|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I’ve got a question about skeletal champions. I understand that they’re supposed to keep their intelligence and class levels. My question is: are they supposed to NOW be vulnerable to mental effects? Can you intimidate a skeletal champion?
It seems just wrong. Am I missing something? Skeletons and many other undead have the mindless trait. Skeletal champions do not. What gives?
As andreww notes, you can absolutely intimidate a Skeletal Champion, Which makes sense, they're a thinking being with emotions and self preservation as a goal. The same is true of vampires, ghouls, and most other thinking undead.
Hello, quick question.
Is a cleric dedication enough to be able to use a Staff of healing to its full potential ?
"You can Cast a Spell from a staff only if you have that spell on your spell list, are able to cast spells of the appropriate level, and expend a number of charges from the staff equal to the spell’s level."
In other words, say i'm a level 10 sorcerer with a cleric dedication, can I use a Greater Staff of Healing to cast heal, restoration, restore senses and remove disease ?
|
|
I don't think so. I'm pretty sure you need to be able to cast the spells of the appropriate Tradition of the appropriate level for it to work.
It would let you avoid needing to take them as spells known on a Divine Sorcerer, but wouldn't let an Arcane Sorcerer cast them with only the initial Cleric Dedication.
Hi Guys. Does the +1 circumstance bonus to AC from Shielding Salve, stack with Raise Shield/Cover? So if you apply to a shield and then make the Raise Shield action, do you still get the additional bonus to AC?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hi Guys. Does the +1 circumstance bonus to AC from Shielding Salve, stack with Raise Shield/Cover? So if you apply to a shield and then make the Raise Shield action, do you still get the additional bonus to AC?
No; both are circumstance bonuses, so don't stack
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hi Guys. Does the +1 circumstance bonus to AC from Shielding Salve, stack with Raise Shield/Cover? So if you apply to a shield and then make the Raise Shield action, do you still get the additional bonus to AC?No; both are circumstance bonuses, so don't stack
Thanks for clearing that up, for me.
|
Is a cleric dedication enough to be able to use a Staff of healing to its full potential ?
"You can Cast a Spell from a staff only if you have that spell on your spell list, are able to cast spells of the appropriate level, and expend a number of charges from the staff equal to the spell’s level."
In other words, say i'm a level 10 sorcerer with a cleric dedication, can I use a Greater Staff of Healing to cast heal, restoration, restore senses and remove disease ?
You would need the higher level archetype feats, so you could cast the higher level spells:
A spellcasting archetype allows you to use scrolls, staves, and wands in the same way that a member of a spellcasting class can.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Is a cleric dedication enough to be able to use a Staff of healing to its full potential ?
"You can Cast a Spell from a staff only if you have that spell on your spell list, are able to cast spells of the appropriate level, and expend a number of charges from the staff equal to the spell’s level."
In other words, say i'm a level 10 sorcerer with a cleric dedication, can I use a Greater Staff of Healing to cast heal, restoration, restore senses and remove disease ?
You would need the higher level archetype feats, so you could cast the higher level spells:
A spellcasting archetype allows you to use scrolls, staves, and wands in the same way that a member of a spellcasting class can.
I see where you're (Nefreet) coming from on this, but I don't think the text explicitly supports your reading of it -- it doesn't say that you must be able to cast spells of the appropriate level from that spell list, only in general.
A clarification would be helpful, since I read it the other way as well.
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Regarding the spell Aqueous Orb:
How can creatures make the DC 10 Swim check when they become Grabbed and thus Immobilized? Immobilized prevents actions with the Move trait which Swim has.
Specific overrides general. The spell specifically says you may make the DC 10 Athletics check to swim out of the Orb, so you can.
A question about catfolk weapon familiarity-
I have a catfolk Rogue Scoundrel, and want to use Kukris-
in Catfolk weapon familiarity, we have this:
"In addition, you gain access to Kama, Kukris, and all uncommon catfolk weapons. For you, martial catfolk weapons are simple weapons, and advanced catfolk weapons re martial weapons."
