thekwp's page

Given the wording in Multiweapon Fighting that says

This feat replaces the Two-Weapon Fighting feat for creatures with more than two arms.

I would believe yes, this would qualify as satisfying the prerequisites for Improved Two-Weapon Fighting.

However, strict RAW for Improved Two-Weapon Fighting looks as if it would grant only one of the weapons in the multiple hands to get extra attacks.

In addition to the standard single extra attack you get with an off-hand weapon, you get a second attack with it, albeit at a –5 penalty.

Note the singular. This would would seem to imply that a multi-limbed creature with Multiweapon Fighting and Improved Two-Weapon Fighting would get a primary serious of attacks, an extra attack with each additional limb, and one additional extra attack at -5 for one additional limb.

A very cursory glance through the Bestiary 1-5s shows no creatures with such a feat combination, but several with special racial abilities involving multiweapon fighting. This supports as RAI interpretation that no, you really cannot stack them this way.

Anyone with other thoughts or examples?

Other people allow the held charge to be "free-floating", usable with any appendage the creature possesses and movable between them (even between attacks in a full-round attack). This seems too permissive to me, because you'd never be affected by the accidental discharge provision.

Especially since you can deliver a touch attack as part of an unarmed strike, and an unarmed strike could be any part of the body, e.g. a head butt or a kick.

If you can freely rotate it, then the wizard / monk holds his wand in one hand and has shocking grasp in the other. He moves to the foor, moves his "held charge" to his foot, then while standing on one foot he opens the door. Finding no one on the other side, he move the "held charge" back to his fist, and moves to the other room. Finding something interesting to pick up, he does so, moving the "held charge" to his forehead, or his elbow. That gets ridiculous, IMNSHO.

The discharge guidelines for a held charge are clearly supposed to provide some sort of limitation on a character's actions and consequences for violating them (losing the spell).

Reading through the rules on a quick pass, I think that you are correct that, as a spell-like ability, one can use Dispel magic on a Anti-Paladin's Fiendish Servant. However, Dispel Magic is not a banishment effect, and the creature was clearly not killed. As a result, the 30-day-or-next-level penalty cycle is not triggered.

I believe I would interpret the resummoning of the Fiendish Servant as a daily use of the Anti-Paladin's ability to magically call the servant to his side. That is an interpretation of the rules, though, not a use of the RAW.

Beastmaster

Thanks!

I cannot tell you how many times I had looked at the APG, but had completely forgotten about that one. I even remember now thinking about about how the name was fairly appropriate for the fairly (ok, extremely) cheesey 80s flick. Yet, when I was responding to this message, I had completely forgotten about it.

but is only defined in the eyebite spell as near as I can tell.

Good catch!

I think that reinforces the idea that it is not a standard effect, but a specific outcome of certain events, e.g. a spell effect, and (with Unchained) certain diseases and poisons. I actually think it would be a good standard condition.

Given that this ability does not include the style of language like "once chosen, this may not be changed" that is present for so many abilities that cannot later be changed, I am inclined to go with the idea that you do get to pick it with every use. However, the language is a ambiguous, and my first thought on reading it was that it was a singular option, not a variety.

I agree that ammunition is sold separately. Just like batteries.

I would suggest that you can no more customize the weapon by having it with a strength rating for a bow than you can customize it by having it made from cold iron, or mithral. In this case, what is not stated is (most likely) prohibited.

However, as always, get a final ruling from your game master.

It would make much more sense if Appraise had a scaling DC like so many other skills (see the Craft skill for an example).

Here's a rough draft:

DC Determine value
10: Daily-use item (daily living items like food and drink)
15: Common items (ordinary household stuff that everybody has or uses commonly like clothing items, pots and pans, household tools like brooms, etc.), light armor, simple weapons
20: Uncommon items (things most people only buy once like wagons,...

And I have just added that to my house rule set. Thanks.

Since the section you are referencing refers to alternate rules for dealing with Poison and Disease conditions provided by Pathfinder Unchained, the answer to your question is to find a way via "eyebite, sequester, or similar methods" to inflict sufficient exposure to poison or disease so that someone succumbs to it and produce the state. Assuming, of course, you are playing in a game that is using that set of rules from Pathfinder Unchained.

Comatose is not a standard Condition in the game. So, you will not find a spell, class feature, or special ability that imposes it as a condition since it is NOT a condition that the standard rules use.

