thelemonache's page

217 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


1 to 50 of 217 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>

avr wrote: you might be able to afford Shared Stash and a valet familiar via elemental whispers if a ratfolk...

Shared stash is a pretty handy little trick I might be able to work with, has some steep requirements though. hmmm.

Using the bow with a regular blast isnt so bad, its the using Blue Flame composite with the 2 burn cost (3 or more if empowered etc) where it really starts to hurt without the gather power.

Dragonborn3 wrote:
Since it's a form infusion could you add a substance infusion to it as well? Once you have Infusion Specialzation it could be pretty cool.

I would assume you can, i think since its a "blast" now it even gets elemental overflow plus to HIT, but it clearly says no to damage. The character I am building uses a conductive bow and I was planning some decent elemental damage but the build kind of shuts down since I need all my hands just to gather power. Back to the drawing board I guess?

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm late to the party, but as I am making a kineticist right now I wondered the same question. As written we already know the answer, but were all hoping it's an oversight/oops and that's specifically what I would like to FAQ. :) I mean to even not use the talent so that you can gather power again for regular blasts, you have to spend action putting the weapon away. Kind of a pigeon-holding pain. maybe give us a feat that lets us gather power with one hand?

strange yes... but I'm building a cohort that is a quadruped mount and I was hoping to make it a kineticist, but you "must have at least one hand free to aim the blast (or one prehensile appendage, if she doesn’t have hands)". are there any feats that can be taken by non specific races to achieve this?

class dips?: witch hex prehensile hair, alchemist discovery tentacle
magic items?: monkey belt but only 5 minutes per day

avr wrote:

A magus like Lady-J says, in particular a bladebound magus because of this ability:

Energy Attunement (Su): wrote:
At 5th level, as a free action, a magus can spend a point of his black blade’s arcane pool to have it deal one of the following types of damage instead of weapon damage: cold, electricity, or fire. He can spend 2 points from the black blade’s arcane pool to deal sonic or force damage instead of weapon damage. This effect lasts until the start of the magus’s next turn.

Thats a fun looking ability, I think magus is a good fit, my only worry is that Magi seem to run out of steam quick if there are lots of encounters in one day. The kinetic blade route seems hard to beat damage wise. If this wasn't a thematic/challenge build for myself I think that would be the way to go. Visually there is just something cool about energizing a sword you know? :)

bloodrager is a swift so it wouldnt stack with the 6d6 from shifter :(

Hello! I'm making a character that uses a Kitana and I want to be able to do lots of energy damage with it. So far shifter archetype "Elementalist Shifter" gets me 6d6 as a swift, shocking 1d6, Elemental fist and Djinn style 1d6+wis... what other goodies am i missing? The multiclass barbarian variant could get me their elemental rage power for another 1d6 but kills my feats.

Tried working in kineticist with conductive but doesn't seem to work for melee. Any ideas?

unarmed strike is irrelevant to fists. Unarmed literally means "not armed" and makes no mention of a fist. In fact a gelatenous cube can make an unarmed strike. Karate dire tigers sound fun.

Under polymorph rules, you lose your base forms natural attacks, so no bite while polymorphed if your a kitsune/tengu/whatever, but if you have a feat like aspect, then yes you can use that while polymorphed as long as you still have the limb to use it (so no claw attacks while in snake form etc). If your referring to the shifter claws, then they specify that you can use them for natural attacks only while in your shifter major aspects, but i am assuming you meant more broadly.

As for damage type, yes just assume, they forgot, honest mistake. Fire is fire, water is cold, earth is acid, air is electricity. I'm also willing to bet that they will never take the time to spell it out/correct that omission either so I wouldn't hold your breath for an official answer on that one hehe :)

I would say an appropriate amount of skin for your size, so like no cheesing and wearing like a feather, like realistically wearing an animal skin as a cloak or something. It's not clarified so there is no official answer, just don't be cheesy and I'm sure you'll be fine. as for number per day, well it's a hex so unless it says otherwise it is unlimited. I would say it works identically to change shape and every other ability like this, meaning you can stay in shape indefinitely. If it was in fact unlimited and forced you to spend a standard action every x amount of minutes then it would be the only unlimited polymorph ability in the game to do so, so yeah i would say indefinite (it is a major hex so it is supposed to be good).

