elgabalawi's page

Organized Play Member. 194 posts (445 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 12 Organized Play characters.


RSS

1 to 50 of 194 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

i seem to have forgotten how to do this. I posted and deleted, but it's still not showing up anywhere for me to get back to this campaign/thread that I can find. Brian's clearly screening my calls, so if someone has the time to remind me, that would be cool. I'll try to track it down later as well. thanks

well, i'm coming up as a character in the character tab, i just thought i remembered it coming up in my alias's "campaign" tab as well. maybe i'm misremembering

hmm. i also went back to add a picture to this guy and posted again, but the picture didn't show. i feel like i've managed screw everything up :-)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Sorry, I'm at work and can't remember my google password to be able to log in and adjust the map - I know it's some version of "i f#**ing hate passwords," but i can't remember what is capitalized and what isn't

Flynn moves 5ft. south/down on the map and takes total defense as he waits to see what happens next

let's see what Gorum brings us he whispers to himself


cool. thanks. in fact, i think it was the arcane pool stuff that i was half remembering but forgot that it was specific to that ability.


Hi,

i believe the answer to my question in the subject is yes, but i couldn't find anything as definitive as i would like (even though i thought i had seen something at one point).

oh, and in case it isn't clear enough in the subject i'm asking if i cast magic vestment on my +1 armor, at a level at which magic vestment gives a +1 enhancement bonus, does the armor acts as +2 armor? and likewise with magic weapon.

thanks in advance for any insight.


ah, radiant flight is what i was thinking of, but i'll check out the celestial plate as well.
Thanks so much!


Hi,

I thought I saw something in one of the books a bit ago that was purchasable 1/day flying enhancement for heavy armor, or maybe it was a specific full plate that could fly once a day, but now I can't manage to find it anywhere.

Does that ring a bell for anyone? and if so, could you fill me in?

Thanks in advance!


Awesome. Thanks so much


So there's feat ways to get decided to damage for slashing weapons (dervish dance, slashing grace), but I can't find one for an actual piercing weapon. Anyone have any insight on this? It doesn't have to be a feat, just want dex to damage on a rapier without buying the agile property.
Thanks in advance


Thanks! I'll check that out


Hi, does anyone know of any magical items that give an extra channel or two per day? Thanks


Sounds logical to me.
Thanks again


thanks!
this is for a pfs character, so is there anything you would have me point to in particular to state my case?


hey, so if my magus has the silent spell arcana and the still spell arcana, can he use both of them at once to cast a silent and still spell?

thanks in advance


Argh, those are exactly what I was looking for, mythic stuff isn't pfs legal, right?


Thanks!


Hmm, I'm not seeing the bonus to breaking doors with the size increase in the spell description. If you could point me to that, that would be super. Thanks


Given the cost, I may start with just purchasing some enlarge person pots. I hadn't thought of that, but it could be worth it for the occasional flavor


Thanks!
I will now commence looking at all that


Yeah, not quite what I'm looking for, but thanks for the thought.


Thanks, this is for a pfs character, but that's nice to know.


Wish I had known about that


Never leave home without it :-)


Thanks, I'll check that out. Looking for fun flavor for my barbarian who might take that rage power that gives a +8 to breaking stuff


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I ran a fun bar fight once. It was low level, so that helped, but basically a thug picked a fight with them for sitting in his seat/table and then as soon as initiative was rolled, the barkeep pulled his heavy crossbow out and yelled, "no weapons," making it clear that their would be runners for law enforcement if that rule wasn't held to.
The group reported enjoying it.


So does such a thing exist that does not actually increase strength but just increases the checks?

Thanks in advance


yeah, i tracked down the resonant power. it's kind of a fun one.


ah, the tome. i think that will be prohibitively expensive, but thanks all the same.


we posted at the same time imbicatus.
thanks for the specifics.
are they pfs legal? for some reason i have a memory of someone saying they weren't.


ah, i forgot about them.
i'll go looking now, thanks.


i noticed recently an item that added +2 to dex as well as other things that wasn't the belt. i haven't found anything similar for wis. is anything out there that i've missed?

thanks in advance.


thanks. i was asking for my crusader cleric, so i've already lost a domain and wouldn't be able to do theologian, but that would be perfect for my daughter's character.


thanks, that was what i was assuming and hoping, it just seemed odd that a cleric couldn't then prepare them in his/her normal slots.

thanks again.


howdy,
so i believe that if a cleric's domain spell is not a cleric spell, then s/he can only prepare it in the domain spell slot.
this makes it seem to me that they "kind of" know the spell.
so what happens with wands and scrolls? can cleric's automatically use wands and scrolls of their domain spells that are not cleric spells?
and this is for pfs.

thanks in advance.


thanks so much, that headband looks nice. it's hard to think about not using the headband for the stat bump, but it's definitely something to think about.

thanks again.


so does anyone know if any exists for channeling positive energy?

i've been looking through what i can, but i haven't found anything yet.
any info would be greatly appreciated.
- thanks


that sounds reasonable to me.
thanks for your thoughts.


another question.
for the final encounter, how did folks handle letting the PCs find out, or not find out, about the two main ways to save the day? i must admit, i've only read through that section once, so maybe i missed it, but i figured i'd ask because i'm going to be re-reading it now away from computer access and then will be getting home with only a small amount of time before having to run it.

so any thoughts about would be much appreciated.


i like the sound of that. i don't have time to parse through it all carefully atm, but thanks so much for your thoughts.


hey, i'm pretty new to gming, and i've got a bunch of questions about this one as i'm looking to prep it. if anyone has any insight, i'd greatly appreciate it. so here goes:

1. on p. 6 it says that pathfinders can suppress an individual effect of the Guards and Wards spell for 24 hours. how does that work mechanically? do they just say, "we decide to suppress the fog?" Do they have to succeed at a spellcraft check to recognize the spell first? Do i have to tell them that they have the ability to suppress one effect? it seems very vague.

