Seriously consider riding your big cat, it means your attacks all benefit from flanking too.
Either way I share avr's scepticism regarding distracting charge.
To be fair all you really need to be an amazing melee hunter is outflank, paired opportunist, pack flanking and combat reflexes - anything else is just gravy..
I'm a big fan of the one level dip of wild child brawler for all the brawler goodies and full animal companion and minimal downside..
I'm really not sure how you can find another way to read "If you roll a natural 20 on an attack roll" as anything other than ... uh ... needing a natural 20 on an attack roll.
I'd be interested in how you would word it so it was clearer..
Also it is a third party feat so flagged to move to third party forum,,,
It clearly differentiates between the attack roll and the roll to confirm - I suspect you and your fellow players are conflating the two..
So the feat is in two stages.
I imagine the bracketed bit is to make it clear that the second step doesn't require a roll if you can confirm a crit by another method, to distinguish it from the first ste which requires a natural 20.
Once you turn iyour weapon-enchanted folding shield into a buckler it is no longer a weapon and therefore can't benefit from effects that only apply to weapons..
Forgo - "to go without or lose the right to".
When a term does not have an in-game definition you use the normal English definition. If you lose the right to something/or are without it it is no longer available - I really don't think you have a case at all. Plain English is simply not on your side.
There are no rules that inherently grant you tangible benefits while in the presence of your god.or in a sacred space.
As noted there are several things you can add - be sure to keep an eye on how that affects the challenge of the encounter - for example unhallow imay count as a CR5 hazard (depending on how you read the trap/environment rules and potentially increases the encounter challenge by 1) and normally requires a level 9 caster..
I would probably keep it simple and liberally apply the +2/-2 "GMs friend" modifier for favourable circumstances and/or a timely cure moderate wounds or negation of an attack once or twice in the encounter - again keeping an eye on the challenge - as GM you don't need everything to be a formal effect .
You don'y have to recruit 'em.
Also worth noting that followers follow different rules to cohorts regarding death.
There is no cumulative clause like there is for cohorts. Doesn't matter how many die - still just a -1 penalty..
Multipliers don't follow normal maths in Pathfinder.
CRB common terms wrote:
Multiplying: When you are asked to apply more than one multiplier to a roll, the multipliers are not multiplied by one another. Instead, you combine them into a single multiplier, with each extra multiple adding 1 less than its value to the first multiple. For example, if you are asked to apply a ×2 multiplier twice, the result would be ×3, not ×4.
100* (10+9+1+1+1=)22 = 2,200
Still a lot of bodies...
incorporeal special quality wrote:
It has no Strength score, so its Dexterity modifier applies to its melee attacks, ranged attacks, and CMB.
Yup, I'd take away it's strength score and replace weapon finesse with a another feat.
Only reason I can see for it to have a strength score is to interact with it's daggers and scrolls, but if you treat it's personal daggers and all scrolls (and writting based magic items - maybe) the same way a ghose treats "treasured items" - that'll cover that if you really need to cover the minutiae (i.e it just works and don't worry about it :)).
You have a lot of superfluous information there. Much of it is completely irrelevant..
First and most importantly, the rules do not distinguish between PCs and Monsters for how rules affect them (unless called out specifically) - the rules are exactly the same.for everything..
natural attacks wrote:
You can make attacks with natural weapons in combination with attacks made with a melee weapon and unarmed strikes,
seems pretty comprehensive to me - explicitly you can mix weapons and natural attacks - the "pathfinder 2talon attacks or 2 attacks" is largely bad rules interpretation - especially the second answer.
unarmed attacks wrote:
“Armed” Unarmed Attacks: Sometimes a character’s or creature’s unarmed attack counts as an armed attack. A monk, a character with the Improved Unarmed Strike feat, a spellcaster delivering a touch attack spell, and a creature with natural physical weapons all count as being armed (see natural attacks)
.A natural attacks is an unarmed attack that counts as armed - it is unarmed as you are not wielding a weapon, but it is counted as armed - so you threaten with it, you do not provoke attacks of opportunity when you attack with it etc.
multiple attacks wrote:
A character who can make more than one attack per round must use the full-attack action (see Full-Round Actions) in order to get more than one attack.