We have always played that because of the cost (feat or spell) and effect (usually duplicating a spell or a weaker form of a bardic song that takes multiple rounds sometimes) that it reasonably made sense to treat them more like spells. So one bardic, and all the masterpieces you could afford to maintain with your action economy/music rounds

PossibleCabbage wrote:

I feel like "this bloodline power" implies that what follows is, indeed, a bloodline power and not some sort of hyrbid of a bloodline power and something else.

"X counts as a bloodline arcana and a bloodline power" means it should be affected by anything that refers to an arcana as well as anything that refers to a bloodline power.

I hear ya, I could see it both ways. :)

Lune wrote:
Don't really want to get into a deep debate on this (there have already been several) but that is NOT the language it uses, thelemonache. It says it counts as both.

"This bloodline power counts as your bloodline arcana and also replaces laughing touch." Thats a direct quote. counts as arcana, replaces laughing touch.. It literally gets no level 1 bloodline as written.

I am on the no train. The feat specifically says gain first bloodline power, and Sylvan specifically says (almost as if intentional) that it is the arcana and also replaces first bloodline, meaning it isn't the first bloodline, it replaced it, similar to language that would say somethign like "this ability replaces your favored enemy" would prevent you from taking something with the prereq favored enemy.

I agree with Cyrad :D the rule is: as long as the effect is not specified as a polymorph effect and does not change your size, then it stacks with a polymorph effect.

Sorry, the spell you want is giant form 2. Polymorph Any Object can only be used as the listed spells. Lots of new spells have came out since then so a generous GM might allow them to work under PAO, but by rules normally they do not. I would argue that "permanent huge without losing your gear" is intentionally not allowed with this spell.

As for your scroll questions, literally type "scrolls" into the d20pfsrd and read that whole section, it answers every question you just asked, including mishaps for scroll failure. :)

Rysky wrote:
They're still producing them because lack of a FAQ here doesn't make them completely unusable, it just falls into "You and your GM decide how they work",

Well... that depends on your GM haha :) The absolute worst part of the game is when the GM and the players argue, and it's not even about "getting your way" or anything like that it just makes it hard to plan a 2 year character if you cant use it the way you thought once you get there you know? But thank goodness for retraining rules am I right???

I would say my GM is easily one of the more reasonable/easy to talk to GM's out there and we often come to great compromises but not every GM is like mine so I can be sympathetic to the pain when people give the "ask your GM" reply. Specific and well documented rules will literally keep some groups together (believe me there is plenty of other things in the world to argue over, rules for your favorite game don't need to be on that list hehe).

I'm not mad at the designers at all and I think in general they do a good job. It definitely feels as if they have some sort of reason for not answering this question formally yet so I will continue to patiently wait, I think I even have a calendar event set on my phone to resurrect this thread twice a year.... ;) I do recognize that they need to keep making money so they mostly look forward with new content, but I wouldn't mind seeing a little more looking backward (you know quality over quantity, support existing to give value to the new stuff). Heck if they crowd funded getting old rules clarified, I bet it could be super lucrative! I would happily throw 10 bucks at getting this FAQ answered :D TAKE MAH MONEYS!!! <3 <3

I warms my heart to see this thread resurrected again... but breaks my heart to see that it needed to be resurrected again.... XD

its written explicitly in the feat how many times. Read the "special" line directly from the pfsrd. Even if a monk doesnt get t for free, they still use the second sentence:

stunning fist:
You know just where to strike to temporarily stun a foe.

Prerequisites: Dex 13, Wis 13, Improved Unarmed Strike, base attack bonus +8.

Benefit: You must declare that you are using this feat before you make your attack roll (thus, a failed attack roll ruins the attempt). Stunning Fist forces a foe damaged by your unarmed attack to make a Fortitude saving throw (DC 10 + 1/2 your character level + your Wis modifier), in addition to dealing damage normally. A defender who fails this saving throw is stunned for 1 round (until just before your next turn). A stunned character drops everything held, can’t take actions, loses any Dexterity bonus to AC, and takes a –2 penalty to AC. You may attempt a stunning attack once per day for every four levels you have attained (but see Special), and no more than once per round. Constructs, oozes, plants, undead, incorporeal creatures, and creatures immune to critical hits cannot be stunned.

