>>Ask *Mark Seifter* All Your Questions Here!<<


Off-Topic Discussions

6,401 to 6,450 of 6,818 << first < prev | 124 | 125 | 126 | 127 | 128 | 129 | 130 | 131 | 132 | 133 | 134 | next > last >>
Paizo Employee Designer

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Renkosuke wrote:

Mark! I have a very important and slightly urgent question that needs your attention.

What's your opinion on ducks?

They're not all they're quacked up to be.

Paizo Employee Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
MichaelCullen wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:

FAQ Tuesday returns!

FAQ wrote:

Spirit Guide Oracle: What happens if a spirit guide oracle gains the arcane enlightenment hex, which adds spells “to the list of shaman spells she can prepare?”

An oracle doesn’t prepare spells, so that particular hex isn’t useful for her.
What if they can prepare a spell via versatile spontenaity?

They still don't have a list of spells that they prepare, so I wouldn't buy it.

Paizo Employee Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
CanisDirus wrote:

Mark,

The item Wismuth salix in Ultimate Equipment states:

Quote:
If you drink a vial of it while suffering from the nauseated or sickened condition, you may immediately roll another saving throw (with the +2 bonus) against the effect;

Can we take this to imply that it can be imbibed while nauseated, similar to Stillgut?

Thanks very much, and looking forward to seeing you at Gen Con!

It must be the case given the functionality, or else that line doesn't do anything. Saw you at Gen Con!

Paizo Employee Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
dynilath wrote:

Hi Mark,

In CRB Potions part, it says
Quote:
The person applying an oil is the effective caster, but the object is the target.

It seems that oils only work on objects.

But the following
Quote:
Likewise, it takes a full-round action to apply an oil to an unconscious creature.

refers a situation that oil is applied on creature.

Then, can oil really be applied to creatures?

Oils are typically for object spells; that's why oil and potion of invisibility both exist (the oil is for objects).

Paizo Employee Designer

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Protoman wrote:

Hey Mark, quick questions about kineticist wild talents (specifically with form infusions) that deal with area effects centered on the kineticist.

Back during the playtest you said that the aerokineticist's Cyclone's "All creatures and objects within a 20-foot-radius burst centered on you take half your blast’s normal amount of damage" shouldn't hurt the kineticist itself, but allies should clear out.

Is that still applicable post-playtest? Or is the kineticist considered damaged also now?

What about Detonation from Psychic Anthology? "Flames explode outward from your body, dealing your blast damage to all creatures and objects within a 20-foot radius." Would the pyrokineticist be hurt inside the radius like everyone else? Or because the flames explode away from the body, he doesn't get hurt? Or should it be like the Detonate spell, where it's auto-success on the saving throw for half damage?

Generally, centered on you effects that smack you will mention it, like the detonate spell does. The self-centered kineticist abilities should spare you their wrath, but like most self-centered things, they're not the best with friends.

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
JaC381 wrote:

A question about bringing back slain gods and demigods. Some sources seem to imply that this is harder than just True Resurrection - for example, Asmodeus and the archdevils mourning Mammon, Baphomet being worried about dying in WotR, dead gods like Curchanus, Acavna, Amaznen and Aroden not being immediately raised. If it was as simple as True Resurrection, divine allies, servants thereof, or independent spellcasters looking for potential allies are rewards would quickly bring any slain god or demigod back. Yet gods can come back - Mammon's revival in a new form, or Tsukiyo's resurrection (which is interesting in that Shizuru had to recruit Qi Zhong instead of doing it herself).

Has the difficulty of bringing back gods or demigods ever been addressed anywhere? Are there rules for it?

This gets into the realm of story more than rules and is more a James question. My guess is that entities of that power level need something more than a true res to revive, something special, possibly unique to that entity or circumstance.

Paizo Employee Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
kadance wrote:
Wait. Did someone say Aroden died?

Yes, someone said that.

Paizo Employee Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
ckdragons wrote:

Hello, Mark! Hope you enjoyed GenCon!

Considering the wording of wind walk, do the creature targeted by this spell need to be in gaseous form to fly? Or do they get the 10 ft flight while in solid form and need to change to gaseous form for the 600 ft flight?

Thanks!

I've always read it as both speeds are part of the gaseous form.

Paizo Employee Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Richter Harding wrote:

Hi Mark,

Currently running into a bit of a discussion with my lodge about archetyped familiars, I know that improved familiars cannot be some archetypes and that familiars that have the change shape ability need all their forms to be capable of taking the archetype.