Unless you are taking the full attack action (or have another ability that explicitly permits it) Any character whether monster or PC can only make a single attack - even if it's entry lists (for example) 2 claws..
That's not what it says though - nowhere does it say that the benefits of masterwork are included and costs are not the same thing as benefits.
Any suggestion that they stack is vehemently opposed, but no-one has ever satisfactorily explained the rules support for it.
Elven chain is a unique item and not overwhelmingly compelling as it is treated as light armour including for proficiency - which normal mithral chain doesn't.
To be fair not 100% sure what I'm going for, just floating ideas and seeing if anything sticks for some badass or interesting leather armour. Something thematic considering the multi-eyed beast it originates from.
So, I'm considering including leather armour made from a [protected intellectual property] that is naturally bouyant. If I make it so that it has no maximum dex am I right that you need +10 dex modifier to better Mithral Breast Plate (+6 AC +5 max dex)? Is there any other effect of no max dex that I'm overlooking?
I know I could just give it a +9 or +10 max dex, but no max dex sounds way more awesome...
I'm also thinking of adding a minor bonus to fly checks to hover/not fall. or maybe a boost to saves vs gaze and ray attacks? any better ideas out there?
Your GM is quite correct. Fireball does not target. This counter does not work against AOEs.
hexcrafter magus wrote:
Hex Magus (Su): At 4th level, the hexcrafter magus gains access to a small number of witch’s hexes.
um! what is the argument that you get access to hexes at 3rd level again - because that seems particularly unambiguous. You may get an arcana at third level, but you don't have access to hexes to take one.
It takes an extremely...optimistic....reading of the rules to think you can take one at third level.
1) This depends on your GM, the rules on where ACs appear from are vague, the rules on replacing an AC kinda points to one not being immediately available. So, unless it's a core part of your character, where I would assume you've been developing it as part of the unspoken background that many characters require, you'd likely have to perform the ritual for replacing an animal companion in my campaigns - subject to anything you can point to (be it campaign events/background/rules) to persuade me otherwise.
2) IF you have persuaded me that you have a suitable beastie following you, then MAYBE it could be repeatedly infused with the power of an AC and reduced to normal animal otherwise - at least until it got annoyed at your fickleness/being used and abused and wandered off. Again though, largely up to your GM.
3) no, you have to have a domain power it can replace.
4) no, it only grants access to domain powers. .
Domain powers are a subset of your full domain, and while inquisitions are interchangeable (to an extent) with domains, they can;t be interchangeable with a part of a domain. The Icon causes you to retain part of your domain abilities, so you you don't ever have the full domain to swap out.
Each time you switch animal focus on yourself you start a new '1 minute' use. There is no wording that permits you to change your aspect once you have selected it - you select one type of animal to emulate when you activate it and that is your lot until you activate it again..
The only reason you can switch freely on your AC is you never run out of 'minutes' if you do so.
Artificial 20 wrote:
You can move diagonally past an enemy - explicitly.
CRB measuring distance wrote:
You can move diagonally past a creature, even an opponent.
What you can't do is move diagonally past a solid object that runs along that border - such as a wall. Basically look at what is in your way. if you can step over it (such as a pit) or it doesn't fully fill the space (a small tree) then you can move past it diagonally.
If, however, you are trying to step around a big impassable object that either fills the square or runs along that edge such as a really big tree or a building (or a 'designated exception' type creature that fills the entire space - such as a gelatinous cube) then that's a big no.
Oh, I've thought of another question, is there a Handle Animal trick to getting your animal companion to enter a style stance?
phantom ability wrote:
The phantom stays fully manifested until it is either returned to the spiritualist’s consciousness (a standard action) ...
There are no other restrictions in respect of distance or LoS/LoE.
You can't harbour your phantom blade. You don't have either the phantom ability or the shared conciousness ability.
Table 10-2 is fine, it's well explained on how to use it and when it is appropriate to do so, and it is extremely useful at what it's designed for. It is still a tool though and as subject to misuse as any other tool.
As for the DCs in mirrored moon, they are not inappropriate to the task. It shouldn't be easy to half the time to search nearly 100 square miles.
