maouse33's page

OK. So the phrasing on Flurry of Blasts is horrible. Just start there.
"Instead of a single kinetic blast, you shoot two kinetic blasts at targets within 120 feet that each deal damage as if your kineticist level were 1st (effects or abilities that increase your kinetic blast’s damage don’t apply)."

So the horrible part is "Effects or abilities that increase your kinetic blast's damage don't apply" - Like what the actual???

Here are Effects and abilities that increase your blast damage:
Elemental Overflow - directly adds to hit and damage.
Elemental Overflow - can add to Con Bonus.
Aetheric Boost - can add directly to damage.
Focused Blast - can add to damage.
Point Blank Shot - adds 1 damage within 30 feet.
Kineticists Diadem - adds 1d6/1d8 damage.
Con Enhancement Items - adds con bonus.
Wish spells to increase Con - adds con bonus.

And there's probably more that I just couldn't think of off the top of my head.

So like NONE of that Applies? Take your character back down to an un-enhanced, non-magical, non-buffed out level 20 Kineticist and just do 1d6+5 max damage (18 Con) per blast? I mean, what is the point of this ability as written?

I am intent on ignoring this phrasing, but is there any clarification as to if this means "everything that can affect the damage" or just "things that add to the damage" which would be more understandable?

The Ultimate Campaign has the following text:
Discount: Some buildings halve the cost of constructing
a related type of building in the same settlement. This cost
reduction applies only to the first constructed building of
the types listed in this line. For example, an Academy halves
the cost of your next Library in that settlement; if you build
a second Library in that settlement, you pay the normal cost
for it. If 2 buildings give the same discount, only one discount
applies per new building, but you may construct 2 buildings
at the discounted cost. For example, Market and Theater both
halve the cost of an Inn; if your settlement has a Market and
a Theater, you may construct 2 Inns at half cost (the Market
discounts one, and the Theater discounts the other).

We see here, clearly, that a single TYPE only receives the discount once. That is fine.

The question is: does each TYPE of building get a discount once? Or does the discount only apply to whichever one you build first? The implication is "the first constructed building of the types listed" = "the first constructed building of each type listed". So if you have a castle, you get a discount on ONE Noble Villa and ONE Town Hall.

Any chance in the nine layers of hell that I might get some clarification on this? I am going to fire up the old pc game (if I can find it) and see how it runs this (I believe we got a discount on each type once, but it was a very long while ago I played).

Thanks for any help: including - being a Dev and giving an answer or being a player and letting me know how the PC game handled it. Opinions not really needed as I'm not the GM, so I need something more concrete to bring to my GM (who at this point doesn't know the problem exists, but I'm a bit ADHD and want my ducks sorted).

In point of RAW: Parsed Feat-

1) You don’t take the –2 penalty for making trip attempts with a ranged weapon using Ranged Trip,

2) and you can attempt special ranged trip combat maneuver checks against flying creatures.

If the combat maneuver succeeds, the target falls... etc.

You can use a NORMAL RANGED TRIP WEAPON for the special combat maneuver.

How do you get a ranged trip? The feat RANGED TRIP lets you throw any weapon as FRA. You can throw a thrown weapon with TRIP special ability as a standard attack.

This is important for things like Shikigami Mimicry... I can now do the special ranged trip combat maneuver a FLURRY of times in a round - replacing the normal attacks I do. Granted, at a -2, like the normal RANGED TRIP attempt with a 2H sword or WHATEVER WEAPON you like.

NOTE: ACE DISARM does require two feats RAW, as it states RANGED DISARM for both the -2 negation and the special attack.

So, the quick question is: Does the explosive bomb feature of the bomb from a Gun Chemist cause the 15 foot cone to be a 15 foot cone, or a 15 foot cone with another 5 feet around it with the splash of 10 feet?

The long form explanation:

Explosive Bomb: The alchemist’s bombs now have a splash radius of 10 feet rather than 5 feet.

Exploding Bullet*:gun chemist’s alchemical ordnance splashes adjacent targets as though it were a splash weapon.

Alchemical Ordnance (Su): If the gun chemist uses alchemical ordnance to make a scattering shot with a weapon with the scatter quality, each creature in the area instead takes additional fire damage equal to ... etc...

So you can shoot them with a bullet for a 10' radius splash (25 squares) or scatter shot and do what?> 6 or 7 squares (depending on a corner or side cone)? Or can you pick up the edges with 10 foot of splash and splash out (20 squares)?

The diagrams:
Normal Scatter
xxx
xx
x

Explosive bomb scatter (no target set on fire)
SSSSS
SXXXS
SXXS
SXS
SSS

Vesrus:
Normal splash
SSS
SXS
SSS

Explosive bomb splash (target is on fire if hit directly, no save)
SSSSS
SSSSS
SSXSS
SSSSS
SSSSS

I'm thinking, just as a GM call, I'm going with the Explosive Bomb Scatter. Thoughts?

I've skipped book 4 completely; as we had a paladin and several good aligned persons in the group. I replaced this with an easy "the elf team sent to hunt for information on the drow have returned through the gate into the capital." They informed the players and the queen and court of all the exploits in the darklands. The reason for this was because of a mythic encounter earlier on, and mythic levels. I didn't want to have to edit book 4-6 for mythic stats, and as it turns out, book five picks up APL where the players are after book 3 (due to some mythic fights in the war). Anyway, the long and short of this is that because the Night of Arrows, one PC wants to exterminate every elf he sees... calm down calm down... And the rest of the group has been told by the queen that the winter council sent the assailants after them AFTER locking them in the prison... so the rest of the group don't really trust any of these stupid elves either. They didn't get to see the depravity of the Drow, but somehow the Drow now look more friendly than the elves.

And now they've been told by the queen to team up with Quilindra to get to the place they're going. Once she's "found out" (they already know she's evil), the queen's good reputation is out the window too. So I expect the one who "runs" the secret elf group to be a COMPLETE LOSS. There's no way they're making allies with the party after trying (nearly successfully, I'd add, as four members of six were KO'd in the battle) to kill them. It's not even going to be a discussion. The other three members? Maybe two of them are viable allies.