But what about class archetypes that gain either the improved familiar feat or use the wording 'as if she gained the improved familiar feat' and do not gain the change shape ability.

As a sidenote, this is meant for pathfinder society

The archetypes in question are :
The Asmodean Advocate Cleric from the Dirty tactics toolbox
The Bonded Investigator from Inner Sea Intrigue
The Demon-sworn Witch from Heroes of the Darklands
The Egorian Academy Infernal Binder Wizard from the Inner Sea primer
The Pact Wizard from the Familiar Folio
The Tinkerer Alchemist from Inner Sea Intrigue

And the familiar archetypes in question are :
Figment, Infiltrator, Mascot, Mauler, Pilferer, Protector
and the Valet.

Are these class archetypes forced to retrain/multiclass if they want to keep a archetyped familiar, are they able to keep the new familiar archetyped or can they choose to not have their familiar upgrade into a improved familiar so that they can keep the playstyle they want to use.

I'd allow them to keep a non-improved familiar if they'd like to keep the archetype, though that doesn't work strictly.

Paizo Employee Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
blahpers wrote:

Hi, Mark!

How do you run dominate person in your games? What constitutes a command being sufficiently "against its nature" to provoke another saving throw?

It's like Porter Stewart said in Jacobellis v Ohio: I'll know it when I see it. Generally it's something that is truly abhorrent or directly contradictory to the creature's way of life, goals, relationships, etc.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Hi Mark!

How does it feel to be answering questions again? :)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mark Seifter wrote:
. Starfinder iconics are pretty stellar!

D-... dang it, Mark.

(Well played.)
((I’ve been giggling at this since I read it.))

EDIT:

Mark Seifter wrote:
Renkosuke wrote:

Mark! I have a very important and slightly urgent question that needs your attention.

What's your opinion on ducks?

They're not all they're quacked up to be.

Part two


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mark Seifter wrote:
Rysky wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
Ah, a much less contentious FAQ this time around. :)
Of course, who doesn't love Succubi? :3
Archons?

Can confirm, at least some archons love at least some succubi...

(In our game, anyway.)

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Mark Seifter wrote:
Lemartes wrote:

Hi Mark, I'm guessing you had a hand in the Martyr Paladin Archetype but I could be wrong. Thematically and mechanically I love this archetype however, there are a few things I am uncertain about. If you could help that would be great. :)

The Martyr Paladin does not gain immunity to fear from their Aura of Courage.

Fearless Aura

The Fearless Aura Feat grants fear immunity to all your allies. It is my understanding that you count as your own ally. So would you get immunity to fear as well?

Any help is greatly appreciated. Thanks Mark. :)

Yeah, that allies bit can get confusing, and that's something I think Starfinder did well to clear up. I'd say the specifics of the archetype would override the general, so the martyr might wind up in a situation where everyone except you has the immunity. On the other hand, the point of the horror archetypes is specifically to give you several cool toolkits (Tortured Crusader is my personal favorite, since that's the one I mostly wrote whole-cloth during development) to face horror threats while not having immunities that make a horror game less fun, so in those situations, Fearless Aura should be off the table anyway since it makes matters worse.

Sqqqqqqqqueeee, thank you for the Tortured Crusader! It finally got me to play a Paladin :3

Paizo Employee Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Steve Geddes wrote:

Hi Mark.

Any chance you'd feel up to wandering into the Starfinder forums and offer some thoughts on "the DC70 issue"? (Or would you be able to share your perspective here?)

I've come up with a way to reconcile RAW in my own mind, but it would be interesting to hear some background from the designers - I appreciate you're not technically part of the Starfinder design team, as such. Nonetheless, you do seem happy to shout into the storms of internet rules debates from time to time.

Don't know what this refers to. Is it the starships? Regrettably, that's one of the few sections that I didn't more than temporarily alight on (I was asked to build a few ships with the build point rules and see if I could make one that was OP). I heard there's new DCs that are much easier now?

Paizo Employee Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Ssalarn wrote:

Hey Mark, how does Sacred Weapon interact with size modifying effects?

