midknight's page

Yup, still the same in 0.9.2 :-(

Is anyone else having problems with the magical knack trait?
It doesn't work for my Pal 1 / Sorc 1 since version 0.9.1 :-/
I'm using Excel 2007.
When I select the trait it just shows a #REF in the box under it and no arcane classes appear in the drow-down list to choose to which one does it apply... :-m

I am not sure about it in PF, I think that was issue in 3.0 or 3.5.

You could not perform any other action in the middle of another action and still continue with first action. Free actions still remain action and thus require character to finish previous action to be made. Of course it is debatable issue and mostly ignored.

Well, Quick Draw is also used for iterative attacks with thrown weapons so that should not make a difference...

Thanks to everyone for your answers and for clearing things up, I had missed that paragraph about not using the same limb twice... :-P

I like the full attack with one-handed weapon + 1 claw + 1 bite option, looks like marginally better than TWF and not too cheesey... :-m

Would it be correct (rules-wise) for a Dragon Disciple to make a full attack with a two-handed weapon, then drop it as a free action, grow claws and teeth as another free action and attack with all 3 of them as secondary natural attacks?

What about the other way round with quick draw? :-m

What about full attack with armor spikes, then 3 natural secondary attacks? :-m

The 'loop' in 3.5 was that it was a direct question in the 3.5 FAQs, and it was official that 2-handed weapon + armor spikes were allowed (even encouraged when using a 2 handed reach weapon).

Also in the original SRD, there was the mention that true neutral was only for neutral gods... maybe they sniped that text but kept on using the rule:

"Alignment
A cleric’s alignment must be within one step of his deity’s (that is, it may be one step away on either the lawful-chaotic axis or the good-evil axis, but not both). A cleric may not be neutral unless his deity’s alignment is also neutral. "

I see no reason for imposing such a penalty on casters. If a caster has no LOS but has another way of knowing where does he want the spell centered, he should be able to do so, and it has been quoted that RAW support this. Bear in mind that this is only for area spells, of course you need to see the target for targeted spells.

A caster may be blind but could be using her familiar's empathic bond, telepathy, one of the many detection spells, blindsense, tremorsense, a listen check or the directions of another party member to target an area spell.

In the realm of houseruling, as a DM, I might require a caster level or maybe spellcraft check for specially 'vague' directions, like the party fighter saying 'aim your meteor swarm forward and a bit to the right'. :-P

According to RAW you could. From the magic section of the PRD (bolding mine):

Effect: Some spells create or summon things rather than affecting things that are already present.

You must designate the location where these things are to appear, either by seeing it or defining it. Range determines how far away an effect can appear, but if the effect is mobile, after it appears it can move regardless of the spell's range.

[...]

Line of Effect: A line of effect is a straight, unblocked path that indicates what a spell can affect. A line of effect is canceled by a solid barrier. It's like line of sight for ranged weapons, except that it's not blocked by fog, darkness, and other factors that limit normal sight.

Also, remember you don't have to announce beforehand what you are doing with each attack or even if you are full attacking or not.

You can make your first attack and then decide after seeing the result (i.e. if the opponent drops) to take a move action or continuing the full attack (taking a 5' step or not, as you see fit).

It will attack with +11/+6 for 3d6+15(x3) or +11/+6 3d6+12(x3) and +6 1d6+10 damage, with reach
AC 18
HP 67 (average 67.5)
F+6 R +6 W +5

str 23 dex 13 con 18 int 8 wis 8 cha 9
(base scores 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 8)

mw great axe, mw studded leather

CMB +13, CMD +24

sample feats: power attack, weapon focus(great axe), toughness

Sample Fighter 6

It will power attack with +10/+5 for 1d12+15(x3)
AC 15
HP 59
F+7 R +5 W +4

str 18 dex 13 con 14 int 12 wis 11 cha 8
(base scores 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 8)

mw great axe, mw studded leather

CMB +10, CMD +22

sample feats: power attack, weapon focus(great axe), toughness, Lunge, weapon specialization(great axe), lightning reflexes, iron will, cleave

I still think the minotaur would beat the crap out of him ;-P

Ability Modifiers: +8 Str, +4 Con, -4 Int, -2 Cha
Armor Class: +5 natural armor bonus

You may only play such a character in a 4th-level or higher group. Your progression compared to the party's should look something like this:

HD/Class; Class
6/00; 04
HP: 10 + 5d10 + (con x 6)
Base saves: +2 Fort, +5 Ref, +5 Will
Base Attack: +6
Bonus Armor/Weapon Proficiencies: All simple weapons plus greataxe (regardless of class)

Why 4th-level party?