I'll have to do some serious tongue work to get the module to not just be a "See and Slay" adventure. Horribly written (the introduction to the winter council is like "hey, here's the elves, great bunch of folk, even if they did just try to kill you all two days ago!"), with convoluted plot, which leaves no good taste in anyone's mouth regarding any elves. But hey, it's been interesting, and I look forward to running the PCs through Galt, et al this week. They're all Drow in the waiting is another plot hole, as far as I'm concerned... the whole "suddenly turning into Drow" is nonsense of the highest order. It took 10,000 years for those who hid on Golarion... but hey, POOF! You're a Drow now! WTF is that?

other "typos" - the spike was never damaged, just pulled free long enough to escape. Stone to Flesh is not the spell used, but stone shape, to pull it free again.

Is the negative levels from Enervation "damage" that gets the Orc Bloodline +1 and/ or Blood Havoc +1 per die bonus (with necromancy focus)? (I don't think dragon bloodline would affect it, but maybe there's a necromancy dragon blood?)

I mean, we're rolling dice. Is it "damage"?

So is Enervation 1d4+1 (or +2) and Energy Drain 2d4+2 (or +4)?

I can't seem to get to where they are damage, but it seems like they are a damage type of some sort.

Hmmm... after looking at it more, it seems you "bestow negative levels" as a CONDITION. Not damage. So the answer seems to be no.

Mythic Legendary Item Undetectable reads: "This grants its bonded user the ability to become utterly undetectable while invisible. While invisible and in physical contact with this item, the bonded creature can’t be detected or scryed by any method."

Lvl 20 Hidden Master reads: "At 20th level, a ninja becomes a true master of her art. She can, as a standard action, cast greater invisibility on herself. While invisible in this way, she cannot be detected by any means, and not even invisibility purge, see invisibility, and true seeing can reveal her. She uses her ninja level as her caster level for this ability. Using this ability consumes 3 ki points from her ki pool. In addition, whenever the ninja deals sneak attack damage, she can sacrifice additional damage dice to apply a penalty to one ability score of the target equal to the number of dice sacrificed for 1 minute. This penalty does not stack with itself and cannot reduce an ability score below 1."

That's a bit of a text difference. Now, the way I've been running Legendary Undetectable is that you can't be detected, or scryed on - "because mythic" - by any means. However, things that cancel INVISIBILITY still make you visible; namely evocation (not scrying or divination) spells that cancel invisibility. They don't detect you, so much as they simply cancel the invisibility. That seemed to make sense until I'm pitting the party against a level 20 ninja who as Hidden Master. Which turns out to be "better than Undetectable".

So the verbiage is "utterly undetectable while invisible" versus "cannot be detected by any means, and not even invisibility purge, etc... can reveal them". Nothing in the first verbiage indicates that they can't be revealed with purges.

So I mean, besides screwing over the players with multiple save or die chances, do you think the reconciliation of these two abilities this way makes sense? Presumably a anti-magic field would nuke both abilities (unless they somehow had tech/natural invisibility).

The situation is this: DR applies to EVERYTHING except what's after the Slash. SR applies to ONLY what's listed. So UNTYPED SPELL damage ignores everything because it is NOT what's listed - and specifically bypasses DR. DR applies to UNTYPED Natural damage, because it is NOT what's after the slash.

Seems to be the correct interpretation of RAW, anyway. (Still couldn't find "untyped damage" defined anywhere).

DR 5/slashing- stops everything except slashing. Untyped isn't slashing, not (an) energy (type) damage. So it's stopped.

SR Cold 5. Disintegrate does 40d6 untyped energy damage from a spell. It is not Cold. So it bypasses SR cold 5. It also bypasses DR 5/slashing because it is energy damage from a spell.

It comes down to inclusive and exclusive abilities. DR is exclusive in that it protects against what's NOT listed. SR is inclusive in that it protects against ONLY what's listed. So when you get to spell energy, is it listed? No. Then no protection. The opposite applies to normal (non-magic) damage from all sources for DR. Is it /slashing? Then protection!

FAQ's DR applies to magic attacks that do
weapon type damage (bludgeoning, slashing, piercing)
"as if it were from a physical weapon."

DR = damage ignored from *NORMAL ATTACKS* = nonmagical sources
Normal means "non-magical"
Attacks means "things that do damage"

Negates riders if totally blocks damage

DR Doesn't Apply:
touch attacks
energy damage dealt with an attack
energy drains
poisons (inhaled, ingested, contact)
diseases (inhaled, ingested, contact)
spells, slas, energy attacks
non-magical fire

DR = invulnerability, tough hide, instant healing

JJ - states FAQ'd SR applies environmental damage
So does DR apply to NORMAL environmental damage?

JJ states it's just untyped damage.
Falling damage is UNTYPED.

Nothing in here says DR doesn't apply to untyped damage.

Applies to all damage, regardless of source, except what's after the slash.
Unless the DR entry says it doesn't apply.

Ergo, DR applies to Falling Damage, even IF it is untyped.

Is there an actual statement somewhere where it doesn't apply to environmental damage? Because I'm not finding that anywhere. Only that JJ says it's untyped, and a bunch of mysquotes about it not applying or changing to bludgeoning or some other thing. It doesn't have to change to typed. It applies to anything except whatever is after the slash. That means UNTYPED. It applies to untyped just like it was NOT slashing with DR 5/slashing.

Am I incorrect in my reading of this? Did I simply miss the part of the book where it says DR doesn't apply to environmental damage (it isn't under the DR, nor environmental sections).

Adding in this quote from JJ: "Spells and effects that do untyped damage are pretty rare in Pathfinder, since these spells are quite powerful since their damage can't be stopped by any form of immunity, resistance, or damage reduction." - Note he specifically says DR doesn't apply to the SPELLS that are untyped (neither do immunity or resistances). He specifically stated in another post that environmental damage do cold/heat damage where it seems to apply = countering the idea that untyped (well, badly described, let's be honest) environmental damage overcomes immunity and SR.

A) What is untyped damage. (Got a source for the definition?)
B) is untyped damage from a NORMAL (non-spell/magic source) different than magical untyped damage (seems to be based on the SR FAQ).

FAQ's DR applies to magic attacks that do
weapon type damage (bludgeoning, slashing, peiercing)
"as if it were from a physical weapon."

DR = damage ignored from *NORMAL ATTACKS* = nonmagical sources
Normal means "non-magical"
Attacks means "things that do damage"

Negates riders if totally blocks damage

DR Doesn't Apply:
touch attacks
energy damage dealt with an attack
energy drains
poisons (inhaled, ingested, contact)
diseases (inhaled, ingested, contact)
spells, slas, energy attacks
non-magical fire

DR = invulnerability, tough hide, instant healing

JJ - states FAQ'd SR applies environmental damage
So does DR apply to NORMAL environmental damage?