I think you will see clearly in the section from Pathfinder Unchained that they are proposing a new method to handle the consequences for diseases and poisons, and only use the term in that context. It was not a mechanism that I had looked at closely before, and I find it interesting, so thanks for bringing it up.

Let me further muddy the proverbial waters by adding an edge case:

Suppose a rogue, with no ranks in Spellcraft but several ranks in Use Magic Device, observes a wizard who used a wand to raise an opaque mist which blocked sight. The rogue takes the wand, and later activates it using Use Magic Device. The rogue has no knowledge and no skill to determine if the wand is really a wand of silent image or minor image, or a wand of some variant of obscuring mist.

Does this rogue seen through the illusion generated by the wand?

Or is it specifically because shuriken are ammunition?

Because shuriken are ammunition, you do not need quick draw. If you have a feat, class feature, or archetype that allows you to treat another thrown weapon as a monk weapon, then you could combine quick draw and flurry of blows for that weapon. Likewise, if you had multiple monk weapons with the throwing magic weapon property, you could do the same.

I do not believe that Throw Anything will let you use Flurry of Blows to throw melee monk weapons, however. These weapons, in my humble opinion, are still improvised weapons when throw; Throw Anything just allows you to avoid the -4 penalty when using these improvised weapons.

However, I am not sure how a strict RAW interpretation here works. The crux of the debate would seem to focus on if you can still use a weapon's feature when using it in an improvised fashion. Clearly, not all features can be used in all circumstances, e.g. when throwing a orc double axe, in my humble opinion one cannot make use of its double weapon feature.

The most obvious answer being "If your GM allows"

This.

As a Gamemaster, if a character tried this in my campaign, they would start the game with their pepperbox, be able to sell it immediately.

And then find no applicable masterwork items available for sell, stealing, or as loot for at least a level or two. Without the bonded item, they would have to make that concentration check for each spell.

That, of course, is assuming that I did not just prohibit them from trying to "game the system" right out, and the player in question was not getting the notion of game play and balance or the concept of working the game master to make sure everyone had fun, thus needing a clear lesson.

Well, you may have a problem in that the language for Pack Bond which replaces Animal Companion for a Hunter does not include the language:

If a character receives an animal companion from more than one source, her effective druid levels stack for the purposes of determining the companion's statistics and abilities.

So, it is not clear that the Packmaster can actually gain animal companion level benefits from another class.

But if we read the rules as a RAI saying that this ability in replacing the Animal Companion ability is only intended to have language as to explain the difference, then let us proceed down the logic you have setup.

• Class Level || Effective Druid Level Wolf #1 || Effective Druid Level Wolf #2
  
• Hunter (Packmaster) 1 || 1 + (Boon Companion bonus 0) = 1 || N/A
  
• Hunter (Packmaster) 2 || 1 + (Boon Companion bonus 1) = 2 || 1 = 1
  
• Hunter (Packmaster) 2/Ranger 1 || 1 + (Boon Companion bonus 2) = 3 || 1 + (Boon Companion bonus 2) = 3
  
• Hunter (Packmaster) 2/Ranger 2 || 1 + (Boon Companion bonus 3) = 4 || 1 + (Boon Companion bonus 3) = 4
  
• Hunter (Packmaster) 2/Ranger 3 || 1 + (Boon Companion bonus 4) = 5 || 1 + (Boon Companion bonus 4) = 5
  
• Hunter (Packmaster) 2/Ranger 4 || 1 (hunter) + 1(ranger) + (Boon Companion bonus 4) = 6 || 1 + (Boon Companion bonus 4) = 5
  
• Hunter (Packmaster) 2/Ranger 5 || 1 (hunter) + 2(ranger) + (Boon Companion bonus 4) = 7 || 1 + (Boon Companion bonus 4) = 5
  

The Ranger's Hunters Bond class features is a 4th level ability. It grants effective druid level at Ranger level -3. So, a 4th level Ranger has an effective druid level of 1.

However, Rangers do not have a "pack" type archetype in the Paizo rules. So, a Ranger can only add his effective Druid level for Animal Companion to one animal. As a result, the rules would have all of the animal companion effective druid levels from the ranger class going to one of two pack animal companions from the Hunter class.

In the long run, what happens when you remove permanent enchantments? Well...

-15 AC
-8 less attack (not sure on damage- depends)
-8 less saves
-3 spell DCs

And much more. But all that would be the immediate effects.

That is a very good summation as a starting point. I would also add that just as important but far more difficult to calculate or compensate for are the "utility" powers that magic items grant. Extreme mobility (such as spider climb, flying, or various flavored teleports) is just one example.

