Just for the sake of completeness:
PRD, CRB, Combat, Combat Maneuver:
(Highlighting is done by me and not part of the RAW)
These combat maneuvers can be performed in place of a melee attack (and therefore as an AoO):
Keep in mind that these maneuvers make you the subject of Attack of Opportunities themself (if you do not have the corresponding feat).
2. If successful, does the trip happen before or after the baddie moves? If before, does the baddie lose any movement spaces he had left in that move action? If not, could he choose to use the remaining movement spaces to crawl?
I would say that it interrupts the action. The baddie would be knocked prone on the field where the AoO happened (or maybe 1 field further, depending on his move speed and a coin toss, let him fly in a high arc). An indication to this is actually the ruling regarding casting spells and executing combat maneuvers: in both cases, one has to take the damage from the attack of opportunity (if any) as penalty to the concentration- or CMB-check.
Yes, he can. He will still provoke AoO's. You only say "I want to use my standard action to execute a (second) move action". This does not alter any properties of the move action. Withdraw lets you move out an threatened area without (certain) provoking AoO's, and it is a full-round action.
This is funny. The FAQ I linked in my first post is from 2013. As far as I know, there is only one Edition of the Advanced Player's Guide, printed in 2010. Either this FAQ directly violates the RAW or there is something we are missing.
Diego Rossi wrote:
I understand your point. My point of view:
PRD, APG, Alchemist:
As you can see, the authors used inert in the Alchemy class feature and perists in the Infusion text. The RAI is that an Alchemist does not start preparing "countless" extracts, setting them down directly after creation and then "cherry picks" the ones he needs. The wording is still unclear, though, and can be misinterpreted. I would argue that, though the liquid itself forming the extract, sill exists after 24 hours, the extract looses its effects as normal and thus the extract ceases to exist.
On the other hand, letting the extracts persist over the 24h time barrier would stop the players from selling extracts to make gold. If an Alchemist wishes to prepare a new Extract, (s)he can simply pour old Extracts in her/his posession before starting to create new ones.
An Alchemist or Investigator can make Extracts of True Strike if they have True Strike on their Formula List. If you want a Wondrous Item that lets you cast True Strike, there is the Cloak of the Hedge Wizard (divination). It costs 2500 gp.
Not only can an Alchemist create an Extract of it, (s)he can even share it via infusion.
Is it PART of a move- or withdraw-action. You use it while moving.
Example: Let's say a character with a base speed of 30 feet wants to move away from an oponent. He/She use this supernatural ability and "slides" 10 feet with Dimensional Slide, consuming 5 foot of his/hers movement. This would allow the character to move 25 feet "on foot" after the dimensional slide.
If the same character wishes do withdraw, but there are oponents threatening squares on the withdraw path, that are not the starting square, the character can first move until reaching a threatened square, then slide, and then move further (if he/she has movement left).
EDIT: Minor text fix (removed "can" in the second sentence).
What about Wand of Cure [Light/Moderate/Serious] Wounds, Wand of [Enlarge/Reduce] Person, Wand of Haste... ? I would argue that a lot of common spells are there. But the argument "it is there so you can cast it with a spelltrigger-item" is in my opinion invalid. An indicator for this is the spell "Air Walk, communal". It is a Level 5 spell and thus cannot be stored in a wand and wands are the most common spelltrigger items.
What me boggles much more is that
Extracts are the most varied of the three. In many ways, they behave like spells in potion form, and as such their effects can be dispelled by effects like dispel magic using the alchemist's level as the caster level. Unlike potions, though, extracts can have powerful effects and duplicate spells that a potion normally could not.[...] An extract is “cast” by drinking it, as if imbibing a potion—the effects of an extract exactly duplicate the spell upon which its formula is based, save that the spell always affects only the drinking alchemist.