JJ states it's just untyped damage.
Falling damage is UNTYPED.

Nothing in here says DR doesn't apply to untyped damage.

Applies to all damage, regardless of source, except what's after the slash.
Unless the DR entry says it doesn't apply.

Ergo, DR applies to Falling Damage, even IF it is untyped.

Is there an actual statement somewhere where it doesn't apply to environmental damage? Because I'm not finding that anywhere. Only that JJ says it's untyped, and a bunch of mysquotes about it not applying or changing to bludgeoning or some other thing. It doesn't have to change to typed. It applies to anything except whatever is after the slash. That means UNTYPED. It applies to untyped just like it was NOT slashing with DR 5/slashing.

Am I incorrect in my reading of this? Did I simply miss the part of the book where it says DR doesn't apply to environmental damage (it isn't under the DR section).

I'm just wondering how one would rule the "double the weight" mechanics of large items versus the +2 Str for a size change.

Example: Medium Character with Full Plate 50 pounds. And other gear totaled up to be right at his STR light load. Let's say 18 Str with 50 pounds of additional gear.

Size change to Large, he's now carrying 100 pounds of armor and (presumably) 50 pounds of gear. 150 pounds. Str 20 is just 133 max light load though, so now they're over burdened?

The reason this came up was more because I have a player who's race building with a large starting character who doesn't want to be overburdened every second of every day. They can shape change into small or medium humanoids. So they could put on lighter gear from say a small creature, and then shape change.

The other issue with a starting character is cost as well. Double price for large? I'll take a medium weapon and armor please. And change on up to large after donning it.

The weight may be the same as large, but do I keep the price break? All knowing that when anything is removed it turns back to medium size if bought that way.

And the other thing they have is a large bow (double cost and weight)... which, when fired from a small frame, does large damage as it reverts to regular size. Which is a cool effect.

Thoughts?

OK. So the "closest we have" to an explanation of how rage powers work is "they don't work from other sources, and the Feat "Extra Rage Power" is another source."

That part is fine. So what happens if, say, we have a Spell Warrior Skald who's doing the following:

3rd level takes Celestial Totem (lesser)
6th level takes Celestial Blood (lesser)
7th level FEAT takes Celestial Blood
9th level takes Celestial Totem
At 12th level, takes Celestial Blood, Greater.

Now, that is a GREATER ability shared with everyone who gets their Weapon Song. But they don't get the Celestial Blood from the FEAT. So no resistance from the 7th level feat, but they DO get the benefits of the GREATER blood?

That is my understanding of it, because the only requirement to BENEFIT from it is it must be active (the people gaining the ability don't have to qualify by having the rage ability themselves).

Concerns? Abuse? Comments?

TLDR: Can a Skald skip to handing out (with spell song) GREATER rage powers if they use feats (other sources) to take the lessers?

OK. So the "closest we have" to an explanation of how rage powers work is "they don't work from other sources, and the Feat "Extra Rage Power" is another source."

That part is fine. So what happens if, say, we have a Spell Warrior Skald who's doing the following:

3rd level takes Celestial Totem (lesser)
6th level takes Celestial Blood (lesser)
7th level FEAT takes Celestial Blood
9th level takes Celestial Totem
At 12th level, takes Celestial Blood, Greater.

Now, that is a GREATER ability shared with everyone who gets their Weapon Song. But they don't get the Celestial Blood from the FEAT. So no resistance from the 7th level feat, but they DO get the benefits of the GREATER blood?

That is my understanding of it, because the only requirement to BENEFIT from it is it must be active (the people gaining the ability don't have to qualify by having the rage ability themselves).

Concerns? Abuse? Comments?

TLDR: Can a Skald skip to handing out GREATER rage powers if they use feats to take the lessers?

I'm scrapping parts of the caravan rules... just looking for advice on more because this is all I've encountered so far.
#1 the consumption is WACK. I can't build a caravan that CAN MAKE a 94 day journey. Everyone starves around day 40-50. They simply can't bring enough food. So I'm knocking off the "wagon" consumption (wagons don't eat anything, though the horses do). Anyway, without this, 5 cooks and 3 scouts can keep the party from starving to death before day 100.

I have 19 travelers in the party, as I hired 5 drivers. So this means that consumption would have been 27 or 28 (depending on wagon). With a cargo of 52. See how that doesn't work? 520/28 is 18.5 days food. 520/19 27 days. Reduced 10 by cooks and 9 by scouts = a caravan that can support itself (0 consumption). But that also means that 8 NPCs / PCs are busy all day. +5 drivers. That's 13 spots taken. Leaving 6 spots open.

The "necessary" Fortune Teller... that leaves 5 adventurers. Able to do what they want to help.

That's where I think the Caravan was "supposed" to be. Able to sustain itself across the top of the world without everyone starving to death before they get to Minkai. If the players all went off and died, they'd still make it. It is kind of crazy that the players would HAVE TO be caravan "employees" to even survive the journey.

We'll see how the combat goes when I get to it. But CR -4 seems to be the prevailing wisdom... or base it on the actual caravan level instead of the player's level, and do separate encounters for each.

So the Spell Warrior Weapon Song states: "If an affected weapon is not magical, at least a +1 enhancement bonus must be added before any other special abilities can be." Implying/ RAW stating that if it IS magical, it does not require the +1 Enhancement bonus.

So that implies that a magic weapon, like an aimed decanter of endless water, can take on the weapon song bonus of say, Flaming. So you can have Flaming Water (1d6 fire, 1d4 water damage). No attack roll needed. Higher levels you can add two or three elements, or ghost touch, etc...

So is there a better "auto hit" weapon out there that can be weaponized/ boosted by Weapon Song?

Necroing this thread for the following:

Weapon Song from the Skald Spell Warrior states:
"If an affected weapon is not magical, at least a +1 enhancement bonus must be added before any other special abilities can be."

A Decanter of Endless water is a weapon, as it does damage.

Thus the Weapon Song applies. You can make FLAMING WATER. LOL. 1d6 fire, 1d4 water damage. No attack roll is needed. At higher levels you can add other things like Ghost Touch, etc... from Weapon Song.

Get a bunch and they all can take on 2d6 elemental damage for a nice little BOOST to damage.