BTW, I think you missed the feats...

Yup, like Paul said, you don't even need the metamagic feat.

From the PRD, Magic, Spell Slots section:
http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/magic.html

"A spellcaster always has the option to fill a higher-level spell slot with a lower-level spell."

I think that the mounted combat rules state that the rider cannot attack more than once if the mount moves:

http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/combat.html

"If your mount moves more than 5 feet, you can only make a single melee attack."

You cannot have your mount move and then make a full attack yourself which point 6 in the previous post may imply.

Aside from that, yes, both the rider and the mount have the usual set of actions each (move + standard or full-round).

midknight wrote:

The idea is to have a playable character for levels 1 to around 16.

I was thinking for Paladin 2, then Sorcerer(dragon) 3 (char level 5), then Dragon Disciple 4 (char level 9), then either go on on DD or eldritch knight 7 (char level 16).

I would do paladin 3/sorcerer 2/DD 8/EK 3 for level 16. BAB 14, CL 10...this is better for a melee focused character.

Why paladin 3? I don't see mercies that useful... :-m

In Pal 2/Sor 3/DD 4/EK 7 you end with CL 12 and BAB 13 (and can specialize)...

After Paizo finishes with the upcoming nerf bat on Paladins, we'll see.

Are paladins going to be officially nerfed?

Any suggestions for the build anyway? I was thinking of going the mounted combat route for spirited charge, then getting leadership for a nice mount, then other 'classics' like power attack, arcane strike, etc...

As I'm planning a gish character for the next adventure path we'll play I'd like to ask opinions on this kind of build. It has to be pfrpg core only.

The idea is to have a playable character for levels 1 to around 16.

I was thinking for Paladin 2, then Sorcerer(dragon) 3 (char level 5), then Dragon Disciple 4 (char level 9), then either go on on DD or eldritch knight 7 (char level 16).

It'd be primary melee, high strenght character with some buffs. Probably with a high-crit weapon (falchion) or taking the ride chain of feats and a lance... The small charisma-based buffs from Paladin 2 might come handy as well...

Magical knack is a must, of course.

any opinions and/or suggestions?

That could have used some spoiler tags :-P

I'd say that, to flank such a creature you'd have to take a 5' step out of that square so that the creature is between you and your ally, as in a standard flanking.

I think you cannot flank a creature with whom you share the square.

Barator wrote:

You know the old saying about giving a man a fish or teaching him to fish.

I personally prefer:

"Build a man a fire and he'll be warm all night, but set that man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life."

Terry Prattchet dixit ;-)

If you'd like a rule from 3.5, there was a feat for 'climbing' onto bigger opponents... 'Giantbane' from complete warrior (p111):
GIANTBANE:

GIANTBANE (TACTICAL)

But for these to work together, you'd need to flank with an ally and be adjecent to that same ally... That's a bit complicated, isn't it?

It might be fun in a foursome attack though... Nice implementation for a small goblin/kobold/etc. swarm...

If your village melts all of its weapons [...]that's irony.

Iron-y? That couldn't possibly be coincidence ;-P

Well, I guess he can perfectly see the spot, and he can reach it as well... the issue is that he probably won't reach it when he tries:-P

What makes me doubt is if Displacement does give concealement or just a plain miss chance, as it says "as if it had". If it read instead "effectively granting" there would be no doubt :-P

In the Blur case, for example, there is no doubt, as it clearly says "This distortion grants the subject concealment".

That's a quick one... is somebody under a Displacement effect not sneak-able?

As a side note, does it prevent an AoO as well?

Relevant rules:

The rogue must be able to see the target well enough to pick out a vital spot and must be able to reach such a spot. A rogue cannot sneak attack while striking a creature with concealment.

Total Concealment:
You can't execute an attack of opportunity against an opponent with total concealment, even if you know what square or squares the opponent occupies.

The creature benefits from a 50% miss chance as if it had total concealment. Unlike actual total concealment, displacement does not prevent enemies from targeting the creature normally.

Now imagine that you pissed her off...

Seen that before...

I use them as written. And I do allow to carry them loaded, just to make them that tad more useful.

And no, I don't care at all about that being unrealistic.

Wait... you read 'destroyed' and understand 'damaged'? :-m

So when characters are damaged beyond -CON, they are not dead, because they have been damaged?

