Thank you!
By "fabricate" I mean using the spell "fabricate" my wizard has craft:alchemy, so he can make decent rolls making poison.
It looks like, by using the "fabricate" spell, I pay the ammt it would cost for items to be fabricated, and roll the craft check. Fabricate isn't a banned spell, so I have to think that they would know the spell would be used in this manor in-game?
So on a couple different chronicle sheets, it allows me to buy smaller amounts of ammunition, for instance "shock" arrows, max 3.
If I choose to purchase that item, do I need to cross it off my chronicle sheet, or can I purchase those items each time I go on a new adventure?
A different question for poison. Got "purple worm poison" max 3.
The question with that, is if I purchase 1 dose, can I "fabricate" more in-game and if I have any left at the end of the adventure, it just goes away? (other than the original dose)
As always, citing official rules is appreciated, sorry if the answers to these questions have been posted, I couldn't find them...
Can you sell something to another PC in-game, do you track that on your chronicle sheet as items purchased/sold?
If I create an ioun torch or torch of continual flame, and another PC is willing to purchase it for more than I could sell it, is that legal?
If you use planar binding to bind a creature and that creature dies, do you get to keep anything they left behind? I understand you can't sell the stuff, but what if you just want to keep it?
What if you have an ioun torch and you cast "continual flame" on another piece of equipment, like a sword or shield. Does one of the items loose it's flame at the end of the scenario?
Tattoo's can be pretty damn handy, for cheap, for instance:
Tattoo of "Air Bubble" , 100gp, any tattoo slot, inner sea magic, anytime you're on a boat and fall overboard, make sure you can still cast spells and/or breathe if you're under water.
This spell doesn't say anything about acid-fog type spells, but I'd rule air bubble would at least give you a large save bonus...
Thank you! Obvious oversight on my part.
Let's say my caster uses planar binding, and wins the CHR check to compel our friendly little archon to make said devices?
You buy yourself a grey ioun stone = 25gp
You summon a lantern archon.
You command the archon to cast "continual flame" on the purchased ioun.
What do you have? Because it's not a RAW "ioun torch".
RAW says you need to be a 12th level caster with CWI to make an "official" "ioun torch" so what the hell did I just make? And how much is it worth if I choose to sell it?
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/wondrous-items/wondrous-items/h-l/ioun- torch
Draeke Raefel wrote: Itsgottabeodin wrote: KaeYoss wrote: Didn't we have this discussion? As a side note... fabricate! Bracelet of Fabricate: Command Word Fabricate 1xday = 16,200 gold.
if you have use magic device or have it on your spell list a wand would be cheaper. nice.
I submitted this a couple days ago...
http://www.pathfinderdb.com/character-options/magic-items/458-cross-peen-ha mmer-of-fabrication
Let's assume you roll average of 26 and NEVER roll a 1.
"Tears of Death" = 6500gp = 65000sp
DC 26 craft check every week = 26sp of work accomplished/week.
26/65000 = 2500 (weeks) = 48+ years.
Just checking to make sure I'm doing this right...
Dust of choking and sneezing is one of the best one-shot items in the game.
I think after my next game session, our DM might not allow it in the game.
It seems about as European a setting as the scimitar is a European weapon.
:P
Seems like half the campaign stuff so far has been based in Osirion, so shouldn't the khopesh be a martial weapon?
Prot.from evil is broken as all get-out, even if every game I've been in has used it RAW.
I agree with Remco for the most part. And would like to add that most of the time in cases of spell vs. spell on effects, most of the time me and the gamers I've been involved with are inclined to say the higher level spell will trump the lower-level spell. For instance, true-seeing would trump non-detection in this scenario.
And AGAIN, I don't have any issues with the items that are categorized by power rather than culturally exotic. I'm not talking about all the weapons that ARE categorized properly, I'm talking about the ones that are NOT, like you say, mostly monk weapons. And if you'd like to talk about the quarterstaff, from my understanding the difference between the european version and the asian one was pretty significant.
