My thought is that you would be Frightened for 2 rounds.
My reasoning is that even though Frightening (Ex) doesn't spell out (nor need to) fear conditions, it is still a subset of Intimidate(Demoralize), which means that the second Frighten doesn't increase to Panicked. It just extends the duration.
The question is if that is a correct assumption. (That being is Frightening (Ex) a subset of Intimidate(Demoralize)?)
I agree.
Frightening (Ex) doesn't do anything in itself. It affects what happens when you use intimidate to demoralize.
So the condition, whether shaken for several rounds, or frightened, still comes from you demoralizing the enemy.
Imbuing you with negative energy, this spell allows you to paralyze a single living humanoid for the duration of the spell with a successful melee touch attack.
A paralyzed subject exudes a carrion stench that causes all living creatures (except you) in a 10-foot-radius spread to become sickened (Fortitude negates). A neutralize poison spell removes the effect from a sickened creature, and creatures immune to poison are unaffected by the stench.
It's possible that the bolded part is what is confusing your friend. You are entitled a Fort save to negate all the effects, and provided you failed your save and are affected then people affected by the stench are also entitled another saving throw to negate the secondary effect as well.
At first sight it seems that they're different modifiers and the -2AC from blindness should apply even if you have blind-fighting. Like some sort of spatial disorientation penalty due to blindness, but I think that is covered by the penalty to Perception and STR or DEX checks.
If we assume things to work this way, a strange situation comes up when you're blind and attacked by an invisible opponent and you don't have blind-fighting. Then, strangely, you would have the AC penalty and your opponent a bonus. Would these stack or overlap?
Common sense says that the bonus and the penalty come from the same source, the target not perceiving the attacker.
They're the same and should not stack, thus blind-fighting should get rid of both. That's my opinion.
Here's the relevant text...
Invisible:
Invisible: Invisible creatures are visually undetectable. An invisible creature gains a +2 bonus on attack rolls against sighted opponents, and ignores its opponents' Dexterity bonuses to AC (if any). See Invisibility, under Special Abilities.
Blinded:
Blinded: The creature cannot see. It takes a –2 penalty to Armor Class, loses its Dexterity bonus to AC (if any), and takes a –4 penalty on most Strength- and Dexterity-based skill checks and on opposed Perception skill checks. All checks and activities that rely on vision (such as reading and Perception checks based on sight) automatically fail. All opponents are considered to have total concealment (50% miss chance) against the blinded character. Blind creatures must make a DC 10 Acrobatics skill check to move faster than half speed. Creatures that fail this check fall prone. Characters who remain blinded for a long time grow accustomed to these drawbacks and can overcome some of them.
Blind-fight:
Blind-Fight (Combat)
You are skilled at attacking opponents that you cannot clearly perceive.
Benefit: In melee, every time you miss because of concealment (see Combat), you can reroll your miss chance percentile roll one time to see if you actually hit.
An invisible attacker gets no advantages related to hitting you in melee. That is, you don't lose your Dexterity bonus to Armor Class, and the attacker doesn't get the usual +2 bonus for being invisible. The invisible attacker's bonuses do still apply for ranged attacks, however.
You do not need to make Acrobatics skill checks to move at full speed while blinded.
Normal: Regular attack roll modifiers for invisible attackers trying to hit you apply, and you lose your Dexterity bonus to AC. The speed reduction for darkness and poor visibility also applies.
Special: The Blind-Fight feat is of no use against a character who is the subject of a blink spell.
I assume you think is works this way because in this text:
Shooting or Throwing into a Melee: If you shoot or throw a ranged weapon
Actually spells that require attack rolls are considered weapons and are subject to this penalty.
Yes, that was the wording that made me think this. Do you have some other citation for that 2nd part? Thanks!
PFRPG p.185 Touch Spells in Combat.
this is the relevant text from the PRD:
Quote:
Touch Attacks: Touching an opponent with a touch spell is considered to be an armed attack and therefore does not provoke attacks of opportunity. The act of casting a spell, however, does provoke an attack of opportunity. Touch attacks come in two types: melee touch attacks and ranged touch attacks. You can score critical hits with either type of attack as long as the spell deals damage. Your opponent's AC against a touch attack does not include any armor bonus, shield bonus, or natural armor bonus. His size modifier, Dexterity modifier, and deflection bonus (if any) all apply normally.
edit: Not the same wording certainly, but armed attacks and weapons are synonyms mechanically.
I assume you think is works this way because in this text:
Shooting or Throwing into a Melee: If you shoot or throw a ranged weapon at a target engaged in melee with a friendly character, you take a –4 penalty on your attack roll. Two characters are engaged in melee if they are enemies of each other and either threatens the other. (An unconscious or otherwise immobilized character is not considered engaged unless he is actually being attacked.)
If your target (or the part of your target you're aiming at, if it's a big target) is at least 10 feet away from the nearest friendly character, you can avoid the –4 penalty, even if the creature you're aiming at is engaged in melee with a friendly character.
If your target is two size categories larger than the friendly characters it is engaged with, this penalty is reduced to –2. There is no penalty for firing at a creature that is three size categories larger than the friendly characters it is engaged with.
Precise Shot: If you have the Precise Shot feat, you don't take this penalty.
...the bolded section doesn't mention spells?
Actually spells that require attack rolls are considered weapons and are subject to this penalty.