Special: A monk receives Stunning Fist as a bonus feat at 1st level, even if he does not meet the prerequisites. A monk may attempt a stunning attack a number of times per day equal to his monk level, plus one more time per day for every four levels he has in classes other than monk.

James Risner wrote:

All of your questions are Ask Your GM type.

Animals can't have Int 3+.
Animals with magical effect can have Int 3+.

Child animal with Headband is entirely Ask Your GM.

The rest of the questions are answered in the rules, or your GM can interpret the rules in a way they wish.

I will never argue against asking your GM things, but in this case, you shouldn't need your GMs permission unless he wants to intentionally go against the rules (Which is his perogative). Yes its literally written in the rules that you can have an animal with high int (meaning above 2), yes its literally written in the rules that your Avian, Biped, Quadruped, Quadruped Hexapod, Quadruped Hooves, Quadruped Squat Body, Saurian, and Serpentine can wear headbands as in this gentleman's example (the only categories that cannot are Piscine (like a seal), and Venomous (scorpion, spider, etc)). The exact items each animal companion can wear are detailed on page 1 of the Animal Archive (official paizo book circa 2013 or something).

straight from the pfsrd in case you need more proof :)

Intelligent Animals:

Increasing an animal’s Intelligence to 3 or higher means it is smart enough to understand a language. However, unless an awaken spell is used, the animal doesn’t automatically and instantly learn a language, any more than a human child does. The animal must be taught a language, usually over the course of months, giving it the understanding of the meaning of words and sentences beyond its trained responses to commands like “attack” and “heel.”

Even if the animal is taught to understand a language, it probably lacks the anatomy to actually speak (unless awaken is used). For example, dogs, elephants, and even gorillas lack the proper physiology to speak humanoid languages, though they can use their limited “vocabulary” of sounds to articulate concepts, especially if working with a person who learns what the sounds mean.

An intelligent animal is smart enough to use tools, but might lack the ability to manipulate them. a crow could be able to use simple lockpicks, but a dog can’t. Even if the animal is physically capable of using a tool, it might still prefer its own natural body to manufactured items, especially when it comes to weapons. An intelligent gorilla could hold or wield a sword, but its inclination is to make slam attacks. No amount of training (including weapon proficiency feats) is going to make it fully comfortable attacking in any other way.

Even if an animal’s Intelligence increases to 3 or higher, you must still use the Handle Animal skill to direct the animal, as it is a smart animal rather than a low-intelligence person (using awaken is an exception—an awakened animal takes orders like a person). The GM should take the animal’s Intelligence into account when determining its response to commands or its behavior when it doesn’t have specific instructions. For example, an intelligent wolf companion can pick the weakest-looking target if directed to do so, and that same wolf trapped in a burning building might push open a door or window without being told.

you absolutely can have an animal companion with an int above 2 via either magic or your 4th level ability point. In fact, having a 3 int means your animal has the capacity to understand a language with linguistics (but still not speak) and can take any feat in the game it qualifies for, not just animal companion feats. It is still an animal (not a magical beast).

during a flurry no, I agree with Fuzzy-Wuzzy. I dont know if it holds a charge or not though.

Bloodrealm wrote:
The biggest problem here is that you won't be able to abuse Pounce during Defensive Stance.

Hmm well if you could get immune to fatigue you could cycle the stance maybe? If you wait until level 9, 1 level of oracle with the lame curse will give you immunity to fatigue with a -10 to movement but still could be worthy.

shifter/rogue, shifter/brawler, and shifter/monk are my three favs. However also Shifter/warpriest would be actually pretty powerful with some self heals and buffs, plus i think the claws might even get better natural damage from warpriest.

