yumad's page

Goblin Squad Member. 165 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.



1 person marked this as a favorite.

Usually additional damage from spells and inspire courage for your weapon attacks assume YOU are wielding it. You are not wielding these javelins, they are being thrown by the spell, I'd say no weapon damage modifiers from other spells on holy ice. Interesting question though.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

3.5 FAQ on Freedom of Movement:

Does the freedom of movement spell protect a character
from being stunned? The argument is that “stun” is a
condition that hinders movement.
Freedom of movement is one of those tricky spells that has
a lot of open-ended wording that might lead to confusion. The
spell becomes much more manageable if you just look at it as
something that ignores any physical impediment to movement
or actions. If you assign this restriction, then it makes sense that
freedom of movement works against solid fog, slow, and web;

each of these spells puts something in the way of the creature
that stops them from moving/acting, or specifically targets the
creature’s physical movement.
With this interpretation, spells and effects such as hold
person that apply a mental impediment to taking any action
would not be bypassed by freedom of movement. These are
mental effects, and freedom of movement only helps you bypass
physical effects (such as solid fog) or effects that specifically
impede just your movement, not spells that stop you from
taking any action, as hold person does.
In the same vein, freedom of movement would not work on
someone who had been turned to stone by a medusa’s gaze or
by a flesh to stone spell.
To answer the original question, being stunned is one of
those mental effects and would normally deny a creature the
ability to act at all. Since it’s not specifically focused on just
impeding movement, and it is a mental, not physical
impediment, freedom of movement would not help a stunned
creature to act or move normally.
This interpretation of freedom of movement can make it
easier to adjudicate the effects of the spell, but it is also more
restrictive. As always, it will ultimately be up to the Dungeon
Master to make the best call as he sees fit for his campaign and
play session.

Since freedom of movement is from 3.5, then the FAQ and intent of the spell should carry over unless stated otherwise.

Edit: Sorry for the awful text formatting, it's copied from a PDF containing the 3.5 FAQ.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Sindalla wrote:

You know, at first, I thought, "this is ridiculous, your players are trying to abuse the system."

I went ahead and read the whole spell to see if something was missed and here you go.

PFSRD wrote:
This spell enables you or a creature you touch to move and attack normally for the duration of the spell, even under the influence of magic that usually impedes movement, such as paralysis, solid fog, slow, and web. All combat maneuver checks made to grapple the target automatically fail. The subject automatically succeeds on any combat maneuver checks and Escape Artist checks made to escape a grapple or a pin.

Daze and Staggered are as much a debilitation to your movement as paralysis, on an even lower scale actually. I guess a case truly can be made here. Good find!

Nope, paralysis is physically preventing you from moving, which also prevents you from taking most physical actions. You can still take mental actions freely. It's a movement inhibitor, not an action inhibitor. Daze and stun are action inhibitors, you were hit in some way or had a spell cast on you that prevents you from thinking straight or similar and are unable to act appropriately.

Daze and stun are closer to frightened to confused than paralysis. They prevent actions entirely or prevent you from doing the actions you want to do. You need to have the ability to tell your body to move before you can do so.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
nogoodscallywag wrote:

Hmmm...I tend to agree except my players are making a good argument. The first part of FOM does say: "This spell enables you or a creature you touch to move and attack normally for the duration of the spell..."

If your players want to play like this the next time they cast freedom of movement have the recipient fly off into space as they are no longer affected by the gravity of the planet or the star it orbits around and would fly off in a straight line. Not to mention depending on the composition of the orbit of the planet if it is post apoapsis the planet's orbit would be accelerating and the player would start to sink into the planet since rock and stone apparently no longer impede their movement until he can clear the orbit. This will often have them end freedom of movement embedded in the planet.

Or, you can just use it as intended and only have it prevent movement restriction, not action restriction.

Not only are your players munchkins but they are bad at it.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
nogoodscallywag wrote:

But, can it not be argued that daze does indeed impede movement?

