Captain Morgan wrote: You'll have a better time if you pick a level first. What level feels most appropriate for its role in the story? I can fill in the stat modifiers from there, but you need to pick a starting point. Its level would be equal to its PF1 CR, if that helps. Oh, my goal is level 5, but I didn't want to prejudice responses.
I wondered if folks might give me some feedback on a custom creature. Any idea the level such a creature should be? I don't know exactly what the stat modifiers are just yet:
Immune: mind affecting and Critical Hit damage (special) Vulnerable: on a critical, instead of applying extra damage to the golem, apply it as you would an object with hardness 5 (apply non-crit damage normally). The Clockwork Golem can take two dents without becoming broken, but each dent applies a -2 penalty to all dice rolls (including damage) and -2 to AC. A broken Clockwork Golem does not function, but it may be repaired by an expert craftsman. A destroyed Cloclwork Golem cannot be repaired and is a total loss.
When a telekineticist uses Foe Throw, is she subject to the weight limits of Telekinetic Blast? Ability links:
Arguments in favor:
Arguments against:
After a Facebook discussion on the subject devolved into "you're wrong and a dumb#@& because your disagree with me" I thought I'd bring it here (where we have such a reputation for cool heads? Lol.) No, where maybe we can get a devs attention or a FAQ ruling if it feels enough people disagree. Please discuss! Also, if no clear rules answer from the text or a developer becomes evident, please FAQ. Thanks!
doomman47 wrote: Isn't it against pfs rules for the GM to roll in secret since that falls under the rules of Changing an encounter on how its suppose to happen. To my knowledge, no, it is not illegal to use a screen. Many gm's do. My problem is that it erodes trust. If people think the gm is cheating, and that gm is using a screen, they can only conjecture. And that leads down dark paths.
Rysky wrote: Well when the term fluff literally means “something trivial, superficial, and of no value” and you’re applying it to the bulk of someone’s work, something they devoted a lot of passion and energy to, it is. Tell that to my pillow, my couch, my comforter, or winter jacket. Flavor connotes an equally useless trait of a particular item. My breakfast's flavor isn't what sustained me through the day. I could have eaten a slurry of protein and carbohydrate powders in water and gotten the same benefit. Flavor makes the experience now enjoyable. Now, flavor can give us clues as to the function of a particular food, but in the end, the flavor doesn't *do* anything. It's irrelevant. I could sit on an elevated wooden board to watch TV. In fact, that would've been a lot cheaper than what I have. But I spent a lot of good money on a fluffy couch. The wood and metal structure does all of the work. Without the structure, the couch doesn't function. But don't tell me the fluff is useless! The fluff is the main reason I bought it! I will do my best to avoid using the term "fluff" now that I know that it communicates things I don't normally intend. But it certainly feels a little silly.
It's here:
Polymorph wrote:
Beast shape 2 is a polymorph spell, so the above would apply.
Wonderstell wrote:
Well, not exactly. Because you measure your (ranged) attacks from your best corner (singular), while they have to target all four of yours from a single corner. Which means that behind a curtain like that, you have concealment. Note that it doesn't mean they can't assume you're back there. They saw you go in and didn't see you leave. But they don't know exactly where you are, and they can't see you to target you effectively. For a real world example, imagine a marching band show with some 5ft wide props. A color guard performer can go behind one and literally make a costume change, and most of the audience will miss it. Likewise, imagine that performer looking around the edge and tossing their flag to another performer. You can probably see them (because they're 'attacking'), but they still have cover. I know real world != mechanics, but that doesn't mean it doesn't help you visualize it.
Azothath wrote:
Right. We have a fundamental disagreement about Bane and how it's passed to the arrow. Here's a for instance: +1 [creature] bane bow shot at [creature] using:
Is the arrow +5 or +3? If BANE ITSELF is passed on, it's a +5 arrow. Not only does it bypass alignment, it also does 2 more points of damage in addition to its d6's. If bane is PIECEWISE passed on, the bow counts as +3, shooting a +3 arrow. It bypasses Silver/Cold Iron because +3 arrow, and it does it's d6's, but no +2. By my reading, however, the ARROW ITSELF receives the BANE property. NOT that it gets it piecewise from the weapon. Because that's how the Core Rulebook reads. One of the best things about bows is the ability to pass special abilities to the arrows. You get double your money, but it's expendable. This should be the same for Bane.