Another implication is the increase of power of Greater Dispel Magic. If almost every benefit or augmentation a creature has comes from a spell (whether cast or from a bottle), then the use of Greater Dispel Magic becomes an even better tactic than before.

However, I think the baseline of the top end mechanics impact is summarized quiet well with lemeres's list above.

Lots of the advice depends very much on the course of the campaign you want to run.

The difference of advice need to work a campaign that you plan to go from 1st to 6th before wrapping up is very different than what you will need if you want to start at 4th and proceed to 17th.

The biggest piece of advice is: Are your players interested?

If your players are interested, and trust you to make it work, all the problems can be resolved, but it WILL take some work to resolve.

At the higher levels, as Claxon mentioned, your best bet for not making a complete rework is likely to use the Automatic Bonus Progression. The lower levels, though, could prove interesting, especially if you have plenty of alchemical gear and supplies in addition to potions.

One large adjustment for the players is the impact on treasure. If you do not have magic items, one of the rewards in the system is gone. Characters will run out items to purchase, and then money will start to lose meaning, except for the group to pull together its resources to buy the most powerful wand (cannon) they can afford. So you will need to think about adjusting that. What other rewards will characters have?

You can start doing things to limit your spell-casters to "balance" this out, but that starts down a spiral series of changes through the system. Maybe that is what you want, but you should be clear on your intent.

So, what are you trying to achieve, what do you envision your campaign covering, and what tools are you willing to use to do it?

So, if players do not believe the risk is real, many of them will not find the reward as exciting. What "risk" is for each group varies -- is it character death? Is it failing to achieve goals even if they beat all the monsters in a fight? Whatever it is, players need to believe that there will be some consequence for not doing well, and some reward for doing well.

The guides listed here do a good job to start giving you a handle on getting a good "typical" and "challenging" game. One important part to remember is that the game frame work makes resource management an important element. An encounter that your party uses about 25% of their resources, including per day special abilities, magic, and spells to "quickly beat" their foes worked exactly as intended. It is also ok to let the players have the chance to let their characters shine.

The key is to not let all the encounters be the same, and to not let the "best path" for triumph always be the same.

One way to do this is by variety! Variety is the spice of life, and of encounters. Change the type of things they are fighting. Or the creatures approach. Or its look. Or the number that appear. Or the pacing of the encounters. Or the environment.

Look for ways to create interesting synergy between the opponents and the environment, or their allies. For example, a spriggan is a CR3, so you might think that two spriggans could be a interesting challenge for you group. However, a spriggan that has learned to work with two darkmantles could be much more interesting, especially one that sneak attacks with his crossbow from the cover of magical darkness generated by the darkmantles and moves around a lot. Against a group without darkvision, or a group with limited darkvision, this could prove to be far more of a challenge than the basic CR might suggest. Do this in a natural cavern with a "path" worked through it and enough natural stalactites to give a small creature cover, but only but a low wall for a large creature, and it can use the terrain and the darkness to its advantage.

Make your creatures interesting. Jot down quick notes for the encounters: what languages will the creatures use, can anyone understand them, and what will they understand if the party uses. Next, have short ideas of phrases, styles, or anything else that might lend them character. Does not matter if they are foolish, humorous, vile, ugly, or snarky -- intelligent creatures should not be verbally foes. Maybe they call out to their deity to curse the party, maybe they make rude jokes about the inadequacy of the characters sexual lives, maybe some of the opponents joke with each other in a friendly rivalry on who is doing better against the party. Given them all some sort of style, it doesn't have to be much because they may not last long. However, your characters should have a different attitude about goblins, demons, and decapus based as much on the flavor of the encounter as the mechanics of the tactics.

Finally, but sure to describe the setting in all senses. Don't just give the size of the room; what does it smell like? Is it cold and damp? How does it sound?

If you are designing the encounters, make a list of character abilities. Ideally, a custom adventure for a group of characters would include something that threatens them on their weak saves and threatens them on their good saves (give them a chance to shine as well as suffer). Look for class features to find ways to use them. Bard in the party? Look for ways countersong might come into play! Inquisitor in the party? Have it be clear when a long dangerous fight might start so they can feel like they get use of their judgement ability; bonus if you can tie that encounter to their inquisition and god in a way that makes the inquisitor eager to strike. No one in the group with disable device? Have a locked door that they have to figure out another way to open -- break it down, find the key, locate the secret side door, whatever. Paladin or Fighter with bravery? Include a fear effect. You can almost build your adventure by picking one or two elements for each character that is a chance for them to show off, and one or two elements that are difficulties they are weak at, then start figuring out how to tie all your elements together...

