>>Ask *James Jacobs* ALL your Questions Here!<<


Off-Topic Discussions

20,751 to 20,800 of 78,526 << first < prev | 411 | 412 | 413 | 414 | 415 | 416 | 417 | 418 | 419 | 420 | 421 | next > last >>
Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2008 Top 16, 2010 Top 4

James Jacobs wrote:
ShadowFighter88 wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
We've got a REALLY cool picture of Seoni dressed as Valeros coming in a few months.
For the love of Cayden; tell me you're not planning to do the reverse of this! There are some things man was not meant to know and how Valeros would look in a skimpy red dress is one of those things!
We'll see.

Does this mean you're changing your "who would you cast as" vote for Valeros to Eddie Izzard now?


Why are there no traits that give fly as a class skill? Between Gliders, magic items and non-"Personal" spells, non-casters are fully able to use the Fly skill.


James Jacobs wrote:
Glutton wrote:
What have the ropers spelled out?
You mean Jack, Janet, and Chrissie's landlords?

Whoops, I was referring to the strange symbols Ropers are spelling out with their bodies in Orv.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

LazarX wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
Alan_Beven wrote:
James, on a bit of a skill question roll :-) I have a player who has dumped charisma to 8 who has then taken ranks in Diplomacy netting a total +5. He claims that this makes the character personable and effectively has removed the poor charisma from his characters personality. I don't agree, on the basis that if you have a 8 strength and a +5 climb you can climb OK but you are still weak on other strength related tasks. I think the character is generally not so personable, but has a way of speaking that allows him to be persuasive. I am inclined to play NPCs as not really gravitating to the character, but if the character can get a NPC engaged they can go to work with the diplomacy skill. Is this the intention of charisma and diplomacy in the game? Would you play the NPCs in a similar way?
This character may be a good diplomat, but he's still got a low Charisma and that means he's a terrible liar, not very intimidating, and relatively unartistic, for starters. To me, this character sounds like a great way to interpret a "soulless executive" who's really good at board meetings and keeping the shareholders happy... as long as he doesn't have to lie about his company's success!

Then again players like that tend to bump up their Bluff skills. The problem is that skill ranks and pluses can quickly out pace the modifiers by attributes.

So take that same player in the example above and assume he's pimped his Bluff modifier to the same extent as his Diplomacy. Does that change your interpretation?

Only so far as that character now feels to me less honest. But the interpretation is the same—instead of telling the truth, he's spinning tales and lying.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

3 people marked this as a favorite.
The NPC wrote:
Do elves in Pathfinder/Golarion trance or sleep?

Elves sleep in Pathfinder.

"Trancing" is something that's specifically part of the Forgotten Realms.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Alan_Beven wrote:
LazarX wrote:

Then again players like that tend to bump up their Bluff skills. The problem is that skill ranks and pluses can quickly out pace the modifiers by attributes.

So take that same player in the example above and assume he's pimped his Bluff modifier to the same extent as his Diplomacy. Does that change your interpretation?

Interesting point. I think fundamentally the issue is that the skills diplomacy and bluff are way too widely worded, certainly far more widely than say swim, or disable device. Basically players seem to believe that if you have diplomacy or bluff ranks suddenly a low or average charisma character becomes a silver tongued orator. My belief is that they do BUT their general likability does not increase. Pathfinders lack of henchman, dominion or large scale army rules doesn't add much to the clarity here. Low charisma characters are less "magnetic" and I believe that interactions with the masses would be highly dependent on this, but your diplomacy and bluff can overcome it in one on one interactions. After you had "wooed" them with your words a few hours later your base likability returns.

I "think" that's what James was talking about In his response to me. Did I get it basically right James?

If you spend a bunch of skill points on the Charisma skills even if you have a low charisma, you can absolutely "fake" having a personality. Folks do that in the real world all the time.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Alexander MacLeod wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
ShadowFighter88 wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
We've got a REALLY cool picture of Seoni dressed as Valeros coming in a few months.
For the love of Cayden; tell me you're not planning to do the reverse of this! There are some things man was not meant to know and how Valeros would look in a skimpy red dress is one of those things!
We'll see.
Does this mean you're changing your "who would you cast as" vote for Valeros to Eddie Izzard now?

Nope.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

deuxhero wrote:
Why are there no traits that give fly as a class skill? Between Gliders, magic items and non-"Personal" spells, non-casters are fully able to use the Fly skill.

Because we haven't invented a trait that does that yet. Maybe some day we will.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Glutton wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
Glutton wrote:
What have the ropers spelled out?
You mean Jack, Janet, and Chrissie's landlords?
Whoops, I was referring to the strange symbols Ropers are spelling out with their bodies in Orv.

Ah!

That's not a mystery I'm quite ready to reveal the answer to yet.

Sczarni RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Which Golarion mystery do you most want to reveal? Least want?

