it three or more times is teeeechnically legit, though the case where there would normally BE a benefit to doing so is limited.
The entire question arises because of the note that Flaming doesn't stack with Flaming on the same weapon, or even with Flaming-like spells (Sunmetal, for example).
So, the ENTIRE question is this:
I know it seems like a pretty simple yes-no question, but I've got pretty good arguments on both sides.
So, to preface, yes. I know it's probably impossible. No, i don't care. Mach 5 is the target, not the expected outcome. Aaaand, no, I really don't care that it's ponyfinder. I could use a dozen different flying critters.
Salient points are this:
Two of my feats are called for by other things, and a third by the Run feat (unless there's a better one for flying). But I'm using a true professional rogue, so i still have 19 (combat feat basic talent, general feat advanced talent), giving me a 220 base fly, 1100 on a 'run'.
Beyond that, spells and disposable items are off the table.
Anyone got suggestions for more zoom?
out flank wrote:
I call shenanigans. Unless an ability explicitly calls it out, you can't fulfill the criterion for two desperate2 roles on one skill just because it explicitly calls out doing so on a different one. The only reasonable exception would be if the ability you wanted to use it with was a prerequisite for the named ability.
@Kayerloth (In)famous to have someone want them murdered. The original challenge was for a "properly built wizard", so assume paranoid.
Also, the entire challenge is supposed to, for all intents and purposes, supposed to run the 'rules' as PFS legal. So, the GM is mainly an arbiter between two rules lawyers.
Ah, but there are plenty of ways to levy brute force maintaining impunity. With very few exceptions, aoes are reflex saves, which are stupid to use against rogues. Slippery mind almost negates the few aoe Will saves. I can't for the life of me remember the name, but i distinctly recall a feat that lets you make a reflex save to avoid a fortitude save. And there are plenty of ways to hide in plain sight. Targeted spells are useless of you can't see what you're shooting.
I mean... I CAN do that, Xenocrat, but I was hoping to avoid the cheese of "Oh, I spend 120,000 of my 880,000 gold on a ring of three wishes." Or, you know, a Luck Blade. Or a scroll of Wish. Though, I know all about Mind Blank, so Discern Location and mind reading are out, since a properly built wizard will have it running constantly. Are there, perhaps, and means of divine intervention or knowledge that are accessible by non-artifact items and would bypass Mindblank?
*notes down the Ring of Planar Focus*
So, many moons ago, my current GM said it was impossible to kill a properly built level 20 wizard as a rogue. I took this as a challenge. I'm at the point where I've one detail left: getting to the wizard's personal domain to kill the 'real' him and his clone(s).
I need a way to travel across the planes to a given person, rather than going to a specific plane. Any suggestions? (In the spirit of the challenge, I'm not using Eldritch Scoundrel, and premade items are required. Third party items are ok, but I'd prefer PFS compliant.)
Also, if anyone has a sample l20 wizard they could direct me to, that would be fantastic.
Actually, Khan, I didn't notice that either, so thanks for telling me. It's a pretty good spell for this purpose. Even just a 40 foot radius can be down right devastating on, say, a battalion going through drills or an army marching in ranks. Recruit camps? Wiped out. Bases on their monthly uniform inspections? Leveled. Hell, we're assuming a tenth level caster. He could Widen it and use himself as bait to lure most of an army into an 80' radius. My character once lit himself on fire to escape the belly of something that had eaten him. Centering the spell on himself would be right up his almost-suicidal approach to warfare.
I was listening to the Wheel of Time books, and one of the scenes inspired me a bit.
To be honest, I think a single casting of Control Winds from zero wind will do it, if the army is encamped, rather than at barracks. Flying debris does damage, when you consider that an army camp is going to be full of unattended weapons and armor... and, if winds are strong enough to tear off roofs, things like horse lances, tent poles, and the like are going to be airborne hazards to everything.
Good suggestions, though, thanks everyone.
So, yeah... Exactly what the title says, but I'll refine my terms a little. I need one spell that fills the following criteria:
~Up to level 5, preferably 4
My GM is telling me that an idea I had for a spell is over powered explicitly because it is, as he and I both define it, 'an army killer'. But I know for a fact that Contagion could do it with a little luck, and that Greater Contagion could do it with great ease. But I'm looking for 'quick' results on the slaughter.
I know it was asked like seven years ago, but are evil outsiders considered to be operating on positive energy for the purposes of healing? I ask this question specifically because of Holy Water, which states that it is 'infused with positive energy', and damages both undead and evil outsiders. It could go either way in my book, but nothing else calls it out the way Holy Water does.
So, my GM and I are arguing over whether or not he can add his dex bonus to a combat maneuver made using a Gypsy Prank, because he's using a bladed scarf and had Weapon Finesse.
I'm telling my GM that he's an idiot, because he's replacing the CMB with his Perform Check. He's citing the line "If the gypsy gains bonuses on combat maneuver checks from any feats, spells, magic items, or similar effects, they are added to the Perform bonus when using the appropriate combat maneuver" as to why he should add his dex bonus.
Can I get a rules lawyer, please? I'd like an FAQ, if there is one, that addresses this. Or a specific rule. Or just a half-brick in a sock.
My group house rules that pulling from a bandolier is a Swift Action, rather than just a move action that doesn't provoke...
But, by raw, pulling a wand from an efficient quiver is a move action. Per the text of the item in question, "as if from a regular quiver or scabbard." Technically, a wand doesn't GO in a scabbard or quiver, though an argument can be made that you CAN make a holster for a wand. In which case, it's the same action as drawing it normally would be.
My Oracle keeps his healing wand in his bandolier.