I believe Hero Labs is calculating the warpriest's Sacred Weapon Damage incorrectly in some instances, but Hero Labs disagrees and will not correct the issue without a developer FAQ or clarification.
Relevant rules text-

"Whenever the warpriest hits with his sacred weapon, the weapon damage is based on his level and not the weapon type. The damage for Medium warpriests is given on the table above; see the table below for Small and Large warpriests. The warpriest can decide to use the weapon's base damage instead of the sacred weapon damage—this decision must be declared before the attack roll is made. (If the weapon's base damage exceeds the sacred weapon damage, its damage is unchanged.) This increase in damage does not affect any other aspect of the weapon, and doesn't apply to alchemical items, bombs, or other weapons that deal only energy damage."

Relevant points-

1) Sacred Weapon damage is declared at the time of the attack.

2) Sacred Weapon damage is based on the warpriest's size.

The specific instance of the issue is this-

A 20th level Medium-sized Warpriest is wielding a Large-sized bastard sword. Normally this weapon deals 2d8 base damage, so for a Medium-sized warpriest there should be no change in his damage dice. When an enlarge person spell is applied to the warpriest, his bastard sword increases to Huge and deals 3d8 base damage, which should be the same as the Sacred Weapon damage for a Large-sized Warpriest so Sacred Weapon should once again not come into play.

Instead, what Hero Labs is doing is applying the Large-sized Warpriest's Sacred Weapon damage first, and then applying the size increase a second time to the bastard sword so that the Sacred Weapon damage is being calculated as 1 size larger than it should be at 4d8. Since Sacred Weapon damage does not come into play until an attack is declared, and the warpriest's Sacred Weapon damage doesn't increase to 3d8 until after he becomes...

It works differently for, say, monks, but as you've analyzed, sacred weapon is weird and different because it replaces the whole weapon's damage based on your size, whether it be a dagger or a greatsword. It seems not to be based on the weapon's size (or virtual size vis-a-vis impact or lead blades) but your size, as you say. If it wasn't, you would have an awkward situation where a size-Large dagger (normally 1d6 and a one-handed weapon for a Medium creature) randomly did much more damage than a Medium greatsword does for the same warpriest (assuming they were both sacred weapon options). Even if that point isn't crystal clear, it should pretty clearly be 3d8 for the Large warpriest with no other shenanigans, not 4d8.

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Maps Subscriber

Can we get you out to SkålCon? That is my burning question!

Hmm

Paizo Employee Designer

3 people marked this as a favorite.
FiddlersGreen wrote:
Shaman, Nature Spirit wrote:


Friend to Animals (Su): The shaman can spontaneously cast summon nature’s ally spells as a druid. In addition, all animals within 30 feet of the shaman receive a sacred bonus on all saving throws equal to the shaman’s Charisma modifier.

When possessing an animal via a spell like possession, do I gain the benefit of this ability?

Would it be accurate to say that the animal is benefiting from the ability, and I thus benefit from it because I am possessing the animal?

You are not the animal, so it probably shouldn't apply. Possession is a complex beast, though.

Paizo Employee Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Richter Harding wrote:

Hi Mark,

Adding to my previous post, what of the situation that the familiar
does not get replaced but is upgraded instead, the same creature gaining
a new shape without being able to change back?

If the familiar had an archetype, would it transform into the improved familiar and automatically retrain all it's replaced 'class' features, or would it remain an archetyped non-improved familiar because because it cannot upgrade due to not having the 'class' feature that it requires to be replaced?

It seems like it would transform and lose the invalid archetype, though again, I'd probably allow you to skip the transform if you want.

Paizo Employee Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Barto Bu'tae wrote:

Good day to you Mark!

A few questions about the Alchemist (I apologize for any redundancy, these are things I have looked for in the message boards and still feel have been unanswered PFS legally) will try to keep them in an easy Yes/No format.

Eldritch Heritage for getting a familiar: "At 1st level, a sorcerer, bloodrager, or any other character with one of the following bloodlines can choose to gain a bloodline familiar." When choosing this feat can the Alchemist (specifically Chirurgeons who auto get Skill Focus Heal) get a familiar from any bloodline (Celestial in this case)in lieu of their 1st level bloodline power?

Does a Homunculus created through the Craft Construct via Promethean Disciple Discovery count as a familiar?

When a 10th level Chirurgeon gains Breath of Life as a 4th level extract which "His infused curative ability applies to this extract." Is it available for use with Healing Bomb?

Thank You

1) You aren't those classes and don't technically have the bloodline, so probably not

2) No, it's a construct you made but not a familiar.