20 levels of shifter is out of the question, so what else do we have? I've been trying to break this class all weekend... and I am failing hard hehe. Multiclass seems to be the only real way to solidify the class after level 8, and since the keystone ability of shifter isnt that attractive anyway I don't think it would hurt it too much to dip out of it. Shifter has lots of weaknesses, but there's another forum already for that, what are it's strengths?

strength list for me:
1. at will claws - pair with a race that has a bite already and you have a good/accurate sneak attack delivery device
2. Large form at level 4 - this is an early boost (in a way could be a disguised weakness if your fighting in a lot of enclosed spaces like in a pathfinder mod or something, but lets assume its a strength hehe)
3. prestige class friendly - the higher level you get with this class the less awesome it is so all those prestige classes you wanted to play suddenly sound attractive.
4. decent armor class options - lets admit keeping some wisdom while armored is kind of attractive? I could see some solid tank-like builds out of this class.

Shifters absolutely need mutated shape to stay at all competitive, so it looks like all builds will need that super high wisdom stat.

Possible prestige ideas that could be fun:
Dragon disciple - was I the only one disappointed at the lack of dragon shape for shifter?
Shadow dancer - a shadow jumping tiger with rogue talents sounds fun. Shadow dancer was always a weak choice for most other classes, but alas not for shifter! And you can use the shadow evocation in form since its not a spell.
Assassin - all of the yes. Fits great with the class I think and since natural weapons are great sneak attack delivery devices, this fits great.
Stalwart defender - would love to see a silverback stalwart defender or something like that.

Multiclass dips from other classes:
monk - 3 levels of flowing monk gives you a strong AC boost when fighting many enemies, also helps ease the feat burden a bit of getting feral combat training to really open up what you can do with your claws (including getting still mind for monastic legacy)
fighter/brawler - 4 levels of a fighter flavor of your choice goes a long way in getting the shifter caught up to the feat level of other martial classes.
sorcerer - only really for dragon disciple entry
ranger - only if it's ever clarified it shapeshifting hunter feat will work with shifter. RAW i would say no, RAI i certainly think this is reasonable with the ambiguity of how you read "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." which sounds like it was meant to be a catch all for getting them access to wild shape feats but doesn't quite spell that out. (a discussion for another thread perhaps?)

I immediately think of Aasimar (Plumekith), Kitsune (with realistic likeness and fox shape for added shifter goodness), and Tengu (racial sub for the claws, even though they are redundant the granting of unarmed strike feat for meeting prereqs gives you a lot of steam to start some exciting feat chains at level 1, useless of course if you plan on taking monk though), and oreads have some interesting feats and really good ability score bonuses for a shifter

3 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite.

Some of the wild shape feats call out druid by name in the gains section, but Shifter says it only counts as a druid for prereqs. As is shifters gain no benefit from "Shaping Focus" or "Shapeshifting hunter." Is that intentional? I would imagine the language would have read "shifters count as druids for feats with wild shape as a prereq" if that is what they wanted, but they specifically call out only "prerequisites."

Mutated Shape, can I use this new limb (like a claw or slam limb) as a human hand? It says any appendage of my choice, and I want to manipulate things while wild shaped. This is a serious wild shape game changer if not addressed hehe. :)

I've wanted a shifter class since I started playing pathfinder, so I admit I may have had overly high hopes. Don't get me wrong, shifters are still cool but I was a little let down that druids are still better at shifting somehow. Shifters get an early boost but cant hold a candle to a druid after level 8. Maybe after I play one my mind will change.

Shifters Edge is the best ability they have and it's not even baked into the class (basically a class feature that eats two feats and eventually post-errata wont stack with Agile). The aspects give enhancement bonus to ability scores, which lets be honest I will have better than what they offer with magic items that will outpace the class. This lessens the importance/usefulness of the chimeric aspect chain which seem to be sold as valuable class features.

Seriously hoping for an archetype that removes the awful burden that the errata to "feral combat training" became and I thought for sure they would bake it into the shifter class, allowing them to use unarmed strike feats/effects with at least their claws. Shifters seem very feat starved for a spell-less martial class. Go go archetypes! :)

Claws at will is awesome, but really just makes me want to take one level (maybe 2 to get defensive instinct) and then 18 monk/fighter/brawler/druid/rogue. Like, any race with a bite, one level of shifter, 19 levels of anything else. Heck, 6 levels of Lion Shaman and the Shaping Focus feat is just as competitive as the 15th level Tiger aspect.

