jhansonxi's page

Magical Knack doesn't work for Alchemists because they aren't spellcasters.

The Underground Chemist rogue archetype gets access to alchemists discoveries at 10th level.

These two classes have an inherent synergy and complementary features (like skills), making the combination appealing to PCs with both high dexterity and intelligence (goblins, tieflings). It also makes for a good story - the amateur chemist decides to become a professional alchemist.

Allowing the former to stack with the latter when determining DC, duration, and caster levels of effects and skill checks would not be overpowered and help negate some of the limitations and oddities of alchemists as non-caster "casters".

FAQ says longspear can be used improvised against adjacent targets.

Edit: Just noticed this thread was an archaeological exercise.

Just noticed the description for Soul Soap

This small bar of coarse gray soap has tiny pieces of ash, coal, or hard earth embedded in it, leaving anyone washed with it as dirty as before. Washing a creature with the soap requires water and takes 1 minute, after which the creature can attempt a new Will saving throw against any hostile ongoing mind-affecting effect currently affecting it. Unwilling creatures must be pinned or otherwise made helpless before they can be washed. The soap is sufficient to wash one creature.

Implies pinned condition = helpless. If this is an isolated reference then it's probably an oversight in the description.

The Master Craftsman feat is one sure way to get it, within limitations.

Craft is for making items.

Profession is industry knowledge (identifying who made an item, for example).

Bluff covers sales and marketing.

Appraise is for determining value.

Sense Motive is for identifying a lie about an item.

Sleight Of Hand is for unauthorized 100% discounts.

Perception is for identifying people getting unauthorized discounts.

Escape Artist is for, well, you know.

Not necessarily according to the PRD and your GM.

FAQ also says not flat-footed if grappled or pinned.

http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fm#v5748eaic9t5u

Sean K Reynolds (designer) comment about unarmed and natural attacks

Probably should be allowed but RAW is iffy. "Thrown" is a vague name for a weapon category since it is also a verb.

I'm not aware of any rule disallowing it either although most redundant abilities are not useful. Stacking multiple armors might be helpful in case one of them is destroyed or its abilities suppressed.

Not all that odd. So far as the character knows, he isn't in any immediate danger. He has no stress or distraction that would prevent him from maintaining an average level of altertness.

This particular side point really boils down to whether or not "immediate danger" is from the character's point of view-- i.e., the character is intensely aware of the monster five feet away and that's a distraction to him, or is unaware of the monster so he proceeds as normal-- or if it's a meta-construct that is applicable regardless of what the character himself is aware of; that is to say if a juggling PC is no longer able to take 10 on his juggling check because there are goblins down the road that he failed to spot.

Yep. The character could be wrong but they wouldn't know that until after the fact.

In 3.5, concentration checks were required for skill usage that could result in an AoO. If they're caught flat-footed then the Take 10 obviously didn't happen. They would require a concentration check because of the AoO (modified by damage) and then roll the skill check (since the Take 10 was interrupted).

Wall of Stone - not affected for the described usage (containment)
Chains of Light - blocked since everything is contingent on paralysis which FoM blocks
Icy Prison - blocked but the "line of effect" blockage may still be present (in target's favor); probably GM discretion

From what the PRD says, only when not in combat or anything that requires a concentration or caster level check. There might be penalties while doing something strenuous, like non-routine climbing and swimming, but that's mostly GM discretion. Locating a trap or enemy via take 10 would make more sense as a passive activity, ie. the GM determines if you detect it when not actively searching for one.

Disable Device is probably up to you and mostly for simple traps that are not an immediate distraction themselves unless you screw it up. You'll have some idea of the DC and your skill but there may be unknown factors that reduce your skill or increase the DC without your knowledge (like magic).

If I understand correctly, the same natural weapon, gained from two different sources, with different damage amounts, is handled the same way as duplicate effects like enhancement bonuses - the larger one takes precedence.