You are missing nearly 20 years of history with 3rd edition and pathfinder that has lead to this point. It's kind of hard to be concise without that background.
A short answer to your specific question(maybe - there other opinions) is that they feel the need to curb some of the power of spellcasters in general and especially in regards to narrative impact as compared to non-spellcasting classes (look up caster/martial disparity if you are feeling particularly masochistic). While they could have made magic more unreliable or dangerous or any one of a number of things (most I can imagine would be very unsatisfactory in one way or another) they opted to reduce the overall number of spells available together with a reduction in the effects of spells (in very broad sweeps).
trivial is easy - if the DC is equal to, or less, than the DC in the leftmost column it is trivial.
I for one do not want them to remove all GM adjudication from the game, pathfinder can handle many types and flavours of games and what should be impossible for one game might just be legendarily difficult in another - I can decide what is impossible as appropriate for my game.
And with regard to the pits as pointed out, everything gets a reflex save, even if immobilised - I assume that the stats take into account the 0 dex...
pit trap wrote:
The rules actually have you covered.
If the DC is trivial, you shouldn't really be asking for rolls."You break that fortune cookie easily"
An extreme-difficulty skill DC defeats even the most skilled characters most of the time, but it’s just low enough that there’s some chance of success. Use these DCs if you want success to be unlikely but not impossible.
There exist things that are flat out impossible, and you don't need a roll as you will auto-fail.
"I'm afraid that lock is too difficult, no matter how lucky you get you will not be able to unlock it without the key".
Please no. Situational bonuses are not "interesting", nor are they fun.
The bigger problem some of you have with them changing it is people like me who want magic weapons to be important. They should matter and they should matter in every fight.
Colette Brunel wrote:
Well, that's embarrassing... I have never noticed that :)
Well, it's reliable enough that you get people like me who love the +1/level and think that if you remove it I may as well go and play another game because it's just not the game I want to play. There is a lot I don't like about PF2, but the +1/level is not one of them.
p291 on stacking bonuses wrote:
If you gain multiple bonuses of the same type, only the highest bonus applies—you don’t add them together.
p190 on quality bonuses wrote:
Item Bonus: Weapons and skill-boosting items of expert, master, and legendary quality add the listed item bonus to attack rolls with the weapon or skill checks using the item
p371 on potency runes wrote:
A weapon potency rune grants two offensive benefits. The weapon’s wielder gains an item bonus to attack rolls with the weapon equal to the potency value. For instance, an expert dagger with a +2 weapon potency rune would grant a +2 item bonus to attack rolls with the dagger.
Prone / unconscious creatures and screening; also, movement through an "incapacitated" creature's space
The rules should not need to tell you that you cannot walk through walls. Let me know of a game that feels the need to tell you this so I can avoid it. I will not play a game that is so patronising that they think their readers need to be told this.
Kyra can attack the ogre because she can see it. You can draw a line from the top left corner of Kyras square to the top right square of the ogre. That should be sufficient for precise senses to work. The ogre would need to take an action to hide to become 'sensed' to Kyra.
I cannot see any reasonable argument that Kyra cannot see the ogre, Kyra can attack the Ogres top right square so she can attack the ogre. she cannot draw a line to the centre square so the ogre has cover.
It is that simple .
And if it's not defined, a term has it's usual English meaning. blocking terrain is terrain that blocks you - you cannot move or fire through it. If the book needs to define even basic stuff like this it will be too large to be practical.
Prone / unconscious creatures and screening; also, movement through an "incapacitated" creature's space
incapacitated has it's normal english meaning if it isn't defined in game - they don't (and shouldn't) need to define every single word they use. Paralysed is about as incapacitated as you can get.
If two characters end up sharing a space one of them (GM decides) gets shunted or made prone. 'Accidentally' covers just this sort of situation.
IF you can move into a square and you can move out of a square then you can move through a square - this is self-evident and does not need further defining.
As for screening, that seems perfect to leave up to a GM's call. I can see some situations where some creatures would still provide screening and others where they shouldn't.
Gm's can and should make judgement calls. These are the sorts of situations that are varied enough that some GM discretion is desirable.