I would say that it does qualify. Firebrand allows you to treat the torch as a normal weapon (and improves damage), not an improvised one. Improvised weapons are still weapons, so you could cast MW or GMW on it. The fire is not magical fire, it is from the lit torch. So you could theoretically have a +5 torch that does 1d6+5+(1d4+1)fire per hit.
Also, you could use Inner Sea Gods torch fighter feat and not have to worship Asmodeus
Precision damage is primarily sneak attack, it can be a number of related abilities that mimic sneak attack with varying requirements
Skirmish requires movement
Is that actually true?
Yes, any creature immune to critical hits is immune to precision based damage.
To the best of my knowledge, there is no creature that is naturally immune to precision based damage, that is not naturally immune to critical hits. The reverse would be true as well
Although there are a variety of abilities that reduce them- 1)cannot be flanked, unless by a rogue 4 levels higher- basically renders you immune to precision based damage, but not technically as it doesn't apply to skirmish (rogue scout archetype), precise strike, sudden strike, or studied strike all of which mimic sneak attack 2) Fortification- reduces critical chance, etc.
This is the reason that the monster description include both in the description
Theodor Snuddletusk wrote:
Snap shot only gives the archer attacks of opportunity within 5ft (melee range)
Here is the feat:
Benefit: While wielding a ranged weapon with which you have Weapon Focus, you threaten squares within 5 feet of you. You can make attacks of opportunity with that ranged weapon. You do not provoke attacks of opportunity when making a ranged attack as an attack of opportunity.
Normal: While wielding a ranged weapon, you threaten no squares and can make no attacks of opportunity with that weapon.
Your "damned sniper" isn't following the rules. An archer trying to 'pin you down' has to hold their action- such as "I shoot at NPC 1 if he moves"
A sorcerer does not get additional spells known at any level, including first. The alchemist does.
Of course they do:
A 1st level sorcerer does not cast 9th level spells, no matter what the ability score. The magic may be within them (for RP purposes), but the mechanical number of spells known is set in stone. by level.
Why would anyone play a sorcerer, that can only cast six different spells (4 0 level and 2 1st level)?
Question: if the wizard were to lose intelligence, for whatever reason, would he erase bonus spells from his spellbook?
If you are asking me, obviously the answer is no. If that was meant as help for the OP, no need to reply
I have to agree with Grey Mage- the body goes to the same age as the original character.
If you as the GM prefer to keep that original stats as when cast, fine they don't take the penalties to physical scores, but they shouldn't get the benefits of old age either. because your logic hinges on the fact that the clone was cast when they were young.
Also, natural life span is not affected- i.e. you have a natural span of 81 years, and your wizard got killed at 79, you only have 2 years to enjoy your nice young body. Based on what you were saying, you infer that soul is what holds memories (thus you should keep the mental benefits), meaning you age doesn't change. In the above example, you are a 79 yr old wizard in a young body, well at 81 you die of natural causes, because the spell, RAW, doesn't allow you to reroll natural life span
I would think this questioned would be better answered by switching the wizard to sorcerer.
Yes the alchemist maintains a "spellbook" the same as a wizard, but it seems like you are asking whether an alchemist would get additional spells known for a permanent increase in caster ability.
So my response to you would be "Does a sorcerer get additional spells known for increasing charisma?" The answer to that question is no.
Like the wizard, the alchemist increases spells known by finding sources (spellbooks, formula lists, scrolls- perhaps involving a spellcraft check. This is the RAW way to increase spells known, you can homebrew around it, but the answer is no, you do not get more formula known for increased intelligence
just adding my 2 cents
The point of withdrawing is that you don't take an Attack of Opportunity. As previously stated, it does not affect movement through threatened squares that you did not start in.
While you don't technically have to be in melee range, without the proper feats you normally don't take AoO from ranged combatants.
Even with Snap Shot (5ft), or its upgrade Improved Snap Shot (10 ft) you are still technically in melee range (of a reach weapon with Imp SS).
So the question of whether you are required, RAW, to be in melee range, isn't relevant- no offense meant OP.
You would not do a full withdraw in ranged combat, you just double move.
You are absolutely right and we agree perfectly on this part. The question is, when you take versatile channeling (giving you the other side), would you be variant channeling (heal-presumably of the same portfolio), or would it be a standard channel (as a cleric 2 levels lower, per versatile channel). It doesn't explicitly say, at least in my opinion, thus the post
I don't see any reason you wouldn't get both sides of Variant Channeling if you choose to use it, though it's going to be treated as two levels lower for Variant Channeling as well.
I'm trying not to bias the threads with my opinion. The question is not so much of choice, but my impression, RAW is that you have to select one side or the other, Heal or Harm, which cannot be changed, there is a related thread where the writer, Jason Nelson, stated that during editing, it paizo editors connected heal (postive), and harm (negative), meaning by implication you cannot postive harm, or negative heal
Thus we reach the problem of the question, what is the interaction of versatile channeling feat and variant channeling
Apologies for the lack of clarity
Here is the question:
If I have both variant channeling and versatile channeling (neutral cleric. Do I take both sides of variant channeling-harm and the heal??
Here are the scenarios(presume the conditions effect the target):
Neutral cleric, chosen negative channel with variant channeling, picked up versatile channeling for healing capacity
1)Party is against undead- cleric channels positive energy to harm undead
I have to say that you will run into fame problems before you run out of money if you save it up. If you play up on getting to two, you can afford a mithral bp way before you have the fame. At higher levels its irrelevant, so go with the ring and amulet and just enhance them.... I would not buy new armor or enhance it until you are buying the last piece you intend to wear. Everything else has been said by other posters
I would not like it, for the simple reason of a lot of the GMs in our groups, actually intend to play when they show up, You only get a 1/2 hour of prep time, and they volunteer it too... If you get a bad evaluation from someone that doesn't understand this it would lead to people not playing. To someone that signs up as a GM, the only comment Can we focus a little more on _____. Anything more is insulting, fun is for everyone.
A good GM should be able to figure out your playing style by your actions during the game and adapt (if possible)
As a gm, IF I edit it is adding 3 hp to NPCs, or +1 to attack. The encounters are generally not tough enough. This makes effectively 1 attack more getting through. Also, if the PCs are having a tough time spread out the damage. Everyone should get attacked at least once in every scenario. Most of the scenarios I have played the NPCs do not fight to the death. I think that if the encounters are too tough that is a result of bad GMing
I agree that the plot leaves something to be desired, but I think that most of this is the nature of the demon for non-modules. In Cincinnati, the events hop all over the scenarios, society members are not always current.
For the record, Crits are the only thing that should 1 hit kill, and NPCs don't have to finish off an unconscious PC. 1 hit drops are the name of the game. If they have a 1d8+8 and you think you are going to have to worry about a TPK take 2 off attack, it does wonders for letting tanks survive to run away. If they don't run when they should KILL THEM
I think that if they took action against you, such as an attack for damage, it is not evil. If you just "pass them by" then they won't know you are there, therefore you have to assume that they are neutral. Uniformed soldiers/guards, of course, are an exception.
In pathfinder it is possible to be facing a LG opponent, generally you can expect the good foes to give you a chance to prove yourself a non-enemy. You have to give them the same courtesy