Finally, be ready for non-combat use of skills and abilities. If someone put points into Knowledge (History), be sure to have some interesting tidbits about the location and things they find there. Someone have skill in swimming? Maybe a fast flowing river splitting half the dungeon into separate factions is just what you need. Ranger planning to use survival at every intersection? Be ready for those track checks and what sort of information they might pick up.

Ok. That's plenty enough to work through, but I hope that gives you some ideas on how to start.

Some people think of running a game as a chore. Personally, I think being a game master is one of the most challenging but rewarding activities you can do. Putting together the story and setting and entertaining my friends as they overcome the challenges is some of the most fun I have in role playing games. I hope your find it just as enjoyable as I do!

I am pretty sure SLAs fall into the bucket with spells there.

"In all other ways, a spell-like ability functions just like a spell."

Agreed. Except where stated otherwise, always treat a spell-like ability under the rules provided for handling spells.

I would not use the Magus (or any other classes) class feature or options as a guideline to interpret how a magic item works, unless the magic item specifically calls out the class or class feature.

So "Stack" in the Pathfinder rules are generally used as a contrast to "Overlaps."

As an example, an armor bonus from a Mage Armor spell and from wearing a breastplate overlap, and you only get the best one. However, a dodge bonuses are explicitly identified as a bonus to armor class that stacks with itself, so a +1 dodge bonus from a feat and a +4 dodge bonus from a racial trait would stack for a total bonus of +5.

In this case, I would indeed read this as allowing A character with only swashbuckler levels to quality for Signature Deed. I do agree that it is not 100% clear to me, and perhaps someone else has a better example.

I wish they had used language like they used with Warpriest or Eldritch Knight about qualifying for a feat that has a Fighter level prerequisite. That was more explicit language.

By RAW, LOH does full damage because it is not a spell or magic weapon, but I'd suggest the RAI is for it to do half damage.

I agree that, RAW, all supernatural attacks do full damage. Supernatural abilities are explicitly mentioned as one of the attacks that can hurt incorporeal creatures, and not listed among those that do half-damage.

It feels like an oversight to me too, and I would think that RAI would be for supernatural abilities to only inflict damage as well. However, the current wording is pretty clear.

Looks like the questions you have are actually answered as part of the description of Ranged Chicanery from the Dirty Tactics Handbook.

Ranged Chicanery (Disable Device 1 rank, Sleight of Hand 1 rank, ability to cast mage hand) You can use mage hand to attempt Disable Device and Sleight of Hand checks at range. Working at a distance increases the normal skill check DC by an amount equal to 5 + 1 for every 5 feet the range is greater than 25 feet. You can't take 10 or 20 on this check. Any object manipulated must weigh 5 pounds or less. If you also possess the ranged legerdemain class feature, you no longer increase the skill check DC by 5 while using Disable Device and Sleight of Hand at range.

This reads to me as: if you have Ranged Chicanery and you have Ranged Legerdemain class feature, then when using Ranged Legerdemain you no longer increase the DC by 5 for Disable Device and Sleight of Hand checks. It does not change the DC for Ranged Chicanery.

Having both does not change the range of either option.

3) Mythic spells. Can I store them in armor or weapon?

The Mythic Spells Rules state that:

Mythic Spells in Magic Items: Mythic spells can't be crafted into magic items unless the item is an artifact (for example, you can't brew a potion of mythic cure light wounds).

While this does not explicitly cover the scenario you ask for, I believe that it does provide the RAI for handling the situation. Unless the weapon with the Spell Storing property is an artifact, it cannot store the mythic version of a spell.

Actually, could I get limited amnesia/curse to forgot only the bad stuff?

There are many examples of this, though I have seen intense debates on if the proper common name for such a curse is "tequila", "vodka", or "whiskey".

Additionally, the Synthesist is, unbeknownst to the others, trying to find an evil Artifact of Zon-Kothun that has been stolen from a Shellyn-monastery where it had been kept safe.

The only things he knows about the artifact are, that it looks like a rusty knife and it grants the the bearer enormous power, but quickly kills him. He has been told to "follow the trail of corpses".
(It can't be put down once it has been touched and the bearer needs to make a dc 20 fort save every day or gain a permanent negative level.) The bad guy who stole it is using a horde of weak minions/slaves to transport it, who, due to their low HD and saves, die about every other day. One of them will have died in Highhelm.