Ring that COWBELL my Spell Warriors! Clang CLANG CLANG! More COWBELL!

Hard ruling:

GENERAL: You can’t cast a spell while concentrating on another one.

SPECIFIC: Nothing in SPELLSONG says you can cast another CONCENTRATION SPELL (at all). Thus you CANNOT have two concentration spells going at the same time, and it is a cost of 1 move and 1BP each round you want to free up your standard action for something else (including casting another spell WITHOUT the concentration duration).

Problem solved.

Well, you'd run out of move actions after maintaining two.

Yeh, the question was the last bit about it lasting until the end of the performance = don't have to waste move actions anymore (because it is a free action to maintain a performance). ie. is it a one time cost of a move and a BP or is it each turn.

It really should say "you can continue to maintain it this way until the end of your performance" - but it doesn't because, apparently, you could switch back to maintaining it with a standard action instead of the performance??? See, that is the whole online discussion of how it works. If I don't WANT to spend a move and a BP next round, what happens? Can I spend a standard? Does it last to the end of the performance no matter what? Can I fold in a new spell each round (do they stack like I implied in the first post - say 20 times?)

Spellsong:

Question: I know it's been repeatedly debated on how this actually works, but my question is slightly different - if you continually cast new spells which are ALSO concentration spells, can you get, say 20+ concentration spells going with your performance?

It seems like the "concentration" part of the spell is "folded into" the performance, so given enough BP rounds, you could fold in a whole litany of spells with this feat.

(also, it appears like you can then be the "only class" (I say this because a bunch get this ability) that can cast more than one concentration spell at a time)

Reasonable reply: It costs 1 move and 1BP each round to maintain the first concentration spell. It costs 1 standard action to maintain the second concentration spell. So at most, you could have 2 concentration spells going UNLESS you were Hasted, at which point, because you get an extra move action, you could have three going at a cost of 2 move, 2BP, and a Standard to maintain all three. This ("logic") seems to imply that the "folded in" spell still costs a move and a BP each round to maintain, despite the verbiage that it ends when the performance ends implying that it is a one time cost.

First; melee, ranged, and thrown are categories of weapons. Improvised is a type. Like 1h, 2h, etc... Find a reasonable match to its list counter part. Meaning its equivalent to a melee weapon if used to make a melee attack. You can RAW state "it never says it's a melee weapon" to wit I'll reply: the definition of melee weapon makes it one (a weapon used to make a melee (category of attacks) attack).

Second: boy did this go sideways. Anyone want to answer the original question about stacking?

Say we come across a improvised+1 club (Clanky's leg?) - Do gloves if improvised might add to that?

The setup is this:
Gloomblade level 9+
Improvised Weapon Master (Sledge) - grants the Gloomblade the ability to summon a shadow sledge.
Shikigami style tree (3 feats).
So the weapon, just as is, is a 6d6 +2 Weapon, with a let's say Frost or Ghost Touch added as the special ability at 9th.

Enter the Gloves of Improvised Might. Just +1 Enhancement. But with the THROWN quality.

The question is: would these abilities stack, like fire arrows +1 and a cold bow +1, or amulet of mighty fists with keen (because you can do slashing with fists, and it only applies to slashing fist attacks) and a elemental fist ability to do fire or something.

It seems to me logical that the abilities would stack (to a +10 total enhancement), but I also realize that this is "cheating" the cost of adding additional magic qualities to a melee weapon. But other than the cheese factor, is this legal? How do things like this stack? Do you treat it like ammo, or like two separate magic weapons - even though it is two magic effects adding to one magic weapon?

I expect this is similar to a magus using a magic weapon as well, but in that instance it specifically states that they can add xyz to it. Was this intended to be done with melee weapons like it is with ranged weapons and their ammos if you can get magical qualities from multiple sources to affect one weapon?

I guess another example would be simple spell effects on weapons that add fire or what not. This is above and beyond the fact that they might be a +5 Holy Avenger... making it a FLAMING +5 Holy Avenger. So I think I have my answer (they stack, even, perhaps, beyond the normal +10 limit). If you use a scabbard of keen edges on that same sword, for instance, it is now a KEEN +10 total weapon, making it a +11 total bonus weapon, and with the heat metal spell it would even do 1d4 (or whatever) fire damage to boot, making it effectively a +12 weapon.

While exploitive, does this sound reasonable then, to expect the Gloves to stack with the Gloomblade's normal weapon enhancements for a improvised weapon? Thoughts? Any RAW on this sort of combination?

The first problem: It makes you proficient with AN / A improvised weapon. NOT all improvised weapons.

But yes, you can make shadowy versions of that weapon over and over. But only one per feat you've spent.

(ps. the sledge + shikigami tree + this is quite nice)

How do multiple familiars' abilities stack? Say I get a tattooed familiar, then a tumor familiar: Does it get the ability to disconnect from the tattoo form as a move (it's own) or does it now take a move action on the part of the alchemist? Does it get fast healing 5 from the Alchemist side while attached? If I have a carnivalist rogue, does it get Sneak Attack if it is my second or third familiar type added?

Because of the nonstandard wording on these familiars: The carnivalist stacks with the sorcerer, which only stacks with wizard and witch, and what stacks with alchemist tumor familiar? I understand that under the familiar section it says "they all stack together, regardless of the wording" but does that mean all their weird abilities stack, and how so? (see above regarding the detachment issue).

"Levels of different classes that are entitled to familiars stack for the purpose of determining any familiar abilities that depend on the master’s level." - this indicates all the abilities do, in fact, stack.

Since Shatter Defense states:

Any shaken, frightened, or panicked opponent hit by you this round is flat-footed to your attacks until the end of your next turn. This includes any additional attacks you make this round.

And NOTHING in it states ANYTHING about hitting someone at all (just your attacks)...
why do people insist that you have to actually hit someone FIRST for this to work?

It seems like the qualifying condition is that they are shaken, frightened, or panicked. Not hit.

Am I reading this wrong? I don't think I am, but every "interpretation" I've read reads in some nonsense about needing to impart a hit AFTER someone is shaken, frightened, or panicked. Nothing in the ability mentions getting hit.

Examples:

An ally uses Intimidate to scare a foe. They're shaken. Shatter defense gives the benefit versus the shaken foe.