Next, we have weapon tricks for Rogue-
"You gain expert proficiency in simple weapons, as well as the rapier, sap, shortbow and shortsword..."
Does this not imply that I should now have expert proficiency in the Kukri, which is now a simple weapon to me?
Yes. This is precisely what these weapon familiarity feats are for.
Just be aware that the Catfolk Weapon Familiarity feat will be errated eventually so that it is worded like the other weapon familiarity feats.
But that will have no effect on you.
A question about catfolk weapon familiarity-
I have a catfolk Rogue Scoundrel, and want to use Kukris-
in Catfolk weapon familiarity, we have this:
"In addition, you gain access to Kama, Kukris, and all uncommon catfolk weapons. For you, martial catfolk weapons are simple weapons, and advanced catfolk weapons re martial weapons."
Next, we have weapon tricks for Rogue-
"You gain expert proficiency in simple weapons, as well as the rapier, sap, shortbow and shortsword..."
Does this not imply that I should now have expert proficiency in the Kukri, which is now a simple weapon to me?
The issue is that Kukris are NOT catfolk weapons and therefor do not fall under "martial catfolk weapons are simple weapons". Catfolk weapons are ones that have the Catfolk Trait and there is exactly one of those: Claw Blade. That's why it doesn't show up in pathbuilder, as it doesn't do anything for the kukri other than allow access to the weapons.
The issue is that Kukris are NOT catfolk weapons and therefor do not fall under "martial catfolk weapons are simple weapons". Catfolk weapons are ones that have the Catfolk Trait and there is exactly one of those: Claw Blade. That's why it doesn't show up in pathbuilder, as it doesn't do anything for the kukri other than allow access to the weapons.
Thankyou
Hello! I was wondering about the archetype feat from Medic called Resuscitate. I was wondering if it was possible for spells like Gentle Repose or items like Timeless Salts to affect the timer of how long Resuscitate, or would one rule that it won't apply to it since it's not a spell?
Hello! I was wondering about the archetype feat from Medic called Resuscitate. I was wondering if it was possible for spells like Gentle Repose or items like Timeless Salts to affect the timer of how long Resuscitate, or would one rule that it won't apply to it since it's not a spell?
RAW, those have no effect on Resuscitate as it isn't magic or a spell.
RAI, I don't think it changes: Gentle Repose/Timeless Salts just protects the corpse from decay and keeping it fresh. I don't see that as keeping the window open for mundane resuscitation attempts. A perfectly preserved body would still be brain dead.
I don't think that the control water spell got any clarity added to it from the most recent rounds of Errata. The wording of the spell is incredibly strange. The spell has no target. Nothing in the area description specifies that the area needs to contain water for the spell to work. Then we get the description that sounds like it was written in an archaic spell book:
By imposing your will upon the water, you can raise or lower the level of water in the chosen area by 10 feet. Water creatures in the area are subjected to the effects of slow.
What is "the water" that the caster is imposing her will upon? ground water? the level of water? Is this same as the water level? It would be really cool to see folks at paizo talk about different ways this spell is intended to be used, even if you all wanted to avoid making set rulings about exactly what it is supposed to do.
What happens when I cast it on a small fountain in an inclosed room? Can I Moses a river? If so, for how long?
Even as a GM I find this spell a little difficult to fiat fairly.
Snow and ice are frozen water. Can this spell control them? What about water vapor?
Wider question: does anyone vet the spell descriptions people come up with? This kind of thing should have been caught very early in the development cycle.
Can you target a small cup of water in the middle of a small room to flood the whole room? Who the heck knows.
I don't think that the control water spell got any clarity added to it from the most recent rounds of Errata.
That has been pretty thoroughly debated to the point of beating a dead horse in other threads. As far as I know, the errata didn't bring anything new to the table.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Can you target a small cup of water in the middle of a small room to flood the whole room? Who the heck knows.
