cephyn's page

Ah that explains it, thank you!

The Alternate would be fine. If you could change my order to the Advanced Player's Guide version, that would be perfectly acceptable.

Thank you for the quick response!

What is the status of this product? I'm seeing it listed on Amazon for over $200! Was there some announcement I missed? Will my order be processed in the estimated time frame?

This should help:

The intent of this thread is to keep track of a list of questions for which people desire an official ruling, because the debate can't be resolved satisfactorily by player discussion. I am starting with the ones below. Please add more, BUT DO NOT DEBATE HERE -- instead post a link to the debate thread (I can't figure out how to make the links active though, the html tags get escaped).

1. Can you disarm a shield?

2. Can a monk take Greater <combat maneuver name> at level 7, as it seems the iconic monk, Sajan, must have done?

3. Whirlwind, combat maneuvers and AoOs
a) Does Whirlwind Attack allow AoO from Greater Trip?
b) Does Greater Trip permit AoO from all creatures threatening the tripped target?
c) Does Lunge effectively increase reach by 1 square (as monster reach)or does it displace the reach by 1 square (as reach weapon reach).

4. Does the monk ki extra attack stack with haste?

not really. i admit that IF you play a HALF ORC wizard, with a 14 strength, and a GREAT AXE as a BONDED ITEM(already this is a pretty ludicrous suggestion) that 6 times per day you will be able to do barely more than someone that just prepared ray of frost. sounds like a horrible idea to me. but you go ahead and play a bad wizard.

So what i'm getting from your argument is this:

in 100% optimized cases, all abilities should be equal.
there is no place for discussion of non-optimized cases.

frankly, i like that there are things that work out better in non-optimized cases - gives some flexibility to actually coming up with story-based role-playable characters.

You're calculating average damage on hit. When you figure in that it has to hit the creatures full AC that +4 to hit. Against a basic CR 2 creature, let's say AC 14, you have a 55% chance to hit. Your elf has a 70% chance to hit its touch AC, let's say 11. 4.675 vs. 3.15 average damage. A marginal advantage, when you have a goofy half-orc wizard with a freebie 300+g item (omigosh OP anyone?). Both of which pale in comparison to the guaranteed 3.5 dmg from evocers force missile, if doing damage is your thing.

This is an argument for a different thread, but attempting to do damage at all is still suboptimal. Your human barbarian with the same elite array is doing 2d6+7 each round and quickly outstrips your meager damage.

I should hope a barbarian is outdamaging the wizard with a weapon.

May want to factor crit chance/damage in there too though.

But in the end...you admit the damage is similar. So it's not utterly useless. And when you factor in a freebie item like that - you call it overpowered. Maybe it is and maybe it isn't, but you really just undercut your whole argument.

cephyn wrote:

meatrace wrote:

It's a horrible ability now. Utterly useless. Just acid splash or ray of frost.

Seems pretty useful to me. 18INT elven wizard hurling a longsword? Sounds good to me.

So you have a +4 on your attack roll and have to hit its full AC.

Or have something reasonable like a 14 dex and have +2 to hit its touch AC. And the Longsword (which costs money and a use of a limited class ability, which requires you to be a sub-optimal specialization of wizard) does on average a single point more damage while hitting less often. Nah, I'll pass.

sorry. didn't realize that by "utterly useless" you meant "has no place for a fully 100% efficient optimized build" - my bad.

It's a horrible ability now. Utterly useless. Just acid splash or ray of frost.

Seems pretty useful to me. 18INT elven wizard hurling a longsword? Sounds good to me.

Touch Attacks: Touching an opponent with a touch
spell is considered to be an armed attack and therefore
does not provoke attacks of opportunity. The act
of casting a spell, however, does provoke an attack of
opportunity. Touch attacks come in two types: melee
touch attacks and ranged touch attacks. You can score
critical hits with either type of attack. Your opponent’s
AC against a touch attack does not include any armor
bonus, shield bonus, or natural armor bonus. His size
modif ier, Dexterity modif ier, and def lection bonus (if
any) all apply normally.

Touch: You must touch a creature or object to affect it.
A touch spell that deals damage can score a critical hit
just as a weapon can. A touch spell threatens a critical
hit on a natural roll of 20 and deals double damage on
a successful
critical hit. Some touch spells allow you to
touch multiple targets. You can touch as many willing
targets as you can reach as part of the casting, but all targets
of the spell must be touched in the same round that
you finish casting the spell.