Extracts are the most varied of the three. In many ways, they behave like spells in potion form, and as such their effects can be dispelled by effects like dispel magic using the alchemist's level as the caster level. Unlike potions, though, extracts can have powerful effects and duplicate spells that a potion normally could not.[...]
An extract is “cast” by drinking it, as if imbibing a potion—the effects of an extract exactly duplicate the spell upon which its formula is based, save that the spell always affects only the drinking alchemist.
The highlighted portion of the first paragraph suggest that a) a spell made into an extract can be more potent than the corresponding potion and b) you can create extracts of 4th, 5th and 6th level spells, as well as personal spells. But at least the assumption about the "more potent effect" is in fact not true, because the highlighted portion of the second paragraph lets only the alchemist have the effect of this extract. This means Haste (a Level 3 spell) is now a single-target buff, which is on par with the potion. A wand would grant the full "buff", as it would allow multiple allies to be affected.
Then there are the obvious spells on the formulae list (everything "Communal"). Either this is a mayor oversight or the passage regarding extracts needs serious rewording wrt. the target of an extract.
That is correct. If the swarm comes into contact with the elemental, is has to roll it's Reflex Save. If it fails, it takes damage. After that, the swarm rolls the second Reflex Save. If it fails, it will be picked up and take the damage each turn until the effect ends, the swarm dies or the elemental dies.
The downside is that it's incredibly expensive and it's ONLY 9 rounds/day of Greater Invisibility, relegating it to emergencies or going nova.
9 rounds is actually a lot. Imagine a TWF Rogue on level 9 (Sneak Attack +5d6, BAB +6/+1) with Shortswords. This character could damage an oponent for 3x 6d6 DMG per round. Let's assume that this rogue spends two rounds to get to the target. This would leave seven rounds of full damage. If you take the average, this would be 21 DMG per Attack, 63 DMG per Round and 441 DMG total. If the Rogue has improved Two Weapon fighting, that is an additional attack per round. If the rogue gets Haste, that is another attack, all stacking, resulting in a total of 5 attacks per round. You get the idea...
For you, 9 Rounds / day would mean that you can get four sneak attacks in reliably (1 round activating the amulet, 1 round shooting, 1 round deactivating the amulet, consuming 2 rounds for one shot).
There is still the possibility of Invisibility potions. With 300 GP a pop, you would have to consume 34 of them before the amulet breaks even.
With unchained rules and 15 points in Stealth, you can deny an enemy, that is unaware of your location, its Dexterity-Bonus to AC, but this only qualifies for one attack (after the first attack you either have to re-hide by using Sniping, as marked in the Stealth skill descripton or be discovered).
Bringing some sources to this discussion.
[...]The rogue's attack deals extra damage anytime her target would be denied a Dexterity bonus to AC (whether the target actually has a Dexterity bonus or not), or when the rogue flanks her target.[...]
FlankingWhen making a melee attack, you get a +2 flanking bonus if your opponent is threatened by another enemy character or creature on its opposite border or opposite corner.[...]
If you attack with the ranged weapon, then no, you do not flank your target.
[...]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.
Well, this is tricky. In my opinion this feat still does not grant you the flanking bonus. I have two arguments for this: a) your attack is still a ranged attack (the feat description does not mention that this is treated as melee-attack) and b) the part under Normal emphasizes the RAI: you can make (an) attack(s) of opportunity (you can also grant flanking to others, but this is more a side effect). As far as I am aware there is no possibility to grant flanking to a ranged attack with pure Paizo material.
If you are willing and your GM permits it, there is a 3rd Party Feat
Even at a distance, you can take advantage of a distracted opponent. Prerequisite: Point-Blank Shot, Precise Shot, base attack bonus +10. Benefit: When attacking with ranged or thrown weapons from a distance of up to 30 feet, if the nearest adjacent space to your target is unoccupied and the opposite space is occupied by a threatening ally, you are considered flanking. Both you and your ally gain all the benefits of flanking, including +2 flanking bonus on attacks, rogues can sneak attack, etc. Normal: Only characters in melee are considered flanking.