Specifically in the case of the example Feral Gnasher - the "Hard Head, Big Teeth racial trait" doesn't change with the Animal Fury bite because only the Savage Bite class ability specifically refers to it, not Animal Fury. But larger "Savage Bite/Hard Head, Big Teeth" bite damage is used in place of the default Animal Fury bite damage (when using Animal Fury as part of a grapple check) by virtue of being a larger duplicate source of the same natural weapon.

If you can finagle some way to make another check to Maintain after you've already failed one (not a re-roll, a whole separate check), then sure, you'd get an extra Animal Fury bite in that case. But not in this one, and it would still only result in 5 attacks instead of 4, not 6.

No finagling required since Greater Grapple allows it.

This feat allows you to make two grapple checks each round (to move, harm, or pin your opponent), but you are not required to make two checks. You only need to succeed at one of these checks to maintain the grapple.

No particular order required and Animal Fury applies per check. However, Rapid Grappler requires a successful check to maintain with Greater Grapple which would disallow an Animal Fury bite on the swift action RAW so I think you're correct about that.

I think we've debated it enough. Between the FAQ, Grapple rules, class abilities, and the feat descriptions there's enough ambiguity to justify an official clarification. There are dozens of threads on various forums about builds using these but no consensus on interpretation. It's a problem of RAW, RAI, and design intent.

I'm going to hold off commenting further until Mark responds. I'll work on my "Throw Anything" thesis in the meantime.

I was referrring to the subsequent rounds because Greater Grapple only works then.

Animal Fury (specifically) allows 1 Bite as a result.

Per grapple maintenance maneuver.

A barbarian can make a bite attack as part of the action to maintain or break free from a grapple. This attack is resolved before the grapple check is made.

Since the grapple check occurs after the Animal Fury bite, there's no way to determine if the maneuver check will be a successful "maintain". If the first check fails, another action to maintain is initiated with the next check, prompting another Animal Fury bite as part of the action that is resolved before that check. There is nothing in the Animal Fury description that invalidates the damage if the grapple check fails.

This feat allows you to make two grapple checks each round (to move, harm, or pin your opponent), but you are not required to make two checks. You only need to succeed at one of these checks to maintain the grapple.

Whenever you use Greater Grapple to successfully maintain a grapple as a move action, you can then spend a swift action to make a grapple combat maneuver check.

You can inflict damage to your target equal to your unarmed strike, a natural attack, or an attack made with armor spikes or a light or one-handed weapon. This damage can be either lethal or nonlethal.

Two move actions and a swift. Grapple check damange (bite) + Animal Fury bite damage per check. 6x bite damage.

In that case, it only pertains to having multiple sources for the same natural attack: Unless you have extra limbs, no dice.

I certainly hope that's true because the Animal Fury rage power allows an attack as part of a grapple maneuver. According to what you said:

There is absolutely nothing that precludes attacking with natural weapons twice in a round, provided they are done with separate actions.

Since Greater Grapple turns grapple maintenance checks into move actions, and Rapid Grappler adds another as a swift, a Feral Gnasher's Animal Fury bites are no longer constrained by the FAQ if what you said is correct. So instead of only 3x bite damage as part of grapple maintenance (which are not attacks), the grapple combat maneuvers isolate Animal Fury bites from being "attacks" or "iterative attacks" so now that's 6 bites worth of damage at 9th level!

There is absolutely nothing that precludes attacking with natural weapons twice in a round, provided they are done with separate actions.

Then the FAQ should say per turn, not per round.

Haste specifically says you get an extra attack with a natural weapon, so it's not a 100% rule...

The original question specifically excluded Haste. The question is regarding the default combat conditions.

Natural weapons are not "limited to once per round", they simply don't get iterative attacks, but can all be used in the same round.

Multiple natural weapons is not what the question is about. This about using the same natural weapon, a bite, twice in the round which is expressly prohibited according to the FAQ.

