ofMars's page

164 posts. Alias of Marten Dollinger 101.


1 to 50 of 164 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

the next thing I want to do is have the items be linked to easy tools, possibly provide individual entries for items made from special materials, and adding an option to make certain items always available, like healing potions and common alchemical items

3 people marked this as a favorite.

So maybe this should go in general instead of homebrew, let me know.

I created a shop generator. There aren't really clear guidelines of what should be available to purchase beyond the very simplistic suggestions in the GM guide, so I made a sheet to use the following calculations:
an item has a % chance of being in the shop, 70% if it's of the settlement level -4 or lower, 65% level -3, 60% level -2, 55% level -1, 50% level, 35 % level +1, 25% level +2
if it's in the shop, there are d3 of that item, +1d4 if it has the consumable trait, 10% chance of adding 1d2, and -1 available if it's uncommon, -2 available if it's rare. The philosopher stone and elixir of rejuvenation are technically in the sheet but currently have 0 chance of being shown as available in the shop.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/16SjEP0b5BoHOVbBrMaEVxUQ4vKo8zUkY/view?usp= sharing

I created it in excel, but it works in google sheets just fine. Make a copy and let me know what you think or if you have any suggestions on how to make it more accessible or if any calculations seem wonky

There was some clarification from a developer that only being able to sustain a spell once per turn is going to be in the next errata/faq, think it was in a thread about flaming sphere. I personally don't think it would be busted to allow for that spell, though. Not sure when the errata/faq is coming

Honestly, I don't think there's anything busted about being able to do either one with thrown weapons, given that 1) you can only do it once a round anyway, 2) the range of thrown weapons is generally very low and 3) you now have to use actions to be armed again, not to mention they only apply to your hunted prey.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
The Ronyon wrote:

Allowing a Dex based Force Open manuver would be weird to me, the other would not.

Are there any weapons that have Agile and Force Open?

You mean finesse and force open, and no, Force open is not a weapon trait, except for maybe the crowbar

Malk_Content wrote:
Paradozen wrote:
Malk_Content wrote:
rainzax wrote:

Wait wait.

It's a Rogue feat.

Why does it not scale with Rogue class DC?

Because it doesn't say it does. It tells you what proficiency it gives you, which is Trained unless you have higher from another source.

Or do you mean why doesn't it from a game design point of view? Because then it would give you an automatic ranged attack that scales without gold costs, has better action economy AND is at your highest (likely) bonus. It would be borderline mandatory.

How is the action economy better? All the damage cantrips are 2-actions to shoot and rogues are proficient in shortbows which are 1-action to shoot.

If you were already a ranged focused character then yeah it's worse. But if we go melee looking to see how long it takes to go ranged as needed it is much worse.

Cantrip 2a and you can still have your melee weapon or weapons out.

Short bow. 1a stow weapon, 1 a draw bow, 1a fire. Then 1a stow bow plus 1a draw melee to get back to your optimal mode again. +2a if you are two weapon fighting.

quickdraw is a level 2 rogue feat...

Zioalca wrote:
Chief Cook and Bottlewasher wrote:
I believe that at 5th level you can only increase your 18 ability to 19, not to 20. Then to 20 at level 10, not to 22. I don't have the book to hand.
That is correct. You get 4 boosts to spend but they each have to go into different abilities.

also that you only add 1 to ability scores that are 18 or higher instead of 2

Mark Seifter wrote:
We have it coming in the next errata batch. Sustain once per round only, unless the spell specifically encourages you to do so more than once like spiritual weapon.

are you allowed to give us more? like, is it a change to the prereq of the action, or to the action itself? can we sustain multiple spells per round but only once per spell or straight up one sustain at all?

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Old_Man_Robot wrote:
Squiggit wrote:
Cyder wrote:

Universalist is not an arcane school. So its not covered by the class feature 'Arcane school.'

Universalist is not a class feature thus is never gained.

This assertion is completely at odds with the actual text of the book, because not only is Universalist covered by the class feature "Arcane School", it's the only place that covers it.
That’s simply not true. Go look at page 209 again.

Yeah, it says if you don't pick a school, you are a universalist wizard, and you get the drain bonded item for all the spell levels you can cast instead of once per day. We get the "you're a universalist by default" reading rather than "you choose universalist" reading. If you don't choose a school, you gain these benefits if you are a wizard.