What is your favorite era for a Call of Cthulhu game? Favorite CoC spell? Mythos creature? Alien technology?

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

At what age are gnomes sexually mature and able to carry a child to term?


Hmm, as a type of music that originated in the 'underground' did Dwarfstep (later mispronounced by humans as Dubstep) come into being when a Dwarf had too much gas one day near some tubes that amplified the sounds he made?

Would this make an interesting Bard concept?


I should stop disappearing like that, shouldn't I?

Sczarni RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Can a Heal check remove an infestation (GMG)?

Paizo Employee Creative Director

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Thomas LeBlanc wrote:

Which Golarion mystery do you most want to reveal? Least want?

What is your favorite era for a Call of Cthulhu game? Favorite CoC spell? Mythos creature? Alien technology?

Most: What's really going on in Numeria.

Least: What happened to Aroden.

Favorite Call of Cthulhu era: 1920s.
Favorite spell: consume likeness
Favorite mythos creature: shoggoth
Favorite alien tech: brain cylinder

Paizo Employee Creative Director

3 people marked this as a favorite.
doc the grey wrote:
At what age are gnomes sexually mature and able to carry a child to term?

Unless you're running a game where child pregnancy is necessary, it's best to assume "Adulthood" as indicated by the random starting ages on page 169 of the Core Rulebook (40 years for gnomes).

If you're running a game where child pregnancy IS part of your plot, then I wouldn't go lower than 25 for gnomes.

As always, these answers are non-binding and non-canon until they're in print. Although I don't see us doing a book called Ultimate Pregnancies anytime soon.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Tels wrote:

Hmm, as a type of music that originated in the 'underground' did Dwarfstep (later mispronounced by humans as Dubstep) come into being when a Dwarf had too much gas one day near some tubes that amplified the sounds he made?

Would this make an interesting Bard concept?

Depends on the level of comedy, farce, and goofy you're comfortable with in your game. In mine, that kind of thing crosses the line.

Pathfinder is serious business!

Paizo Employee Creative Director

ANebulousMistress wrote:
I should stop disappearing like that, shouldn't I?

Mmm hmm! Welcome back!

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Thomas LeBlanc wrote:
Can a Heal check remove an infestation (GMG)?

I would say yes, because it's kinda unfair for it not to. It should work the same way as for disease and poison, in that the check only provides a bonus to saves against the effect, but doesn't remove it.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
James Jacobs wrote:
doc the grey wrote:
At what age are gnomes sexually mature and able to carry a child to term?

Unless you're running a game where child pregnancy is necessary, it's best to assume "Adulthood" as indicated by the random starting ages on page 169 of the Core Rulebook (40 years for gnomes).

If you're running a game where child pregnancy IS part of your plot, then I wouldn't go lower than 25 for gnomes.

As always, these answers are non-binding and non-canon until they're in print. Although I don't see us doing a book called Ultimate Pregnancies anytime soon.

Thanks I was wondering as for me it's always been a little grey as to whether the starting ages for non human races were meant to represent age of maturity or age at which the normal member of their species started adventuring. I remember reading back in 3.5 in one of the supplements (I believe races of the wild) that with elves they hit adulthood in their early 20's but usually don't decide to go out and adventure till around the 1 century mark so I've always wondered how that handles with other races that aren't as closely related to humans or have such large life expectancies.

Now follow up question at what point are Gnomes, elves, and dwarves considered old enough to not be completely dependent on their parents?

Paizo Employee Creative Director

doc the grey wrote:

Thanks I was wondering as for me it's always been a little grey as to whether the starting ages for non human races were meant to represent age of maturity or age at which the normal member of their species started adventuring. I remember reading back in 3.5 in one of the supplements (I believe races of the wild) that with elves they hit adulthood in their early 20's but usually don't decide to go out and adventure till around the 1 century mark so I've always wondered how that handles with other races that aren't as closely related to humans or have such large life expectancies.

Now follow up question at what point are Gnomes, elves, and dwarves considered old enough to not be completely dependent on their parents?

That depends entirely on the story you want to tell.


James am I miss-remembering, or could detect magic not be used to locate magical traps? I can't seem to find a statement about it not being able to do so.


Dear Mr. Jacobs,

I have a question about the Samsaran alternate racial trait Mystic Past Life. It appears that a spell caster can choose spells from any other spell casting class, such as an Reincarnated Oracle could choose to add spells from the Wizard class similar to an Ancient Lorekeeper can. There is a limitation though, and that’s that the individual spells chosen must be of the same type (arcane or divine). The example given is Divine Power being a divine spell so it can not be added to a Wizards spell list however it could be added to a Druids spell list.

The question then becomes, what makes a spell divine or arcane?

Spells like cure light wounds can be cast as either divine or arcane, as well as detect magic, fireball and so forth.