Normally each natural weapon can only be used once per round even if granted from multiple sources. This includes bite attacks and Animal Fury. The Haste spell and Feral Combat Training feats allow exceptions to that limitation. Assuming these two exceptions are not in effect, consider the following hypothetical situation:

A Feral Gnasher with the Ankle Biter goblin feat bites to grapple an opponent (Lockjaw/Grab). Later in the round the opponent attempts to break free on their turn. Their combat maneuver allows the Feral Gnasher an Ankle Biter bite as an immediate action, in addition to any AoO the opponent's maneuver may provoke. Can the Feral Gnasher make this bite or is it inhibited by the earlier use of the bite in the round? Or, because an immediate action is essentially the next round's swift action utilized early, is the Feral Gnasher not allowed to use their bite on the next round for grapple damage?

Does the strong jaw dice doubling clause count as size increase?

No. It's an "effective size" increase, not an actual "size increase". These increases are different types. They do not stack with increases of the same type but do stack with each other. The damage doubling is a workaround for hitting the maximum creature size cap but it's still an "effective size" increase. Normally natural weapon damage scales according to this chart (which is different than the chart in the monster rules).

The Strong Jaw description should probably be updated to refer to the chart instead of doubling the damage.

@Archaeik: Are there any rulings about bite damage stacking when bite abilities, from different sources, have different damages? I've read through dozens of threads about it but found no definitive answers.

The Grapple combat maneuver says:

Humanoid creatures without two free hands attempting to grapple a foe take a –4 penalty on the combat maneuver roll.

The Grappled condition says:

In addition, grappled creatures can take no action that requires two hands to perform.

This seems to imply a different number of hands are needed to grapple, or that both hands are depended on for initiating a grapple but not for maintaining it. Is this true?

A Feral Gnasher gets Lockjaw which provides Grab but has target size restrictions.

If a target is too large for Grab but the Feral Gnasher still performs a grapple, and chooses to damage the opponent, can both bite and weapon (or unarmed) attack damage be used?

Animal Fury bite damage is 1d3 for a small character, 1d4 for medium. If a character already has a primary natural weapon bite of 1d6 (Goblin Feral Gnasher Savage Bite w/Hard Head, Big Teeth racial trait), does the Animal Fury bite damage change? Is the Animal Fury damage affected by size/effective size changes?

I made this spreadsheet that calculates the maximum item price in GP for the number of days of crafting for any given DC, assuming Take 10 check is used. It's useful for quickly screening which items that can be crafted within a given timeframe based on Craft skill. To use it, you just enter their current skill + tool bonus in the Craft box, find the desired DC, then look up the maximum GP purchase price to determine the number of days of crafting required.

For example, a character is on a ship voyage for 5 days. The character has a skill + tool bonus of 6, yielding a Take 10 Crafting check of 16. For a crafting DC of 15, an item can at most have a purchase price of 17.1 GP an still be crafted within 5 days with no failure chance. Then just search the various item lists for those with a Crafting DC of 15 and prices within 17.1 GP.

To use it, make a copy or download it.

The first link is for mundane crafting, not magical. Magical crafting allows you to add +5 to the DC to double your speed but no more than that.

You're correct. I was thinking of the Master Craftsman feat which allows magical items to be created by non-casters. Also there are the "alchemical power components" from the Adventurer's Armory which can enhance spells.

With high crafting skill items can be created in less time (+10 DC) so effectively that increases the number created per unit of time. The Master Alchemist feat allows more doses of poisons to be created at the same time. There is also the downtime system which can provide more opportunities for crafting.

I think the single-item limits are so DMs can keep track of ongoing crafting activities better.

A feat that just grants a fixed number of skill points would accomplish the same. The player could assign them to any combination of skills as desired, limited by the skill cap.

I came up with this idea as a defense against Ball Lightning, Chill Metal, and Heat Metal for a character that only wears studded leather. Changing the studs to non-metallic during crafting seems trivial but is undefined in the PRD except for mithral and adamantine.

