![]()
![]()
bbangerter wrote: In order to counterspell you need to be able to perceive the caster as they are casting so that you can identify the spell (and cast the same spell as a counter). So no you cannot counter at the receiving end of teleport (unless of course it is a very short range teleport where you can also see the caster pre-teleport). Dispel magic also works for counterspelling (just has a check). Are you saying that a caster on the other side of a force wall (no LOE, but able to see the spell being cast and thus identify) but within range of the destination, would actually be able to counterspell a teleport/ddoor? bbangerter wrote: A teleport spell is not completed until the targets have disappeared from one location AND re-appeared at a new location. Both locations need to be free of AMF. Just like a fireball is not complete until it has appeared at your finger, then traveled to the target point and exploded. Likewise an AMF at the source or destination (and everywhere inbetween as it is not instantaneous travel) foils the fireball. Nor is a Stone Discus or Arrow Eruption spell complete until it hits the target under that logic. All 3 still work through AMFs as far as I'm aware. If those fail to work, what does work then? I'm genuinely curious to know which Instantaneous Conjurations you think work inside an AMF, and which do not. I'm also curious how you think instantaneous non-conjuration spells interact with AMF as well, e.g. fabricate. ![]()
Diego Rossi wrote:
Sure and you might have a point if the spell targeted a point inside the AMF. Quote: Range personal and touch Once the spell is cast, all that's left is the result of the spell. Or are you saying that someone with a readied action to counterspell at the destination of teleport can counterspell it? ![]()
Mysterious Stranger wrote:
It would stop teleportation circles, for sure, but Quote: The effects of instantaneous conjurations are not affected by an antimagic field Thus things like Teleport would function. ![]()
FAQ wrote:
Since abilities don't affect spells from magic items, even if you somehow included the ability in the scroll, it still wouldn't affect the spells cast by the scroll. ![]()
They should be asking in the PFS forums if they want a PFS answer (hence why I've flagged it as being in the wrong forum). As AD said, it doesn't matter when they do the test, as it only cares that they've slain a devil with HD greater than their own at some point in their career while being witnessed by a Hellknight. ![]()
MYrmidarch doesn't actually get spell combat with ranged weapons, just something that's similar to it. Therefore, how spell combat works has no bearing on jt and they just do what the ability tells them. Note that you only get to attack while delivering a ranged touch attack from a spell, whereas spell combat allows you to make regular attacks with any extra attacks you have left over after doing so. A better archetype to ask about, would have been Eldritch Archer, which actually does get to use spell combat with ranged weapons. But I suspect you deliberately avoided it because it does call out removing the need for a free hand. ![]()
Construct Modification Rules wrote: Performing modifications on one's own construct requires the Craft Construct feat, and the creator must pay any additional crafting requirements and/or costs associated with the modification. Completing a modification requires 1 day per 1,000 gp of the modification's base price (minimum 1 day). While similar, Construct Modifications are not crafting, therefore you cannot ignore requirements, nor can you speed them up like with crafting. ![]()
Diego Rossi wrote:
We've discussed this before, with your agreement on how it works. They do "stack" for dealing damage (as long as the requirements of both are met). --- To clarify, a Ranger 5/Hinterlander would not stack with each other for determining the progression of their Favored Enemy class features (as per the FAQ) and instead have their own pool of Favored Enemies. This would leave them with the following: - Favored Enemy (Ranger) 2 Picks
This means that they could have:
or - Favored Enemy (Ranger, <Any Ranger Favored Enemy Choice>) +2