But.... even though I am super critical of this class that I have wanted for a long time, still love the book and look forward to trying a shifter out for myself! Here's hoping for more combat styles that benefit both unarmed strike and natural weapons! (I mean come on... panther style? TIGER style?? GOPHER STYLE?? Oh wait... I made that last one up...) :D

P.S. oh and were is my *expletive* dragon shape?????? sigh... archetypes... :P

"+1 to existing level of a arcane/divine class" is for spells only. Eidolon does not advance with Mystic Theurge.

"Isn't deceived by illusion" is a tad misleading I think. I read it more as "if the illusion is trying to deceive you, you are not deceived" because some illusions create effects that are there whether you believe them or not. So in this kind of grey area I would just read it very strictly, it always makes it's will save and that is all (and I want to believe that is why they bothered to clarify in ()'s ). But this technically also means that objects/constructs can see silent image etc because you only get the will save if you interact with it. So, from across a world or the gulf of space (if your perception is that awesome) it would see the illusion, as soon as it trying to interact with the illusion though it would get its will save and know it's fake. It has been clarified that "seeing something" is not "interacting with something."

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Nefreet wrote:
thelemonache wrote:
i dont agree that you get the +3
You do.

Oh nice :D ok then i agree with everything everyone else said :D

i dont agree that you get the +3, flurry seems clear that only for the purpose of calculating your attack is your BAB higher. The feat checks your real BAB not the attacks BAB (a subtle but important difference in my eyes), so per RAW you only -2 to all attacks and +2 total dodge to AC at level 8.

For the purpose of these attacks, the monk’s base attack bonus from his monk class levels is equal to his monk level. For all other purposes, such as qualifying for a feat or a prestige class, the monk uses his normal base attack bonus.

but that being said... I really dont think its unreasonable for a GM to let you use the flurry BAB in a homebrew. :) like seriously, its only another 1 or 2 ac hehe

I wish :(

well in my opinion, yes it's 32 ft tall, but it only blocks its 3x3x3 cube in combat. its how the game compensates for its reach, yes its spilling over into other squares a bit visually, but from a game mechanic perspective, other people can occupy those spaces since it's not overly invested in those extra squares, but since it is flexibly in there it can reach those squares for attacking. So when it comes to things like squeezing and finding a cage big enough for those types of creatures, you most certainly should say you need a cage bigger than 3x3x3 but from a combat/reach perspective the player is correct to say it only takes up 3x3x3 for the sake of a game token (basically the space it is unwilling to share and gets special game mechanics when you try).

on a side note, lighting effects are often forgotten about for sneak attack. Normally there isn't a whole lot of light Underwater, make sure your amount of light isn't giving your opponent any % of concealment, because you cant sneak attack someone who has concealment without the "shadow strike" feat. Unless you have "normal light" or "bright light" (or darkvision/magical nonsense) you cannot sneak attack anyways :D

unfortunately there is no way to get rid of it that I know of. You might be able to convince your GM to let you use leadership on it though. Then it could even take class levels :) I dont think it would be so far fetched of a thing to request, there are rules for figuring out its effective cohort level and then you could just go up with class levels from there.

I agree with the minute per animal, but for some action drama, I would treat it as a sunder attempt on the attached harness. So like just cut the rope (and don't roll a 1 or you hit the horse hehe)

Speak with Animals of Its Kind (Ex): If the master is 7th level or higher, a familiar can communicate with animals of approximately the same kind as itself (including dire varieties): bats with bats, cats with felines, hawks and owls and ravens with birds, lizards and snakes with reptiles, monkeys with other simians, rats with rodents, toads with amphibians, and weasels with ermines and minks. Such communication is limited by the Intelligence of the conversing creatures.

tumor familiars have no animals of approximately the same kind as itself, so no they cant talk to even other tumors with that ability. The devs made it clear in the improved familiar FAQ that tumors are lumps of flesh in the shape of animals, not actually animals/magical beasts/etc

tumor familiars, as lumps of flesh in the shape of animals, can’t become Improved Familiars