Here's a thing, though, when you take the wizard dedication archetype, you do not gain the full benefits of the wizard class. Your character can say they're a wizard in the flavorful narrative sense, but you are not, in the mechanical terms that allow you to pick class feats, a wizard. All the archetype feats that allow you to gain class feats are what allow exceptions to the rule of what class feats you can choose from, but you still need the prereqs unless the archetype feat explicitly states otherwise, or states you gain a specific, sometimes identical, benefit rather than the feat itself. If, for example, you took the school spell feat and got the force bolt spell, you would then meet prereqs that require a focus spell, or that specific spell, but you would NOT meet the prerequisite of being an Evoker.

Taking wizard dedication doesn't make you a wizard, it gives you wizard abilities and wizard options.

I personally would allow HoA to be taken with basic arcana until paizo says otherwise because it doesn't seem unbalanced, but maybe it is, and RAW says you can't

yeah, Beowulf got me. basic arcana still needs you to have any prereqs, and hand of the apprentice lists "Universalist wizard"

mrspaghetti wrote:

-Unseen Servant (sustained) reads:

You summon an unseen servant which you can command as part of Sustaining the Spell.

If you could Sustain it more than once, would the servant get 2 actions each time? Clearly not.

sorry for thread necromancy, just came across another spell that would benefit being able to be "sustained" more than once per turn, the protective ward power. You could use all your actions to get the range of the ward to 15 feet on the turn you start it.

You're definitely right about unseen servant, but not because of the sustain rules. A summoned creature gains the minion trait, the unseen servant can only get two actions per turn because of the minion rules, not because of some implied rule about sustaining spells.

Nothing in the requirements of the "Sustain a spell" action say anything about having already used the action, it doesn't have the flourish trait, and I think if they explicitly wanted to prevent this, the first sentence in the action description "Choose one spell with a sustained duration you have in effect" would have added the clause "that you have not already sustained this turn."

All that said, I think flaming sphere is somewhat balanced against this because you can't use the sustain action the turn you cast it because it states subsequent rounds, and the successful reflex save prevents all damage instead of just half

1 person marked this as a favorite.

So hand of the apprentice is not an "initial school spell," but it does require you to be a universalist to take it. So, since choosing universalist as the level 4 archetype feat "arcane school spell" doesn't grant you anything, and you wouldn't meet the universalist prereq if you tried to take it using the "basic arcana" feat, there is no way to gain Hand of the Apprentice through archetypes. Even if you took arcane school spell at 4 and basic arcana at 6, it wouldn't matter, because taking the school spell at 4 doesn't make you a member of the school you choose, it just gives you the power. I'm wondering if this is just a quirk of the rules, or if it's an intentional balance decision.

It really doesn't seem that impressive on paper, but I'm hoping the fact that it gives you the ability to use wands, scrolls, and staves without a skill check using the trick magic item feat makes it more useful. I am leaning more towards the set of feats to get the focus spells, though

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yeah, I said I was wrong in an edit, but they SHOULD be immune. Tripping an ooze would be very much like nailing jello to the wall

They are immune to the prone condition so you cannot trip an ooze. I do think it's odd that flat-footed isn't listed amongst their immunities

edit: I'm wrong. Must have been remembering a different stat block. I don't run it with that immunity though, because it's pretty absurd

4 people marked this as a favorite.

You can also heighten even if there's no listed benefit because some effects like counteracting care about spell level

and still fun at level 1, when my druid player wiped an entire encounter of skeletons with three action heal before anyone else realized the skeletons were there

we've already been over this. A fighter class feat and a fighter feat are the same. There is no distinction. Fighter is a class, so a fighter feat is a class feat. Class is not a tag, it's implied by any tag that is a class. There are no fighter feats that are not class feats

They would need to take the proficiency feat, though I think Alchemist is a great archetype for a rogue. sneak attack energy damage is cool

Yeah, the fact that fighter Feats are the same as class Feats is essential to the argument; I think they were just getting ahead of the logic that someone might present that a fighter feat is not a class feat when they were talking about not being able to take dedication Feats at all. In order to make it so Fighters can truly only take fighter feats with combat flexibility, they either need to change the wording of the archetype rules to say that you can only get archetypes as part of the process of leveling up, or they need to change the combat flexibility wording to say you gain the benefits of the fighter feat rather than you gain a fighter feat. I really don't think this was the intent, it's sort of absurd to think that a 9th level fighter can on a daily basis gain a couple cantrips

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Given that a bandolier would obviate the need for class Feats that do the same thing, I would say not. There are no class Feats for quick drawing tool kits, though so it's just the kits that benefit

1 person marked this as a favorite.