Azothath wrote:
Honestly, I used that as an example. I'm much more interested in what happens with a +3 arrow. So you're of the opinion that the "bane" special quality isn't passed on, but rather that the pieces thereof are?
Gallant Armor wrote:
If you say so. I think I'm done here.
Gallant Armor wrote: It's not about reading it differently, you are just missing the that the term "magic weapon" is defined as having at least a +1 enhancement bonus. If something counts as a magic weapon for DR it counts a having a +1 enhancement bonus for DR, this would stack with bane. Nothing in the FAQ refutes this. "other than the ways indicated in the Core Rulebook" is an important phrase to note; ammunition counting as magic is an exception to the FAQ so the enhancement bonus applies. Oh, I understand your reasoning. I simply disagree. The fact that an attack bypasses DR/Magic does not imply that it has a +1 enhancement bonus. A level 1 kineticist throwing a physical blast bypasses DR/Magic. They don't have enhancement bonuses. It's a logical fallacy that since a -> b, b proves a. In this case, a is "enhancement bonus ≥ +1" and b is "counts as magical for the purposes of DR." One causes the other, but the reverse is not necessarily true.
Gallant Armor wrote:
Based on the FAQ quoted and linked above. I think we're going to have to agree to disagree here. We clearly read the text differently.
Gallant Armor wrote:
Gallant, you are absolutely right. The arrow will land with +3 damage, and it will be fired with +3 to hit. But none of that matters when you're dealing with DR, because the conferred bonus doesn't help you get through DR.
blahpers wrote:
This is at the crux of my question. Simplifying the question muddies the waters. I'm specifically NOT asking about a +3 bow or a +1 bane bow alone. See, bane says it passes the ability, NOT the enhancement bonus. Which means when it hits, the arrow is bane. Bane increases your actual enhancement bonus by +2. Thus, I'm of the opinion that a +3 arrow fired from a bane bow should bypass alignment DR.
Claxon wrote:
Right. A normal arrow fired from a +1 bane bow lands with +3 to attack/damage, but it is not +3 for DR purposes, because the arrow itself is only +2 (from bane). You've got to have at least +1 on the arrow itself to get by any DR besides DR/Magic.
My question: Does a +1 Arrow fired from a +1 Evil-Outsider-Bane Bow at an evil outsider bypass DR/Silver or Cold Iron? Some relevant sources:
FAQ wrote:
source: link prd wrote:
source (which is much more readable): link So my question, I suppose, depends on the answer to this question:
Because if the BOW gets it, it then passes on its hit/damage, but the ammunition does not count as +3 for DR purposes. If the ARROW gets it, then the +1 the arrow has and the +2 from Bane make the ARROW a +3 arrow for all purposes, including DR. I appreciate your responses!
Java Man wrote: As a GM I go with the more explicit description in the spellcraft skill, but the text in detect magic is sufficiently vague that I wouldn't argue with a GM who ruled the other way. Also seems like a rare event that the difference would matter. If you're trying to bang out as many items as you can with a single casting of identify or something, I can see it mattering. If the alchemist is the only one who's able to do the identifying, for example, and they don't have multiple identify extracts prepped, they might want to know just how much they could do. (In that case, it's items per level. With detect magic it's significantly longer - minute per level, and 3 1/3 items per minute.)
I assume initiative had been rolled, and the cannoneers had already had their chance and readied it on their turn? It's really no different than all of them readying against the caster. I've never used cannons before, but I'll assume you're running those mechanics correctly. My only concern would be if you are readying actions outside of combat.
Sniping is best done in a team scenario. Let someone else initiate combat. Use your surprise round to get into better position rather than to fire. Either that, or take your shot, then skip the next round and use bluff to distract then get back into hiding. (Or use a Goz mask and a smoke stick and get your full attack in...)