I don't think there's any point. Destroyed is destroyed, with 0 hit points, and not repairable with the Craft skill or a number of spells, as in the part you quoted.

I think it's easy, MW ammo is damaged of all it's hit points, becoming destroyed and beyond repair.

Yup, fact is that it was 3.5 official ruling anyway (though that doesn't necessarily mean that it's valid in PFRPG)...

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20040309a

I'd disallow switching rings during combat. Maybe to use the 3rd ring on your finger, you need to attune yourself to it, taking 1 hour (just like praying/memorizing for spells).

That's really a weird house rule... do you disallow switching magic weapons in combat as well? :-P

Ah but only 1 per hand, ya add another how does the magic know which was first?

Well, that'd only work for 3 rings total, of course, and you could easily switch amongst two of them.

According to RAW, magic does know which is the third (as it is the one that doesn't work) ;-)

If you add a third ring anywhere (same hand or different hand) the magic from all three rings cancel each other out.

But the rules nowhere say that. They say the third one doesnt work:

A character can only effectively wear two magic rings. A third magic ring doesn't work if the wearer is already wearing two magic rings.

So, you wear ring number 1, it works; you add ring number 2, both work; you add a third ring, still only rings 1 and 2 are working. If then you pull out ring 2, you are wearing rings 1 and 3, so they should be working; then you put back ring 2, and it doesn't work ('cos it's the third ring you are wearing).

The only movement implied is pulling one ring out of the finger and back in, isn't it? Why full-round action then?

The real in-game situation is a mate from the group wearing normally a protection and a counterspell ring. He has a third ring, one of invisibility. What would he have to do to switch from prot+counterspells to prot+ invisibility? The idea is to change rings (as mentioned above) as a move-equivalent and activate invisibility as standard. Would you say it's 'cheesy'? :-m

Rules state only one ring works in each hand, so if you put a third ring it doesn't have any effect.

What kind of action would it be to switch the ring you are using?

I mean, imagine you are wearing a ring on one hand, you get its effect, then you wear a second ring on the same hand that doesn't work. Then, in the middle of combat you want to switch to your second ring. You'd have to put the first one out then in, right? What kind of action would that be? Any idea if this was adressed somehow in 3.5?

I think multiclass works ok with non-casters, but needs tweaking with caster types. When I seek the causes I can't help thinking that, if every class contributes to BAB or saves, maybe every class should contribute to caster progression.

One way to measure the problems in multiclassing is to use the CR calculation method. Take a CR 12 for example, is equivalent to two CR 10s, not two CR 6s, right?

Then you should make multiclass work in a way that a fighter 6 / rogue 6 is more or less as good a fighter as a fighter 10 and as good a rogue as a rogue 10. I guess this works now more or less due to ability sinergy, and BAB and saves stacking.

But, a cleric 6 / wizard 6 is nowhere close in cleric abilities to a cleric 10 or a wizard 10. It's event worse than two 6th level characters together, so less than a CR 8 (and we were aiming for a CR12!)

I guess one try would be to create multiclass feats to make other classes contribute to caster level at it's class minus 2 levels or such...

Alternatively there are also rules provided in the Complete Adventurer that allow a Rogue to make a Stealth check to leave his hiding spot (cover/concealment) and sneak up on a target who is standing in the open, without being detected along the way.

Yup, namely it'd be -5 to the stealth check for every 5 feet of movement without cover or concealement...

raw even two speed weapons shouldn't work, you could choose which weapon to use for the extra attack though.

Where's that info about RAW from?

I think two weapons of speed should definitely work with one extra attack each, as well as two keen (simmilar description about stacking) weapons with extra critical range each:

(This benefit is not cumulative with similar effects, such as a haste spell.)

This benefit doesn't stack with any other effect that expands the threat range of a weapon (such as the keen edge spell or the Improved Critical feat).

One quick question. When hasted and 2-weapon fighting, in a full attack do you gain one adittional attack with each weapon or only with the main hand?

When making a full attack action, a hasted creature may make one extra attack with any weapon he is holding.

Quote:

I'd go with just the main hand, but wanted to make sure...

If you had 2 weapons with the 'speed' property you would have one extra attack with each, wouldn't you? what about haste and a 'speed' weapon in the off-hand? :-m

I'm not sure I understood correctly, If the subject is surrounded on all sides, it's 8 oponents threatening her. That'd be:

XXX
X0X
XXX

X=Enemy, O=Subject

My guess is that she'd have to roll separately for each AoO she's trying to avoid. I'd say the first one would be the one from the opponent she's trying to get through, so the acrobatics DC for each roll would be:

CMD1 + 5
CMD2 + 2
CMD3 + 4
...
CMD8 + 14

That'd be moving at half speed. For full speed she'd have to increase the DC by 10.

