lucesque's page

Your thread title refers to Spellstrike, while your post refers to Spell Combat. That makes a difference.

If you re-read Spell Combat, you'll see it carries its own special restriction on weapons used; the traditional one-handed style of the magus is not merely the result of needing a hand free.

Spellstrike, on the other hand, has no such restriction.

That was my mistake. I think I had just read Spellstrike when I started the thread. My inquiry was about Spell Combat, but reading it closely makes sense that it would require a free hand.

So considering this below, which I found on the d20pfsrd:

What kind of action is it to remove your hand from a two-handed weapon or re-grab it with both hands?

Both are free actions. For example, a wizard wielding a quarterstaff can let go of the weapon with one hand as a free action, cast a spell as a standard action, and grasp the weapon again with that hand as a free action; this means the wizard is still able to make attacks of opportunity with the weapon (which requires using two hands).

Would it be fair to assume that a Magus using Spell Combat could attack with a weapon two-handed, switch to one-handed to cast the spell, and return to two-handed wielding after the spell is cast? I know it'd still earn the -2 penalty on all attack rolls and all that.

Does that seem right?

Eric Clingenpeel wrote:

InVinoVeritas wrote:

So, you could have a 20 Dex, Improved Initative, a scorpion familiar, and Reactionary and get +13 to initiative at first level.

That is... In... sane... Cool, but insane

Agreed. I find surviving the first volley to be a better tactic than volleying first. I prefer not to be so prone to violence.

"It matters not who strikes first, but who strikes last."

Does the magus arcana Pool Strike Arcing stack with Pool Strike Clinging?

Arcing hits one target and then strikes additional targets. Clinging makes targets hit by arcing stick for an additional round to deal half as much damage. Will the extra targets take damage too?

POOL STRIKE ARCING
"The magus can expend 1 additional point from his arcane pool when using the pool strike arcana. If his attack hits, the magus can target a number of enemies within 15 feet equal to his Intelligence modifier (minimum 0) with a ranged touch attack as a free action. Those struck take the same energy damage as the primary target of the pool strike, including increased damage on a critical hit. The magus must be at least 12th level and must have the pool strike magus arcana before selecting this magus arcana."

POOL STRIKE CLINGING
"The magus can expend 1 additional point from his arcane pool when making a pool strike. A single target of his pool strike takes energy damage as normal from the pool strike and also takes half this amount of damage at the beginning of its turn on the following round. The magus must be at least 9th level and must have the pool strike magus arcana before selecting this magus arcana."

Nope. See bolded:

POOL STRIKE CLINGING
"The magus can expend 1 additional point from his arcane pool when making a pool strike. A single target of his pool strike takes energy damage as normal from the pool strike and also takes half this amount of damage at the beginning of its turn on the following round. The magus must be at least 9th level and must have the pool strike magus arcana before selecting this magus arcana."

Me again with more Magus questions.

Pretty sure this is green, but I just wanted to make sure before I start knocking people around. If a Magus were to cast Force Punch via Spellstrike, and used the Toppling Spell to knock people over, would that work right?
I didn't see anywhere in the description of Spellstrike that said you could or couldn't use Metamagic feats on spells delivered through your weapon. Force Punch is a touch attack, and has the Force descriptor... so it's good to go, right?

Right?

The only way to get a shield bonus while using the tower shield in cover mode, is to expose yourself, thus giving up the cover.

You can have one or the other, not both.

The situation in questions was having a tower shield in one hand and a small shield in the other (smaller than a tower shield, anyways). While deployed, you sacrifice the AC bonus the tower shield has for total coverage, but you'd still get the AC bonus from the other shield.

While this was not at all what the thread was originally about, it's an interesting concept.

In the scenario of using a Tower Shield and another shield (or weapon) in your other hand; the -2 penalty imposed by the tower shield on attack rolls is only applied if you haven't "deployed" the Tower shield for total cover right?

Because if you've deployed it for total cover you've used your standard action and cannot (normally) make an attack that round?