No, I was in the same thought process as you, but that's not their argument. Their argument is this:

When you level up, you gain a fighter class feat. Because of the rules as written for archetype feats, you can instead choose to gain an archetype feat.

When you use combat flexibility, you gain a fighter feat. ( and remember, as we've been saying every time, a fighter feat is a class feat) because of the rules as written for archetype feats, you can instead choose to gain an archetype feat.

The fact that you only gain it until your next daily preparations is immaterial to the fact that the language for gaining a class feat is ultimately the same as when you level up.

It's really dumb, and I believe it goes against the rules as intended, but because the rules for archetype feats don't explicitly indicate they are only choices to be made when leveling up instead of choices to be made anytime some element of the game lets you gain a feat, it works. In my own games, combat flexibility is going to let you gain the benefits of a fighter feat, rather than gain a fighter feat, and that will solve this whole mess

1 person marked this as a favorite.

really, all you'd need to change in combat flexibility is say "gain the benefits of a fighter feat" instead of "gain a fighter feat"

well one interesting reversal I've just noticed is that spells with attack rolls are the new save or suck, it's just hit or suck. while spells you get saves against now generally have a fail effect, attacks generally do not. You're not going for a lower touch AC anymore, and there's no more "holding the charge" for melee touch. Sure, you get your best ability to attack because of how spell attacks work now, but it feels real bad to wiff on the shocking grasp. Also, and this isn't necessarily as power thing, you'll very occasionally run into spells that don't do what they used to. Produce flame, for example, is now a cantrip, and it's not like as literal orb of flame that you use for light and can choose to attack with, it's ONLY an at will attack that provides no illumination as written

Yeah, the argument now has to be clarifying the verb language rather than the noun language. It's not about class vs fighter, it's about what it means to "gain" or "select." Can archetypes feats only be "gained" or "selected" when you level up, the usual time for choosing feats, or can they also be gained or selected any time an ability says you can gain or select them? Combat Flexibility says "gain" a feat with certain prerequisites, and the rules for archetype technically meet those prerequisites, because they can be chosen instead of class feats. I still think it's silly. Filing this under weird quirk of the rules language along with magic fang not working on animal companions and parry weapons provoking attack of opportunity.

Well now that I read " Once you have the dedication feat, you can select any feat from that archetype in place of a class feat [[i.e., fighter feat]] as long as you meet its prerequisites." maybe I am wrong, so I guess this does need clarification. I would still rule that you can't use it to take archetype feats RAI, as combat flexibility seems to harken back to bonus feats and martial flexibility being limited "combat feats" in 1e.

I'm also still pretty sure that select here refers to the choices you make when you level up, not any time you get to choose feats ever, but I can see the way it could be read to get all rules lawyer about it.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
hyphz wrote:

If gaining a "fighter feat" through your class gives you a feat that can be traded for an archetype feat, then the "fighter feat" that Combat Flexibility gives you can be so traded also. The words "fighter feat" cannot mean two different things in different places for no reason and with no text saying so.

a fighter feat is by definition a class feat, but a class feat is not by definition a fighter feat, one contains the other. Archetypes let you trade class feats for them, Combat Flexibility does not. It's not a two-way trade. An archetype feat is not a fighter feat. Normally, gaining a class feat is permanent outside of retraining. Combat flexibility lets you temporarily gain a fighter feat, i.e. a feat with the fighter tag. Archetype feats do not have this tag. They don't inherit this tag just because you traded a the chance to take a feat that did have the tag for it.

Combat flexibility essentially says "gain a fighter feat for a day" An archetype feat is not a fighter feat, so you can't choose it with combat flexibility.

I'm not saying that you can use combat flexibility to gain dedication feats, I'm saying the opposite. Maybe I'm misunderstanding the OP, but it seems like he's saying either fighters have to be able to use flexibility to gain dedication feats, or they can't gain dedication feats at all.

Fighter is a class, so a fighter feat is a class feat. All fighter feats are class feats, but not all class feats are fighter feats, so not all class feats can be chosen with Combat Flexibility.