You hit someone with curmodgeon smash, enforcer, or bullying blow and get a free intimidate; your foe is now shaken or worse. Each additional attack is versus a shaken, frightened, or panicked foe, so gets the Shatter Defense benefits.

I don't see how so many people read the "plain English" and added in "but you gotta hit them first" because of the name of the ability, and poor wording?

Am I wrong, RAW? Is there a FAQ stating the wording was meant to include "after you hit them"? Is that just the interpretation of "hit by you" in the Feat (as opposed to "after you hit them" which would be a better wording)?

Which one fixes it:

"Any shaken, frightened, or panicked opponent is flat-footed to your attacks until the end of your next turn, after they are hit by you once this turn. This includes any additional attacks you make this round."

"Any shaken, frightened, or panicked opponent attacked by you this round is flat-footed to your attacks until the end of your next turn. This includes any additional attacks you make this round."

Acrobatics: ^1^ This DC is used to avoid an attack of opportunity due to movement.

Invisible: Do not provoke AoO when they move due to total concealment.

Ergo, you can move through opponents without any Acrobatics roll.

Doesn't matter if they're invisible, except that if you're not, you provoke from them.

Do players have access to Uncommon spells of their level from the CRB?

Seems like a pretty simple question that I can't find an answer to after searching for a few flipping hours in the USELESS - NAY MORE THAN USELESS Guide to organized play. (I think I read every html link, but who knows, it's a spider web of horror)

Also: we aren't using fame any more... and Reputation is replaced with ONLINE PP ... but then there are TIERS for boons? Do we get the boons on the TIER chart? Or do we have to buy them with PP?

So my question is direct to a specific combination, but probably applies in other situations as well:

Sorcerer, Tattooed Sorcerer Archetype:

Familiar Tattoo (Su)

A tattooed sorcerer gains a familiar as an arcane bond, as a wizard equal to her sorcerer level. Her sorcerer levels stack with any wizard or witch levels she possesses when determining the powers of her familiar—this ability does not allow her to have both a familiar and a bonded item.

Wizard, Exploiter Archetype:

Arcane Reservoir (Su)

At 1st level, the exploiter wizard gains the arcanist’s arcane reservoir class feature. The exploiter wizard uses his wizard level as his arcanist level for determining how many arcane reservoir points he gains at each level.

This ability replaces arcane bond.

So what we have is an "Arcane Bond, that stacks with LEVELS" from the Sorcerer, and no "Arcane Bond" ability on the WIZARD LEVELS. So do they still stack?

Plausible in game reality reason: It's magic. Another reason: Some Gods don't like getting sucker punched and cause it to break for the weaker version of the spell so their followers don't get sucker punched continually without ever being able to retaliate.

Third "reason" is it is level 3 spell that grants someone an extra-ordinary ability (invisibility) in a universe full of light. In a way, it is a very tiny limited wish. And we all know wish stacking is bad. So the world doesn't let you keep the benefit of the wish if you do bad things like attack other people.

The real reason is still: because it says so in the spell description. Same reason you can zap someone for 5d6+10 electric damage with shocking grasp and not hurt anyone touching them, including yourself. Magic be like that.

Aid other stacks for a lot of things, including grappling... this is why you don't mess with a press gang... if you get jumped by 8 people, you're probably going to get grappled.

can you get advanced familiars? Automatons have a nice little core I'd love to remove if I'm a caster of multiple classes... (+4CL in all ways makes a Sorc/ALc/Wiz pretty deadly - instant 5d6 1st level spells in his off class(es))

Now throw in Whirlwind Attack and just hit every darn thing! (A Dex based Fighter - Gloom Blade can do some damage stacking reach) And don't even talk about the ridiculous Bard juggler threatening 50' with thrown juggled items... how the blazes does that even work with whirlwind attack and quick draw?

Now. The question you have to ask is this: How the heck does reach work with a Medium Sized creature with 20+ feet of reach? Is it 20' diagonal still? A huge square? Or is it like a Fireball spread?

The Lyre of Building is a "game wrecker." Especially if you have a high constitution/high perform character. Basically play for 24+ hours with forced march and make yourself whatever you want. (seriously, 4800 man hours/hour = 115200 man hours. Which is a two man team working for 27 years... in a day). 55 man years of work. (basically a whole modern adult life +10 years).

Anyway, that aside, you do need materials. But not tools. So you can harvest from around you (trees, dirt, stone, etc...). It's rough, but doable.

Now, would a Calikang let you bury it? No. And would it get "in the way" so you can't build someplace? Probably. There's nothing saying it can't completely bugger up the works. I mean, sure you have 100 men working for three days, but imagine if there was a Calikang in their way? How much work will they get done? None. That's how much. None.

DC to ID a magic item is 15+Caster Level.

So let's look at a bag of Holding type I: 15+9 = 24.

Versus a Bag of Devouring: 15+17=32. With the stipulation that if the person doesn't exceed the DC by 10, all they get is the original purpose of the item. Meaning you need a 42! to ID a Bag of Devouring.

Seems like there is a "pretty grey line" between 24 and 42. Like, how does that work? I'm considering making it a DC 34 instead (the DC of the original item +10).

What is actually correct? The DC of the cursed item +10 or the original item +10?

maouse33 wrote:

I am able to make a MELEE attack against everything I THREATEN.

No, it's the other way round: You THREATEN everything you can make a melee attack against.

This ability does not change anything about how to use a thrown weapon, it merely allows you to use your thrown weapons for mechanics that require threatening, like attacks of opportunity or flanking.

Other abilities, like Whirlwind Attack, are completely unaffected, since they require melee attacks and have nothing to do with threatening.

If you want to "Threaten Everything", learn Mage Hand, Improved Unarmed Strike and the Magic Trick (Mage Hand) for Thrown Punches.

You didn't read whirlwind attack... it's NOT "you can make a melee attack against all opponents you threaten"; it's actually within REACH (not threaten). Not "you threaten everything you can make a melee attack against" as you said; whirlwind attack doesn't say a thing about threat ranges. So, since you treat your juggled items as melee weapons with REACH of up to 40 feet, whirlwind lets you somehow do a melee attack against everything within REACH, 40-50' (as stated with lunge and longarm).

The Busker ability DOES let you threaten out to 40ish feet. With ranged weapons, not melee weapons. But that is because they are being treated as REACH (melee) weapons with that range. Which is a "specific beats general" rule break. It's kind of like the feats that let you threaten with a bow... except that (snap shot) says "threaten" and not "reach"... whereas the Busker ability says nothing about "threat" range (because that is derivative of reach (melee) weapons).