So, you need something with the "trail of corpses."

My suggestion for this: After the party has to make a choice on what appear to be equally valid paths for their destination, come to a small "neutral territory" encampment, some place semi-civilized that they can gather information, supplies, etc.

At this location, they find rumors and panics of a strange plague that has recently struck the location. In reality, the possessor of the artifact and his small horde moved through here for supplies not too long ago. While here, the Rusty Knife of Zon-Kothun was stolen from the minion who was carrying it; perhaps after the first minion who was carrying it died from its curse. The poor looter nearly died from the curse before selling the whole thing, only to die in a small public fight unexpectedly because of the negative levels not yet removed. Through the petty criminals of the town, the Rusty Knife of Zon-Kothun bestowed chaos and confusion as their numbers died unexpectedly and quickly over the course of several weeks or a month, while the leader raged at his minions to retrieve. Without the explanation of what was actually happening, wild rumors of a new plague weakening and killing people spread like fire, as did stores of a spectre seeking revenge on the living, dire wraiths in the service of the neolithids seeking to cull the weak, and whatever other wacky rumors you can come up with. Just days before the party arrived, the villian finally had his minions recover the Rusty Knife of Zon-Kothun and left town.

People are on edge, rumors are flying, and some subtle investigation would be required to dig up the truth of what happened, and who had the item that no one realized was the key element. The party could get approached to resolve the "threat" (dire wraith attacks or whatever the rumor of the moment has) even though it is already gone; the party could be approached for extra healing and protection; other NPCs in town could be leaving etc.

Hopefully, your Synthesist has a chance to gather information about his foes, e.g. who was the first to die from this, what are the symptoms, when did it end, etc. In the meantime, the rest of the party deals with a strange situation that appears to have nothing to do with them...

In building out a mythic mounted Paladin / Champion, I've run into some grey-zones and contradictions in the rules, and would appreciate some clarity and additional insight. In particular, I'm not sure how a few Champion Path Abilities play out when the character is mounted.

None of the Champion Path Abilities apply to companions, such as the Paladin's Bonded Mount. Several of the Guardian Path Abilities do apply, though, so you might consider the Dual Path mythic feat.

So, RAW, the answer to both your questions is "No."

-Kevin

Gruingar de'Morcaine wrote:

5) Can cure light wounds (specifically from a wand) be used to damage a haunt?

It's specifically permitted, though you might get questions about what to target with your spell. As opposed to Channelling the whole area indiscriminately. I'd say that any part of the area of effect of the haunt works for cure spells.

Most of the example haunts I have read have clear indications of the manifestation, which is part of the "notice checks" for handling the surprise round. The haunt has an area as well. I am generally pretty free form as a game master because of the free form nature of haunts.

For example, if fear inducing haunt manifests as bleeding walls in the area, then the walls are all valid targets. That is pretty easy to adjudicate.

A more difficult example might be if the haunt manifests an ear-piercing scream from the portrait of matron of the wizard household who banished her wizard son for not being loyal to their cause. The area of affect subject to the haunt might be a larger area, but I might require the cure spell be applied directly to the portrait rather than just any wall or floor in the area subject to the scream. In such cases, though, I would not let the haunt trigger without someone being within reach of the "target" point of the haunt. If coherence demanded that the haunt's center and manifestation be centered in a way that is difficult to reach, I would consider that a modifier increasing the reward of the challenge of the haunt.

Channeling energy to blanket the area is the easy and sure way to get the source.

If you know that a haunt is in an area, then Detect Undead as well as the various Detect $ALIGNMENT are specifically noted as able to notice a haunt before manifestation. I would take this to allow a character a chance to pinpoint the area and range and point to apply a cure spell to do the most good, but that interpretation is getting into house rule territory.

Does walking through a couple of examples like this help clarify using Cure spells with haunts?

what book is Haunts in? I ask because of

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/gamemastering/haunts
they don't actual list the source

It is from the GameMastery Guide. It is implied because of the section in the d20pfsrd website, but it could definitely be more clear.

Assuming you drop the first repeating crossbow, store it somehow such as with a glove of storing, or fire the newly drawn crossbow one-handed, then absolutely you can do this.

I only make a point of this because keeping track of what happens to the extra weapons can prove significant for such things as unattended objects and area of effect damage spells.

While written for 5th level characters, I am finding Carrion Hill to be an excellent adventure. I do not think it would be very difficult at all to raise the challenge level up one level and accommodate a 6th level party.