I looked, but I couldn't find another thread. Oracles who cast modern spells get cure or inflict spells in addition to their spells known. That language is conspicuously absent from the description of wordcasting oracles Ultimate Magic wrote:
I know pretty well that in the rules forum, I'll get a RAW answer. I guess my question is whether people think it's also RAI that oracles have one fewer known spell per level if they are wordcasters?
John Compton wrote: And with that, we're back to developing more scenarios, sanctioning more playable content, and working toward our best convention season yet! I hear there's a Drowned City whose seers could use some official Pathfinder Society sanctioning... :) If you're looking for suggestions, that is.
Also, there's literally no reason they could NOT take the trait. Traits do not have prerequisites. Whether you could USE the trait could be at issue. Shifter includes this line, whose language I hope is cleared up in the Ultimate Wilderness wrote: A shifters can take feats and other abilities that require wild shape; for the purpose of qualifying for prerequisites, her effective druid level is equal to her shifter level. A strict constructionist will say that the time you spend in wildshape is not a prerequisite. A loose constructionist will probably say that it's clear what they meant - that if you're dealing with wildshape, a shifter is a druid. However, there's also some interesting interaction with the FAQ that adjusts the duration to Level+WIS mod. Some things to discuss with your GM: 1) With BotS, how many hours of wildshape do I have? Twice my previous total? 2xLevel + WIS? 2xLevel? I can see any of those being your answer. 2) Do I use it in one hour increments or two? This one may depend on the first. For me, I would make it twice the previous total, useable in two hour increments, (so every shift is up to twice as long, but the number of shifts stays the same.)
Tarik Blackhands wrote:
A few other corner cases: Flurry of blasts
Am I the only one who thinks the purchase guidelines at Stonefire Supplies border on ludicrous? A town of that size has a base value of 1,000gp. And it has a purchasing power of 5,000gp. It seems silly to imagine that they'd have any magical item up to 3,500gp. I feel I need to roleplay Uda's magic emporium as a place of quiet ostentation. Like, everything is a work of art. That table there, it's solid oak. The tooth under the glass dome? That came from the linnorm killed by the first linnorm King millennia ago. (Certificate of provenance is in the safe in the office.) Solid wood paneling with beautiful molding work adorns the walls. Exposed support columns have headers that you think might be gold, or at least gilded, hiding their capitals. Yes. This is a place of wealth that far exceeds what this town could otherwise support.
nosig wrote:
Evocation, no stagger, yes SR. Also I don't think the new one has made it into legality yet.
MadScientistWorking wrote:
That's why I only prepped it once. I still prefer it to produce flame. And it's still a good spell. It's just not game breaking.
Quote:
Ah, right you are. What i get for trying to be quick. No matter. My point remains. You can build a very effective character out of a druid. (Even with the armor restrictions.)
Also, druids can make fine full casters. Take a domain instead of a pet to add back a little oomph. Water perhaps? (Actually, I like flowing for its domain ability. The spells are already on your list, but they're all but one decent spells.) (I assume Feyspeaker is the archetype you're looking at?) Keep in mind that you add a wizard enchantment or illusion spell at one level higher, but at every level! Yes, that means you get them later. It also boosts the DC of said spells. At 8th level I'd maybe start out with something like this: 1: Obscuring Mist(d), Heightened Awareness, Thunderstomp, Mudball(2), Snowball, Remove Sickness 2: Cat's Grace(d), Deja Vu(w), Aggressive Thundercloud, Flaming Sphere, Stone Discus 3:Water Breathing(d), Hideous Laughter(w), Resist Energy (communal), Wind Wall, Call Lightning 4: Freedom of Movement(d), Suggestion(w), Ice Storm, Moonstruck Druids can be lots of fun to play. And there's more than enough on that list to get me through an adventuring day. Plus, I can wild shape 2x/day into a tiny-to-large creature. If you take weapon finesse and go small, you can find some pretty great options that play to your dex. There's nothing wrong with druids. They can be a lot of fun.
pad300 wrote:
As far as proficiency, yes that's true. As far as the action, nothing says it doesn't stay a tower shield indefinitely. If you were worried about it, you could make it take its original form to hang on your wall at night, but every morning you make it a tower shield and boom.