Even at a distance, you can take advantage of a distracted opponent.
Prerequisite: Point-Blank Shot, Precise Shot, base attack bonus +10.
Benefit: When attacking with ranged or thrown weapons from a distance of up to 30 feet, if the nearest adjacent space to your target is unoccupied and the opposite space is occupied by a threatening ally, you are considered flanking. Both you and your ally gain all the benefits of flanking, including +2 flanking bonus on attacks, rogues can sneak attack, etc.
Normal: Only characters in melee are considered flanking.
EDIT: Minor text fixes.
EDIT 2: In foresight, just a RAW
Base attack bonus + Strength modifier + size modifier
This is why it is important that it is not mentioned that the attacks granted by Snapshot are no melee attacks. If they were, RAW says you have to apply your Srength-Modifier instead of the Dexterity-Modifier. Since this would certainly not go unnoticed, there would be some wording like "treat this attack as if it were a melee-attack, but still apply your ranged attack bonus".
Yes they replied. Scroll up to the initial question. There is a little box on the upper right reading:
4 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Staff response: no reply required
Should I put "FAQ request" or “Designer response needed” in my post or thread?
Should I put "FAQ request" or “Designer response needed” in my post or thread?No.
Please refrain from putting "FAQ request" in your title.
I think there is a minor difference between "someone ignoring your Dex-Bonus" and "you loosing your Dex-Bonus". If you loose your Dex-Bonus, everyone attacking you ignores your Dex-Bonus (e.g. because you are paralyzed). If an opponent is invisible, only this opponent ignores your Dex-Bonus.
I know and I do not deny the crit range for a magus-spell. In fact, in my current campagin, I have a magus who uses this ability. We interpret the spellstrike as it was described by Mathmuse since I think that this is how it was intended. The RAW wording, however, is confusing and would be clearer if it would specify that either only the free attack granded by spellstrike uses this critical range or the attack that delivers the spell uses the critical range wrt. spell critical thread (which by the way would include spells that grant multiple touch attacks, since each successive hit delivers (a part of) the spell's effect).
Returning Weapon wrote:
[...] It returns to the thrower just before the creature's next turn (and is therefore ready to use again in that turn). [...]
So you would need at least two Returning Greatswords (or attack once, then throw it) and you would not get the Power Attack bonus on the thrown attacks. Plus, if the target is in meele, you take -4 to attack and a Range increment of 10 ft. isn't great either (given the Belt of Mighty Hurling can add Range to a weapon, that does not have a Range, which breaks down to "Can you throw a Weapon that does not have a Range?"). And if you are within melee range of your opponents when you try to throw your Greatsword, you will be the subject of Attacks of Opportunity.
Keep in mind that if you get hit by an AoO while initiating the Grapple, you take the damage as penalty to your CMB-Roll. Also, both parties gain the "Grappled" Condition and thus all associated penalties.
The Grappler also gets a +5 Bonus on all Grapple-Checks he makes.
Please do not forget that all listed classes can only cast spells up to 4th level. If you take a look for casters casting up to 6th level (Alchemist, Bard, Inquisitor, Magus, Mesmerist, Occultist, Spiritualist, Summoner; I hope I got all) you get:
Occultist (1st-6th): 442
Granted, Summoner (even with his Cantrips) has less spells than an Alchemist.
Huh nice one. Thanks for pointing that out.
The first sentence allows you to use any attack action, not just your free attack action, to discharge your spell using spellstrike.
The question is: if you miss with your free Attack, but crit with the next attack (not with a nat. 20), does the spell still crit? The wording suggests that you have to crit with the free attack granted by spellstrike.
Example: You attack with a Rapier (Crit 18-20, x2) and Spellstrike. Your first attack is the attack granted by Spellstrike and you miss. Your second attack rolls a 19 and you can confirm the critical hit. By RAW, since you did not crit with the free attack of Spellstrike (reffered in RAW as this attack), your weapon cirts, but your spell does not.