If they have: - Favored Enemy (Ranger, Outsider (Evil)) +4
When they attack an Outsider with the Evil subtype, they gain a +6 (+4 (ranger), +2 (hinterlander)) bonus to attack and damage rolls against them since they meet the requirements of both abilities. However, they only count as having a +4 Favored Enemy Bonus (highest of +4 and +2) for the purposes of feats and abilities that require such or use such to determine their effects. ![]()
Taja the Barbarian wrote:
Name does not matter, Favored Enemy (Ranger) and Favored Enemy (Hinterlander) are 2 different class features from 2 different classes and would therefore stack. Similarly, an Unchained Rogue 5/Slayer 3 gets 4d6 (3d6+1d6) dice of sneak attack when they qualify, despite both class features not stacking and them having the same name. ![]()
Diego Rossi wrote: Those are the rules on flanking in the CRB, and they say explicitly that you need to threaten to give a flanking bonus. Combat Rules wrote: You threaten all squares into which you can make a melee attack, even when it is not your turn. Correct, and you threaten squares you can melee attack into. The ability to make AoOs is separate from whether or not you're able to flank. Similarly, using up all your AoOs does not prevent you from flanking. ![]()
Belafon wrote:
Not sure what you're saying here or what you and bbangerter are arguing over, but yes, a heightened spell counts as a spell of it's level + the adjustment from heighten for all intents and purposes. E.G. Save DCs, globe of invuln, how many spell levels it uses from spell turning, etc. (Note that other metamagics do not adjust DCs, change whether a spell can penetrate a globe of invlun, or adjust how many spell levels it counts as for spell turning). However, the final adjusted level of the spell (original spell level + heighten adjustment + other metamagic adjustments) is still used to determine whether you have the ability score to cast spells of that level, along with determining the DCs of concentrations checks, or whether your metamagic rods can affect spells of that level. ![]()
Metamagic Feats wrote: Effects of Metamagic Feats on a Spell: In all ways, a metamagic spell operates at its original spell level, even though it is prepared and cast using a higher-level spell slot. Concentration Rules wrote:
Note that concentration checks are based on the level of the spell that you're casting, and not the spell slot you're using. This would mean that concentration checks are made as if it were a 1st level spell instead of a 3rd. However: FAQ wrote:
The FAQ makes it count as a 3rd-level spell when doing so is more disadvantageous for the caster. This means that it counts as a 3rd level spell for concentration checks, and the ability score required to cast a spell of that level. Similarly, a lesser rod of Empower cannot be used on Quickened Burning hands, despite being able to be used on 3rd level or lower spells (which are not the same as spell slots), since it counting as a 5th-level spell is more disadvantageous for the caster. However, that same rod could be used on a Burning hands cast from a 5th level slot, since it still counts as a 1st level spell. ![]()
Ryze Kuja wrote: He attempts to cast an Empowered Burning Hands out of a 3rd level slot while he's threatened by another creature Except he cannot attempt to do so, since it counts as a 3rd-level spell for this (most disadvantageous for the caster) and he lacks the 13 cha necessary to be able to cast 3rd-level spell. He could instead cast Burning Hands without any metamagics (or a metamagic that only increases the spell level by 1) in a 3rd-level slot, since it would count as a 1st-level (or 2nd-level) spell. ![]()
Quote: If you do not release the grapple, you must continue to make a check each round, as a standard action, to maintain the hold. If your target does not break the grapple, you get a +5 circumstance bonus on grapple checks made against the same target in subsequent rounds. Once you are grappling an opponent, a successful check allows you to continue grappling the foe, and also allows you to perform one of the following actions (as part of the standard action spent to maintain the grapple). That merely sets the default action for maintaining a grapple to a standard action. Nothing in there restricts you to using other standard actions if you have a way to change your maintain to another action via greater grapple or something similar. In fact, things like throat slicer imply the lack of such restrictions. ![]()