3) No, it's not a cure spell. Counting as one for infused curative doesn't count it as one for other things.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

If you are using telekinetic maneuvers to grapple and since you use your Con mod instead of Str/Int/Cha mod for the CMB check, do you use your Con mod instead of Str mod for your CMD to determine the DC for them to escape?

Dark Archive

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Mark - I wanted to personally come back here to say THANK YOU for your colossal efforts you've done over the last couple of days answering ALL of our questions. This is really appreciated.

Paizo Employee Designer

3 people marked this as a favorite.
tivadar27 wrote:

This came up recently, the rules for acrobatics include:

"In addition, you can move through a threatened square without provoking an attack of opportunity from an enemy by using Acrobatics. When moving in this way, you move at half speed."

I've always interpreted this to mean that you move through *those individual* spaces at half speed (or any spaces you want to be cautious for if you're uncertain about reach). I had a GM who interpreted this to mean *your entire move action* is at half speed. I've been unable to find clarification anywhere else. What say you?

I've always done it square by square (and, as TOZ says, that's explicitly what it was in 3.5).

Paizo Employee Designer

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Thistlefoot wrote:

Hello Mark,

Has there ever been an official clarification on whether or not using a Kinetic Blast with the Kinetic Blade infusion negates the attack of opportunity for using a spell-like ability inside an enemy's threat range? The wording of the Kinetic Blade talent is unclear since it refers to "additional" attacks of opportunity.

It's part of another action so avoids it, as an even more extreme version of why swift action spells (and swift action SLAs) avoid AoOs.

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
shadowkras wrote:
If a creature that has vulnerability to cold damage (like a red dragon) dies and is turned into a skeleton (which grants immunity to cold damage), what happens with her vulnerability?

The rules aren't clear in any way as to whether you apply immunity or vulnerability first, but it doesn't matter because (1 x 1.5) x 0 = (1 x 0) x 1.5 = 0.

Paizo Employee Designer

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Catharsis wrote:

Dear Mark,

when a Kineticist attempts to use Kinetic Blade while grappled, is it treated like a melee attack or like using a SLA? In other words, do I need to roll a concentration check to manifest the Blade, or is that unnecessary since this particular SLA is completely subsumed into the melee attack action itself?

This would make a big difference for my Halfling Geokineticist...

You are still using an SLA, so still need concentration to do so (just not defensive casting because it's safe to cast). My favorite thing to do after being grappled is activate something Su and double fire's defense damage for a round to incredible heights if you've been pumping it. Those poor incinerated dire bears...

Paizo Employee Designer

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Chess Pwn wrote:

So my question today is a request!

Would it be possible/feasible to make "FAQs" on the faq page for links to rule clarifying blogs? Like finding the light and darkness blog is annoying, and if you're newer you'd not even know the blog exists, but new people are more likely to scan the FAQ page and a link there saying, "Hey light and darkness was often questioned, here's a blog with our explanation of things."

That's not a bad idea, basically "Q: How do light and darkness? A: Check out this blog <link>"

I'll bring that up some time!

Paizo Employee Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Lou Diamond wrote:

Mark, I have recently began playing an arcaneist. My first full caster.

I have found what I feel is a incongruance in the rules. Casters scribe
their spells in a spell book but require a separate feat to scribe a scroll. That makes no sense the only difference between the two are, is that a scroll requires a spell trigger. IMO I think that this is a legacy from 3.5 that can be easily corrected by giving all caster classes the scribe scroll feat as a free bonus feat w/o upsetting the balance at all. Scribe scroll is a very weak feat. It is a Feat tax much like Combat Expertise.

Could I get your oppion on a Arcanist Exploit that I have designed,
Meta-Exploit: By Spending one or more points from your Arcane Reservoir to Apply any meta magic feat that you know to one of your Exploits. You would spend one point from your Arcane per sell level increase.
example if the Arcanist were to apply the meta magic feat Burning Spell to his Flame Arc exploit he would spend an additional 2 points from his Arcane Reservoir when he casts flame arc.

Scrolls are single-use consumable items that hold the power of a pre-cast spell within them. Spellbook entries are instructions explaining how to prepare and cast the spell. They're as different as a chapter from a book about programming in LISP discussing how to code a recursive function is from the actual code for recursive Fibonacci

Pro tip: Recursively calling yourself twice and adding together the results is terrible. Iterating each number progressively is meh. Best choice is to take the matrix [[1 1] [1 0]], keep squaring it and then multiply it in the last few times if you don't have a power of 2 fibonacci number. Much faster.