Is a spell itself either arcane or divine based on its name similar to how cure and inflict spells are defined not by their function but the actual name such as arcane mark being an arcane spell and divine arrow as a divine spell?

Or does it go further, do we include spells that contain a divine or arcane source in the spell description such as Bestow Grace as divine and Deafening Song Bolt as being arcane?

Or is it taken even further excluding divine casters from selecting the spell list of any arcane caster in the first place so a Samsaran Cleric could not gain Fireball via Mystic Past Life even though Fireball can be cast as divine spell via the fire domain?

There is a bit of confusion about Mystic Past Life and its limitations, is it limiting individual spell selection or choice in spell casting class to add spells from?

Also do all the bonus spells granted by Mystic Past Life need to come from the same spell list or can each individual spell come from separate spell lists? I think that they all need to come from the same list but figured I would ask while we are on the subject.

And on a side note, love love the new book Advanced Race Guide, it really opens up the possibilities to really embellish and customize each character. Thank you for that and keep up the great creative work.

Thank you for your time.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Glutton wrote:
James am I miss-remembering, or could detect magic not be used to locate magical traps? I can't seem to find a statement about it not being able to do so.

Detect magic can detect a magical trap's aura... but you'll still need to make a Perception check to interpret that aura and a Disable Device check to deal with the trap.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

MLHagan wrote:

Dear Mr. Jacobs,

I have a question about the Samsaran alternate racial trait Mystic Past Life. It appears that a spell caster can choose spells from any other spell casting class, such as an Reincarnated Oracle could choose to add spells from the Wizard class similar to an Ancient Lorekeeper can. There is a limitation though, and that’s that the individual spells chosen must be of the same type (arcane or divine). The example given is Divine Power being a divine spell so it can not be added to a Wizards spell list however it could be added to a Druids spell list.

The question then becomes, what makes a spell divine or arcane?

Spells like cure light wounds can be cast as either divine or arcane, as well as detect magic, fireball and so forth.

Is a spell itself either arcane or divine based on its name similar to how cure and inflict spells are defined not by their function but the actual name such as arcane mark being an arcane spell and divine arrow as a divine spell?

Or does it go further, do we include spells that contain a divine or arcane source in the spell description such as Bestow Grace as divine and Deafening Song Bolt as being arcane?

Or is it taken even further excluding divine casters from selecting the spell list of any arcane caster in the first place so a Samsaran Cleric could not gain Fireball via Mystic Past Life even though Fireball can be cast as divine spell via the fire domain?

There is a bit of confusion about Mystic Past Life and its limitations, is it limiting individual spell selection or choice in spell casting class to add spells from?

Also do all the bonus spells granted by Mystic Past Life need to come from the same spell list or can each individual spell come from separate spell lists? I think that they all need to come from the same list but figured I would ask while we are on the subject.

And on a side note, love love the new book Advanced Race Guide, it really opens up the possibilities to really embellish and customize each character. Thank you...

I think you're overthinking things. The only thing that makes a spell arcane or divine is whether or not it comes from an arcane spellcaster list or a divine spellcaster list.


While we're on the subject of the Samsaran alternate racial ability, is there anything stopping them from taking a spell that is already on their spell list but is present on another's spell list at lower level? (Say a wizard with haste at lvl 3 takes the lvl 2 version of it from the summoner.) The wording of the ability doesn't seem to forbid it, but a lot of people seem to have a problem with it.

Cheers,

prototype00

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
James Jacobs wrote:
Glutton wrote:
James am I miss-remembering, or could detect magic not be used to locate magical traps? I can't seem to find a statement about it not being able to do so.
Detect magic can detect a magical trap's aura... but you'll still need to make a Perception check to interpret that aura and a Disable Device check to deal with the trap.

And if the area is saturated with magic, I imagine that Detect Magic would be useless for that purpose?


James Jacobs wrote:


I think you're overthinking things. The only thing that makes a spell arcane or divine is whether or not it comes from an arcane spellcaster list or a divine spellcaster list.

So why allow players to choose from any other spellcasting class and only specific any arcane or divine limitation on the individual spells?

” You can add spells from another spellcasting class to the spell list of your current spellcasting class…
The spells must be the same type (arcane or divine) as the spellcasting class you’re adding them to. For example, you could add divine power to your druid class spell list, but not to your wizard class spell list because divine power is a divine spell.”

Wouldn’t it have been easier or clearer to specify the spell casting class itself that a player can pull spells from rather than the individual spells? Perhaps something along the line of.

”The spellcasting class you select the spells from must be the same type (arcane or divine) as the spellcasting class you’re adding them to. For example, a cleric could not select the wizard class to add spells from because clerics cast divine spells and wizards cast arcane spells.”

and if it is the spell casting class that you are pulling from what about bonus spells from that class? Could a druid add fireball from the cleric class because clerics cast fireball as a divine spell from the fire domain?