I don't have a problem with it, honestly. Because what does it even mean? If the GM disagrees with what you asked, or how you asked, but is technically correct, is it twisting it?

"I wish for one million gold! (or even 50,001)." Haw, GM, I rolled 5 over the DC, you have to give me 1 million gold! My TRAIT (weakest form of extra-ordinary ability available) says so!

Ok. 1 million gold appears in your brain. You are dead. But rich dead.

"But that's A TWIST!"... no, it's not. You never specified where it was to appear.

Any stray effects are not "twists" - it's not the GM's fault you left things in the air. If you exceed the "power" of a wish by a factor of 20x, expect 20x the "interpretive dance" by this GM. PS. I wouldn't twist wishes from the spell, if they keep their effects to what's listed (or close to it). I will always twist (at least a little) a wish granted by an outsider (because hey, they have a completely different understanding of language and expectations of wishes being granted). You want 50000 gp from a Djinni? It's easier to teleport/transport it from someone who HAS IT, than to create it out of thin air. IOU left in it's place with your name on it. You *may* get a call from an outsider regarding the IOU.

Sandslice wrote:

the GM is not allowed to twist the wish

HA! That would never happen in my campaigns. There has never been, nor ever will be a rule that has power over the GM.

HAHAHA! A TRAIT, at that! Lolz in GMeeze.

I always got the impression that the listed uses for wish are the safe options, meaning they won't go wrong if the caster picks one. Only if they try to wish for something more powerful should there be a chance of the wish doing something bad.

Read the wish magic section:

#1 regular wishes for regular things shouldn't go wrong.
#2 wishing for more than can be granted will cause a "twist."
#3 wishing more than 5 times in a short period of time will cause things to go wrong in an area (see also "the Mana Waste").

So short history of Golarion's Mana Waste: Geb and Nex were fighting, with magic. Vudran Nobles came to visit and Nex gave them Jalmeray (a small island off the coast). They used a bunch of Djinn to wish it a better place to live, and no doubt, were asked by Nex to intervene in the war with Geb. Wishes abounded. Land destroyed. Weird things started happening, and we're left with the Mana Waste.

Wishing a lot is bad. A ring of unlimited wishes, 1/round, costs roughly 2.72 million gold to create. Which, combined with fabricate and false focus, takes 27200 castings, and zero actual gold. Easily done in an 11th level wizard's elven lifetime: 3/day (easily) = 248 years. A human wizard might want to progress to level 15; 5/day (easily) before trying it (149 years, might need some "extendo glue").

Of course, if you make Pearls of Power (5th) for 25k, they more than make up for the time spent. If you get to work on the PoPs right off... It actually reduces the time needed a LOT. After 374 days, you have 50 castings a day (starting with 3), with 47 PoPs. So that cuts the 27200 castings down to 544 days. Or just about two and a half years (374+544 days), no gold, and 50 PoP (lvl 5) and a ring of unlimited wishes 1/rd. Not a bad two years of your life. (you can do it faster by making more PoPs). Oddly, it doesn't get to much better than that even if you get to 125 PoP (making a new one in 1 day from then out isn't that helpful either). You can reduce the time to 704 days for the 125 PoP+ RoUW 1/rd. 218 days earlier... not a huge difference, but a bit better.

PS. I probably should start a new thread, but the 15th level ability is likewise broken... If I use it against the armor someone is wearing, is that a touch attack? If it's magic, does it get a save? Nothing in it says "unattended" objects, just objects.

Impossible Sleight of Hand (Su): - HAHA! I just stole your armor and there's nothing you can do about it! HAHA! I just recalled your armor and am now wearing it! Good luck getting it back!

Oh, you killed me? Well, have an 8000 pound gravestone fall out of nowhere and crush you, centered on my square... enjoy the retributive strike! Hope you can move 10-20 feet as a free action... because that's a BIG stone!

Lich phylactery: now in a private dimension... kill Lich... now is stuck there until I die? I can live with that!

Love the thought of these abilities, but they're quite "broken" as written and need a LOT of further explanation.

Ok, so the Busker ability at 9th level, Inventive Juggler (Ex):

At 9th level, a busker masters unconventionally dangerous juggling techniques. While maintaining this stunt, the busker can use a thrown weapon (even an improvised one) to threaten spaces as though he were using a reach weapon. At 12th level and every 3 levels thereafter, the busker threatens squares up to 10 feet farther away with thrown weapons.

If I'm reading this correctly, they threaten everything at 10' at 9th level. And threaten everything from 10-20' at 12th. And everything 10=30' at 15th. And finally everything from 10-40' at 18th.

So what happens when you combine this with Lunge, Longarm, and other threat range abilities... most notably "whirlwind attack"?

I am able to make a MELEE attack against everything I THREATEN. How is that done with thrown weapons? I mean, here I am, out at 50' (on offense, 45' defensively). Do I roll MELEE attacks for all my thrown attack weapons?

I know this is obviously broken and poorly written. Is there any help for the eager who see this as the "ultimate combat patrol" ability? Also, must you combine it with quick draw to keep drawing out enough ranged weapons to make this work?

I mean, even as a ranged threating attack, patrolling 45' means a 19x19 square area (361-9=352) of movement that you could strike into. And that's just the combat reflexes where you use your dex to hit 10 people coming at you... what are you still juggling at that point to keep it up? it's a Bardic SU, so it's magical... do the weapons return because you're juggling them off people's faces?

It's poorly written and worded, as to how you combine it with things like whirlwind attack. Only melee weapons have threat ranges typically. This makes thrown weapons have a threat range. Which means when combined with "anything within threat range" you get to use it? So can you attack 352 "adjacent" enemies in a single turn?

And then what happens when the Two Handed Thrower feat gets involved? "If you also have the Quick Draw feat, you can throw two-handed weapons at your full normal rate of attacks." Now you're throwing 350 2H Tetsubos...

And I'm not 100% on the whole "whirlwind attack" with reach weapons and threats with natural attacks... can you combine the two in a single round? Ie. Bite or claw 5' and poke people 10' with a longspear in the same whirlwind attack? You threaten everyone within 10' (5' with natural attacks such as bite and IUC; 10' with spear... and then add in longarm for 15', lunge for 20'... and that's just normal with melee attacks, but pretty clear - it's either 10-20' or it's within 20', but different attack rolls based on weapon used to threaten).