So the -2 penalty is only applied when you are using the tower shield to receive the shield bonus to AC right?

Correct, but if you continued to have the shield deployed into the next turn, you wouldn't have to "redeploy" it.

And by the rules, you wouldn't get the -2 to AC. At least, that's how most figure it. If you were attempting a shield bash with the smaller one, then it would suffer the -2 on the attack roll, but otherwise the Shield Bonus to AC is not affected (well, assuming you don't shield bash).

lucesque wrote:

Faelyn wrote:

Why would you take an AC penalty? The only penalty from using a Tower Shield is to your attacks. The idea behind that penalty is the massive size of the tower shield throws off you balance.

Personally, I think shields should provide a higher bonus to AC as is since they were more effective than armor in most historical battles; however, that's another story.

Well, it'd be just as difficult wielding a shield as a sword with your arm strapped to a tower shield while it's deployed, at least that's what I would assume. Since you can't twist and turn while the shield is deployed or risk losing the concealment... at least, that's how I see it. I mean, if it throws you off-balance for using a weapon, why would it be easier to use a shield on the other arm?

A shield would get -2 to attack if used to do so, but otherwise no, there would be no penalty to use it along with a tower shield. You could always houserule one in but... it doesn't really seem fair, unless they have a magic shield or feats the penalty you suggest would equal or exceed the benefit of the shield itself.

Nah, I don't really have a problem with it, just seems kinda goofy to me. It wasn't even the original inquiry I made, I'm not quite sure where the topic turned to wielding a tower shield and regular shield. xD

Why would you take an AC penalty? The only penalty from using a Tower Shield is to your attacks. The idea behind that penalty is the massive size of the tower shield throws off you balance.

Personally, I think shields should provide a higher bonus to AC as is since they were more effective than armor in most historical battles; however, that's another story.

Well, it'd be just as difficult wielding a shield as a sword with your arm strapped to a tower shield while it's deployed, at least that's what I would assume. Since you can't twist and turn while the shield is deployed or risk losing the concealment... at least, that's how I see it. I mean, if it throws you off-balance for using a weapon, why would it be easier to use a shield on the other arm?

You could use a long sword and call it a katana.

I wanted the Deadly trait that comes with katanas.

Or just spend the bloody feat!

lol I like being difficult, I guess.

lucesque wrote:

lucesque wrote:

Here's a thought, I could use these two traits together, right?

Race Trait: Arms Master (Tiefling)
The legendary battle prowess of your ancestors ensures that you have a certain amount of innate martial skill.
Benefit You take a –2 penalty on attack rolls made with weapons with which you are not proficient instead of the normal –4.

Equipment Trait: Quick Learner
You’re skilled at learning the feel of a particular weapon after a few swings in combat.
Benefit: After your first attack with a weapon in which you are not proficient, the non-proficiency penalty decreases by 2 (to a –2 penalty). This effect lasts only while you have the weapon in hand; you must “relearn” the weapon each time you pick it up.

Ah, nevermind. Trait bonuses don't stack.

Neither of those are even bonuses. They certainly are not trait bonuses.

They stack.

They're traits. I found them in the SRD Trait Database.

Here's a thought, I could use these two traits together, right?

Race Trait: Arms Master (Tiefling)
The legendary battle prowess of your ancestors ensures that you have a certain amount of innate martial skill.
Benefit You take a –2 penalty on attack rolls made with weapons with which you are not proficient instead of the normal –4.

Equipment Trait: Quick Learner
You’re skilled at learning the feel of a particular weapon after a few swings in combat.
Benefit: After your first attack with a weapon in which you are not proficient, the non-proficiency penalty decreases by 2 (to a –2 penalty). This effect lasts only while you have the weapon in hand; you must “relearn” the weapon each time you pick it up.

Ah, nevermind. Trait bonuses don't stack.

Here's a thought, I could use these two traits together, right?

Race Trait: Arms Master (Tiefling)
The legendary battle prowess of your ancestors ensures that you have a certain amount of innate martial skill.
Benefit You take a –2 penalty on attack rolls made with weapons with which you are not proficient instead of the normal –4.