This is from the beta (only pdf I have at the moment) but I'm sure its not been changed much since then, and probably is nearly identical to 3.5 or 3.0 even.
"Ray: Some effects are rays. You aim a ray as if using a
ranged weapon, though typically you make a ranged
touch attack rather than a normal ranged attack. As with a
ranged weapon, you can fire into the dark or at an invisible
creature and hope you hit something. You don’t have to see
the creature you’re trying to hit, as you do with a targeted
spell. Intervening creatures and obstacles, however, can
block your line of sight or provide cover for the creature
you’re aiming at.
If a ray spell has a duration, it’s the duration of the
effect
that the ray causes, not the length of time the ray
itself persists.
If a ray spell deals damage, you can score a critical hit
just as if it were a weapon. A ray spell threatens a critical
hit on a natural roll of 20 and deals double damage on a
successful critical hit."

Let's make this real easy. Let's say the man runs 10 m/s. Maybe he's just practicing and easing off the gas a bit. 10m = 33 ft. A round is 6 seconds. So, running 5x his "normal" speed, he gets to run about 200 feet in 6 seconds. 200 feet divided by 5 = 40.

Bolt has a Move of 40, by my calc.

We just started a 1st level campaign using PF rules.

The wizard (universalist) in my game is using this ability to attack with his bonded item (a quarterstaff) and is expecting to get 1.5 INT damage since it's a two-handed weapon.

He wound up being one of the most effective combatants doing 1d6+7 points of damage each round (started with a 20 INT) with a +5 bonus to attacks. As a bonded item it will continue to get better, too.

Thoughts?

Robert

I'm not a big fan of the INT bonus to damage. Jason has said he's thinking of eliminating it altogether. In the game I run, I took it down to half INT bonus to damage. It's still very effective. As for 1.5xINT to damage, I think that's right out, no way I allow that. I'm not even sure HotA should be used for a Qstaff - that's a 2h weapon and it's HAND of the Apprentice, not HANDS. I think that's a long stretch of the ability.

It may have been covered, but can you use Arcane strike with the weapon?

Don't know, Jason said he'd get back to us but, sadly, he never did. :(

We also need to know how attacks against the HotA are resolved.

If the Hand itself can be hurt, does it have HP, AC, etc?

If only the weapon can be attacked, is it Sundering? AoO?

-----------------------

On a different note, I would like to request that HotA should be less complicated. Do we really need all this? My group has just been treating it like a "Weapon Ray" while we waited for an official response, and I rather like the simplicity of it. The laundry list of questions is off-putting for ANY ability, much less the one that 80% of wizards have now acquired retroactively.

I agree that its probably just too freakin complicated. Unless Jason has a miracle rewrite, this ability will either have to go by the wayside or spawn a rulebook of its own.

Does it return the weapon instantly? Or is it limited to 15' per round?

Can combat feats be channeled through? Sneak Attack? Trip attacks?

Can it attack on the first turn?

Are you planning on keeping INT bonus for damage? I mean this is a pretty darn powerful ability with a longsword.

This ability still needs a bit of clarification. Beyond that, I am also leaning in the direction of this ability being a bit overpowered. I am thinking of removing the bonus to damage from the ability, but I kinda feel that this makes it a far less attractive option at high levels.

Thoughts

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

Let's just revisit what Jason said. He admits its unclear. He feels it's overpowered - apparently mainly from the damage bonus.

I agree with both of these statements. As for further thoughts - all we have is that it's unclear regarding XYZ, but anything else, we have nothing - because we don't actually know how it's supposed to work.

Since no one has ever told us what was intended, I'm left to believe that they don't know either and want us to come up with (or rewrite) something we feel is balanced - because we can't playtest it RAW, it's too unclear.

So. I'll give another shot at this. Removing all preconceptions and just looking from a balance standpoint, this thing should work sorta on-par with the rays. So, player can cast and use the weapon within 30', starting first round. Concentration maintains position of the weapon, otherwise, the weapon instantly returns. Otherwise, the weapon may only move 30' per round. Using a primary skill for the to-hit bonus pretty much puts it roughly on par with touch attacks. An opponent attempting to interact with the weapon causes it to return. You must have LoS. It does not threaten. It does not use any feats (power attack, etc). It cannot make AoOs. It does not take up a square (like a tiny creature). Damage bonus CL/2. If not being used for an attack, it works identical to Mage Hand.

