like_a_god's page

I need some clarification regarding the Sift Spell. What exactly does it do?

Sift Spell

Relevant Text of Spell
Area: 10ft cube.

Description:
You examine an area at range as if you were searching for fine details with the Perception skill. Make a Perception check with a -5 penalty, modified as normal for conditions. No penalty is applied for distance. Apply the result against the DC for any hidden features, such as secret doors, traps, or hidden treasure. You must be able to see the area you are attempting to search, and you only find details that can be perceived with sight or touch. Sift detects only objects and features, not actual creatures.

Question
Does the spell allow you to view the 10ft cube as if you were exploring it from a variety of angles or does it act similar to using binoculars and takes distance out of the equation?

If the first is correct then a caster could see around counters or other obstacles that would normally obscure his view. The second would limit the caster to only what he could normally observe given where he is standing but at a higher level of detail.

Thanks

like_a_god

Does anyone have a quick reference for the schools of Magic in Pathfinder? Something that simply lists a small blurb on what each school does or the spells that fall under it? My players are making great use of Detect Magic and this would be awesome to include on my DM screen.

Thanks
like_a_god

Hello,

An issue came up during my last session that I need some clarification on. I’ll abstract the situation a bit since I have players that cruise these boards and, since the situation hasn’t been completely resolved in game, I don’t want to ruin it for them (or me).

Let’s say that an NPC is under spell ‘X’. Spell ‘X’ changes the NPC’s form from human to animal.

The party has encountered the animal. Through successful Knowledge (Nature) checks they have determined that the animal is behaving unusually. This causes the party to pause and ponder what is up with the animal.

The party can determine rather easily that the animal is under the effect of a spell. However, I cannot find any skills or abilities that would allow them to concretely determine that spell ‘X’ was used to change the NPC from a human into an animal. Am I missing something?

The party can use ‘Detect Magic’ to determine that there is a magical aura surrounding the animal and its relative strength. A successful Knowledge (Arcana) check would also reveal that the magic associated with the aura is of the ‘Transmutation’ school. However, that is all that can be determined by 'Detect Magic'.

The party could then try and use Knowledge (Arcana) to come up with a list of spells of the transmutation school that might be causing the animal before them to behave strangely. Given the school of magic, I don’t think it’s much of a leap for the party to conclude that the animal is something other than what it seems. Perhaps, it’s not an animal at all but a person changed into one. Still, this is all speculation on the part of the party. Knowledge (Arcana) cannot determine with any certainty that the change is the result of spell ‘X’

Given the way I’m reading it, Spellcraft seems to be useless in this situation. While Spellcraft could be used to determine, at least for the purposes of counter spelling, the spell being cast by an NPC, that circumstance is long past. Furthermore, since the animal is not an item it cannot be used in unison with ‘Detect Magic’ or ‘Identify’.

Is there something I’m missing? Is there actually a way for the party to determine that spell ‘X’ is responsible for the fate of the NPC?

Thanks,

like_a_god

Howdy,

Just a quick question. Say monster's 'melee' entry reads "2 claws +7 (1d6+2), bite +7 (1d4+2), gore +7 (1d4+2)". I understand that it can all of them in a full round action. However, if the creature is limited to a standard action and it wants to claw, is the standard attack 1 claw or 2 claws?

I'm just not sure if the '2 claws' portion is suppose to be read as 'claw +7, claw +7' indicating 2 separate attacks or '2 claws +7' as a single attack.

Thanks

like_a_god

Hello,

So, I understand that the CR of a creature or encounter signifies the "relative danger presented by a monster, trap [etc...]" and that the higher the CR the "... more dangerous the encounter." (Core Rulebook, 397)

Now, my question is "Relative to what?"

Does the CR represent the relative difficulty/threat between creatures? For instance, an orc is much less a threat than a dragon and, therefore, has a much MUCH lower CR than the dragon.

Or, does the CR represent the danger relative to the party APL? In other words, for a party with a APL of 5 an creature with a CR of 1 would be much less challenging than a creature with a CR 10.

Thanks in advance,

like_a_god

I'm trying to get a good handle on developing encounters according to RAW so that I know what I need to tweak, given my current players styles and gaming abilities, in order to offer a fulfilling experience.

One of the questions I have is whether or not the different point buys have any effect on calculating APL (Average Party Level)? I remember seeing somewhere that the Core Rulebook schematic is based on the 15 point buy. However, if this is indeed the case, is there any information available on what to do when building encounters for characters who were created using 20 or 25 point buys?

It seems reasonable to me that, all other things being equal, a character built on a 25 point by should be more 'powerful' than one built with a 15 point buy. As such, a party of 25 point buy characters should be able to handle more than a 15 point party during an 'average' encounter. But, I can't find this reflected in encounter creation laid out in the Core Rulebook.

Thanks

like_a_god

Howdy,

Do animal companions and eidolons take their actions on the turn of the character to which they are linked or do they have their own initiatives?

I've always run the game under the assumption that since the druid needs to direct the actions of the animal companion and, therefore, the animal's actions take place during his turn. After all, if the druid decides to 'push' the animal he needs to take a 'move action' to do so, something he can't do while it isn't his turn.

I assumed that this sort of thing also translated to eidolons and familiars, but my players brought up the fact that there is an eidolon option that gives them an improved initiative score.

Thanks,

like_a_god

Howdy,

My group has been doing a series of one-shots to try out classes that we haven't played before, such as those in the APG, at different levels and in different situations. What I'm finding, as the DM, is that the group often blows through 'average', 'challenging' and 'hard' encounters according to the rules laid out in the Core Rulebook, pages 397-398.

One of the things I've noticed is that when the group has no animal companions, cohorts, eidolons or other such allies, the encounters seem to be right in line with what I'd consider 'average', 'challenging' or 'hard'.

As such, many players in my group feel that animal companions, eidolons, cohorts etc. should be considered when determining the APL of an encounter. They point to the 'Adding NPC's' section on page 398 as proof that this is the case. In turn they argue that when I was planning for the encounters last sessions that while the APL was 8 when including just the player characters, the party really had a APL of 11 due to their animal companions and eidolons.

I disagree with their assessment. First, there is the sentence in 'Step 1' on page 397 that states you determine APL "average level of your PLAYER characters". Secondly, I've always worked under the assumption that concept of 'Character Level' includes all the resources they have access to whether its a class feature, such as an animal companion or eidolon, or wealth, such as magic items and mundane equipment. It seems like the system is broken if, for instance, a ranger who has an animal companion is considered more powerful, according to APL calculation, than one who chooses to buff his party members.

Which of us is correct? Do you simply take the average level of your player characters when determining APL or do you take the average level of your player characters AND also add that of any animal companions, cohorts, eidolons etc, when determining it?

Thanks,
like_a_god