Equipment Trait: Quick Learner
You’re skilled at learning the feel of a particular weapon after a few swings in combat.
Benefit: After your first attack with a weapon in which you are not proficient, the non-proficiency penalty decreases by 2 (to a –2 penalty). This effect lasts only while you have the weapon in hand; you must “relearn” the weapon each time you pick it up.

Why don't you try this?

Accurate Strike (Ex)
Prerequisite: Magus 9
Benefit: The magus can expend 2 points from his arcane pool as a swift action to resolve all of his melee weapon attacks until the end of his turn as melee touch attacks.

lucesque wrote:

Darksol the Painbringer wrote:

I'd have to disagree; you most certainly can have another shield equipped. It just takes another hand, since you can't use the Tower Shield hand for anything else other than using your Tower Shield.

Of course, they are correct in that using the Tower Shield for cover does not confer its AC, since you aren't wielding the Tower Shield, you're simply holding it to provide Total Cover.

One hand for Tower Shield, the other hand for Shield... but would that come at a penalty in your other hand, as normally you'd take a -2 to attack rolls in your other hand?

Correct. But not just for attacks made with your hand, Unarmed Strikes and Natural Weapons also qualify for the -2.

Would a shield come at a -2 AC penalty for wielding it in the other hand? Or does a -1 translate better?

I recently blogged about Tower Shields, FYI. The problem with using the item for total cover is that if you set it in your turn, an adjacent attacker can take a five foot step [or simply approach from farther away] and end move on your un-set side.

A good solution is to READY the use of the shield for total cover [since you can ready any standard action], triggered by a physical attack, set in the direction from which the attack is coming.

Tower Shield Screed by Cayzle

My interpretation was the purpose of a tower shield was for blocking ranged attacks from bows and such. Historically, that was their purpose. But I suppose a readied action would work too.

They are two different things, one being typical intelligent items (I say typical, but you know what I mean) versus Legendary ones.
It's the distinction between Intelligent Item and Legendary Intelligent Item.

I suppose if you go by the Sneak Attack definition:

If a rogue can catch an opponent when he is unable to defend himself effectively from her attack, she can strike a vital spot for extra damage.

You'd have to be dealing damage in the first place for a Sneak Attack.

lucesque wrote:

Shoemaker wrote:

Does a spell or spell like ability require damage to utilize sneak attack?

Specifically, I am thinking the enchanter daily power of dazing touch. Could I apply sneak attack damage to the melee touch attack?

You wouldn't be able to apply this effect to a Sneak Attack. The only thing that would benefit you is your target would lose their Dex bonus against the touch-attack, if anything.

Can anyone explain why according to RAW?

The sneak attack ability says clearly that all that is required is an attack roll and the necessary circumstances for a sneak attack.

Assuming I had flank, why no sneak attack damage dice on a melee touch attack without damage?

Not trying to be difficult. Just trying to find the RAW to support it when I need it show others.

I think the only handy thing I can find is for Arcane Tricksters.

A lot of everything else I'm finding is along these lines. I don't really find anything that talks about delivering touch attacks on a sneak attack (at least with an ability that deals no damage), but I'm not sure of being able to pass touch attacks through a weapon in that way. Maybe someone else can provide perspective for you. My impression has been always that Sneak Attack and Touch Attacks cannot stack without some special ability.

I'd have to disagree; you most certainly can have another shield equipped. It just takes another hand, since you can't use the Tower Shield hand for anything else other than using your Tower Shield.

Of course, they are correct in that using the Tower Shield for cover does not confer its AC, since you aren't wielding the Tower Shield, you're simply holding it to provide Total Cover.

One hand for Tower Shield, the other hand for Shield... but would that come at a penalty in your other hand, as normally you'd take a -2 to attack rolls in your other hand?

Does a spell or spell like ability require damage to utilize sneak attack?

Specifically, I am thinking the enchanter daily power of dazing touch. Could I apply sneak attack damage to the melee touch attack?