At level 2, a fighter gains a fighter feat of 2nd level or lower. Specifically, I can take Exacting Strike, Point-blank shot, Power attack, Snagging strike, Reactive shield, Sudden Charge, Aggressive Block, Assisting Shot, Brutish Shove, Combat Grab, Dueling Parry, Intimidating Strike, or Lunge, excluding of course any of the level 1 feat or feats I already chose at 1st level. I decide I want to take an archetype instead, so I forego taking one of the listed feats and take the archetype feat Wizard Dedication.

I continue this pattern all the way through level 8. At 2, I took wizard dedication, at 4 I took basic spell casting, at 6 I took Advanced Arcana, and at 8 I took Arcane breadth.

At last, I am level 9, and gain the combat flexibility class feature. As part of my daily preparations, I choose to gain Lunge, a level 2 fighter feat that I do not currently have since I spent all my class feats on archetype feats. Until my next daily preparations, I have Lunge. I CANNOT on the next day use my combat flexibility to gain, for example, Basic Arcana, because that is not a fighter feat.

All this nonsense about not being able to take dedication feats is absurd, given that every single class uses this convention for their class feats. Monk feats are only referred to as monk class feats on page 156, Ranger feats are only referred to as ranger class feats on page 168, and so on. The word "class" is not a tag for feats, the classes themselves are, and the feats with these tags are, in fact, class feats.

hyphz wrote:
Taja the Barbarian wrote:

Fighter is a trait that 'indicates abilities from the fighter class.'

I'd read 'one fighter feat of 8th level or lower that you don’t already have' as being one feat with the 'Fighter' trait.

Unfortunately, again by that reading a fighter could never take a dedication feat at all because a "fighter class feat" would mean a class feat with the Fighter trait, which no dedication feat has.

Well, no? like, what is your goal here? you can't use combat flexibility to gain dedication feats, only fighter feats. So lets say you're normally built as a sword and shield fighter, so you didn't take the snagging strike feat. At 9th level you could use combat flexibility to gain snagging strike for the day because your shield broke yesterday or whatever.

a fighter feat is a class feat, they are the same. There are no fighter feats that are not class feats, there's no reason to say fighter class feat every single time. There are, however, class feats that are not fighter feats. When you take an archetype feat, for example.

Combat Flexibility actually helps with fighters who take archetype feats, since you're trading out class feats for archetype feats. So lets say you're a Fighter that's swapped out the feats you gain at 2,4,6, and 8 for wizard archetype feats. at 9th level, you could use combat flexibility to temporarily have one of the fighter feats you could have otherwise chosen at those levels.

All the classes are labeled and tagged the way you referred to page 144, in a given classes description, it will call it [[class name]] class feat and just refer to them as [[class name]] feats after that point. fighter is a class, therefor a feat with the fighter tag is a fighter class feat.

Ruzza wrote:
Kennethray wrote:
So last week we finished book 1. During the description of the gates I was have a hard time seeing the gates on the map in the location they are listed in. Maybe I am missing something. Where are the bloody gates?

The map markings are a little off. I made some quick notes on my map here to help you.

In between the portals are alcoves with benches, but they could be mistaken for portals at a quick glance (and with the way the letters line up).

yeah, if you look for the blue glow effect in the image, you'll see the gates

mrspaghetti wrote:
ofMars wrote:
...and THEN you're missing out on quicken, so...
Quicken gives you basically one extra action a single time per day. Meh. Imo, better off just casting Haste.

quicken is the only way to cast two 2-action spells in the same round, though. Tack haste on to it to move, for sure

yeah, I didn't think about conservation only being useful if you've already cast a spell of low enough level that you'd actually want to cast again. still seems like an obvious pick at 8th level for a universalist, but it also bears pointing out that if you do, you have to wait until 10th level to get the specialist school focus spells, and THEN you're missing out on quicken, so...

anyway, this is giving me some more food for thought on how to build a 2e arcanist. Originally, I was thinking sorc with wiz dedication and arcane evolution, now I'm thinking universalist wizard with spell sub thesis and sorc dedication

well, I suppose bond conservation can be used once per spell level, too, so there's that, but since it requires you to use a spell 2 levels lower, you can still only do it a max of 8 times a day at level 20. seems like a lot, though. So yeah, bond conservation in particular is beefy on a universalist, but outside of that, they don't get any more spells per day than a specialist.