Also, she could choose not to roll for a particular enemy, and take that AoO.

If you'd like a rule from 3.5, there was a feat for 'climbing' onto bigger opponents... 'Giantbane' from complete warrior (p111):

Btw, might be a bit cheesy, but a level in Elemental Bloodline Sorcerer would change all her energy spells...

Bloodline Arcana: Whenever you cast a spell that deals energy damage, you can change the type of damage to match the type of your bloodline. This also changes the spell's type to match the type of your bloodline.

If you could choose between cold and fire damage, wouldn't that make it a bi-polar ray? :-9

Sorry, couldn't help it ^_^

As the lucky man I am, my partner has a 1st dan black belt on kobudo, and she has her pair of sais at home. I've seen some of her katas with sais and they mostly imply using the pommel as an extension for the punch (grabbing the sai with the fingers between the prongs, with the index finger along the pommel, it's hard to explain with words...), as well as rotating it on your hand as you bring the hand down or from a side, adding the momentum of the rotation to the downward motion. Forward stabbing movements are very scarcely used.

Just browse youtube for some examples:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Rdn0f8x5Lw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zOChC4fLbTg&NR=1&feature=fvwp

Definitely, altough a sai could be used to deal somewhat piercing damage (as a dagger or a rapier could do slashing), it's generally a bludgeoning weapon.

You sir, just won a +2 at my gaming table!

Glad to be of help ^_^

edit:dammit, too late...

Hooray, time to multi-class to 1st-level ninja! ;-)

The question was when are they gained. It makes little since to continue being bitter about it. We know the answer now. Its all just devil's advocacy, you don't have to continue shooting it. Its dead.

Maybe a bit late but, as you wanted something written on the rules, there is a case when you gain bonus spells and not normal spells, and it is specifically mentioned. It's in the paladin and ranger spell lists:

"When Table: Ranger indicates that the ranger gets 0 spells per day of a given spell level, he gains only the bonus spells he would be entitled to based on his Wisdom score for that spell level."

I guess you can read that if you don't have that '0' (i.e. you have a '-') you don't gain those bonus spell slots.

Just for the rules part, nowhere does it say you have to finish your piece in a week, so you could work for five weeks and succed at a DC20 check each of them, that would total 50gp of work (or 10 weeks with DC10 checks).

You could go by the craft rules as well... :-m

I'd go for a 'No', as for example Dragon Disciple explicitly says you do keep on gaining them.

They are bonus spells, not spells known (those are in the sorcerer table and mentioned under 'spells per day').

I'd go for a serious Rogue dip and 2-weapon fighting. Animal fury as rage power and finesse rogue as rogue talent, even if that means throwing away a feat(ditch that longsword and get 2 short swords!)

Heading for barbarian 4/ rogue 3 as a milestone with that selection could get you 5 attacks per round with dex bonus to attack. Go for sneak damage while flanking with the fighter. That would be 2d6 extra damage in each attack, 10d6 if all of them connect.

Congratulations!!! :-D

And thanks for the updates and corrections! :-)

Page 44 of the FAQ gives the example of a character wielding a greataxe (twohanded), shifting the weapon to an offhand, drawing a dagger or a javelin (with quick draw) and attacking normally, all with the primary hand. The FAQ even points out that this is easier with a two-handed weapon specifically because you don't have to drop it. You can just shift it to the other hand.

Which FAQ are you referring to? :-m

The elemental is not of incorporeal type (then it would not be subject to falling), so, according to the rules, it falls normally. (Probably as a DM I'd house rule it falls slowly, though).

As for the dwarf catching him, there are some rules for catching a falling fellow in the Climb skill description:

[QUOTE from=Climb]
Catch a Falling Character While Climbing: If someone climbing above you or adjacent to you falls, you can attempt to catch the falling character if he or she is within your reach. Doing so requires a successful melee touch attack against the falling character (though he or she can voluntarily forego any Dexterity bonus to AC if desired). If you hit, you must immediately attempt a Climb check (DC = wall's DC + 10).

So I guess, in this case it'd be just a melee touch attack to catch him. Perhaps, as a DM, I'd add in a reflex save for the dwarf before he can try that melee touch attack. Failed save would mean the falling character hits him for some damage.