You wouldn't be able to apply this effect to a Sneak Attack. The only thing that would benefit you is your target would lose their Dex bonus against the touch-attack, if anything.

lucesque wrote:

LazarX wrote:

Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:

You could combine Bladebound with Kensai and get free proficiency.

At the nontrivial cost of shutting down magical options you might not want to part with.

I looked at that, didn't appeal to me. And I certainly don't want to -shudders- multiclass just for a katana.

It's not a multiclass. It's another Magus archetype.

Oh no, I know that, I just added that before anyone suggested multiclassing with Samurai or something else first.

lucesque wrote:

LazarX wrote:

Try putting a midget or a eight year old child on a full size horse. No matter how bright and gifted they are... they've got a major problem without some serious modifications. One of them is simply getting on the darned thing.

How does that explain someone mounting a brachiosaurus, then? Do they just Fred Flinstone along the tail, yelling "yabba-dabba-dooo" with expert dexterity? xD

As I understand it they're using something that's the equivalent of a reptilian Choco-bo, not a full size brachiosaurus.

Otherwise yes... that's exactly what they are doing. A Druid's animal companion with it's bond may be able to compensate for the lack of normal physical control options, like not having legs long enough to control it conventionally.

Sure, it's one thing if it's a druid's companion, since they limit the size. But if your Joe Schmoe the Fighter Guy buying a giant brachiosaurus, it doesn't shrink from Gargantuan to Large, right?

Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:

You could combine Bladebound with Kensai and get free proficiency.

At the nontrivial cost of shutting down magical options you might not want to part with.

I looked at that, didn't appeal to me. And I certainly don't want to -shudders- multiclass just for a katana.

Try putting a midget or a eight year old child on a full size horse. No matter how bright and gifted they are... they've got a major problem without some serious modifications. One of them is simply getting on the darned thing.

How does that explain someone mounting a brachiosaurus, then? Do they just Fred Flinstone along the tail, yelling "yabba-dabba-dooo" with expert dexterity? xD

I do still think it merits a custom saddle, since it's a creature two size categories larger.

I figured if I really wanted to dodge wasting a feat for the proficiency, I could use the race builder and swap the Tiefling's Feindish Sorcery for Weapon Familiarity, since I won't be using that anyways. Seems kinda cheating, though. xD

Caravan Drover trait allow you to treat whips as martial weapons.

It's Half-Orc only, but you could nab it with the Adopted trait.

I was trying to get a Katana, though. :c

Well, -5 makes sense, since the Ride skill says this:
If you attempt to ride a creature that is ill suited as a mount, you take a –5 penalty on your Ride checks.
Personally, I wouldn't include a penalty, as long as the saddle and barding is custom fit, so to speak, to fit a horse with a Halfling rider. The way I see it, if a Medium creature can ride Megafauna without penalty, why would a halfling suffer penalties for riding a typical horse?
That's my two cents, anyways.

Well, there are traits as well.

The only trait I know of is Heirloom Weapon, but that specifies any simple or martial weapon only. Know of any others?

Quote:

In most situations, a tower shield provides the indicated shield bonus to your Armor Class. As a standard action, however, you can use a tower shield to grant you total cover...

I would say you dont get shield bonus to AC while impying shield in such way. Others may say otherwise.

Quote:

The shield does not, however, provide cover against targeted spells; a spellcaster can cast a spell on you by targeting the shield you are holding.

Ah, perfect, I didn't notice that. Thanks for pointing it out!

blackbloodtroll wrote:

So, you could carry another shield, gain it's shield bonus, and then use the Tower Shield for total cover?

Well, I don't see why you couldn't. You could essentially use the Tower Shield to gain Total Cover along one side... and then use your shield in the other hand to still provide shield bonus AC against all other attacks. A bit goofy, but rules wise I can't see any issues there.

DarkPhoenix pointed out a part of the description of tower shields earlier.