That is as simple as it gets. I'm pretty tired of the ambiguity of the spell and the lack of answers. Creativity suffers, but at least that's clear and fair. Now most of the schools have a nearly identical Magic Ray, Magic Bolt or Magic Weapon ability.

This is somewhat my point about the weapon occupying physical space.

I cross posted in both the Hand of Aprentice Thread and in this thread.. And it was generally ignored.

It's a good question I don't think any of us have a good answer for. It's not that you're being ignored - we're all being ignored.

Did we ever get a good answer for this?

Nope.

<shrug> It's not a bad ability, but I doubt it's what Jason had in mind in the first place. I'd really like to hear what was intended for this ability from him, at this point.

Rather discouraging to watch this ability not get official attention from Jason in a month. If this is the rack Paizo wants to hang their hats on, they'd better show more overt interest in quality-control. If Jason doesn't have 5 minutes in a month to clarify HotA, how are we not not assume the product as a whole is suffering from neglect.

We need answers to fundamental questions like this a heck of a lot more than we need Prestige Classes hammered out.

I was pretty optimistic that we'd get a firm clarification from jason in the cleric HotA thread but alas, no.

:(

Either kill him or take him to the local authorities. Anything else is not really a good act.

CG players can interact with local authorities - they're just not morally bound to the same laws. The Ranger could be more of an independent bounty hunter. He doesn't need to do what he's told or follow the laws if they hinder his goals.

Kill the bandit king - he cannot be allowed to threaten and kill anyone else. He's clearly a killer threat since he would kill the ranger if had the chance. Setting him free simply endangers others.

Turn him to the authorities - let the local authorities handle it, and it's their choice what to do with him. All the ranger has done is apprehend the criminal, possibly through means unavailable to the law.

*(Su) Turn this into a standard action cast to allow the wizard to magically throw a weapon you are equipped with at a target.
*The target must be within 25'+(CL*5)'
*Apply your (INT+BAB-RangedIntoMelee) modifier to the attack roll
*Apply your (STR+DEX) to your damage roll.
*Weapon returns to you after your turn is over so that you don't provoke an AOO.
*Using this ability while threatened causes an AOO.
*Feats such as cleave and sneak should work.
*All ranged bonuses and penalties apply (ie. concealment, winds?)

How's that look? Adds a tiny bit of scaling, while taking away a lot of the complexities of the spell.

Weapon you're equipped with...meaning holding? Or just on your person? Weight limit? Size limit?

STR+DEX to damage? No way. Nothing else in the game does this (afaik), its completely at odds with d20 mechanic philosophy. And since it's magic, it doesn't make much sense, you're not actually throwing it. I personally don't like any damage bonus at all, given the assumed power level of the spell, but 1/2 level is as far as I think it needs to go.

I can see allowing sneak to work, but not cleave. I'd rather combat feats not apply at all.

But overall....this is much easier to deal with than "as Mage Hand with the following changes". But it's also like a beefed up version of Launch Bolt.

I'd almost rather the universalist wizard power just be changed entirely, to something less confusing. It's boring, but maybe just an Arcane Ray (works like all the other rays, just uses generic magic power). Or something not combat based but utility based.

But as we customize this (obviously with the wizard ability in mind) do we decouple the ability from the Magic Domain Cleric ability? Make that different?

This ability still needs a bit of clarification. Beyond that, I am also leaning in the direction of this ability being a bit overpowered. I am thinking of removing the bonus to damage from the ability, but I kinda feel that this makes it a far less attractive option at high levels.

Thoughts

Jason Bulmahn

It needs a ton of clarification. Mainly can it attack the first round, how far can it move in a round, can you channel sneak attack or even feats through it and more. It's a huge problem. :( I think it needs a rewrite from scratch to be really clear.

I agree that it is probably overpowered. At low level, that bonus to damage is huge, as is the to-hit bonus even. I would definitely agree with taking the damage bonus out. It hits as hard as a fighter at low levels, with no threat of direct retaliation.