No, because you can't target objects! ;)
There have been more than a few tricky rules interactions that have come up with the 9th level monk in my game. This one nearly stumped me.
In Clinging Shadows Stance (10 ft reach) the monk used Whirling Throw to throw a creature 10 ft away. They assumed the target was still grappled since it never left their threat range, I ruled otherwise. So here's the question:
When a monk uses Whirling Throw, can they maintain the grapple if the target remains within their reach?
I think this is one they won't answer because it's too specific (and they have a rule of thumb for PF2 to avoid getting into minutia as that leads down rabbit holes best left to GMs on site). I'd say you made the right call, and I find it odd that they assumed their PC would maintain the grapple.
I wonder if that's the whole point of their build though, to keep throwing their opponent away from them every round without having to let go. So maybe allow a rebuild if that's why they made their choices?Not that it does significant damage, nor will it age well when most enemies gain reach. I believe PF2 even has rule somewhere where you can attack an out-of-reach creature's limbs if those limbs remain in reach (due to Grab mostly). Hmm.
To me it seems obvious when you throw something, you release that something. Obvious to the point nobody would list it in the feat. I wrestled (long ago) and even in combat sports a person will nearly always have to regain control of a thrown opponent, even someone you threw down right at your feet (unless you travel with them, which you don't with Whirling Throw).
And re-grappling is something the PC could do. Note Whirling Throw doesn't have the Attack trait so there'd be no penalty to Grapple in the same round. If they start the round with the opponent grappled, they could even Throw, Grapple, Throw again (from the new, perhaps better position) with zero MAP on their only Attack action. (Or Flurry Grapple!)
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Scorpion Whip - are bards proficient? Or is it just basic whips they are and its a separate weapon? I can see both sides of the argument.
Scorpion Whip is a distinct weapon from Whip, so bards are not proficient with them
Do non-druid primal casters (such as sorcerers or witches) gain access to using a primal focus?
The druid class specifies that because they are a druid they can.
Because you're a druid, you can usually hold a primal focus (such as holly and mistletoe) for spells requiring material components instead of needing to use a material component pouch.
But then the description for the basic primal focus, the holly and mistletoe, states that all primal casters can use them as a primal focus.
Plants of supernatural significance provide a primal focus for primal spellcasters, such as druids, when using certain abilities and casting some spells. A bundle of holly and mistletoe must be held in one hand to use it. Other primal foci exist for druids focused on other aspects of nature.
I think it means that you'd still have to have a components pouch if you aren't a druid, but you can still hold and use the primal focus.
Also similar question to holy symbols and non-cleric divine casters.
Do non-druid primal casters (such as sorcerers or witches) gain access to using a primal focus?
The druid class specifies that because they are a druid they can.
Because you're a druid, you can usually hold a primal focus (such as holly and mistletoe) for spells requiring material components instead of needing to use a material component pouch.But then the description for the basic primal focus, the holly and mistletoe, states that all primal casters can use them as a primal focus.
Plants of supernatural significance provide a primal focus for primal spellcasters, such as druids, when using certain abilities and casting some spells. A bundle of holly and mistletoe must be held in one hand to use it. Other primal foci exist for druids focused on other aspects of nature.I think it means that you'd still have to have a components pouch if you aren't a druid, but you can still hold and use the primal focus.
Also similar question to holy symbols and non-cleric divine casters.
Any spellcaster that can make a substitution has it listed in their class description, so, unless otherwise noted in that class, they would need a material component pouch and the focus/holy symbol/whatever would be of no practical spellcasting use unless needed by a specific spell or ability.
Addendum: The foci have general casting classes listed because of sorcerors, which vary by bloodline in their accessible spell list
So you can use one, but it doesn't replace the need for material components? Or in other words, you can hold one and involve it in your casting but still need a free hand and pouch for material components? I thought it might be like that.