Diego Rossi wrote:
Duplicate Thread Main Thread Here ![]()
Diego Rossi wrote:
Hold up a moment, are you arguing that: Quote: the ability score modifier used to determine bonus spells of the same type. Gives sorcerers the ability to use Int for their concentration checks, and wizards the ability to use Cha for theirs? ![]()
Diego Rossi wrote: The bolded part says what stat a monster use for the DC of his SLA abilities. Yes? It was never in question what ability score SLAs used for their DCs. Are you arguing that the DC of a spell is what's used for determining their concentration bonus? Not sure what you're trying to say here ... ![]()
Diego Rossi wrote:
It could even be higher since you can make scrolls with a higher caster level. If you mean what the concentration check of its spell-like abilities would be, well, you should probably brush up on the rules for spell-like abilities. Spell-like Abilities UMR wrote: The creature’s caster level never affects which spell-like abilities the creature has; sometimes the given caster level is lower than the level a spellcasting character would need to cast the spell of the same name. Since it'd be able to cast them as a caster level of 11 and using it's Cha stat (the default stat for SLAs), it has a +13 bonus for its concentration check. Diego Rossi wrote:
As stated above, the concentration check is as listed (+8), but for a scroll it'd use the scroll's stats instead. --- But since you want to bring up the topic of reading whole quotes, you should probably read yours all the way through. Quote:
To use your example above, since a monster's SLAs are presumed to go wizard/sorc -> cleric: Spell-like Abilities UMR wrote: A monster’s spell-like abilities are presumed to be the sorcerer/ wizard versions. If the spell in question is not a sorcerer/ wizard spell, then default to cleric, druid, bard, paladin, or ranger, in that order. That means that the Brimorak's Air Walk ability is from the cleric class (and thus divine). The ability score used for clerics is their wisdom modifier, which for the Brimorak is only a 12 (+1). Does a Brimorak have a:
How about if it attempts to cast the same spell from a scroll of Air Walk (Cleric, CL 7)?
What if it attempts to cast a spell from a scroll that isn't an SLA it has, like Searing Light (Cleric 3, CL 5), what would its concentration check be for that spell? Same as above?
And for a different scenario, how about if solo-classed fighter with 14 Int, 12 Wis, 13 Cha attempts to cast a scroll of Fireball (Wizard, CL 12), what would their concentration bonus be:
![]()
CRB wrote:
Concentration checks use the caster level of the spell for their bonuses, therefore you'd use the scroll's caster level for the check. Similarly, if a caster had Varisian Tattoo, spell specialization, or other feats/abilities that increased the caster level of a spell they cast, they'd benefit from it during their concentration checks for that spell. ![]()
Your own stats don't apply to spells cast from scrolls, so you would use the caster level of the scroll and the lowest ability score needed to cast the spell by the class that the scroll was made by for concentration checks involving that scroll. Similarly, you would use the lowest ability score needed to cast the spell for calculating the DC. ![]()
Diego Rossi wrote: It doesn't say it works as the standard ability, actually, it works differently from the standard ability. So, it isn't the same ability. Again, that is incorrect, altering an ability means that they keep it. Diego Rossi wrote: Now SKR test: Doesn't apply, they still have the ability. ![]()
Artificial 20 wrote:
Note that that FAQ doesn't apply, as the ability doesn't replace the mesmerist tricks class feature, and only alters it. For an an example of how ability replacements are worded, look further down in the archetype at Feign Destiny. Quote: This replaces touch treatment.