It is a less attractive option at higher levels - but it should be! It's a 1st level ability. If you're relying on first level abilities at 15th level, I think something is wrong.

Jason opened up cleric design comments to include domain comments. I have posted a "please explain Hand of the Acolyte" in there. Hopefully we'll get an answer finally, since its pretty much the same ability.

Almost a month now... I'm gonna say that HotA can attack when it's summoned and move and attack after a concentration check and that it can move 30' on the first turn and per turn.

Why would there be a concentration check?

Hand of the Acolyte - what is it supposed to do (identical to the Hand of the Apprentice issues, as far as I can tell).

*bump*

*sigh* Sadly our patience has gone unrewarded. :(

Again, for paizo, I realize the beta reporting isn't on the Magic Section yet - but we're not discussing changes to the ability or the merits and power of the ability. That's what we will be discussing when we get to the Magic section.

The problem is, we can't formulate suggested changes or evaluate the merits of this ability until we actually know what HotA does. Otherwise when it comes to the Magic section, by the time we get to playtest whatever the answer is - the beta evaluation will have moved on.

We just want to know how HotA is meant to work. Then we can let you know how it playtests.

:(

I was thinking that depended on whether the hand gets an attack the first round or not. As written, the hand only draws a weapon as a free action when it's summoned - so the wizard would technically have to resummon it every round to get the darts as a free action.

But it is a mage hand, so I suppose it could grab the darts itself - probably as a move action rather than a free?

i think that makes the most sense, tergiver. free action upon casting to draw, move action to acquire the dart after.

A light crossbow is 4 pounds and can be fired in one hand, but can't be reloaded one-handed. Still, reloading is a move action, and concentrating is a standard... it could work. I'd stick with darts, though, if you wanted to go missile. Weird mental image either way.

Can you reload someone else's light crossbow? Is that an action anyone has ever dealt with? Because if you think about it, reloading would take two hands.

1.now as a DM would you allow this in a 1st lvl game(he is first lvl) if the rest of the party was not built with the same level power.

2. as players how do would u feel If the PC overshadows combat and makes the CR1 encounters a cakewalk?

3. IF as DM you didnt see this and now you do how do you solve the problem of one PC being more powerful then rest?

4. if the PLAYER doesnt see anything wrong with his PC even when he is taking all the fun out of combat how do you deal with that?

THIS TOPIC IS NOT ABOUT THE BUILD IN QUESTION, IT IS ABOUT HOW DMS WOULD DEAL WITH THE PROBLEMS THIS BUILD MAY OR MAYNOT BRING IN TO THE GAME.

False premise. It absolutely is about the build in question. the dm has final say on everything. if the player won't play within the framework of the game, then he doesn't play. That eliminates question 1 (the answer is no, you dont allow it if it doesn't fit in your game) and 2 (not an issue, the build is disallowed).

#3, if you didn't see this coming, you may want to reevaluate why you are allowing so many non-core builds. because if this one slipped by, you clearly don't understand all of what you are bringing into the game and how to run a group that has all that open to them. it's unlikely it can be fixed without having the characters start over. it's not fair, but it's the DM's fault for not paying attention or not understanding what he got the group into. suck it up, admit you made a mistake, and move on.

#4, if the player can't see how he's affecting the group and ruining all their fun - then have him switch characters for a session with one of the other players. let him feel what they feel in battle. if he still doesn't get it - he never will. and that means he will not fit in the group.

it's the DM's job to reign in this sort of thing at the beginning. I actually did run a campaign where I allowed too much stuff for a couple characters and they overshadowed the rest of the group in combat. how did i deal with it? a couple ways. (this was 2nd Ed days, btw)

1)split groups of monsters. Send some toughies in with some chaff for everyone else to fight. the big guys took on the tough ones, the supporting characters handled the less tough. everyone contributed that way, and it was all tailored to their abilities.

2)have encounters that strike at the powerful characters weaknesses so that they are not the most effective in the fight. you can't do this every time, it's not fair, but once in while its good to take them down a peg.

3)risk a power creep by throwing in a couple cool magic items that the powerful guys can't use. not too many though. or have NPCs that interact strongly with the non-powerful members, or have storylines that center around the other players and their class abilities to let them shine.

I don't know how much I like it, but I do think its an idea worthy of discussion and exploration. Good call.