Sorry for the confusion, I am trying to wrap my head around the intent as well as the rule.

Again, thank you for your time.

Edit:
Sorry, I got my head all tangled up in a logic knot and I am trying to figure this one out.

I have another question, Mystic Past Life doesn’t add spells as bonus spells it adds spells “to the spell list of your current spellcasting class”. If spells are determined to be arcane or divine by the spell list that they are on, wouldn’t this be a self satisfying requirement? Meaning any spell added to my spell list would inherently be of the proper type like the rest of the spells on that list?

Again, thank you for your time and your help sorting this for me.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

MLHagan wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:


I think you're overthinking things. The only thing that makes a spell arcane or divine is whether or not it comes from an arcane spellcaster list or a divine spellcaster list.

So why allow players to choose from any other spellcasting class and only specific any arcane or divine limitation on the individual spells?

” You can add spells from another spellcasting class to the spell list of your current spellcasting class…
The spells must be the same type (arcane or divine) as the spellcasting class you’re adding them to. For example, you could add divine power to your druid class spell list, but not to your wizard class spell list because divine power is a divine spell.”

Wouldn’t it have been easier or clearer to specify the spell casting class itself that a player can pull spells from rather than the individual spells? Perhaps something along the line of.

”The spellcasting class you select the spells from must be the same type (arcane or divine) as the spellcasting class you’re adding them to. For example, a cleric could not select the wizard class to add spells from because clerics cast divine spells and wizards cast arcane spells.”

and if it is the spell casting class that you are pulling from what about bonus spells from that class? Could a druid add fireball from the cleric class because clerics cast fireball as a divine spell from the fire domain?

Sorry for the confusion, I am trying to wrap my head around the intent as well as the rule.

Again, thank you for your time.

Edit:
Sorry, I got my head all tangled up in a logic knot and I am trying to figure this one out.

I have another question, Mystic Past Life doesn’t add spells as bonus spells it adds spells “to the spell list of your current spellcasting class”. If spells are determined to be arcane or divine by the spell list that they are on, wouldn’t this be a self satisfying requirement? Meaning any spell added to my spell list would inherently be of the proper type like the rest of the spells on that list?

Again, thank you for your time and your help sorting this for me.

Okay... I'm in the office now and in a place where I can more easily reference the rules that are causing problems. And before I go further... While I can GUARANTEE that you're more familiar with Advanced Race Guide than I am. I've barely cracked the spine on the book, and this was the Hardcover book we've done so far that I've been involved the LEAST in, but what part I have been involved with was pretty much just the Samsaran. I rewrote the first paragraph of the flavor text, and requested the designers change a few of the rules options because the author had misunderstood how samsarans (which, admittedly, are weird and desperately need more information) work.

So.

If you take the Mystic Past Life trait, you need to have a spellcasting class already. In other words, you need at least 1 level in a spellcasting class. So, by taking that 1 level, you know whether or not that class is a divine or arcane spellcasting class. And you know what spell list that class has.

What this power lets you do is look at your chosen spellcaster class's spell list and add in spells that aren't on that list, but those spells must be chosen from the same type of magic (be it arcane or divine). In this case, what determines whether or not a spell is arcane or divine is merely the fact that the spell is on an arcane spellcaster's list or a divine spellcaster's list. Perhaps the MOST clear we could have written this would be:

"If you are an alchemist, bard, magus, sorcerer, summoner, wizard, or witch, you may add any spell to your spell list from the alchemist, bard, magus, sorcerer, summoner, wizard, or witch spell lists. If you are an antipaladin, cleric , druid, inquisitor, paladin, oracle, or ranger, you may add any spell to your spell list from the antipaladin, cleric , druid, inquisitor, paladin, oracle, or ranger spell lists."

When picking your spell, pick from the class spell lists, not from the spells themselves, because that way you can always tell if the spells you're looking at are divine (they're in the antipaladin, cleric , druid, inquisitor, paladin, oracle, or ranger lists) or arcane (they're in thealchemist, bard, magus, sorcerer, summoner, wizard, or witch lists).

We didn't write the power like that though for two reasons: 1) because it takes up more words and isn't a very fun sentence to read, but mostly because of 2) listing it that way unintentionally blocks out future spellcaster lists we haven't invented yet.

A druid could not add fireball, because fireball is not a divine spell—it doesn't appear on the divine spell spell lists anywhere, and its description does not list it as being a spell that can be cast by a cleric. When a domain grants a spell like this, it grandfathers that spell into the cleric's spell list, but doesn't actually add it to that spell list. THAT SAID... your GM may interpret that differently. If you tried that in MY game, I would require you to worship a deity that grants access to the Fire domain, wether or not you're actually a cleric.

