tasslehoff220's page

Cackle (Su): A witch can cackle madly as a move action. Any creature that is within 30 feet that is under the effects of an agony hex, charm hex, evil eye hex, fortune hex, or misfortune hex caused by the witch has the duration of that hex extended by 1 round.

I originally thought this meant the which can affect one target per cackle but the consensus seems to be against me. That's fine as linguistically any could mean any one or any and every. Has there been any official clarification on this? (I wish they had said "any one", or "every" just to avoid the ambiguity)

If anyone can give me any official ruling or link to one, that would be great but I don't really need opinions on the rule as I already know what the typical thoughts on the matter are.

thanks in advance. =)

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/m/magic-jar

Magic Jar states: Attempting to possess a body is a full-round action. It is blocked by protection from evil or a similar ward.

What happens if you are already possessed and someone casts pro evil on you? Are you still possessed? Is the spell caster forced back to the jar? Is he trapped in the body?

As an on the fly ruling so the game could progress I decided he was trapped in the body til the pro evil ended (I like the fluff of magic circles and similar spells blocking anything from getting either in or out) but I think the correct ruling would be that he is forced back to the jar. Is this correct?

thanks in advance

If a player is on a mount and has that mount take a single move action while taking a full attack with his bow does he take any penalties? It seems to me he should and that this is an unintended way to get a full attack with a move.

My reasoning: When you make a full attack while your mount does a double move you take a -4 penalty. A double move is just using a single move action twice (the penalty coming from firing while your mount is moving). Since you have to fire while your mount is moving to get the full attack (it is clearly stated that if you wait until you stop moving you can only attack as a standard action) you should take the same penalty.

Was this the game designers intent? It is not stated anywhere. I would really like a game designer to answer this question on intent as it seems to me that the intent was for anyone who take a full attack while their mount moves should take a penalty. If you fire while you take a single move action you should take that same penalty.

Can a game designer tell me if this was taken into acount when the rule was made or just overlooked?

I have a player in my pathfinder game who wants to play a bladesinger. I have no problem with this as I would like to see how more prestige classes shold look in pathfinder. Well we are almost at 6th level and he wants to take it at 7th level. Can anyone give me suggestions for how to make it pathfinder? It seems to me it should be a little stronger. Ideas I had were increasing the number of blade song free spells per day or giving it some other abilitiy. I have been examining eldritch knight and duelist for comparisons. Thanks in advance for any suggestions or help.

Ok, so the Pathfinder bard can do stuff rather than just buff his allies with his song. I like this but looking at the 20th level ability it seems a bit over the top for two reasons.

First, pathfinder seems to have attempted to do away with save of die effects replacing them with 10 damage per level. This ability and that of the 20th level rogue break this trend. I would rather the game remain consistent and stick to massive damage with these two effects but as the rules are written I do not feel that is actually a major problem nor is it the fact that it is a will save (death effects are tradtionally fort saves, any fighter opponent will probably bite it every time).

Second, what is actually the problem is what happens on a successful save. The bard's opponent is stunned for a d4 rounds. This is way too powerful. Otto's irresistable dance was recognized to be too poweful so it was nerfed. Compare this ability to the unnerfed version. 1d4 rounds automatic stun at a range without a touch attack or SR. Wow! And the bard can do it 20+ times per day (albeit to different opponents). This is insane. Every 20th level combat against a big creature will be boring and against groups the bard just goes through them 1 at a time. Bards should have some reason to buff. This ability should definitely be will negates not will partial. What do other people think about this?