So you can use one, but it doesn't replace the need for material components? Or in other words, you can hold one and involve it in your casting but still need a free hand and pouch for material components? I thought it might be like that.
Yep. Unless their particular class outlines a substitution, they will still need material components. They can hold that sprig of holly or holy symbol for flavour, but that won't stop them needing a free hand and a material component pouch
AFAICT this comes about because the Animal Form spell uses the term "first cast". I agree it is possible to interpret it as your GM has if you are just talking about the Animal Form spell. It is not a really firm interpretation as "first" lacks the context to be totally clear.
However it is the only one of the form spells with that wording. So this interpretation does not apply to the other form spells.
The wording of the Wild Shape Feat alerts you to the possiblity that you may not get all the forms avaiable on a spell. Though I always interpreted that in terms of the complexity of things like the Soaring Shape Feat.
But what it does say is
Heightened (2nd) You can also wild shape into the forms listed in animal form.
that was forms plural.
Which fairly contradicts or perhaps modifies the possible limitation on the Animal Form spell.
So on my opinion while this limit could exist in the Animal Form spell, it is not a limit for a Wild Order Druid.
Personally I choose to forget the distinction exists.
My GM and I routinely go back and forth regarding wild shape for druids. I'm used to D&D 5e and I DM 5e but some of the rules never fully make sense for Pathfinder 2e. 2nd level Wild Shape let's you use animal form. What we constantly disagree on is the specifics. It says, basically, that the first time you use animal form as wild shape you choose which animal you wish to shape in to. How my GM interprets it is if I choose Ape form, that's the form I take every time afterwards. To me, that doesn't make sense because as a druid I feel I should be able to turn into an appropriate shape as I see fit, not just the one I chose the first time I used wild shape. We were in a jungle so ape made sense but now we're in a city and wanted to shape into a canine but was told I could only use ape form. Can anyone give me a solid answer?
I made the same mistake as your GM way back in D&D 3.0. It took a player from an entirely different group to show us the error of our ways. For years I was thoroughly convinced that you could only pick one animal form (such as wolf) and then be limited to different sizes of that singular form.
Does Enlarge increase the damage of a constrict (for example on a giant octopus)? It says, "melee damage" not "strike damage" and constricting certainly seems be melee, not ranged.
Unless you're a Jedi, I guess. Hm. An octopoidal Jedi would be interesting. :-)
Updated alchemist, with a focus on the Chirurgeon but part of this carries over to the other fields.
The Research Field ability got the following addition in the 2nd errata:
Your research field adds a number of formulas to your formula book; these are your signature items. When using a batch of infused reagents to create your signature items using advanced alchemy, you create three items instead of two. Each time you gain a level, you can swap one of your signature items with another formula in your formula book. This new signature item must be on your research field's list of possible signature items.
Is this intended to cover all formulas of a specific type, allowing for higher-level formulas as the alchemist advances? Or is it always limited to 1st-level items?
Is the Chirurgeon, under this revision, meant to have the ability to have any elixir as a signature formula (with the caveat of the above question)? Because if not, then all Chirurgeon alchemists will always have the same two formulas as signature -- they get the same benefit automatically with all Elixirs of Life at 5th level.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What feats can be taken more than once?
Can you take a feat more than once if it doesn't includes in its description a note such as "Special You can take this feat multiple time, ..." ?
The word usually creates multiple interpretations of the sentence :
1) The section is not always present in feats that you can take more than once.
2) The section is present in the description of feats you can take more than once and also in feats that you cannot take more than once.
3) The absence of this section in a description doesn't provide any additional information.(That's what you get from a group full of engineers.. you don't want your car to USUALLY brake when you press the pedal! Some words are good for flavor text but not for rules.)
Yes it is an open wording. What it means is that they normally use the appropriate keyword.
BUT
There may be complex situations and conditions that govern the ability marked by this keyword. The rules associated with this keyword can be overridden or modified by the text.
OR
Sometimes the rules text overrides this keyword.