OK, here is another question. What about using a longbow with this power? Assuming I keep the HOTA with the bow next to me, how does it handle ammo?

I ask because my first Pathfinder RPG char (starting this sunday) is going to be an Elven Wizard who uses a bow. Using the HOTA, I can get int bonus damage to my bow attacks, instead of applying my negative str bonus to damage.

A bow takes two hands to use. It's Hand of the Apprentice, not Hands. So, I don't think HotA can use it.

Apology for not having read thread.

Semi-relevant, but already covered and rejected, argument against previous post.

By the way I cannot think of a single spell that grows in power the longer you sit and hold it. I don't know every spell by heart, so please forgive me. Can you remind me of one that works that way so I can compare it?

Well Chill Metal does, but that's not a concentration spell.

Most of the Detect Spells work this way.

Interesting question on Implosion. It states
"This spell causes a destructive resonance in a corporeal creature’s
body. Each round you concentrate (including the first), you can cause
one creature to collapse in on itself, inflicting 10 points of damage per
caster level. If you break concentration the spell immediately ends"

First round of concentration? ie Casting round, or first round after?

Storm of Vengeance
This spell creates an enormous black storm cloud. Lightning and crashing
claps of thunder appear within the storm. Each creature beneath the cloud
must succeed on a Fortitude save or be deafened for 1d4x10 minutes.
If you do not maintain concentration on the spell after casting it, the
spell ends. If you continue to concentrate, the spell generates additional
effects in each following round, as noted below. Each effect occurs during
your turn.
2nd Round: Acid rains down in the area, dealing 1d6 points of acid
damage (no save).
3rd Round: You call six bolts of lightning down from the cloud. You
decide where the bolts strike. No two bolts may be directed at the same
target. Each bolt deals 10d6 points of electricity damage. A creature struck
can attempt a Reflex save for half damage.
4th Round: Hailstones rain down in the area, dealing 5d6 points of
bludgeoning damage (no save).
5th through 10th Rounds: Violent rain and wind gusts reduce visibility.
The rain obscures all sight, including darkvision, beyond 5 feet. A creature
5 feet away has concealment (attacks have a 20% miss chance). Creatures
farther away have total concealment (50% miss chance, and the attacker
cannot use sight to locate the target). Speed is reduced by three-quarters

But that doesn't make it stress free. Just like some people can have a lot of fun playing a video game but get stressed out if it gets too hard, some people have a ton of fun playing DnD until the story doesn't go the way they wanted it to. When I'm a player, I don't get stressed. I see death as just another part in the story. When I'm a DM, I confess I'm a wreck. I don't want to make the game challenge-free. I don't want my...

Ditto to that - DMing is a long day for me. It's not easy for me, and I feel responsible for giving my players a fun day.

I wouldn't think that it should be "automatic".

It's only automatic if you don't want one.

Well, you don't need to threaten to sneak attack.

...

Jeez. This is going to be tough. Needs to be in the book, too.

That's a good point. I revert to "no freaking clue". :)

Can HotA get the benefit of a flank?

The answer to this is clearly no - it does not threaten, so it cannot flank.

Everything else? No clue.

To find the post number, look for the corresponding info when you View Source

<A name="748881"></A>

It's kinda hard, you have to strip the post number, which isn't easily accessible. Then put after the url &page=(pagenumber)#(postnumber) as seen below.

http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/paizoPublishing/pathfinder/pathfinderR PG/general/weaponSwapFeatDoesntSeemLogical&page=1#748862

That's a good point, DdO - the text can be interpreted that you don't have to have an empty hand. I didn't even realize that's what it was saying the first time I read it. That does make this feat suddenly really strange to me. Why would anyone fight this way?

Maybe I'm playing/DMing rare groups but - don't PC's usually find their (really) good weapons? Are PC's commonly buying awesome stuff? Is bank-breaking really a problem? Are most people's treasure just gold and they go to the Final Fantasy Magic Shop for stuff?

In my experience breaking the bank isn't really a problem...not enough of one to warrant a goofy feat to help out...

I'm going to go with the majority here, this feat is wonky. I don't like it. 2 Weapon Fighting definitely needs a boost - but this isn't it. It needs more specialness to offset the amount of feats you spend on it. Obviously this is more a discussion for when we get to the Feats in design forums. 2 Weapon needs some love. This feat isn't it. :(

We REALLY need adjudication and/or guidance from Sean or someone on this.... It's already come up quite a bit in our game.