As far as I can tell, a universalist can never get the advanced focus spell of a school, and you had to have hand of the apprentice to get the first level focus spells of the other schools

A thing to remember is that drain bonded item works more like a pearl of power from 1e than how the arcane bond used to work, it gets you an extra casting of something you already prepared rather than anything from your book, so a specialist not only gets a bonus school slot, their other three slots can be a greater variety of things (esp. now that opposition schools don't seem to be a thing anymore). Universalist only gets to prepare 3 spells, then cast another one of those again, getting the drain per spell level instead of 1/day to make up for it

well, they don't get to cast their most powerful spell several times a day, getting drain bonded item for each spell level is just the replacement for the school spell slot that they don't get. Bond conservation doesn't do anything more for them than it does for any other wizard

specialist wizard - up to 3 slots per spell level +1 school slot per spell level + 1 drain focus per day

universalist wizard - up to 3 slots per spell level + 1 drain focus per spell level

1 person marked this as a favorite.

my group is already about a third 2e games, and would be more if we weren't in the middle of 4 APs

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Just wait till kingmaker finishes its second edition conversion. It'll have rules close enough

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Indi523 wrote:
Regarding Bespell Weapon, I just don't personally think it's worth it. As NielsenE mentioned, 2 feats for...

I am not certain what you guys mean. For a wizard Bespell Weapon is a level 4 Feat and I don't see any Prereqs for it??? Is that not one feat!

I think it's because in this build, they're doing a martial as the main class. You can't get bespell weapon without taking other dedication Feats first.

mrspaghetti wrote:
Pumpkinhead11 wrote:
mrspaghetti wrote:
Charm was a bad example, but I think you know what I meant. Have fun.
Not sure what you mean. It seems there’s a bit of confusion on both sides at this point. My point was simply an interesting interaction between mechanics. At this point I’m not sure which part you think should or shouldn’t be RAI. Sorry if it came off otherwise; seems like just simple misunderstanding

I'm not confused actually. Given only the excerpts you posted from the Quicksilver Mutagen description your argument is completely sound. But if you also read the phrase that comes before it, i.e. "you become swifter and nimbler", then there is doubt imo. That's because to me it indicates the source of the bonus, which would not really affect a roll which is entirely based on an ability modifier completely unrelated to one's swiftness or nimbleness.

To me it is logical that RAI the Mutagen bonus to attack rolls only applies to ranged attacks modified by dex.

but when you get into ranged spell attacks in general only being the spell ability instead of dex because they got rid of touch AC and still wanted casters to hit, you can see why they'd differentiate attacks RAW to fit this paradigm.


Would you say that someone with quicksilver mutagen gets a bonus to finesse melee attacks because of your RAI applying to dex? what about to AC, since dex hits that, too? The transition from flavor to mechanics unbalances the item. It applies to what it says it applies to, and that includes spell attacks, and excludes all sorts of things that you could imply with "quicker and nimbler."

This is reminiscent of my 5e player getting stuck between the description of true strike giving her "an insight to her opponents defenses" and the mechanical effect of just giving her advantage. She wanted knowledge about their AC or resistance or whatever because of how she interpreted the flavor description instead of the mechanical abstraction of that description.

it's pretty simple, no need to complicate it. If a bonus says it applies to an attack roll, it applies to anything with the attack trait. If it applies a ranged attack roll, it applies to any ranged attack, including spells. If it says it applies to ranged weapon attacks, it excludes spells because spells are not weapons. The fact that there are bonuses that say all these things proves that. quick silver mutagen isn't a status bonus to your Dex, is a status bonus to those specific things.

This is sort of meta, but the only reason you apply spell casting modifier to spell attacks instead of dex (like you would an unarmed or ranged attack) at the design level is because they got rid of touch AC. Having some things only work with weapon attacks is how they rebalance that, and quick silver mutagen is a scenario that a spell attack gets the bonus, whereas sneak attack, for example, is not, outside having that rogue feat.

hyphz wrote:

So the attack roll made for Escape is neither made with a weapon, nor made unarmed?

"Attempt a check using your unarmed attack modifier against the DC of the effect."

It is an unarmed attack sort of, but

"You can attempt an Acrobatics or Athletics check instead of using your attack modifier if you choose (but this action still has the attack trait)."

Pg 471.

Captain Morgan wrote:
I might stick a flag on the mattresses that says "Fort Yoletcha."

I really like this is a clue and I kind of wish I thought of something like that. The second group did eventually deescalate, but the goblin sorcerer kept calling her a goblin and got too close so she flung a dagger out and critted him so half the party attacked while the other half tried to calm things down

Wheldrake wrote:

Wow. Didn't realize that. So really, the only way for it to work is for the wizard to be the archer. That significantly reduces its effectiveness.