2. on p. 8 under the fire mephits description, it says they start north of A1. Does that mean in area A5? or does it mean at the north end of the hall of A2? or something else? The mummies start "near area A5," so I assume that means the north end of A2. In general, i'm having a hard time figuring out where they are all supposed to be once the PCs enter.

3. more on that first fight. I can't tell how involved B and S are supposed to be. Does S just stay in A3 and observe with claivoyance? does B leave A5 and join the fray? if not, how does B know what's going on? I feel a bit at a loss how to set that up so that B and S are there but so they don't automatically become indistinguishable to the PCs and immediately just get attacked and end any chance of dipomacizing and whatnot.

thanks in advance for any thoughts/clarifications.


makes sense. thanks.


glad to hear it. i thought i remembered that not being the case for some other movement effects like reposition or bull rush or something, so i figured it was worth checking.


in the description of ghoul touch, it makes it seem that the save is just in relation to the sickened feeling for those in the 10 ft. radius of the paralyzed person and that the person touched becomes paralyzed with no save if the touch attack lands. that seems kind of crazy but definitely how it seems to read in plain english. is there any precedent for the way spell descriptions work that points to the save also being in regards to the touch effect.


has there been any clarification on if you can use force punch to push people off of ledges or into fire or whatnot?


hmm, unseen servant is an interesting one. having it bite it from area damage would be annoying, but that might still be the winner for me compared to 10k or more for an item/glove or the weapon cord (maybe i'll have a change of heart, but right now I'm not really digging the visual of my dervish dancing scimitar wielder having a wand flapping around him on a string).
thanks for the thoughts and keep them coming if there are any more.


that would be nice, but yeah, it is pretty pricey. not sure if i could justify 10k just to make sure that i don't lose a lvl 1 wand. it would be way cooler though.


Bbauzh ap Aghauzh wrote:

When it becomes a rule issue, then common sense definitions really don't matter as much as what's mechanically possible. In this case, "physically possible" cannot be just fluff and each GM has to look at their game in regards to both mechanics and game balance.

i'm not convinced the other reading of it turns it into fluff. it turns it into a feat that the animal companion can take if smart enough but cannot use. that doesn't seem like just fluff to me so much as the way the rule reads in conjunction with the mechanics of the game.


hmm. thanks for the thoughts. one of the characters i was thinking about this with is a dervish dancer, so i'm thinking that the dangling wand would interfere with fighting since he can't have anything in his off hand and take advantage of the feat. looks like i might be just dropping it.


Hi, i was wondering if there is any way to store a wand as a free action? i wouldn't need to access it again easily, but after using it to cast something, i'd like to be able to get it out of my hand (without dropping it) and move if possible.

anyone know of anything?

thanks in advance.

oh, and i'm already locked into being a half-orc, so no tail (not that i'm sure if that would work with a tiefling or not)


i can't say i've thought about this overly much, but i've always liked the idea of having crossbows be against touch ac. it has always seemed to me that this would be balanced by the lack of iterative attacks since loading would always be at least a standard action (light) if not a full round. and maybe up the damage a bit on heavy or whatever. i like some of the strength rules for reloading a heavy one or some such as well.


Bbauzh ap Aghauzh wrote:
pauljathome wrote:
Bbauzh ap Aghauzh wrote:
Jiggy wrote:
RedDogMT wrote:
An animal is not physically capable of doing an unarmed strike
I don't even know how to respond to a statement like this.
The point being, every unarmed strike a creature makes is inherently considered a natural attack.

Improved unarmed strike allows one to make a lethal or non lethal attack.

In the real world, animals can be trained to do non lethal attacks.

So, by your own logic, animals MUST be able to take improved unarmed strike. They are physically capable (as shown by real world examples), they have the INT, they can buy the feat.

Animals do lethal damage all by themselves already.

They need to be taught a trick to do non lethal damage.

IUS is not that trick. IUS allows someone who normally does non lethal damage to do lethal instead and not take the AoO.

And there is no trick currently written into the game that allows your animal to be commanded to do non lethal. You can push them to do so though.

this is where it seems to me that you are arguing based on the belief that "physically capable" is the same as "mechanically capable." i can see an argument for that, but i don't think it's and open and shut case. it seems to me that using the word "physically" in that statement evokes or connotes more of a connection to the common sense meaning of capable than the game mechanic capable. if that's the case, then an animal can clearly take ius (i'm assuming you wouldn't argue with the common sense idea that animals are capable of unarmed attacks even though you argue that the mechanics of the game change these to being called natural attacks or somesuch) but it would simply be a wasted feat within the game (obviously except for taking it as a prereq).

i'm curious about your thoughts on this as well as on why what i've taken to be your reading of it should be assumed.

thanks in advance.

1 to 50 of 194 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>