The craziness of 50' threat range with thrown weapons, but doing melee attacks with them is a bit odd.

My current favorite build is:
traits: surprise weapon, dockside brawler (or Magical Knack Sorcerer)
Far Strike Monk 2: for evasion, shikigami style, shikigami mimicry, catch off guard, and quick draw. Four feats with 2 levels. (unchained for BAB and HP, old style for saves)
3rd level: tattooed sorcerer: For familiar, +1 CL with evocation mage tattoo, 3rd level feat: throw anything.
4-20th level: exploiter wizard; start with dimensional glide exploit, 5th feat level shikigami manipulation.

Now you are a full caster with a 6d6 sledge melee/thrown weapon. Or you can use a wand to poke people for 2d6 damage. Or a rod for 3d6. They count as magical, and the eclipsed rod or merciful rod is the cheapest 3d6+4 weapon in the game at 1500 gp. You can enlarge person to up that to 4d6+4 (+ str boost) if you want.

You end up with double 1st level spells (basically) - a 4d6+4 shocking grasp from the sorcerer side. If you, at 9th level, take improved familiar, and get an automaton, you can remove the core. That gives you +4 Caster Levels in all ways as a lesser artifact. Which means the sorcerer side is 5d6+5 and the you can get +5 CL on the wizard side easier for all your spells.

You can imagine the possibilities from there. If you go human, you can get another feat, as well as human feats to let you get all the skills (not super great, but all can be used untrained).+1 returning gloves of improvised might? Or whatever.

The alternate to stealing from the party is killing the rogue and taking all his gear. Because while he "steals" the other party members "kill."

"It's just what my character does."

Only in the most basic sense do we agree on this. In the instance of the Phoenix bloodline, it is a hard no from me. Not only does the spell deal no damage, it HEALS living targets. Attacks deal damage. This spell does not.

Attacks do NOT need to deal damage. That's not correct at all. Anything that requires an ATTACK ROLL is an attack. (not the only thing that is an attack). This spell REQUIRES an attack roll. Thus it is an attack. It heals, but it is an attack.

Damage has not been dealt and has not been subject to any sort of damage reduction or resistance. That happens after the damage has been totaled and APPLIED to the creature. Since the spell never does any damage, the DR or resistance of said creature never comes into play.

If no damage has been rolled, how much do you heal?

You can only critical when you deal damage.

No. You can only critical when you ATTACK. You might not do any damage. But that is based on the damage roll generated from the attack versus the resistances. You can still critically hit and deal no damage. (see also creatures with say 1d3-2 damage vs someone with DR 2)

See, this, I think is where you're getting an attack and a damage roll confused. An attack roll is (can be, it can also be an area) a D20 roll to hit. It can crit on a nat 20 (and hits). A crit does double the damage roll. This is the "normal damage" for the roll, with all other modifiers added, equals the damage. Subtract from this normal damage resistances or conversions... and you have damage taken (or healed) by the creature.

You're starting out with it being a "no damage" spell. I'm ending with it because it requires a damage roll to be converted. We disagree on what we think the order of operations is. For me it logically follows that in order to convert anything, we need that anything totaled first.

I am only replying to correct a possible misunderstanding of my comment by you, or an misrepresentation of my statement. I take the most 'restrictive' reading of an ability when any looser reading of the ability begins to break down existing rule interactions in other areas.

Its not a matter of 'the least possible', it is a matter of the 'normal damage of the spell'. Painful Glare and Sneak Attack do not modify the actual spell, they are separate abilities that activate under specific circumstances. They are not 'normal' to the function of the spell.

Quote:

So let's talk about a dip in rogue + accomplished sneak attacker...

I will pass on discussing this, as I would not permit sneak attack to work with the Phoenix bloodline ability. As I stated, taking a less restrictive reading of the ability causes rules to break down elsewhere. Your question is proof of that.

Maybe I should approach it from the other side: the mesmerist. Because I have no issue with anything I've argued regarding what a normal damage roll is. It "includes all normal modifiers to damage" (and that's a quote straight from somewhere in a book).

The mesmerist ability, though does say "When an attack that deals damage hits the target of a mesmerist’s hypnotic stare"...

#1 We both agree that even though a spell does no damage, it can be an attack (I presume you have no problem with this). So the "when an attack" part is not a problem.

#2 "that deals damage" - this is where I run into a problem with my argument. The spell is not going to do any damage, ever. Even riders don't do damage (as we've discussed). It will do healing. It converts its normal damage to healing. Now, as part of the spell's normal damage, it could add painful stare. Which is where the whole "chicken and egg" problem starts. GM ruling. You say no. That's fine. I point out other precision damage that would be part of the normal damage roll, and think that makes a case for this being able to be applied. However, I will grant that "sneak attack" doesn't say "that deals damage" in it's description anywhere. Nor does it say it's any sort of an action taken after a condition is met. It's a precondition precision damage adder. So ok, I see your point, like I said. The other part of this is: does the damage need to overcome resistances? or does it just need to "do damage" not "succeed in damaging the target"?

#3 "hits the target of a mesmerist's hypnotic stare" : "A mesmerist can focus his stare on one creature within 30 feet"

So SA/crit would work to up the damage of the spell (conditions met), but the painful stare wouldn't necessarily. Guess I can see that. Pin down your allies to heal them and extra 2d6/2! lolz.

If you still believe otherwise at this point, we'll just have to leave it at that. I won't budge on the matter, even if I was the one playing the character. If your GM allows it, that's cool. It won't fly at my table.

Yeh, we disagree. I think you should be able to target a person's "hurty bits" with heal spells just like you could with harm spells. It's magic, after all! I don't know if my GM will allow it. I'm actually fine with it either way, so long as we know before she uses it in game. I can understand your reasoning, as I've said. I just don't agree that you can "restrict the damage to the least possible" and call that "normal damage." Normal damage is the damage you'd do with it under any other circumstances... ie. painful stare/ sneak attack/ critical hits can apply.

So let's talk about a dip in rogue + accomplished sneak attacker for 2d6 extra on the 1d3+1 heal? Would you consider that #1 an attack that would break invisibility (because to get sneak attack on my friends, them not seeing me is the best way)? Or does it count as a "heal spell" and thus not break invisibility even though it required a ranged touch attack?

