vikhik's page

Just my 2c:

Blind-fight's relevant part:
An invisible attacker gets no advantages related to hitting you in melee. That is, you don't lose your Dexterity bonus to Armor Class,

Sneak attack's relevant part:
The rogue's attack deals extra damage anytime her target would be denied a Dexterity bonus to AC

Stealth's relevant part (because wasn't the assassin in this example stealthed, not invis?):
Success: your observer fails to notice you

Now, I believe that Blind-Fight works against invisible opponents, that you know are there.

I believe that, given the above, sneak attack should work for the first attack.

There is no reason why a stealthed rogue cannot sneak attack an eligible target, at least once. (And try and re-hide if they're sniping ;)

Just purchased this, eagerly awaiting my shipment!
Does anyone know when the PDF for this will be available for me to download? Shouldn't it already be available?

I cannae wait to read this!

Just a note, I, Ogi's DM am watching this thread. It's a rather annoying issue as I don't want to nerf ogi's riding abilities, yet I also don't want repeated encounters nerfed by him outdoors, so I'd also love to see other DM's opinions on how to deal with mounted chars that deal ~50 damage on a charge at level 5

Zen79 wrote:

I included these requirements because I didn't want every fighter to use a scythe. Let me explain: the core weapons are balanced somehow, i.e. there are weapons with a high threat range (Scimitar, ...) but with a low multiplier, and there are weapons with a high multiplier (Scythe, ...) but a small threat range. Now, whith introducing my feats, all 'optimizing' players would choose one of the X4 crit weapons and get the better threat range from the feats. Thats the situation I wanted to avoid with these requirements.

The point is that a falchion and a scythe do exactly the same amount of average damage, with or without crit-increasing feats, so there's no reason to limit the feats to one or the other.

I think the point is to make non standard weapons viable at a high feat cost, and I admire the work. E.G. a club based fighter.

How does one resolve a level 2 elf fighter with the Trample feat? He has a str of 14 and a light warhorse.

Personally the Overrun combat maneuver is a little convoluted. Can he overrun multiple targets?

Do I
A. Use his characters CMB and the horse gets a free hoof attack against the target?
B. Use the horses CMB and the horse gets a free hoof attack against the target?
C. Some weird combination of the above?

If Maethoron the Cavalier ordered his horse to overrun a group of kobolds (or one?) as part of a charge.. could he also use his lance? Could he attempt to overrun at the same time? What can/can't he do?

*Twitch*

In that case... couldn't you just "quick draw" one hand crossbow back and forth between your main and off hands?

For someone names after the god of pranksters you're quite uptight :D

And possibly, but i think that still counts as one weapon. What I wrote was RAW, in TWF iirc it never specifies you must have two weapons, one in each hand _at the same time_. It just specifies that you fight with two weapons!

Can I just say, I once used a similar character. I love the concept. The trick isn't to reload your crossbows quickly.. the trick is to have a lot of them available and loaded at hand.

Think about it this way, how many hand crossbows could you strap to your body. Add quick draw. Maybe add a houserule feat that you can keep crossbows loaded on your person for up to X hours without damaging the crossbow or risking harm to yourself.

if your dm wont let you stand behind cover stealthed for an hour loading a million accessible hand crossbows (easily 8!) without shooting yourself in the foot do the following to him/her. They deserve it.

// ***WARNING*** EXTREME CHEESE (and/or f!$$ing cool.)
Quick draw and rapid reload

1. Fire both crossbows
2. free - drop both
3. free - get one for main hand
4. free - reload one
5. continuing iterative - fire it
6. free drop it
7. free - get one for off hand
8. free - reload it

etc etc

As many free actions as you want in a round? Eat your heart out, carry a dozen hand crossbows.

Hey everyone.

Right now I'm in the midst of reading through the Pathfinder rules (and loving them, for the most part) and I came across an old, badly worded rule that has left me wondering how to treat it since the dawn of 3.5e.

Let me recount it so we're all on the same page here.

Pathfinder RPG Rules wrote:

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. You can touch one friend as a standard action or up to six friends as a full-round action.