In truth, they need to just go through and remove all those offending spells and put a big note in offices for the future that reminds them alchemist extracts can't target non-creature things or create effects that don't affect the drinker.
If you take a look at the achemist's spell list, you will see that it is the shortest of all "spellcasters". Cutting it down would harm the class I think.
Its useful to have on their spell list because they can use a wand of that spell. If it wasn't on their list, then they would have to make a UMD check, but because it is on the list, they can automatically do it.
Alchemist class wrote:
Although the alchemist doesn't actually cast spells [...]
Alchemist: Is an alchemist a spellcaster for the purpose of crafting magic items other than potions?
Alchemist: Is an alchemist a spellcaster for the purpose of crafting magic items other than potions?As written, no, alchemists are not spellcasters, and therefore can't select feats such as Craft Wondrous Item.
Thus, an Alchemist cannot use the corresponding wand and such a formula would indeed be useless for an Alchemist. He could brew the spell into a potion, but this potion would be useless as well.
This is slightly off-topic but underlines that extracts are in fact mechanically decoupled from potions.
Alchemist: Does the Accelerated Drinker feat from Cheliax, Empire of Devils allow a character to drink an alchemist extract as a move action?
Alchemist: Does the Accelerated Drinker feat from Cheliax, Empire of Devils allow a character to drink an alchemist extract as a move action?No.
This is true and by pure RAW, the spell would only be able to transform the Alchemist (or, if he has the Infusion discovery, the drinking person) into liquid. This would be kind of funny in some ways, save that the object is not allowed to be over 20 pounds.
I think the developers would not (intentionally) give a spell to a class, which then cannot be used by this class.
This implies that you only get visual information with Scrying (but a caster using this spell could still be sightless. The image is mentally projected in the caster's conciousness).
Furthermore, the spell description says that you can only observe creatures, not places (thus you cannot use Scrying on a place). As to how many environmental information you get would be the decision of your GM.
I would allow any view angle that holds the target of the spell in focus. Thus you could "fly around" the target, getting environmental clues, but not roam around freely (this rule of thumb should also deny situations in which the caster wishes to "zoom out" too far, since he effectively looses sight of the spell's target).
While each ray spell must make a ranged touch attack, the opposite is not true. There is no rule stating that each spell must fall in one of the given categories.
I would not categorize spells transformed by "Spell Reach" Metamagic as "Ray" and therefore not grant the bonus from Weapon Focus(ray).
Regarding the spellslinger, however, there is no downside.
Since it is a ranged touch spell, this bonus does apply.
School transmutation; Level alchemist 3, bard 3, druid 4, sorcerer/wizard 4
School transmutation; Level alchemist 3, bard 3, druid 4, sorcerer/wizard 4[...]
This spell is available as alchemical formula and thus can be used by an Alchemist.
As I understand it: you drink the extract, which "charges the spell". With this "charged spell" you then have the ability to turn one object within the given size- and range-limitations to liquid.
I think the point is that
which would apply to shurikens. Furhermore:
This includes magic weapon bonusses.
Getting 50 "infinite use" +5 shuriken for the price of 98,000 GP instead of 50 "normal" +5 shuriken for the price of 50,000 GP makes a difference. In other words: "throw" (or, more likely, shard) 100 of these, and you are in the positive.
Restriction This ability can be placed only on melee or thrown weapons.
(sorry, I only found the OGC online reference for this enchantment).
No, you cannot add "Sharding" to your shuriken.
"Somewhat consense" does not cut it.
That is why I want to have it FAQ'ed :)
As of right now, every argument is outside of the rules since definition is unclear. A baseline to go by would be to say "it does not say splash weapon, it is not a splash-weapon; it has no range increment, it cannot be thrown". This is the only logic that could apply (and is most likely how it was intended, but I would like to read this from the developer themself).