In a game world that seems to be as culturally diverse as pathfinders world, it seems silly that those "exotic" weapons are marked that because they are essentially weapons from the far-east.
Going back to the scimitar. Again, I read a few different sources on its history and for the most part, it's a Persian weapon. Yes, it was used in Europe, no where near as much as something like the longsword, rapier, crossbow, etc, etc... If you don't think my example of the scimitar is great, well, there's always the kukri, that was never used anywhere close to medieval Europe.
I really think the monk weapons, as well as the hand/repeating xbows and the spiked chain should be re-categorized, because the power of the weapon doesn't fit with the category they are in.
I haven't seen the butterfly sword in any PF book, I would put it in a category based upon power level, not cultural exoticism. Seems like most of the racial weapons got placed in exotic because they are powerful weapons in their own right. So if the butterfly sword has stats like an longsword, it should be in the martial weapons category.
OK. Partially my bad on the scimitar part, but from what I read about the history, it would still be an "exotic" weapon for most of europe. From what I read, it made it as far as parts of what is now Germany, but was not a widely used weapon in any parts of Europe, which is kind of my point about "exotic" weapons.
I have no problem with weapons like the bastard-sword being exotic, it seems to give a decent advantage.
And I did mean rapier when I was talking about scimitar. It seems almost the exact same as a scimitar, except you can finesse it, which in my book qualifies it for "exotic" for power-level rather than region.
I also, personally, think spiked-chain should be removed from "exotic" because it doesn't have reach, and I think if regular x-bows are simple weapons than the hand x-bow and repeating x-bows should be martial, not "exotic", seems like they get designated "exotic" more because it would be difficult to find them rather than hard to use.
I don't like the idea of being "region-specific" because really, a kama is a sickle and nunchaku are a flail. No matter where you go, seems like it would be fairly easy to use a sickle or flail...
hey Ya'll
I've had a concern about weapon proficiencies and categorization for a long time. I had my GM bring it up when he went to the Piazo con up in the PNW. He said one of the game designers acknowledged it was an area of concern, but they didn't have the time/resources to rework the section.
My primary concern is that some of the weapons are categorized as "exotic" because they are from "exotic" places, while other weapons are "exotic" because they are better weapons than the rest.
Let us take the kama for starters. Exotic weapon, same stats as a sickle, which is a light melee weapon. Oh, except a sickle costs 3X as much for some reason... So this weapon seems to be in the "exotic" list because it's from an "exotic" location. Here's my primary concern with this. For some cultures (Tian Xia in this instance) the kama should be an light melee weapon. Matter of fact, they should consider a western "sickle" as an exotic weapon along with a whole host of other "western" weapons that they wouldn't have in their culture.
Now, lets talk about the scimitar. This weapon is a one handed melee weapon. Arguably, stat-wise, it could be an "exotic" weapon. And as far as culturally exotic, correct me if I'm wrong, but if we're basing the entire weapon table off of what was historically medieval european cultures, than the scimitar should definitely be "exotic".
By now, I'm hoping you understand my point.
A "simple" solution to the problem would be to re-categorize weapons by stats as simple, martial, exotic, etc... But I have a feeling there is some opposition to this method and maybe some debate as to what should qualify weapons for the different categories.
And lastly, I would like to BEG!!! Pathfinder to help make this change official so that I don't have to argue with my GM who wants to be all RAW all the time.
Any input/insight is appreciated!
"Mind flayers first appeared in the official newsletter of TSR Games, The Strategic Review #1, Spring 1975."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illithid
"Copyright protection for works published prior to January 1, 1978 was increased by 20 years to a total of 95 years from their publication date."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Term_Extension_Act
And I'm guessing the fee to license it from WotC is WAY more than it's worth, that's too bad...
The original intent of IP law was to give the creator 4 years of a "monopoly" on their idea. Thanks to the big D with mouse ears it's been extended a LOT longer than that. Does PIAZO have an on-staff or even friendly lawyer that could let us know if something created by someone not even affiliated with WotC a long long time ago in a galaxy far far away is even covered considered their "property" at this point in time?
|