"The creature is unable to act normally. A dazed creature can take no actions, but has no penalty to AC."

It restricts the movement by making the dazee unable to take actions...

If this logic works, then freedom of movement makes you immune to death, because death impedes your movement too.

It's only for things that specifically impede movement directly, not indirectly like daze, stun or death.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rynjin wrote:
yumad wrote:
Rynjin wrote:
Meanwhile, the party Barbarian pounces, and gets the same amount of damage or more with much fewer hits required, while having more HP, DR, etc.
Yeah, but the barbarian is an outlier and exception, not the rule.

Meanwhile the party Paladin Smites, and gets the same amount of damage or more with fewer hits requires while having more HP, AC, self healing, etc.

Meanwhile the Party Ranger lets loose with a flurry of arrows at his Favored Target, dealing the same amount of damage or more while having more HP, an Animal Companion, spells, attacks at long range, etc.

Meanwhile the party Fighter attacks a target and deals the same amount of damage or more with fewer hits required (alternatively "lets loose with a flurry of arrows for ludicrous damage") while having more HP, higher AC, etc.

The only difference between them and the Barbarian in that scenario is that he can do it in one round instead of two like the everyone else.

yumad wrote:

Hell, we are doing a power limited campaign in which we don't allow full caster and other extremely powerful options, and barbarian is one of the non-full-caster banned classes.

Relevance to the subject at hand?

yumad wrote:


Why not just, you know, flank? It's not like rogues/ninjas are THAT fragile or vulnerable in visible melee combat with the right feat/talent/trick choices. Offensive Defense is a good one.

The problem being that that requires the Rogue to actually hit something, which is far from guaranteed.

The relevance of my comment about banned classes in relation to my comment of your post is clear, don't play ignorant just to snark.

The massive strength of the barbarian, besides the literal massive strength and damage, is pounce which makes him amazingly mobile My comment was only in comparison to other melee classes so the points about archers, while correct, aren't valid. If that wasn't clear from the fact that I was addressing a barbarian comment then that's unfortunate. Melee options other than barbarian require that they position themselves before blowing up the target, like ninja/rogue.

Paladin smite adds a lot of damage yeah, but how much does sneak attack add? At level 11 a paladin can add 11 damage (or 15 with bracers of the avenging knight), while 6d6 sneak is an average of 21 damage, which can be pushed up by deadly sneak making the minimum roll on sneak dice 3. The paladin gets cha to attack rolls but the ninja often is attacking flat footed which can sometimes be as good or better, and sometimes worse. The paladin penetrates all DR, which is a great boon and hard to beat, but the DR needs to be greater than 5 for this to matter with average damage rolls, or even greater than 10 if the paladin does not have the bracers. Offensive Defense, if you can land the hit equals out the AC bonus from smite too, and often rogues can have similar AC to paladins wearing full plate because of their often prodigious amounts of dexterity. The ninja has no answer to the increased hit die or the self-healing because the paladin IS the better class, but the gap isn't as large and the advantage to offense is certainly not heavily skewed in the paladin's favor, slightly yes. The power gap is certainly not as large as melee vs ranged, especially gunslingers or things like nova bomb alchemists or T1 casters in general against martials.

The classes aren't balanced. Yes the barbarian and many other martials are the mechanically superior option to ninjas/rogues but they aren't the complete garbage that a lot of threads on paizo make them out to be. I don't play ninjas/rogues and I still think the hate they get is overblown.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mikaze wrote:
I swear to God I'm gonna flag the next poster that says "shenanigans".

Antics? Capers?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
ShadowcatX wrote:
This is really, REALLY a stretch to even claim this is worth asking. No, it doesn't work like that, no the wording doesn't hint, or indicate or anything else that this is how it works.

Except the first reply to the thread was an acknowledgement that this is a valid reading. Covering your ears and yelling until I go away does not make it any more true.