As for the second question, that could indeed be a self-satisfying requirement. As you may have noticed, our rules writing can be overly pedantic and overly wordy at times...

Paizo Employee Creative Director

1 person marked this as a favorite.
prototype00 wrote:

While we're on the subject of the Samsaran alternate racial ability, is there anything stopping them from taking a spell that is already on their spell list but is present on another's spell list at lower level? (Say a wizard with haste at lvl 3 takes the lvl 2 version of it from the summoner.) The wording of the ability doesn't seem to forbid it, but a lot of people seem to have a problem with it.

Cheers,

prototype00

This is a perfectly legal option. A samsaran wizard could indeed take the bard's 3rd level version of confusion as a spell. He'd get it at a lower level, but he'd also get the lower save DC associated with it being a lower level.

It's interesting you mention the summoner, though—in that case I would NOT allow it. The summoner's spell list is FAR too permissive in a lot of cases there regarding what spells it gets at lower levels, such as haste or teleport. In my games, of course, this problem is solved by the fact that I don't allow summoners in my game.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

LazarX wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
Glutton wrote:
James am I miss-remembering, or could detect magic not be used to locate magical traps? I can't seem to find a statement about it not being able to do so.
Detect magic can detect a magical trap's aura... but you'll still need to make a Perception check to interpret that aura and a Disable Device check to deal with the trap.
And if the area is saturated with magic, I imagine that Detect Magic would be useless for that purpose?

Yup.

Although "the area is saturated with magic" should be a stunt that a good GM would only pull rarely, since building dungeons to rob the player characters of being able to play with their toys is bad. By the same reasoning, it's lame to have all dungeons be warded by teleportation wards once the PCs reach 9th level and can use teleport.


Can you Teleport into or out of an extradimensional space? I'm thinking specifically of the Create Pit line of spells as they actually create an extradimensional pit. I'm wondering if a caster could Dimension Door/Teleport out of a Pit spell instead of having to climb out or wait for it to end. I know they could fly/levitate, but there are others that can use similar features.

While I'm specifically thinking the Create Pit spells, this also applies to a Bag of Holding, a Rope Trick, Portable Hole, etc.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
James Jacobs wrote:
"If you are an alchemist, bard, magus, sorcerer, summoner, wizard, or witch, you may add any spell to your spell list from the alchemist, bard, magus, sorcerer, summoner, wizard, or witch spell lists. If you are an antipaladin, cleric , druid, inquisitor, paladin, oracle, or ranger, you may add any spell to your spell list from the antipaladin, cleric , druid, inquisitor, paladin, oracle, or ranger spell lists."

Two question:

1) an Alchemist formula can be taken as spells even if they don't have a equivalent spell ? Example: Alchemical Allocation

PRD wrote:

Alchemical Allocation

School transmutation; Level alchemist 2

Casting Time 1 standard action

Components S

Range personal

Target you

Duration 1 round

This extract causes a pale aura to emanate from your mouth. If you consume a potion or elixir on the round following the consumption of this extract, you can spit it back into its container as a free action. You gain all the benefits of the potion or elixir, but it is not consumed. You can only gain the benefits of one potion or elixir in this way per use of this extract.

2) Some spell aren't too powerful when taken from a list and added to another? Example: taking Holy Sword as a cleric

Getting a +5 holy weapon at level 7 instead of level 13 is a strong benefit. Even more so as a cleric has a larger number of 4th level spell than any paladin.


James Jacobs wrote:
LazarX wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
Glutton wrote:
James am I miss-remembering, or could detect magic not be used to locate magical traps? I can't seem to find a statement about it not being able to do so.
Detect magic can detect a magical trap's aura... but you'll still need to make a Perception check to interpret that aura and a Disable Device check to deal with the trap.
And if the area is saturated with magic, I imagine that Detect Magic would be useless for that purpose?

Yup.

Although "the area is saturated with magic" should be a stunt that a good GM would only pull rarely, since building dungeons to rob the player characters of being able to play with their toys is bad. By the same reasoning, it's lame to have all dungeons be warded by teleportation wards once the PCs reach 9th level and can use teleport.

This isn't necessarily true. If a Wizard using Detect Magic just takes a little time creeping through the dungeons, he'll be able to Detect any magical traps. If he studies the first round, he detects a magical aura, if he studies for a second round, he'll detect if there is more than one aura, and the third round allows him to study an aura to identify it. So he could, if he wanted, take a few seconds for every 60 ft in front of him (or so) to find out of if there are additional auras, then determine if any of them are traps.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
James Jacobs wrote:
LazarX wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
Glutton wrote:
James am I miss-remembering, or could detect magic not be used to locate magical traps? I can't seem to find a statement about it not being able to do so.
Detect magic can detect a magical trap's aura... but you'll still need to make a Perception check to interpret that aura and a Disable Device check to deal with the trap.
And if the area is saturated with magic, I imagine that Detect Magic would be useless for that purpose?