Paizo Employee Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Tacticslion wrote:

Mark!

1) Starfinder is amazing! Thank you!

2) I've 270 posts to catch up on here?! How did THAT happen?!

3) I'm calling you out! ... sort of, kind of, please if you don't mind!

Basically, starting more or less here (reading the quotes means you don't need the earlier posts) are a series of posts that question the merits of low-light vision and then question how it works. The gist is this, though: to the general and specific lowlight vision entries, only the low light area is doubled; according to the World's Mightiest Blog! (tm) and the Light general rules, low-light vision doubles the effective radius for all light. Am I just reading something wrong? Is there a rules contradiction? What's up?

4) Oh, also, what's up? How are you? :D

2) People posted 135 posts and then I answered them?

3) First sentence of page 173, right beneath the camels on the bridge.

4) Just getting things done and doing as best I can at the moment.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Mark, I've noticed you mentioned in your answers that SLAs are not subject to AoOs. Was this a change in the Pathfinder rules I missed? Or was this change made in Starfinder?

Spell-Like Abilities:
A spell-like ability usually has a limit on how often it can be used. A constant spell-like ability or one that can be used at will has no use limit; unless otherwise stated, a creature can only use a constant spell-like ability on itself. Reactivating a constant spell-like ability is a swift action. Using all other spell-like abilities is a standard action unless noted otherwise, and doing so provokes attacks of opportunity. It is possible to make a concentration check to use a spell-like ability defensively and avoid provoking an attack of opportunity, just as when casting a spell. A spell-like ability can be disrupted just as a spell can be. Spell-like abilities cannot be used to counterspell, nor can they be counterspelled.

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tacticslion wrote:

I caught up!

Mark: how is your day, whenever you read this?

It's going alright. A typical day of fun mixed with work mixed with shattering the happy illusions we weave about what is upcoming to convince ourselves "everything will be totally fine."

Paizo Employee Designer

3 people marked this as a favorite.
ckdragons wrote:

Mark, I've noticed you mentioned in your answers that SLAs are not subject to AoOs. Was this a change in the Pathfinder rules I missed? Or was this change made in Starfinder?

** spoiler omitted **

I shouldn't have said (and almost certainly didn't say, but if so, bad past Mark, bad!) that, but you might have gotten that impression due to the multiple questions I've answered in this recent flurry about kinetic blade. SLAs only provoke if they take an action to cast (and like spells, swift and immediate actions also don't provoke). Kinetic blade is part of another action.

EDIT: I have searched out the possible post and, surprise surprise, it is...scoping! The #1 way that rules text misunderstandings pop up in all of our products. I added parentheses to that post to make it more clear that swift action scopes over both spell and SLA.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Mark Seifter wrote:
Tacticslion wrote:

I caught up!

Mark: how is your day, whenever you read this?

It's going alright. A typical day of fun mixed with work mixed with shattering the happy illusions we weave about what is upcoming to convince ourselves "everything will be totally fine."

*offers hugs*

Paizo Employee Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
The NPC wrote:

Mr. Mark Seifter,

How would you convert the Solarian into PF?

Probably just remath the solar weapon damage (and all other damage) to fit PF's expectations and then rebuild the other mechanics based on the PF action economy. The stellar modes and such are fine to stay similar.

Paizo Employee Designer

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Kudaku wrote:

Hi Mark!

I haven't been browsing these these boards much lately, but Starfinder has really reinvigorated my enthusiasm for TTRPGs! We recently finished our Hell's Rebels campaign (fantastic villain by the way) and have just started Dead Suns.

In that vein, I have a few questions for you:

1. Have you been playing any Starfinder lately? What's some things you really like about the system but might not be obvious?

2. Do you use any house rules or modifications in your Starfinder games?

3. A slightly more technical question - Heavy Armor in Starfinder affects your Speed. Does this only modify base speed (ie ground movement) or does it also affect other kinds of speed, like the one offered by Jump Jets (CRB p. 206-207) or the Flight spell (p. 355)?

1) I haven't played very much since the playtest but my playtesters set a grueling pace, playing five days a week throughout the primary playtest period, so we got a lot done at that point. There are a lot of subtle points I really like, but my favorite is how we actually managed to solve the seemingly contradictory directives that forced us to totally redo the math but then somehow have it still work seamlessly mathematically with all old PF monsters (a huge constraint!) The fact that we barely managed to squeeze that out was pretty darn cool.