How does the whole "foe" and "opponent" thing work in combat trying to heal your allies?

maouse33 wrote:

Painful stare is not a separate damage source. It is part of the damage roll which is "normal (fire) damage being converted".

Technically, it is a separate source of damage.

Painful Stare wrote:

When an attack that deals damage hits the target of a mesmerist’s hypnotic stare, the mesmerist can cause the target to take an amount of additional damage equal to 1/2 the mesmerist’s class level (minimum 1).

It is an ability that still requires actual damage to be dealt, but it is ADDED to the damage dealt, and is treated as part of the original damage roll. So, for the Phoenix bloodline issue, it wouldn't work but for any other purposes, it is part of the same damage total.

No. It is not a separate source of damage. DR doesn't apply separately. It's added to damage prior to DR. Because it is the whole ATTACK you apply DR to (if it weren't an elemental attack, of course). It's a separate TYPE. The source is the attack that spurred it. Different types may contribute to the same SOURCE of damage (an attack).

And you're correct in the "additional damage" part. Which is why when I say "you have to determine damage" it is INCLUDED. Because it is part of the source of fire damage (the attacking spell). Before you can convert it to HEALING.

Let's look at this: A Rogue/Sorcerer/Mesmerist: Sneak attacks someone with a Flame Splash.

1d6 sneak attack applies to the ATTACK within 30'.
1d3+1 fire damage spell.
1d6+1 precision from Mesmerist painful stare.
Critical rolled. Another 1d3+1 fire.

Now, SA damage is precision of the same type as the triggering attack: Fire.
Painful stare is precision of the same type as the triggering attack: fire.

So the normal fire attack damage from this attack is: 2d3+2+2d6+1.

Now, half that is converted to healing with the phoenix arcana.

Are we going to claim that "consistently" one precision damage doesn't apply but the other does? (providing, of course, that we're healing our opponents)

Step away for an hour or two and look what happens...

maouse33 wrote:

(ps. I'm glad we can both be civil discussing something which we disagree on. Thanks! Deals no DAMAGE, but requires a DAMAGE ROLL... )

There, that is the crux of the problem.

Pheonix Bloodline gives you a 'damage roll' in the "normally deal" section.
Painful Stare requires 'damage', not a damage roll.

Arguable semantics. Damage is determined with a Damage roll... Painful stare adds to the damage roll... if there is normal damage, and that gets converted, it's after painful stare, not before. You can claim a semantic distinction between damage and damage roll... but the reality is, the spell does "half the normal (fire) damage the spell would normally deal", which is then converted (because you can't convert before you know what this is).

Painful stare is not a separate damage source. It is part of the damage roll which is "normal (fire) damage being converted".

Yes. This is the crux of the problem. The chicken or the egg? When you roll the spell's normal damage (including precision and critical damage), do you include painful stare damage (if you had a rogue, who was doing precision damage, you'd add their precise strike if within 30 feet).

maouse33 wrote:

Yeh, that's an interesting side note, for sure! So what about riders that stun, paralyze, or otherwise "attack" someone but do no DAMAGE? Ponderous inquiries... Like a toppling fire spell that heals?

One of the requirements of Toppling Spell is the target taking damage. That part wouldn't work. The saving throw or movement aspect? That would still function. Rider effects seem to be perfectly fine by the looks of it. Only the damage aspect that is being removed.

Yeh. I was just thinking of a quick example of a rider. Obviously it wouldn't be worth bringing the cantrip up to spell slot level 1.

Regardless, I think we can both agree that the original idea gives essentially "out of combat fast healing 1.66". So That's kind of cool. And being able to unleash an elemental no SR touch spell at 1d3+9d6+10 forever definitely ups a caster's game a little (granted, it's a full round attack). I think I'll keep with it regardless of how my GM rules on the side of "riders" on the normal damage roll. There aren't a lot of other spells out there until like 7th level that grant the no SR. So it is pretty powerful for damaging things with SR. Unless, of course, the GM says "you have to get through DR/Hardness before you deal precision damage" which makes absolutely no sense... well, for one because DR wouldn't apply.

Suffice to say my "painful stare" free action rider occurs concurrent with the damage roll, and as precision damage, is not a separate source of damage from the spell. That then gets converted just like the 1d3+1 damage, and the spell ends up doing no damage, healing the target instead, for half the normal damage (which includes precision and critical damage, if the monster isn't immune - a condition making those damage types not apply in a normal damage roll).

Turns in a day: 14400. Fast heal 1.33 = still healing 19152 damage a day. (1.33 = 1,2 = 1hp, 3 = 2 hp).

maouse33 wrote:

That's a valid point. They do modify the normal fire damage of a spell, however. Which is my counterpoint. Normal fire damage is what is converted to healing HP.

Fore instance, if I did a Fire Splash (elemental spell) for half fire half acid, it would not convert the acid damage. The acid damage would still happen, even under the arcana. Right? Or is all alternate damage / riders just waived and gotten rid of under the arcana???

The problem is that you've skipped over the line of the Phoenix bloodline arcana. It doesn't matter what elements are being used in the spell. The spell deals NO DAMAGE. You are simply crippling your ability to heal if you reduce the amount of fire damage the spell can normally do.

Using Elemental Spell metamagic is only useful if you are converting a non-fire spell to a fire spell.

Yeh, that's an interesting side note, for sure! So what about riders that stun, paralyze, or otherwise "attack" someone but do no DAMAGE? Ponderous inquiries... Like a toppling fire spell that heals?

(ps. I'm glad we can both be civil discussing something which we disagree on. Thanks! Deals no DAMAGE, but requires a DAMAGE ROLL... )

Another interesting side note: The Elemental Spell doesn't change the descriptor of the spell... just the damage.

mostly wrong stuff

DR works against an attack. Precision damage is added to your attack; it's not a separate damage source.

You'll need to keep your attention focused on the spell description itself, not any other added effects unless they explicit alter the way the spell functions. Sneak attack and Painful Stare do not alter the way the spell functions. They are accessory abilities that only work if the spell deals actual hit point damage.

That's a valid point. They do modify the normal fire damage of a spell, however. Which is my counterpoint. Normal fire damage is what is converted to healing HP.

Fore instance, if I did a Fire Splash (elemental spell) for half fire half acid, it would not convert the acid damage. The acid damage would still happen, even under the arcana. Right? Or is all alternate damage / riders just waived and gotten rid of under the arcana???