The section I've bolded appears to explicitly specify that a caster can hold the charge on a touch spell and then perform touch attacks or willing touches with it round after round, indefinitely, then goes on to explicitly specify that touching ANYTHING or ANYONE intentionally or otherwise, discharges the spell. Furthermore, why even go on to detail the act of touching 6 allies as a full-round action if the first ally you touch will discharge the spell?

Am I missing something here? It appears to me that the rule makes itself impossible. Could it be that the word "discharge" is not defined as the spell's charge being lost but rather that the spell's effect takes place but the charge remains held?

So my question to you all is simple... What's going on here, and how should this rule be adjudicated in-game?

Waaait a second.. So my wizard who cast chill touch... and missed.. DIDN'T use up his spell? I thought attempting an attack roll still used up a charge if you missed?

Since skill focus affects one skill, and versatile performance allows you to use your total skill bonus for 2 other skills, would the combination of them effectively allow you to get the skill focus bonus to 3 skills?

Short Answer: Yes

Sorry I was unclear - dming at the same time - I mean does to _identify_ a spell, does a wizard need to:

1. both see and hear the spell cast
2. just see or hear
3. just see

Secondly, I understand the book *implies* sneak attacks with spells with attack rolls are legitimate, but there were arguments for and against.. was there any dev(or nethys, he's almost a dev imo :P) response as to whether a spell can be used to sneak attack with. Mainly I care about the melee and ranged touch stuff, so thanks for clearing that up. Is there any way to properly weapon focus(melee touch spells?)

Thirdly, cat bite/claw/claw gets no benefit from multiattack.. this seems poorly thought out...

My players wizard can hear but not see two spellcasters casting a spell, according to pathfinder skills he must SEE, according to 3.5 he must SEE or HEAR? I believe its a -5 for not seeing or for not hearing in 3.5, does a similar rule exist in pathfinder?

Is it possible to take weapon focus(melee touch) or (ranged touch) and weapon spec etc? Or are they _weapon_ only in pathfinder?

Sneak attack has been discussed in a similar vein, so I wont ask, except to ask has it been confirmed by devs that SA is useable with "attacks from within 30ft" (weaponlike spell etc)

Final question.. What does multiattack do for animal companions or other monsters with three primary attacks? I believe the druid AC gets it for free at some level or another.

My personal 3.5 feat list has over 1300 feats on it. Most of them came from the 3.5 core books and supplements and splat books.

Any chance I could get a copy of that list? :D

Maybe doing it as Std action for a single attack and Move action to *equip* the buckler without having to take it out or pick it up. You could still get a 5' step and it might just be RAW.

That's a great idea, I'd allow a player to use a move action to "reprep" their buckler, it does seem to be fair.

So, I've just created this character and I had a pertinent question: Do things that amplify the save DCs of Channel Energy also amplify the save DCs of things like Command Undead (since they are a variant use of Channel Energy)? My gut instinct says "Yes" and so I built this character on that assumption (using the Sacred Conduit trait and the Improved Channel feats to amplify my Command Undead) but I wanted to make sure I was right before I actually played him. Thanks!

Personally as a DM I allow those feats to stack, it makes for very interesting characters... but I'm not sure on the RAW.

Except that Wild Shape is a supernatural ability, and therefor doesn't have material components.

Ah, that solves it.

I did warn my party for this particular campaign I'd be a bit annoying about rare and/or expensive material components. That being said things like elemental body would be rather difficult for a wizard to do, I suppose I will hand wave most the costless mats after all.

The animals a druid can change to is limited by the environments he is familiar with. Most DM's determine familiarity by where your character grew up, and may add other areas later on. Having a piece of an animal has no influence.

Her options for new forms include

Beast Shape I
School transmutation (polymorph); Level sorcerer/wizard 3
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S, M (a piece of the creature whose form you plan
to assume)

The druid's ability to assume other forms requires the druid to "Have a piece of that creature" (iirc). Is it possible for my druid to use the Summon Natures Ally spells to summon a creature then take a piece of hair etc, or would the animals hair disappear with the animal itself? If so it makes the Elemental Body spells very hard to use..