2) I'm probably going to mainly just put in things that were lost in translation to the final book, like removing the Ghost operative's extraneous +4 bonus that makes it better than all other choices level 1-6 and fixing the issue with Enhanced Resilience where it didn't receive the halving that most physical damage resistance did when they all came to include all three physical damage types (I will likely do this by reverting to the version where you pick one of bludgeoning, piercing, or slashing and get full level).

3) It should affect all of them, otherwise it just stops mattering really fast, since SF gives you all kinds of other speeds at low levels. That said, that's merely what it should be to retain value to that balancing factor for armor; I'm not on the SF team moving forward so my unofficial comments are even more so here than in PF.

Paizo Employee Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Tacticslion wrote:
Mark: if you could eat donuts, how many donuts would you eat?

Usually one or two. Depends on the day and the time of day.

Paizo Employee Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Chess Pwn wrote:

So I'd love to hear your thoughts on this.

Many Many MANY style feats and feats that require style feats are written in this manner.

You can do/have X. While using style also do/have Y.

Is X always active because of having the feat and only Y needs the style to be active to work or does X and Y need you to be in the style to work?

** spoiler omitted **

The examples I have off-hand are the mobile bulwark style, Monkey Style, Snake Style, Crane Style, Boar Style

If it's the latter I wish you could instead put the "while using" at the beginning to make it clear that the entire feat is "while using" and not only the part after "while using" is while using.

It's the latter, and I agree it's confusing. I try to avoid that wording when working on style feats and their children in feat trees.

Paizo Employee Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
45ur4 wrote:

Hi

Any chance to see Aether, Wood, Metal and other typical fantasy elements as Jins for the Sha'ir Occultist?

No "that's up to your GM/depends on your play table/can be a good houserule" admitted

Aaand any chance to see printed in future an archetype for Medium class which makes him more Kineticist related, like maybe Elemental Spirits?

That's up to your group to come up with, even if that answer isn't admitted ;)

Elemental-themed spirits with an overlay like kami medium has could be fun and seems possible to do, though with a lot of elemental books come and gone, who knows?

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ziegfeld wrote:

Hi~ Mark, I have a question about archetype stacking.

FAQ wrote:

Archetype Stacking and Altering: What exactly counts as altering a class feature for the purpose of stacking archetypes?

In general, if a class feature grants multiple subfeatures, it's OK to take two archetypes that only change two separate subfeatures. This includes two bard archetypes that alter or replace different bardic performances (even though bardic performance is technically a single class feature) or two fighter archetypes that replace the weapon training gained at different levels (sometimes referred to as 「weapon training I, II, III, or IV」) even though those all fall under the class feature weapon training. However, if something alters the way the parent class feature works, such as a mime archetype that makes all bardic performances completely silent, with only visual components instead of auditory, you can't take that archetype with an archetype that alters or replaces any of the sub-features. This even applies for something as small as adding 1 extra round of bardic performance each day, adding an additional bonus feat to the list of bonus feats you can select, or adding an additional class skill to the class. As always, individual GMs should feel free to houserule to allow small overlaps on a case by case basis, but the underlying rule exists due to the unpredictability of combining these changes.

So such as magus's archetype Spellblade or Fiend Flayer, they only add new magus arcanas to the list, like this kind of ability to add new options also treat as altering the parent class feature, like the example in FAQ, adding an additional bonus feat to the list of bonus feats you can select?

I know in a normal game, GM can set the houserule. But it's in a PFS game.

Thank you!

Fiend Flayer wrote:

Magus Arcana

A fiend flayer gains access to the following magus arcana. He cannot select any arcana more than once.

Fiendblade (Su):...

Bypassing Strike (Su):...

...

Those wouldn't stack. If that's the only overlap, I'd be very likely to allow it in a home game though. It's a good example of something from my answer to Chess Pwn's question up in the stream; a rule that needs to be the general rule to prevent all sorts of troubling corner cases but that many groups should just bend after making sure there's no issue.

Paizo Employee Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Lou Diamond wrote:
I you cast the spell Spell Immunity on yourself can you choose the spells Dispell Magic and greater dispel magic?

As Mr. Bonkers said: You sure can choose them, but doing so won't have any effect.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Hi Mark, the subject of dex Magi has flared up in the PFS Boards and I wondered if you would be willing to venture an opinion on whether or not Dervish Dance prevented Magi from using spell combat.