Yup.

Although "the area is saturated with magic" should be a stunt that a good GM would only pull rarely, since building dungeons to rob the player characters of being able to play with their toys is bad. By the same reasoning, it's lame to have all dungeons be warded by teleportation wards once the PCs reach 9th level and can use teleport.

It wouldn't depend on the group style too?

If the players will saturate an area with Arcane mark and/or Magic aura spells to foil would be robbers and ward every location were they live against teleportation, wouldn't it be normal for the NPC to do the same?

@ Tels: you are forgetting:

"Magical areas, multiple types of magic, or strong local magical emanations may distort or conceal weaker auras."

it is in the spell description.


Diego Rossi wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
LazarX wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
Glutton wrote:
James am I miss-remembering, or could detect magic not be used to locate magical traps? I can't seem to find a statement about it not being able to do so.
Detect magic can detect a magical trap's aura... but you'll still need to make a Perception check to interpret that aura and a Disable Device check to deal with the trap.
And if the area is saturated with magic, I imagine that Detect Magic would be useless for that purpose?

Yup.

Although "the area is saturated with magic" should be a stunt that a good GM would only pull rarely, since building dungeons to rob the player characters of being able to play with their toys is bad. By the same reasoning, it's lame to have all dungeons be warded by teleportation wards once the PCs reach 9th level and can use teleport.

It wouldn't depend on the group style too?

If the players will saturate an area with Arcane mark and/or Magic aura spells to foil would be robbers and ward every location were they live against teleportation, wouldn't it be normal for the NPC to do the same?

@ Tels: you are forgetting:

"Magical areas, multiple types of magic, or strong local magical emanations may distort or conceal weaker auras."

it is in the spell description.

Oh, I know, but if the adventures are heading into a place with an aura so strong it's concealing all the magical traps, they should know about it ahead of time, or be capable of dealing with the traps in another manner.

Hmm... though Arcane Sight works like Detect Magic, it also says you know all magical auras in sight. Does that mean even the ones that would be concealed from sight if you were using Detect Magic?

[Edit] By knowing about it ahead of time, I mean like, "We're going to a Liches lair, so be extra wary of traps" or something like. Or maybe the Arcane caster casts Detect Magic and realizes the area is so saturated, it's concealing other Auras and warns people to be extra cautious.


James Jacobs wrote:


A druid could not add fireball, because fireball is not a divine spell—it doesn't appear on the divine spell spell lists anywhere, and its description does not list it as being a spell that can be cast by a cleric. When a domain grants a spell like this, it grandfathers that spell into the cleric's spell list, but doesn't actually add it to that spell list. THAT SAID... your GM may interpret that differently. If you tried that in MY game, I would require you to worship a deity that grants access to the Fire domain, wether or not you're actually a cleric.

Thank you for the clearification.

again great work on the advanced race guide and the Samsaran race, I love the concept, so much so that its well on the way as being my new favorite race. the flavor it adds suits me more than most could know.

Keep up the great work and again, thank you for your time.


Dear James Jacobs,

Of the non core 3.5 classes which was your favorite and least favorite? Also, what was your opinion of warlock?


I came across the spell Constricting Coils (PRD hasn't been updated yet, so I'm using PFSRD) from Serpents Skull #6 Sanctum of the Serpent God. Why does this spell exist as 5th level? It does the exact same thing as Hold Monster, (which is also a 5th level spell) but does damage as well. They are both Enchantment spells so both have the same strengths/weaknesses. As best as I can figure, Constricting Coils is better than Hold Monster in every way possible. Why would anyone pick Hold Monster over Constricing Coils?

I mean, they both paralyze, both have will saves, both grant a save each round, both also have the same duration. So if a person is affected by Constricting Coils, they could be coup de grace'd the next round just as with Hold Monster, but Constricting Coils also does damage. I just don't understand why a spell was created that makes another spell completely redundant.

Do you have any insight on this? Should I FAQ this spell to get it bumped up a level or something?

Paizo Employee Creative Director

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Tels wrote:

Can you Teleport into or out of an extradimensional space? I'm thinking specifically of the Create Pit line of spells as they actually create an extradimensional pit. I'm wondering if a caster could Dimension Door/Teleport out of a Pit spell instead of having to climb out or wait for it to end. I know they could fly/levitate, but there are others that can use similar features.

While I'm specifically thinking the Create Pit spells, this also applies to a Bag of Holding, a Rope Trick, Portable Hole, etc.

You can teleport out of pits created by create pit. While they're extradimensional, they're not extraplanar, and they retain a connection to the world via the entrance that makes teleportation through it possible.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Diego Rossi wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
"If you are an alchemist, bard, magus, sorcerer, summoner, wizard, or witch, you may add any spell to your spell list from the alchemist, bard, magus, sorcerer, summoner, wizard, or witch spell lists. If you are an antipaladin, cleric , druid, inquisitor, paladin, oracle, or ranger, you may add any spell to your spell list from the antipaladin, cleric , druid, inquisitor, paladin, oracle, or ranger spell lists."