![]()
Diego Rossi wrote:
Altering the ability still counts as having that ability, it's only when the ability is removed that you no longer count as having it. So they still qualify for the feat. ![]()
doc the grey wrote: But, does one have to identify the spell within a wand before they can use UMD on it, or can they just UMD it and see what happens? Quote: Spell Trigger: Spell trigger activation is similar to spell completion, but it’s even simpler. No gestures or spell finishing is needed, just a special knowledge of spellcasting that an appropriate character would know, and a single word that must be spoken. Spell trigger items can be used by anyone whose class can cast the corresponding spell. This is the case even for a character who can’t actually cast spells, such as a 3rd-level paladin. The user must still determine what spell is stored in the item before she can activate it. Activating a spell trigger item is a standard action and does not provoke attacks of opportunity. All UMD lets you do, is bypass the need for it to be on your class's spell list, you still need to identify it to use it. ![]()
Diego Rossi wrote: AoN shows only the more recent version because it replaces the older version. It isn't an alternative version, the more recent version is the Paizo official version. Except it doesn't always do so. Diego Rossi wrote: Paizo official policy is that more recent versions of a class, ability, spell, mystery, etc. replace older versions. That is incorrect, only reprints override older versions. Pathfinder Design Team wrote:
The only policy is that the default version they use for their publications going forward will be the latest version, however, the previous version is perfectly valid to use and they even encourage you to use the version that your group likes. Similarly, pick-ups only affect the material after them, and you shouldn't change previously printed material to account for such. ![]()
Taja the Barbarian wrote: It looks like Pathfinder #39: The City of Seven Spears introduced the Juju Mystery for Oracles, which is not really connected to the 'Zombie' template of the same name ('Juju' is 'a spiritual belief system incorporating objects, such as amulets, and spells used in religious practice in West Africa' so the term encompasses far more than just a single type of undead). Except that it was originally far more related to controlling undead and making them. For some reason, AoN only shows the reprinted version, but the other version was far different originally, similar to how Pact Wizard was completely different in its reprint. ![]()
Wasp familiar outright prevents having multiple familiars. Otherwise: Familiar Rules wrote: Levels of different classes that are entitled to familiars stack for the purpose of determining any familiar abilities that depend on the master's level. So basically, you can only ever have one familiar. ![]()
Quote: If a bard uses the horn to start a bardic performance, all effects of that performance are calculated as if the bard were 6 levels higher. Quote: A sound striker gains the following type of bardic performance They're bardic performances, I don't see why it wouldn't work. As for the words thing, maybe they blow the horn before they begin speaking to empower their words with its magic. Who knows, it's a magic item in a fantasy world. The mechanics of how the two interact is clear though, they would gain the benefit of three reasons to live. If you want a PFS ruling though, you should ask in the PFS forums. ![]()
Wonderstell wrote:
A monk weapon is a weapon with the monk special ability, not a weapon in the monk fighter group. So it wouldn't let you use the versatile design spear with it, unless you're able to select spears with ascetic style (because you happen to have one spear with versatile design on it). ![]()
There's always the fun Possession rules. The most relevant of which I think is: Quote: The possessor uses her skill ranks, along with any feats the possessor has for which she still qualifies in the host’s body. The possessor doesn’t gain any of the host’s feats or skill ranks, but does apply bonuses and penalties associated with the host’s body. For example, when attempting Fly checks, a character who possessed a bird would use her own ranks in the Fly skill, but the bird’s Dexterity modifier and racial, size, and maneuverability bonuses. How I read that, you still use your own statistics for determining your abilities, and only modify their bonuses based on the physical characteristics of the host. ![]()
Temperans wrote: 2.B) Additional damage does not get multiplied on a crit so the 1d4 fire from the poi would not get multiplied, just like how the +1 fire damage from a lit torch wouldn't get multiplied. Sure, if it was additional damage, it wouldn't be multiplied, but it's not, the weapon's base damage is 1d4 (fire) for medium size. Temperans wrote: The listed damage is - or 0 +1d4 fire. Really? Show me where it's listed as either of those. It's definitely not listed as that on AoN or in the book, so it'd be good to know what errata you're looking at for that info. ![]()
Diego Rossi wrote:
It increases the listed damage of the weapon, which you may notice is 1d4 (fire) for battle poi. If I have a +2 longsword, it deals +2 slashing damage, does this mean that if I have a +2 warhammer, it deals +2 slashing damage in addition to its regular bludgeoning damage? No, instead the enchantment increases the damage based on the type that the weapon deals, and battle poi deal fire damage. That's all there is to it. I see absolutely no reason why in a world where magic can generically increase the damage of weapons, why that enchantment would not increase the effectiveness of the flames that are produced when the battle poi are lit. Unless you're actively selling replacement heads for the poi and priced out the fuel used per time they're lit along with the duration they stay lit, I don't see the reason to consider the fuel to be separate from battle poi itself for the purposes of determining if it's a weapon. UI guess you could be saying that you can enchant the fuel they're soaked in, and purchase different types of enchanted fuels for them ... but I doubt you've made that many homebrew rules for them.
|