Lots to unpack here. Let's see if I can address the issues one at a time: 1) Why no houserules? Well, to be fair, there ARE house rules. They're listed in the Campaign Clarifications document and in the Guide to Organized Play However, that's not really what your asking, I think. You're wanting to know why you and your GM can't agree together on a few things that, well, aren't in the rules but really ought to work a certain way, so for today that's how it's going to be. The answer to that is simple: In a campaign like this, the design is to have the player experience as common across tables as possible. Now, we all know that doesn't happen perfectly - some GM's have a better grasp of the rules than others. Some GM's are more charismatic, and some GM's are better storytellers. But the basic idea is a sound one, at least in my opinion. I like the idea that if I go from my home in Tennessee to Sweden and play a PFS game, I'm still going to have a pretty good idea of how the world works. (Nobody's going to say, "Oh, well, at my table we consider potions to be weapon-like and let you draw them as part of a movement - provided you have a bandolier. What do you mean, you don't have a bandolier?") 2) Why are so many things banned? The company line, as I understand it, is that Pathfinder (the product) and Pathfinder Society (the Organized Play campaign) have different goals. As such, the product folks have a lot of freedom to create and publish items, feats, and spells that may or may not fit well within the setting. Like any good game runner (a role often filled by the GM), the Organized Play staff have selected items and abilities that seem to fit well within the setting. I have not, personally, found the restrictions to be strangling. Quite the contrary - there is SO MUCH available that I have a hard time, in some cases, deciding what character to build next. 3) What is the point of such restrictions in a non-competitive campaign? Two reasons:
Not so much fun. Yes, maybe you came out with a win, but you also probably walked away thinking, "Geez, I could've stayed home." So while this isn't a competitive event, it is important for everyone to have fun. And when one person is severely overshadowing everyone else, it stops being fun. (Honestly, it can stop being fun for that person, too.) Second, the writers have to base their writing on the expected power level of the target PCs. So keeping game balance roughly the same is important. Introducing third party material (or even some of the really overpowered Paizo material) into the campaign makes that impossible, and you end up with PC gods fighting ants, or you end up with dead PCs. Now, Organized campaigns aren't everyone's preference; I get that. You may decide that you'd rather play a game where your good friend Ellie runs a game she makes up as she goes for you and a few other people, and that's awesome. (If you were in my area, I'd ask for an invite!) But hopefully, at least, this will give you a little better idea of why Organized Play campaigns do things the way they do.
justaworm wrote:
With this I would wholeheartedly agree. If you're using a level 2 infusion, you've got to throw a CL4 or higher blast, period.
James Risner wrote: Flurry of Blows which they don’t have has nothing to do with Extra Attack ki pool ability which they do have. Can you show me where they have an Extra Attack ki pool ability? Talonhawke has the right of it. Monks only get the extra attack on a flurry. They either need a level of Monk or enough Ninja levels to get a Ninja ki pool before they can add an attack. James Risner wrote: Unless @Kageshira is saying they don’t have Extra Attack ki ability. I'm saying that outright. They get a monk's ki pool, which means that they can spend a ki point *during a flurry of blows* to get an extra attack. They could also use it to get a burst of speed or to get a dodge bonus to AC. James Risner wrote:
Paizo has chosen to release their material in OGL. That means that, aside from Proper Nouns, generally speaking their material is freely available. That means some people learn it through d20pfsrd. Let's not bicker about semantics. We all knew what OP meant.
Based on the following: CRB p. 208 wrote: You can cast a spell at a lower caster level than normal, but the caster level you choose must be high enough for you to cast the spell in question, and all level-dependent features must be based on the same caster level. CRB - Magic - Special Abilities wrote:
Can a kineticist choose to use a kinetic blast as though they were of a lower level? That is, could a level 10 kineticist choose to fire a 1d6 + half con simple energy blast as though they were a level 1 kineticist?
|