Does the hand hover out there? Or does it dark back and forth from the square of the user? If it stays out, it can presumably be sundered. It specifically doesn't threaten, but if it stays out, does it occupy a space? Can it be positioned above the attacker? Does it flank? Can it be used to sneak attack?

If the caster uses Hand from concealment, can he sneak attack with it? Even if it hovers out there? Can he sneak attack if it doesn't, using the ranged sneak attack rules? Repeatedly?

Does the caster gain iterative attacks at any point?

Wow... This is a crazy issue.

I have posted the full text in the ever-growing current thread on HotA mechanics, in case anyone needs a reference.

It does state that the hand hovers out there (it only returns when concentration is broken) and it does explicitly state it cannot flank or take AoOs - it does not threaten. Because it does not threaten, we've been playing that it can stop in the same square as an enemy. I'd rule it can hover above the enemy as long as you don't exceed the range - get out your Pythagorean Theorem for that one.

As for sneak attack - whoo, hadn't thought of that, and that's a thorny one. Sneak attack is a special ability, it's sorta like a feat. Can you channel feats through HotA? Not ruled in, not ruled out. But if you can - that means you can put weapon finesse through it, focus, or maybe improved crit - what a mess. I'd say no sneak attacks with it, though I can see the case for allowing it. But without it being explicitly ruled in, it makes a big mess even bigger. And don't you need to threaten, essentially, for sneak attack?

I'd imagine it can be sundered, even grappled or stolen from the caster. How would I adjudicate that? No idea.

HotA is a can of worms that has been opened by extremely ambiguous text. :( It needs to be rewritten, from scratch, with explicit mechanics. I hope Jason is seeing these - Sean has already passed it on to him (as you can see in the thread I've linked).

The real question becomes, "How dark is too dark for published content" - since that has to sort of appeal to a wider base. Perhaps modules/paths could be rated in terms of darkness, or have recommendations on what to omit (so that you know it won't affect the overall story).

I once ran a short lived game, that I think died because it was too dark. The premise was the Ilithid had won and taken over the world. The PC races were slaves and food for the Ilithids in the skyscraper cities, kept naked in pens like pigs and cattle and occasionaly used for servants.

The premise was the PCs join an underground trying to over throw the Mind Flayers. But they had to beware as an Ilithid could easily read the mind of a co-conspirator and learn of the plots and simply eat everone's brains.

They managed to escape and sought safety in the wilderness where they had to find clothing and others of like mind, while avoiding the Ilithid hunting parties. Think Logan's Run with a twist there.

Eventually the players just gave up and we moved on as they didn't feel they could overcome the Ilithid who kept finding one or two of them and snaking on fresh brains. Had about a kill a game.

Too dark and too brutal.

I like this premise. I really like the *idea* of the mind flayers taking over, but yeah, REALLY hard. But, that idea really appeals to me if say, you reverse the roles of humans and orcs (or ogres...). Orcs have been on top for a long long time, they're a fairly intelligent and organized race - the humans have been held captive as slaves for generations.

That, to me, might just be about right...neat idea. Basically anything less powerful than mind flayers. :)

Chill hand is "arming" Spectral Hand. HotA comes into play armed.

If you cast Spectral Hand, then Swiftcast Chill Hand, could you attack with it the first round?

Which you can't do at L1. So in terms of balance, at L1, sometimes it takes 2 rounds to do something.

Ah, but you made that attack with the chill hand spell, the same round that you cast the spell. The Spectral hand was simply a "conduit" for the touch attack....

And you couldn't have used Chill Hand at range without casting Spectral Hand first.

What if you already had a spectral hand up and running and then wanted to cast chill touch? Can you channel it through your spectral hand on the same round you cast, or do you have to wait until the next round since you spend a standard action casting the spell in the first place?

But it took you one round to cast the spectral hand - and then a 2nd round to actually attack through it.

Why is this spell seperated from all other spells in the game with special more limiting rules?

Well, there are many spells that increase in power/usefulness the longer you concentrate. This would be in that vein. Not so useful the round you cast it, but much more useful as you troop it out there.