Not I am making this demands. These RAW in and of themself make those demands. If it is a Splash Weapon and has no range increment, it has the default increment of 10 ft. If it is a ranged weapon, it needs to have a range increment or it is unplayable, thus cagetorizing it as a ranged weapon is useless without an range increment. If there is a possiblity to throw poisons, the weapon category itself will most probably answers the attack bonus question.
I highly disagree. Wizards/Sorcerer/Oracles/Witches all most probably have less than +3 on their fortitude saves at level 1.
Behaviour of the cloud is not part of my question. This would be more suiteable in my other question (provided, the clouds do linger at all).
It does not make sense to compare Color Spray with Drow Poison. They are absolutely different and typically used by different classes. A "counter argument" would be: "Drow Poison can affect sightless creatures, Color Spray cannot".
Not everything in RPG is about efficiency. Some things you want to do because they are stylish or because they fit your character.
I do not "demand" anything, I hope it gets FAQ'ed since the rules regarding inhaled poisons are unclear to me ;)
Specifically the first sentence defines a splash weapon, which pretty much sounds like the picture I have of a poison vial (including the 5 feet spread, which is somewhat in consense with the 10 cubic feet given in the description of inhaled poisons).
This all (as well as your comparison with flask of acid) does only hold under the assumption that the poison is liquid. But the aggregate state of a poison is never mentioned. It could be a powder or, in case of inhaled poison, even a solid block, which would be burnt to take effect (or grinded to powder, in case you want to use a poison sand tube, see below).
Our group had an argument over that. There are several points for and against throwing inhaled poisons. One point for throwing poisons is the logical approach: you have a flask that cracks open and the chemical react with the air, creating the cloud. One argument against it is the theory that you need a two-component system to deliver the poison since the only two options I know of to deliver inhaled poisons are either traps or the poisoned sand tube.
We agreed to not throw inhaled poisons as as long as the rules are unclear and not FAQ'ed since neither of us could foresee the balance changes. Thus, I turned to this forum.
Regarding lingering time and poison stacking: I though the guys at paizo would figure out that some additional rules have to be made if throwing inhaled poisons is an option. To keep the question simple, I only wrote the necessary bits, which would imply the rest.
As I said before, I asked the question regarding lingering time in a different thread (click me, I am a link).
The question is: "can I throw the vial at some target (creature or intersectin) so that it cracks open and forms a 10 cubic feet poison cloud with the given effect?". The next question would be "which bonusses do I receive?" (this is obvious for me, since it is a thrown weapon that cracks open and has an area of effect, it is a splash weapon that does not deal any damage) followed by "which range increments does such a flask have?", concluded by the last question "how long does such a poison cloud linger?". The first three questions are interlocked, they cannot be answered independetely and must be answered as a whole (eiter they are ranged weapons, need a clear definition of attack bonus and a range increment or they are not). The fourth question I asked in a separate thread since this is important for poison traps as well and can be answered indepentently.
These questions are somewhat of importance regarding balance when you take a look at the Alchemist class (who gets Throw Anything from the get-go), as well as the Poison Conversion discovery. This makes some cheap poisons really powerful, e.g. Drow Poison. Especially if you consider that a lingering poison can stack with itself if the target stays within the cloud for multiple rounds or multiple flasks are thrown at once.
Dr Styx wrote:
This does not answer the question. Poison Sand Tube changes the area of effect (from splash to 15-ft cone). The sneezing powder has nothing to do with this.
Any RAW sources on your claims? As far as I know, there is little to no ruling about inhaled poision deliveries. There are only construction rules for traps, no timings for the cloud, it is not even defined if the poison in its created form is liquid or solid (which might suggest it must be burned in order to take effect).
I extended my question about poisons being splash-weapon by asking if they can be thrown by any means in case they are no splash weapons. This is the actual core of these two questions.