I suspect that obsidian would be considered a stone material and thus affected by Repel Metal Or Stone. Other spells affecting stone, such as Stone Shape and Stone To Flesh, are undefined for combat usage against stone equipment.

That depends on whether you want your obsidian armor to be 'natural' obsidian or some kind of fantasy equivalent (as mithral is to silver, for instance.)

It has to be. Obsidian can not be made into armor unless it is "magically strengthened".

Your 'auto damage' mechanic for obsidian-studded leather might be more elegantly folded into the rules if you treat all obsidian armor as having 'armor spikes' at no additional cost or weight.

The side benefit was based on the general theme of the material description in the PRD.

An adamantine golem has to be reduced to 0 HP and decapitated with an adamantine vorpal weapon. Maybe something like that.

A failed Red Wizard of Thay who turns to prostitution (houri) to survive?

Your overthinking the detail level of the D20 system. This was intended for long-term blind casters. There are alternatives. There are only a few situations where being able to use a scroll blindly makes a difference, and most of those will be at low to mid character levels. At higher levels, lighting problems are easily solved. The cost reflects that. Adding more situational modifiers provides little benefit and slows the game down.

No. Darkleaf Cloth is nearly identical to Mithral except the hardness and category change. I figured a +50% cost premium was a reasonable trade-off considering the classes (and character levels) most likely to use it.

Only armor normally made with a substantial amount of metal or stone can be made out of obsidian.
Weigh/cost 75% of normal item.
+1 circumstance bonus to Stealth in dim or lesser light.
10 hit points per inch of thickness and hardness 10 (same as Blood Crystal).

Specific armor:
Obsidian Studded Leather armor
Stats as adjusted above.
When struck by natural or unarmed strikes, attacker receives 1 point of slashing damage.

Same as standard Darkleaf Cloth but armor counts as one category lighter, except for light armor. Price +50% over standard Darkleaf Cloth.

The feat is not fantastic, but it does serve a purpose (allowing spellcasters to cast while on negative HP is the main advantage, oddly enough! Also good for Barbarians).

The 1 point damage would require them to make a concentration check.

Unfortunately, you must also pick up Endurance in order to qualify for it. Endurance is an absolute waste of a feat, in effect making diehard cost two feats. Diehard is barely worth one feat, let alone two.

Endurance would make more sense if it at least gave a bonus to making stabilization rolls.

You are mistaken about disabled though, it does allow standard actions [and thus essentially the full power of a Spellcasting (or 2-handed martial with less than 6 BAB and not under the effects of the Haste Spell and within reach of his enemies) character] at the cost of taking 1 point of damage for doing so.

If the feat were worth the paper its printed on, you would automatically stabilize AND function as-normal until and unless killed by the enemy [think the German dude who fought with arrows in his throat in Kingdom of Heaven. But it does not and is not.

You're correct about the standard action. However, if the character drinks a cure potion it causes damage. If the cure potion didn't bring them back to positive HP, wouldn't they be dying again?

The Diehard feat description is confusing.

Benefits:
Automatically stabilize

Limitations:
Disabled
Staggered

First, why both conditions? They are redundant.

Second, what is the point of this feat? Not dying because your Con is low and a healer is unavailable? That's might be useful if there are no opponents around otherwise you get to watch them finish you off.

The name makes it seems like the intention was to allow a "dying" character to heal themselves enough to function but it doesn't work that way. Being "Disabled" prevents standard actions so no Heal checks, drinking a potion, using a wand, scroll, spell-like ability, unless it was swift, immediate, move, or a free action. I can't imagine why anyone would ever take this feat as it is currently written unless they have regeneration (which would still stabilize a character without the feat).

Why not just say "staggered" and "no attacks or acrobatics"?

Can be used without sight.
+25GP per spell level.
Unless user is acclimated to blindness, the DC for deciphering and avoiding mishaps is increased by 5 (in addition to any other adjustments due to lighting and environmental effects).