This is what the Climber's Kit description says:

These crampons, pitons, ropes, and other tools give you a +2 circumstance bonus on Climb checks.

You could simply assume the tools are easy enough to retrieve while climbing, otherwise you could also make the cost negligible. A very small amount for a bundle of crampons and stuff.

Tower Shield wrote:

In most situations, a tower shield provides the indicated shield bonus to your Armor Class. As a standard action, however, you can use a tower shield to grant you total cover until the beginning of your next turn.

When employing a tower shield in combat, you take a –2 penalty on attack rolls because of the shield's encumbrance.

So, you trade the shield bonus to AC to gain the benefit of full-coverage, am I understanding that right?

Wait a minute. I figured out the solution to my problem. Is anyone paying attention? Is everyone ready? For the purposes of the use I want use this course of actions doesn't work.

Here's why:

The definition of staggered:
"When your current hit point total drops to exactly 0, you are disabled. You gain the staggered condition and can only take a single move or standard action each turn (but not both, nor can you take full-round actions). You can take move actions without further injuring yourself, but if you perform any standard action (or any other strenuous action) you take 1 point of damage after completing the act. Unless your activity increased your hit points, you are now at –1 hit points and dying."

Sacred Touch (Trait): As a standard action, you may automatically stabilize a dying creature merely by touching it.

In short: I can stabilize myself but immediately after taking the standard action to do so, I've torn myself up so bad by doing so that I'm dying again.

I wasn't aware of the confusion around being staggered versus being unconscious, but hey, solutions are grand.

Still makes the Klar and Whip, an option.

Whips are exotic, too, though. I'd have to spend a feat to get the proficiency on them as well. I was hoping to avoid that.

Quote:

one-handed slashing weapon, rapier, or cane sword

Both the Rapier and Cane Sword are one-handed Piercing weapons.

The Magus is proficient with a great deal of weapons that can not be use as a Blackblade.

Yeah, I glazed over the fact they were Piercing weapons. My bad.

It specifically calls out that you can choose rapiers and sword canes because they are not one-handed slashing weapons; it is saying that you may choose those two weapons for your Blackblade regardless.

That makes sense. Thanks again!

Is a dying creature one that is unconscious, one that has negative hit points and has not stabilized, or both?
By definition, both. Things with Ferocity (or abilities similar) still lose 1hp per round, and are probably still considered dying.

If it's both, then is a creature with ferocity capable of dying? What happens to the sentence "Creatures that have negative hit points and have not stabilized are dying."?
Creatures will still lose 1hp per round until they do hit their negative in Con, in which they would die.

I want to play a barbarian half-orc with the Ferocious Resolve feat (granting full ferocity) and who has Sacred Touch. This way, if I'm brought below zero HP I can stabilize myself automatically and get over to the healer.
This wouldn't work, as Stabilization specifies the creature would still be unconscious. The way I see it, you stop bleeding out and close wounds enough on a creature plopped on the ground. Someone still moving about would re-open wounds. At least, that's how I figure it.

I'm no James Jacob, but I hope this helps.

There's nothing there that requires you to pick a non-exotic weapon, so you are able to but having it as a Blackblade does not automatically confer proficiency; you would need to take Exotic Weapon Proficiency if you wanted to use your blade without penalties.

I think the part that always confused me about it was that they are already proficient in simple and martial weapons, but it also points out being able to use rapiers and cane swords, which are martial... just confused me a bit, that's all. Thanks for the clarification!

I know for things like Bucklers, the shield is strapped to your arm and cannot be easily dropped. Other shields only require a move action to don or drop. Does that also apply to tower shields?
Also, I'm assuming that you're still considered to have the tower shield strapped to your arm, correct? It doesn't just stand on it's own, right?

So, as far as I can tell, for the Bladebound archetype (Magus) it says you can use any one-handed slashing weapon, rapier, or cane sword. It doesn't specify if you are able to select exotic weapons or not, or if you'd require the proficiency feat for that weapon. I know it's probably super original, but I'd like to have a Bladebound with a katana.

Thanks in advance for any help!