I'm playing a level 5 bard (BAB +3), one of his feats is "combat expertise (CE)" and he has 5 ranks in acrobatics. What happens if I start fighting defensively (FD) with CE as a standard action?
1) +1 AC / -1 attack because of CE (FD doesn't matter)
2) +2 AC / -1 attack because of CE & 3 ranks in acrobatics
3) +3 AC / -5 attack because of CE AND FD
4) +4 AC / -5 attack
The benefits of fighting defensively, combat expertise and acrobatics synergy all stack:
+1 AC / -1 attack from CE
+3 AC / -4 attack from fighting defensively; having 3 ranks in acrobatics applies to fighting defensively, not CE.
Birthmark ....(Trait)
Scholar of the Great Beyond ....(Trait)
Exotic Weapon Proficiency: Dwarven Longaxe ....(Feat)
Devil's Favor ....(Feat from Hellbred)
Spells:
Two Per Day (1st Level):
Disguise Self Expeditious Retreat
At Will (Orisons):
Create Water
Detect Magic
Light
Resistance
Apemantus Oldcastle:
A' peh Man tes _ Old' Cas' el
Shakespeare's dark, cynical, dry-witted, truly misanthropic Apemantus is the one character in the Tragedy of Timon of Athens who tells it like it is, who leaves the civilization of Athens for a hermetic life in a cave. And whose cold truths about humanity, spoken honestly to Lord Timon, all are proven correct.
"We make ourselves fools, ...and spend our flatteries ...with poisonous spite and envy.
Who lives that's not depraved -- or depraves?!
Who dies that bears not one spurn to their graves of their friends' gift?
...Men shut their doors against a setting sun."
Sir John Oldcastle is the religious revolutionary (eventually hanged) who Shakespeare based his character Falstaff upon -- the boisterous, braggadocious, boorish, lewd, drunken, cowardly, best friend of Crown Prince Hal.
Background, Hellbred Scourge:
Apemantus Oldcastle knows little of his past life, vignettes of ephemeral nightmares and sudden emotional reactions to certain smells or sounds. He was Evil. He served some ArchDevil or Infernal Prince. Hungrily he had sold his immortal Soul in Blood. Neither does Apemantus Oldcastle know the circumstances of how he died, and his repentance from unspeakable wickedness, and genuine embrace of Righteousness. He knows only of the Rage of The Nine Hells at his “flight” from Infernal Wrath and Punishment — and of the suspicious gods of Law and Celestia. Apemantus Oldcastle also knows, with cold certainty, that this life, his new life, is a Test. It is a Crucible that will determine if he is genuine in his moral Alignment. And that most likely, unless he does something of epic goodness, his Soul will be condemned to Hell.
Apemantus Oldcastle has the pale skin, platinum hair and violaceous eyes of the Suel. His Chain Shirt armor and Dwarven Longaxe he won in a furious battle with some Dwarven slavers between Cauldron and Sasserine — former mooks of the vile and ruthless Kazmogen.
You can see Apemantus Oldcastle from time to time lost in a thoughtful pall, moving his hand deliberately over his campfire, gazing in the ineffable mysteries of the flame, wondering why his hand feels the scorching heat of fire — as if that was not meant to be — and pondering the ramifications of such new weaknesses.
Sasserine:
Apemantus Oldcastle only awoke to this new life a few months ago, naked in the Amedio Jungle at the base of Cauldron’s mount. After almost being taken by slavers he learned of Sasserine and made his way there — believing he has been brought here for a purpose. And that in Sasserine he shall find his Crucible to salvation.
His first stop in Sasserine, having entered via the southeastern Sunrise District, was the Shrine of Mayaheine. It is to the Paladin goddess Mayaheine that go his prayers, yet he is unsure if she listens. Indeed, he is shunned from her Shrine (building #28 in Sunrise) by Mayaheine’s Paladins. Not that that stops his entreaties to them. Hopefully they will give him some epic quest to prove his righteousness.
But Mayaheine’s Shrine is not the only place in Sasserine where one can find Apemantus Oldcastle searching for an epic quest to prove himself. On the assumption that he was purposefully reincarnated near Sasserine he has approached the Historians Guild (building #23 in Sunrise) where he has spent many days studying. There could be some clue here, some epiphany to be discerned to help him start his quest.
Likewise, in the Noble District, Apemantus Oldcastle has become friendly acquainted with Sasserine's tattoo artist and Sage of all things Planar -- Callisto. One can often find him at Callisto’s Needle, discussing the Lower Planes, Sigil, Celestia, and the Astral and Ethereal Planes (Noble District #26). Perhaps some bit of esoteric, ontological mystery will make itself known here and propel him to his quest.
Additionally, one may find Apemantus Oldcastle in Kiva Willowtop's cartography shop in the Noble District (#20). He has visited a few times, talking with the Halfling about some maps of the Amedio Jungle and any news she may have heard recently. He can't afford to buy any maps of yet, but he's at least made a bit of a friend.
Finally, one may find Apemantus Oldcastle at Sasserine’s Shrine of Liir, also in the Noble District (#2). Here he has sought out what his birthmark may mean from the goddess of poetry and art. Hoping that this icon of a small bird is an mark of goodwill, a Sign from the gods of Law and Righteousness, he has no idea that the Mockingbird is really a secret mark of Mephistopheles -- who once owned his Soul -- and hopes to again very soon.)