I have not gotten yet, but am looking forward to The House on Hook Street which runs from 6th level to 9th. The Paizo blog post on it sounded very good.

Unless you plan to adapt the material, stepping into an Adventure Path can be difficult, with characters missing contacts or context for earlier adventurers. Having said that, Council of Thieves pt3 What Lies in Dust should be easy to adapt, based on my experience playing through it, especially the exploration of the abandoned Pathfinder Lodge in Westcrown.

Likewise, Legacy of Fire pt 2 House of the Beast starts at 5th but goes through 6th with characters ending at 7th. This adventure is 3.5, and would need conversion to Pathfinder rule sets. However, having said that it, is an excellent exploration and dungeon crawl, and would be relatively easy to have a party run this adventure as a standalone with only modest modification. When the group I play with went through it we enjoyed it and found it very challenging, with opportunities for the game master to direct the different opponents to respond dynamically to the party's actions.

I would say that if you have all three of these abilities you don't deal 3x you strength damage, you instead deal your strength damage 3 times.

Sometimes this is the same thing, but when facing damage reduction it becomes quite different.

That is how I am inclined to read it, and my first thought on how I would interpret it. You have three separate abilities that deliver damage. Assuming you had a STR modifier of +6, and were successful to activate all abilities against a target with DR 5, you would do (6-5)+(6-5)+(6-5), or a net of 3 points of damage.

I cannot think of a clear example in the rules to directly compare to, but I base this on the statement that each says "you deal this damage." If they were intended to add together, I would expect language something like "you deal additional damage above what you might otherwise do."

Maybe someone will have an example or other reference to clarify the way these interact.

Doing a quick scan through my Bestiary 5, the word "whirlwind" appears 4 times:

• Three times it is part of the feat "Whirlwind Attack" for different creature's feats.
  
• One time it is a spell-like ability referencing the spell.

Does anyone know if the Horrific fears supplement rules are any good with this adventure path?

When referencing third party rule sets, it is always nice to have an explicit identification of which publisher, etc, to help people identify and find them. I believe Horrific Fears is a third party rule set, because there is no Paizo supplement with that name. I do not have this, and really cannot comment on how it integrates.

For specific questions about interactions with a specific Adventure Path, you might have better feedback form the forum for Carrion Crowns. And I see that you have posted this question there as well.

Alternatively, you find value by asking in the Third Party forum.

I slightly disagree with Claxon's interpretation.

Calculate the total effective active benefit on each item, the arrow and the bow. Then only the highest bonus applies.

+1 bane (undead) arrow used against an undead target is a +3 arrow that does an additional 2d6 of damage. The +5 bow is still a +5 bow. The net result is a +5 arrow that does an additional 2d6 of damage against undead.

If you had a +2 bow, and +1 bane (undead) arrows, and your party's wizard cast Greater Magic Weapon on the arrows, granting them +3 bonus, I believe the correct next bonus when firing at undead would be +3 arrows doing an additional 2d6 points of damage. I believe the bane's increase to enhancement bonus applies to the original enhancement on the arrow, and then compare the result to other stacking benefits in play, resulting in two different effects at +3 rather than stacking bonuses that grant +5 in this case.

Edited -- corrected missing "disagree" in first line. Sorry about confusion.

There is not.

There has been some discussion on this board about the implications of Spell-Like Abilities and other abilities with duration. A recent thread that went into this topic was Summon monster time question, which includes references to other earlier threads and FAQs about this.

The relevant rules you are looking for are in the Cast a Spell section of the Combat rules.

Holding the Charge: If you don't discharge the spell in the round when you cast the spell, you can hold the charge indefinitely. You can continue to make touch attacks round after round. If you touch anything or anyone while holding a charge, even unintentionally, the spell discharges. If you cast another spell, the touch spell dissipates.

Each spell counts as a "held charge" waiting for discharge on your attacking. Casting a new spell discharges your current spell. As a result, you cannot start staking multiple chill touch and frostbine spells on top of each other, or other spells like shocking grasp.

Some of the FAQ and class abilities provide exceptions to the general rules, making clear, for example, that a magus touching her weapon to make use of her class Spellstrike ability does not discharge the spell by touching the weapon.

So you think I can hold a doorknob with the light shield hand, but I can't turn it? Or I can hold a water pump handle, but I can't pump it? Or I can hold a water hose? But I can't squeeze the trigger to spray the water or move the hose back and forth to wet the ground?

An answer of "Yes" is pretty much exactly how I would rule those questions in my game, based on RAW.