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I actually just finished a campaign as a white haired witch that ran around in fox shape grappling giant things. :) an absolute must for the build is the "equality for all" trait

Not sure if this helps logically or not, but I read somewhere that summon monster and beast shape etc, all DC's generated by the summoned monster use the spells DC and all poison etc from beast shapes also use the spells DC since they are technically being generated by the spell. So that's why I would say you have a good case. I think in the same clarification is said that monster damage is not maximized. It still sounds to me that just raw the spell is dealing the damage, for example if he is holding a tea cup he still hits himself for the fixed damage of the spell, and the same goes for holding a greatsword, he still does a fixed damage. This "fixed" nature leads me to agree that its the spell doing the damage, which is different than dominate monster, where the spell is only controlling the creature and not generating the damage. Either way, its like 9-12 damage so who really cares haha but i get the desire for doing it correctly.

you know... you might be onto something there :) however you still ahve to roll for empower I think. So roll a d8, divide by 2, add 8.

to be clear, yes if its your only natural attack and you do not attack with anything else. If you attack with any other weapons that round, your bite is treated as secondary and only gets half strength and -5 to hit. :)

When you have any order of operations issues to deal with i.e. two contradictory rules, I believe historically it just turns into "pick one." For example weapon finesse says "you may" so if your hitting with your int, and your int is drained, you may then choose to use your weapon finesse feat instead.

But if one class feature clearly goes out of its way to say "always" or "never" or something, I believe it is specifically saying that no other option can override that. For example the mauler familiar archetype comes to mind:

At 3rd level and every 2 levels thereafter, a mauler’s Strength score increases by 1. As a result of this ability, the familiar’s Intelligence score remains 6; a mauler can never have an Intelligence score higher than 6.

seems to go out of its way to say you are never allowed to use other class features/magic to go above 6.

Chad Nedzlek wrote:
If you really hate someone, invisibility + startling appearance + sense vitals will pretty much boil/freeze/dissolve/electrocute anything to death well enough (adding 3d6 sneak attack to the 6 attacks that can't miss is a lot of acid damage).

Well, not to derail the original question too much, but I don't think mystic bolts work with sense vitals. Below is from the FAQ, and while i think I was more confused after reading it, it does kind of suggest that it wouldn't work with anything that specifies manufactured weapon. Bolts count as light one handed, but the FAQ says it is not also assumed to be manufactured weapons.

FAQ: Pathfinder Design Team wrote:

In the same vein as abilities like Arcane Strike that affect a character’s weapons, abilities that say “with a weapon,” “with a melee weapon,” and “with a ranged weapon” almost never work with special abilities because such wording is almost always used as shorthand for “manufactured weapon,” “manufactured melee weapon,” and “manufactured ranged weapon.” The exception is abilities that deal damage when a creature touches or hits you in melee (for instance, the occultis’s energy ward focus power), which should also deal damage when a creature makes a melee touch attack against you but rarely call them out directly.
Certain special abilities (for instance rays, kinetic blasts, and mystic bolts) can specifically be selected with feats like Weapon Focus and Improved Critical. They still aren’t considered a type of weapon for other rules; they are not part of any weapon group and don’t qualify for the effects of fighter weapon training, warpriest sacred weapon, magus arcane pool, paladin divine bond, or any other such ability.
Sense Vitals wrote:

This spell makes your eyes shine blood red and allows you to see the vital areas and weak points of creatures within 30 feet of you as a warm glow. This allows you to use any manufactured weapon to make sneak attacks, as the rogue ability of the same name, dealing an additional 1d6 points of damage; this additional damage increases by 1d6 for every 3 caster levels you possess beyond 3rd, to a maximum of +5d6 at 15th level. This additional damage stacks with other sources of precision damage.

I think this distinction was made to prevent blaster sorcerors from using it to sneak attack with their weapon-like spells.