I miss the notion of having fire (or cold, or whatever) arrows that do 1d6 of the element. It made a good space for low-level magical loot to hand out.

It would appear that it's the bow or nothing. Unless future books give us more magical ammo.

I don't doubt they will, seems like low-hanging fruit for additions to a new ultimate equipment style book. Probably start at +d4 of whatever element, then increase the dice with levels

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Stephan Taylor wrote:
ofMars wrote:
I think formulae, like uncommon spells and other uncommon options, give the GM a way to potentially gate off things they might not be ready for. Easy enough to hand wave. What bothers me is that it takes a week to make a batch of 4 consumables, regardless of level. I feel like you should still be able to whip up an alchemist's fire in something like minutes or hours if you've got the lab
I think that’s so that the alchemist’s toes don’t get stepped on hard.

I mean, this is sort of a thing that actually bothers my alchemist. She's limited to her quick alchemy and infused regents. If she wants to just make some extra stuff that won't expire at the end of the day, she has to take a week off adventuring? I'm running age of ashes, and there are moments where you find stuff that explicitly says they are the raw ingredients for specific alchemical items, but she was disappointed that by the rules she had to basically wait until the end of the book to actually make those items because of how long it would take, so I'm adjusting the time

SuperBidi wrote:
ofMars wrote:
I can see the prerequisite for lingering composition being a typo. It would put the bard in line with similar dedications like druid or sorceror, being able to get the first level focus spell at level 4
I also think it's a typo. For all the Bard feats asking for a Focus Pool, not just Lingering Performance. Paizo should give their point of view on that. You know a way to get their attention?

Pretty much just what you've already done posting here, or in the sticky thread that says they might answer on stream. If it is, in fact, a typo, it's something that would have to be changed in an errata since it's an actual textual change rather than something that can be faq'd. In your games, though, as long as it's not PFS, you can just houserule it, and change it back later if it ends up being unbalanced.

Really, ANYTHING on these rule threads can be run however you want because of rule 0, it's only PFS that really needs hard and fast rulings. If I've learned anything from the panels that paizo GM's had a gencon, its that even some paizo staff ignore rules they don't care for in their own games, even office games (likely excluding playtesting, but maybe even then, given some of the inconsistencies).

I can see the prerequisite for lingering composition being a typo. It would put the bard in line with similar dedications like druid or sorceror, being able to get the first level focus spell at level 4

thenobledrake wrote:
Nicolas Paradise wrote:
If your GM owns the PDFs they can open them in Sumatra and right click the maps and click copy image and than paste it into an image editing software like GIMP and it will only have the map and grid with no numbers or extra markers.

While this is true in general, some maps have some markers baked-in to the map image for some reason.

Specifically the first map in Age of Ashes that has secret doors, their marked on the map image rather than laid in as separate objects like the room numbers.

I am not sure why this happens, but I've run into it with multiple publishers and multiple artists so it's probably a procedure thing (one I would assume can't be avoided because of how obvious it is that it'd be better if it were different).

None of them are baked in that I've seen so far, at least for Paizo pdfs. it could be what he's using to extract the image just taking a picture of the pdf rather than isolating the image file. Fumarole's maps, though are pretty great and easier to align in roll20

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think formulae, like uncommon spells and other uncommon options, give the GM a way to potentially gate off things they might not be ready for. Easy enough to hand wave. What bothers me is that it takes a week to make a batch of 4 consumables, regardless of level. I feel like you should still be able to whip up an alchemist's fire in something like minutes or hours if you've got the lab

I mean, it's still once per battle, so I guess it's not too powerful, just seemed like an overlooked interaction. The first time it came up, I compromised and let him do the treat wounds DC and action but only have the administer first aid success

Draco18s wrote:
ofMars wrote:
SO, what are good spells to actually put into these?
Shocking Grasp

Fair enough. So, spell strike ammo is best used for martials that take spell casting dedications, rather than casters that take martial dedications, and best with attack roll spells, I guess, since if you've got a decent save DC you probably don't have a great weapon attack roll

So we already had a long drawn out thread about how many hands it takes, but I want to know how it interacts with the dying condition. Normally you can stabilize an ally in combat, can you use battle medicine to treat wounds on a dying creature? Seems gross to have it be 1 fewer action, a lower DC, and a much better result than first aid, but it's also a feat, so I'm not sure

1 to 50 of 164 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>