Personal experience with a cumbersome heavy object hung or strapped to arm certainly supports the first three. The last example is the one where real world experience would most clearly suggest overriding the rules. To me, however, it is the one that comes closest to modeling an actual attack action, the one thing we know without any question is prohibited.

I infer from the rules that they mean something else other than just "holding" when they talk about things such as "taking two hands to reload". I admit ambiguity. You clearly have a different interpretation. That's fine.

It seems that you understand my reasoning but have a different take on the base assumptions. I think I understand your reasoning, and agree it is consistent. Until something else shows up to clarify the ambiguity allowing us to take different interpretations on those base elements, we will likely to continue to disagree on this. It does not seem game breaking to me either way.

Per RAW, your light shield hand is allowed to hold anything you can hold in your non-shield hand. Which is all you need to load the light crossbow.

I disagree with your interpretation, there. I have always read that as meaning while you can hold something in your hand, holding is not operating.

However, you can shoot, but not load, a light crossbow with one hand at a –2 penalty on attack rolls.

This line from the PRD quoted above supports that notion. A light shield is not a buckler, which talks about what happens when you wield and operate things with the hand on the arm with buckler.

For the OP, GreyFox95, I believe a light shield could be used while firing the crossbow, with the stated penalties for using only one hand, but not be used to reload. In which case, the buckler is the best practical choice.

Since the AC bonus provided by a light shield is the same as a buckler, the difference between them is with a buckler, you can use the hand to wield or hold things, and with the light shield, you can shield bash or hold things.

Looks to me, from RAW, like it would have no impact on illuminations sources from anything but the target.

So, a character with a sunrod shedding light is hit by a darkness bomb. As a nonmagical light, it is extinguished. Frustrated by the alchemists actions, he casts light, but the ongoing functions of the bomb successfully dispels it. None of this has any impact on the light being shed from his partner, a warrior with a +1 flaming sword that is shedding light like torch.

I have always read this to require proficiency with the scimitar, and that any feat or ability to applied to wielding a scimitar applied to this spell. I have never read it as having the threat range of scimitar. My reading has always been that it is a spell, and threatens on a natural roll of 20 only.

I think the referneces to the Mythic spell increase support for the reading the rules as Flame Blade not providing an increased threat range for the spell.

However, this does raise the question in my mind of how I would interpret this for someone with Improved Critical (Scimitar) and using this spell.

Apparently, when you're nauseated enough to pray at the porcelain altar, you can't...

That's why it is a prayer. Only divine intervention, circumventing the rules of the universe, will help you now. [/Humor]

Question #1. Can you add the one point reach evolution to a Serpentine Eidolon(Who has reach bite as a free evolution)? Rule seems to indicate you can only ADD it once..

The FAQ on reach even makes clear that when you take reach, it applies to only one specific attack, not one attack type.

Since the language for the Reach evolution does not include the language allowing you to take it multiple times, you cannot take it again. The fact that the serpentine ediolon receives it for free does not mean that they received another special ability that grants reach, but that they have THAT evolution at no cost. Since it cannot be taken twice, you cannot add the reach evolution again to your serpentine eidolon.

That reads to me like you can make two checks if you have both skills.

This sounds like a bug in Herolabs.

I have always read the rules for Half-Fiend and other such templates that

gains two claw attacks and a bite attack

as meaning that the creature gained this if it did not have them, not that it gained them in addition to the ones it already had. It would be nice if the Half-Fiend rules included language like that for Skeletons that says

A creature with hands gains one claw attack per hand...

to make it clear if a Half-Fiend Kraken had eight claws, instead of only two.

The Skeleton template also includes language of

If the base creature already had claw attacks with its hands, use the skeleton claw damage only if it's better.

which suggests that the claws in general are not additional, and makes clear that Skeleton claws are only augmentations. Other claws gained by templates might actually reduce your claw damage.

But, the final logic for me is that you do not gain limbs with the Half-Fiend template, and you do not get to use natural attacks multiple times without some other Special Ability or Special Quality.

When using making attacks with weapons, and not with natural attacks, it is based purely on the total Base Attack Bonus the creature or character has.

So:

1) Yes, he has a +6/+1 attack.
2) Yes, and the spell even calls this out.
3) If "Spirit of the Warrior" for a "Thamacurge" is just like the Oracle of Ancestors special ability, then Yes (and the rules for "Spirit of the Warrior" mention this explicitly).