Personally I like the warlock. I think the vigilante social talents are some of the best out of combat class features in the game and arguably over 65% of most games are spent out of combat. Great skills, great utility spell access (I would focus on things without DC's), and a fun little bolt for flavor, I definitely like the options. If you only care about combat power, then this is probably not the archetype for you.

and dont forget to take advantage of an improved familiar with an archetype that it normally wouldnt qualify for! (like mauler/protector) It's the best feature of the whole darn archetype ;)

technically no with that spell you can't let them take control but there may be other spells or possession type archetypes that better fit what you want to do? for example you could do this to a willing target and then while riding cast possession later to take over:

Riding Possession wrote:

You stealthily project your soul into the host’s body as an observer, with limited ability to influence the target. This functions as possession, except the host is still in full control of its body and is unaware you are possessing it. You can’t communicate with the host directly, but you can cast mind-affecting spells or riding possession on the host as long as

You can cast these spells as purely mental actions. Even if the spell you cast would normally affect more than one target or an area, it can affect only the host. If the host succeeds at a saving throw against a spell that you cast in this way, it immediately becomes aware that it is possessed, and if it was already aware, it receives another saving throw against riding possession. Protection from evil and similar effects don’t expel you from the host, but they do prevent you from casting further spells from within your host until their durations expire.

its a pretty easy spellcraft check, but technically you can voluntarily fail any save. But whether or not he succeeds in his bluff, circumstances could still make him apprehensive about it. For example, Mr. rando-strange-fella approaches me at the mall and says, let me touch you and cure your sickness. He rolls his high bluff check from being trained and practiced and being a jerk and gets a 25. My sense motive result fails, so I have no reason not to believe him, but I sure as crap still wont let him touch me. I say, if the player role played it really well, it's not a rules question its a reward, but if the circumstances are against him and he is just trying to rules lawyer to win the game then just say no. Bluff is not mind control, people still wont do things that they wouldn't normally do.

I don't think you'll ever get the definitive answer you're looking for but my thoughts:

1. range is 20ft. I think this was probably changed late and the flavor text was not updated. I think they wanted a way to not make the caster be stuck inside it.

2. save is only on casting. Its not a real mist, its a figment, so the only thing that remains after casting the spell is the mist, so even entering the mist after you cast the spell only blocks vision and does not request another save. The spell would have to say it does for it to happen. Pathfinder is kind of inconsistently a 0 assumption game, so even when something makes sense, we have to ignore it by RAW. :/

3. this figment cannot be disbelieved, other wise the save section would say "Will disbelief" just like silent image does. Which also means the caster sees this illusion and has his vision blocked also. Figments by default only follow these rules unless another rule says otherwise:


Figment: A figment spell creates a false sensation. Those who perceive the figment perceive the same thing, not their own slightly different versions of the figment. It is not a personalized mental impression. Figments cannot make something seem to be something else. A figment that includes audible effects cannot duplicate intelligible speech unless the spell description specifically says it can. If intelligible speech is possible, it must be in a language you can speak. If you try to duplicate a language you cannot speak, the figment produces gibberish. Likewise, you cannot make a visual copy of something unless you know what it looks like (or copy another sense exactly unless you have experienced it).

Because figments and glamers are unreal, they cannot produce real effects the way that other types of illusions can. Figments and glamers cannot cause damage to objects or creatures, support weight, provide nutrition, or provide protection from the elements. Consequently, these spells are useful for confounding foes, but useless for attacking them directly.

A figment’s AC is equal to 10 + its size modifier.

A mystic bolt deals 1d6 points of damage plus 1 for every 4 vigilante levels the warlock has.

I think they were pretty clear. It's 1d6 points of damage plus 1 for every 4. "1" being the thing being increased every 4 levels. if it were increase 1d6 it would have to say 1d6. So literally per RAW, +1 point of damage every 4 levels. everyone agrees it would be much cooler to increase by a 1d6 like kineticist, but alas.... weaksauce. :D

Meager Rolmug wrote:
thelemonache wrote:
I've read a few forums on this very same question, and the consensus seemed to be that shadowbard played it's own music.
considering that these two spells seem to be the ONLY way to have 2 performances going at once, i would guess VP is basically referencing the shadow bard spell when it says "doesn't stack with other ways of maintaining multiple songs". Is written poorly, though if that was the intent of the phrase.

There is at least one other I remember off hand; the "duetist" archetype

I've read a few forums on this very same question, and the consensus seemed to be that shadowbard played it's own music.

1 to 50 of 217 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>