This is no more valid than the thread asking about flat-footed vs traps because there were some very "special" people in that thread. If people can't get that right, there is room for this question too.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Quantum Steve wrote:
Kazumetsa Raijin wrote:
The bold parts, being the most relevant. It seems pretty clear to me. The only difference between Damage and Drain, is that one generally lasts longer than the other, and they are "cured" differently.

Not at all. Review the bold parts again.

Damage applies a -1 penalty for every two points. Drain modifies all the relevant stats.

Damage only gives a numeric penalty, so it doesn't really have any effect of statistics that aren't checks of some kind. A -1 penalty to Combat Reflexes doesn't really do anything.

Hold on a second here, combat reflexes provides you with a scaling bonus off of dexterity, if you take a numeric penalty to combat reflexes you definitely do lose AoOs, even by RAW. There is no ambiguity here, there is only one numeric value associated with combat reflexes, a bonus to AoOs. A penalty applies to the bonus given by the feat, a -1 penalty applied to it reduces the bonus given by said feat by 1.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ryan Dancey wrote:
Destiny's Twin has been retired.

I don't like the answer, but I appreciate the response. It's nice to get a response from a company that isn't like drawing blood from a stone.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Barbarian is very strong yeah, but the only thing I'd say is unbalanced is spell sunder. There is no restriction on what it can do by RAW so it can suppress things that require mage's disjunction or combinations of spells like prismatic wall/sphere.

This is bad juju. In our games we rule that anything dispel magic or a similarly powered spell (remove curse, break enchantment maybe), can't remove, spell sunder can't touch either. Otherwise you get really silly situations.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Folllowing tactics to the letter when they have a sufficient int score and appropriate skills allowing them to be capable of making decisions is foolish.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dilvias wrote:

Here is a pretty standard barbarian build, 20 points, 108k in gold:

** spoiler omitted **

So when not raging, IR Barbarian has an AC of 33 (with a DR 6/-, DR 12/- vs non-lethal, and 4 fire resistance), a move of 50', is +22/+17/+12 to hit doing 1d8+10 damage. He can boost that for -4 to hit, +8 damage with power attack, or take a -5 to hit to daze an opponent on a DC 22 vs. fort. His saves are +14 Fort, +10 Ref, +10 Will. He also can attack with the longbow for +15 to hit, 1d8+8 damage. He can drop the shield, taking a -6 to AC to gain a +3 bonus to damage, plus another +4 with power attack. He can do his all day. Not quite as good as a fighter, but for most CR 8 opponents, good enough.

But, what if he faces something nastier, with bad supernatural abilities, is intagible, or just plain hard to kill? IR Barbarian takes a couple of his 28 rounds of raging, and now his AC jumps to 35, he gets +3/+3 with the sword (+5 damage without the shield), He gains +3 to will saves, fort saves and an...

-3 on those will saves, rage will save does not stack with superstition (they are both morale bonuses). Otherwise looks alright.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Really? A thread complaining about FIGHTERS? A thread. About Fighters. People really will complain about EVERYTHING. When I saw this thread I assumed the usual, wizard (and other full casters), gunslinger, barbarian, summoner and also summoner. But fighter?

These damage values are hardly broken at all. You can get a blaster sorcerer/wizard, easily one of the weakest ways to do damage, to hit harder than this. Much harder, more than the fighter's possible maximum damage if both strikes hit, and in a 20 foot burst with little more than the right build and a lesser rod of empowering. And then there are gunslingers. This damage is not outshining the party, perhaps the party is just well, a waste of space when it comes to combat?

The above is perfectly okay if the other characters are alright with not performing well in combat, not everyone has to be good in combat. The GM can make lots of out of combat RPing for them too, using their skills and roleplaying talents. If they are not okay with being useless in combat, then looks like they need to fix their characters, it is not the fighter's fault that he isn't built with a handicap.