---
edited: Beaten to the post twice while writing this. :P

It will then be a spellcraft check to determine that such performance is magical.

I fully agree with Fernn's approach, but I am not sure I would use Spellcraft. The PRD describes Spellcraft as

Check: Spellcraft is used whenever your knowledge and skill of the technical art of casting a spell or crafting a magic item comes into question. This skill is also used to identify the properties of magic items in your possession through the use of spells such as detect magic and identify. The DC of this check varies depending upon the task at hand.

This does not seem to me to be part of the technical art, and it is certainly not crating a magic item. To me, I think the more appropriate skill is Knowledge (Arcana), described by the PRD to include checks for identifying magic auras, spell effects that are in place, and materials manufactured by magic. This seems more like that -- not a specific spell, but a magical affect you could understand or at least identify.

Having said, my reasoning here is influenced by my sense of aesthetics for the proper focus of Spellcraft as compared to Knowledge skills. I certainly would understand someone disagreeing.

I would also let a bard have a much easier time recognizing the use of Bardic Music, and might let them use a Perform check to analyze the intent of the impact of the music.

RAW, no. They must have the firearm training talent.

So, in a society game, do not expect that to work.

Feel free to discuss with your game master if this is RAI, and what she or he might allow.

Woah, This is actually pretty cool considering Im thinking of going flurry of blows with shruikens, so I could jump X amount of feet to touch the ceiling, and then throw shruikens and mooks.

Being a touch pedantic (always a risk for people drawn to look at Rules forums), I read this and processed as written, rather than using the "at" that was likely intended.

And I have to say, that as a character concept while playing a Grippli monk has very little appeal to me, playing a Gripplie monk who throw shurikens and mooks is indeed a crazy awesome build.

Fernn, please know that I find your ideas intriguing and wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

Thanks for the link, DM_Blake. That is pretty definitive.

And so, now I go to plot out my mystery-style investigation adventure based on finding the various victims' remains after they have been killed by a selection of summoned monsters.

Bizarre question based upon this concept. What happens if the summoned creature eats something? Be it an item, or even a target's flesh and bone?

For the sake of my mental hygiene, OBVIOUSLY summoned monsters have a very fast digestive system, and the consumed portions are integrated into their physiology, thus disappearing when the spells end. This works to keep the dungeons tidy, explaining yet again why there are not bathrooms on every level of the dungeon as well.

Of course, I am kidding about all that, and I really don't know. If they do disappear, is having a Summoned Monster (or sets of them) eat a body a way to prevent access to a body for such things as Speak with Dead or Raise Dead? You couldn't even use Locate Object to find the body since it would be off plane...

If not, I can also see the Pathfinder-style CSI at the murder site. "Hmm. Look at the splattering of chewed flesh and blood splattered on the floor all the way over here... Based on the quantity of material and dispersion on the floor, I estimate dropped from the stomach of a summoned Dire Lion. That's likely our murder weapon, then."

Either way, presents some fuel there for something a bit different for someone's adventuring group.

As a twelfth level wizard I...

Should've had a scroll handy haha.

Of course you should have -- you're a wizard, vorpaljesus! Being prepared "for just such an occasion" is what separates the skilled wizard from those other, lesser arcane practitioners. ;) Alas, always easier to figure that out after the fact...

More seriously, my interpretation is that you cannot use those slots, because when you last rested and replenished your spell slots for the day, you did not have those slots to refresh. Your caster level is now 12 for spell effects, spell penetration, and so on. Your BAB has improved and your saving throws. However, you do not have any more spell slots because you did not have them when you last rested.

I would need to check closely with the rules to make sure this is correct.

To avoid these sorts of questions, I usually make it a house rule not to allow the level for character to change until they have rested. That is a house rule, though, and not RAW. There is certainly a dramatic tradition of heroes pushing through to new talents while under pressure in a crisis, so I fully support the game master that wants to use that trope in play as well.

Putting skill ranks into Linguistics would allow learning additional languages, of course. I have always treated it that familiars got the full benefit of a skill their master had (with the caveat that having a skill doesn't mean you can make full use of it, e.g. Craft (Alchemy) does not mean your snake familiar can make antitoxin in your down time). So, if you had ranks in Linguistics and chose a specific language, your familiar got that language as well (and not another).

However, you are right that, RAW, their Speak With Dead ability is moderately useless in most situations.

For my campaign, I would just have the psychopomp's affinity and relationship for the dead trump the normal limitations; that is a flavor and style judgement call only. It is clearly not RAW, and will not get you very far in a Society game.