Two question:

1) an Alchemist formula can be taken as spells even if they don't have a equivalent spell ? Example: Alchemical Allocation

PRD wrote:

Alchemical Allocation

School transmutation; Level alchemist 2

Casting Time 1 standard action

Components S

Range personal

Target you

Duration 1 round

This extract causes a pale aura to emanate from your mouth. If you consume a potion or elixir on the round following the consumption of this extract, you can spit it back into its container as a free action. You gain all the benefits of the potion or elixir, but it is not consumed. You can only gain the benefits of one potion or elixir in this way per use of this extract.

2) Some spell aren't too powerful when taken from a list and added to another? Example: taking Holy Sword as a cleric

Getting a +5 holy weapon at level 7 instead of level 13 is a strong benefit. Even more so as a cleric has a larger number of 4th level spell than any paladin.

1) Alchemists are weird. Using this ability with an alchemist requires some GM input and adjudication.

2) And yes, some spells are powerful... but then again, a +5 holy weapon in the hands of a 7th level cleric is not as bad-ass as one in the hands of a 7th level paladin...

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Tels wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
LazarX wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
Glutton wrote:
James am I miss-remembering, or could detect magic not be used to locate magical traps? I can't seem to find a statement about it not being able to do so.
Detect magic can detect a magical trap's aura... but you'll still need to make a Perception check to interpret that aura and a Disable Device check to deal with the trap.
And if the area is saturated with magic, I imagine that Detect Magic would be useless for that purpose?

Yup.

Although "the area is saturated with magic" should be a stunt that a good GM would only pull rarely, since building dungeons to rob the player characters of being able to play with their toys is bad. By the same reasoning, it's lame to have all dungeons be warded by teleportation wards once the PCs reach 9th level and can use teleport.

This isn't necessarily true. If a Wizard using Detect Magic just takes a little time creeping through the dungeons, he'll be able to Detect any magical traps. If he studies the first round, he detects a magical aura, if he studies for a second round, he'll detect if there is more than one aura, and the third round allows him to study an aura to identify it. So he could, if he wanted, take a few seconds for every 60 ft in front of him (or so) to find out of if there are additional auras, then determine if any of them are traps.

Being able to study and identify auras does NOT tell you if they're traps, though... or what to look for to disarm them, or how to disarm them.


James,
So, you're pretty outspoken about not liking summoners, and you and a lot of other GMs seem to be banning them from games because people think they are disruptive or overpowered.

Personally, Summoner is my favorite class in the game just because of the flavor and variety you get can out of it, so I have to ask this: have you heard anything about any plans to somehow address the perceived issues with the class? I would rather it be nerfed or rewritten than outright banned from so many tables.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Diego Rossi wrote:

It wouldn't depend on the group style too?

If the players will saturate an area with Arcane mark and/or Magic aura spells to foil would be robbers and ward every location were they live against teleportation, wouldn't it be normal for the NPC to do the same?

@ Tels: you are forgetting:

"Magical areas, multiple types of magic, or strong local magical emanations may distort or conceal weaker auras."

it is in the spell description.

Anything and everything depends on group style. So I don't mention that, otherwise I'd mention it at the top of every post.

And player characters aren't the same as NPCs. That's all the reason I need to justify not having all my NPCs act like PCs.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

The NPC wrote:

Dear James Jacobs,

Of the non core 3.5 classes which was your favorite and least favorite? Also, what was your opinion of warlock?

Favorite = Binder

Least Favorite = something from Book of Nine Swords, probably.

I like the warlock. It's actually a really good class for someone who wants to play a spellcaster but who doesn't like having to manage giant spell lists... or who's new to the game and isn't quite ready for the complexity of a full spellcaster.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Tels wrote:

I came across the spell Constricting Coils (PRD hasn't been updated yet, so I'm using PFSRD) from Serpents Skull #6 Sanctum of the Serpent God. Why does this spell exist as 5th level? It does the exact same thing as Hold Monster, (which is also a 5th level spell) but does damage as well. They are both Enchantment spells so both have the same strengths/weaknesses. As best as I can figure, Constricting Coils is better than Hold Monster in every way possible. Why would anyone pick Hold Monster over Constricing Coils?

I mean, they both paralyze, both have will saves, both grant a save each round, both also have the same duration. So if a person is affected by Constricting Coils, they could be coup de grace'd the next round just as with Hold Monster, but Constricting Coils also does damage. I just don't understand why a spell was created that makes another spell completely redundant.

Do you have any insight on this? Should I FAQ this spell to get it bumped up a level or something?

Possibly because constricting coils was poorly designed and poorly developed, I guess. Making it a 6th level spell is a good solution.


James Jacobs wrote:
Tels wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
LazarX wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
Glutton wrote:
James am I miss-remembering, or could detect magic not be used to locate magical traps? I can't seem to find a statement about it not being able to do so.
Detect magic can detect a magical trap's aura... but you'll still need to make a Perception check to interpret that aura and a Disable Device check to deal with the trap.
And if the area is saturated with magic, I imagine that Detect Magic would be useless for that purpose?

Yup.

Although "the area is saturated with magic" should be a stunt that a good GM would only pull rarely, since building dungeons to rob the player characters of being able to play with their toys is bad. By the same reasoning, it's lame to have all dungeons be warded by teleportation wards once the PCs reach 9th level and can use teleport.

This isn't necessarily true. If a Wizard using Detect Magic just takes a little time creeping through the dungeons, he'll be able to Detect any magical traps. If he studies the first round, he detects a magical aura, if he studies for a second round, he'll detect if there is more than one aura, and the third round allows him to study an aura to identify it. So he could, if he wanted, take a few seconds for every 60 ft in front of him (or so) to find out of if there are additional auras, then determine if any of them are traps.
Being able to study and identify auras does NOT tell you if they're traps, though... or what to look for to disarm them, or how to disarm them.

No, but you can identify the spell used in the trap. Traps cast spells just like wands, staffs, scrolls and other items. If someone were to get close enough without triggering the spell to be able to detect the aura, they could also identify the spell used in the trap, whether its a crafted trap that shoots fireball, or an Explosive Runes cast on a book.

If your wizard had Detect Magic on, and was walking down a hallway and noticed an aura, and you stopped to study it, and recognize the aura as matching that of a Fireball spell, it's not as if you'd keep on walking. You could hit it with a Dispel Magic and suppress it for 1d4 rounds (if an item) or possibly dispel it (in the case of spells like Explosive Runes or Fire Trap).

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Is the Vulnadaemon meant to be able to posses others? As written in the book of the damned vol. 3 it's presented as having a true form like mist that posesses victims to foster terror and unrest. This goes as far as wanting sacrifices that they may possess to cause more death and murder but in bestiary 3 they don't have any possession abilities, incorporeal body, or even shape changing abilities. Is this a misprint of book of the damned, bestiary 3, or what?

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
PRD wrote:

Mutagen (Su): At 1st level, an alchemist discovers how to create a mutagen that he can imbibe in order to heighten his physical prowess at the cost of his personality.

....

A non-alchemist who drinks a mutagen must make a Fortitude save (DC 10 + 1/2 the alchemist's level + the alchemist's Intelligence modifier) or become nauseated for 1 hour—a non-alchemist can never gain the benefit of a mutagen, but an alchemist can gain the effects of another alchemist's mutagen if he drinks it. (Although if the other alchemist creates a different mutagen, the effects of the “stolen” mutagen immediately cease.) The effects of a mutagen do not stack. Whenever an alchemist drinks a mutagen, the effects of any previous mutagen immediately end.

One of my players that is making an alchemist asked some interesting question about this piece of the rules.

1) if he were to drink a mutagen made by another alchemist at what level it will work, his level or the level at which it was made?
I think the latter, but as it is powered by the aura of the alchemist that is using it it is possible that the former would apply.

2) He can drink and be affected by a kind of mutagen he can't make, like a Cognatogen or a Feral mutagen?

3) A alchemist with Infuse mutagen can sell a mutagen to another alchemist as it will last until used. Producing it will cost 1.000 gp. What would be the sell price?
What extra price should be applied for extra powers added to the infuse?

Paizo Employee Creative Director

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Matrixryu wrote:

James,

So, you're pretty outspoken about not liking summoners, and you and a lot of other GMs seem to be banning them from games because people think they are disruptive or overpowered.

Personally, Summoner is my favorite class in the game just because of the flavor and variety you get can out of it, so I have to ask this: have you heard anything about any plans to somehow address the perceived issues with the class? I would rather it be nerfed or rewritten than outright banned from so many tables.

At this point, no—it's already in print and has been in play for years. The genie's out of the bottle, and cramming it back in would do more harm than good. If your GM is fine with the summoner, then you're good to go. If your GM is not, I would recommend playing a druid instead—they don't grant the ability to build a wacky outlandish minion, but in basic game play, they're probably the closest to what a summoner does.

Which, I suppose, is good news for anyone who really likes the summoner, because my required changes to the class would only disappoint and anger those gamers.

20,751 to 20,800 of 78,526 << first < prev | 411 | 412 | 413 | 414 | 415 | 416 | 417 | 418 | 419 | 420 | 421 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Off-Topic Discussions / >>Ask *James Jacobs* ALL your Questions Here!<< All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.