Dervish Dance specifies that it is only turned off if the offhand is carrying a weapon or shield. Some interpret that to include using the offhand to cast a spell. They point to the Slashing Grace FAQ with the argument that it would make no sense for Dervish Dance to still work when Slashing Grace was explicitly removed as an option for Dex Magi.

So, I wondered if you had a view on whether or not Dervish Dance does, or does not, work with spell combat.

Paizo Employee Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Squiggit wrote:

This might be better in website feedback but have you guys ever considered some sort of consolidated FAQ-posting thread or 'most recent' sort option for FAQs?

Keeping up with FAQ releases can be hard if you're not active in the forum and even if you are you can miss them if you're not active in the right places. That can be a big deal given that some FAQs end up being pretty sweeping rules changes.

Following the post history of Mark's account and the PDT account can help, but that's not a super intuitive process, especially for people who aren't forum regulars.

The FAQ pages have a date last updated and red text to help, but I agree it's hard to find. That's why I try to announce them all here.

Paizo Employee Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Draco Bahamut wrote:

Hello Mr. Seifter,

I am trying to rework the Medium class around the Cosmic Caravan (or the Zodiac Signs) with 12 zodiac spirits in place of the 6 legends. Do you think the Medium class with acess to 12 spirits would need a major rework for added versatility or can i just create the 12 spirits and put in place of the 6 legends ?

Thanks for you answer and kind dedication to Pathfinder´s fans.

Like Chess Pwn said, you might be better off creating a new axis of 12 and doing some replacement abilities on that axis (a la, "this replaces the major power of your legend") than you would replacing the six legends wholesale. Just be sure never to replace the 1st level lesser power; those are usually paradigm-defining and break a bunch of other stuff (like messing up the casters' casting).

Paizo Employee Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
wraithstrike wrote:

99% of us know that you can not wield two handed weapons in one hand without a rules exception(such as a feat). The equipment section says the following.

Quote:
Two-Handed: Two hands are required to use a two-handed melee weapon [b]effectively[/]. Apply 1-1/2 times the character's Strength bonus to damage rolls for melee attacks with such a weapon.

Even in conversational English which is how most of the rules are written it can seem like it's possible to do so, but with penalty.

So I have two questions.

1. Can a two-handed weapon be wielded normally(without any rules exceptions in one hand?<----This is to prove a point to another post.

2. Is it possible to get the word "effectively" removed without having anyone start an FAQ since it doesn't add to the reading of the rules.

PS: If I do have to start an FAQ should I just ask that "effectively" be removed or should I actually ask question 1?

The effectively is probably there to differentiate it from the situations where you are holding it in one hand but can't use it as a weapon. Wielding and its implications is a bit tangled can of worms.

Paizo Employee Designer

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Kristal Moonhand wrote:
Not sure if you're the right person to ask, but why do some races detailed in books have Race Point values when others don't? Is it up to the person making the race to do it and some people just don't want to?

I don't really know. They probably should never have them outside of ARG because they're more of a brainstorming tool for a GM, and putting them in rules text or with new races gives the wrong impression that you can use them as a carte blanche menu to balance a new race.

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
shadowkras wrote:
What does achoring spells to a ship means?

I believe it's something from Skull and Shackles where you have to choose when casting whether an "immobile" spell uses the ship as the reference point or the planet instead.

Paizo Employee Designer

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Jiggy wrote:
Hi Mark! Have you ever had a Patreon page? If so (or if you know people who have), do you have any pointers for tier rewards and whatnot? I'm starting one soon so I can design games full-time, but I have zero experience with Patreon. O_O

I've never had one, though arguably maybe I should, since I tend to have difficulties getting the word out beyond the messageboards, even with my Facebook fan page. Maybe hit Owen up? I know he has one. Good luck!

Paizo Employee Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
ckdragons wrote:

What is the range for an Life Oracle to establish a Life Link with an ally? Is it touch? RAW doesn't indicate the range to establish the link, only to maintain it. Thanks.

That's a solid question. The only clue we have in the text is that the distance can't exceed medium range, so I guess no more than medium range as written? Though as you say in your next post, the shaman has some better clues in it, indicating that it might be meant to be close/30 for the initial link.

Paizo Employee Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
tivadar27 wrote:

This recently came up on the PFS Facebook forum. From the PFS FAQ:

http://paizo.com/paizo/organizedplay/faq#v5748eaic9vi0

This discusses what stat you can use for UMD. The relevant bit of this follows:
"If more than one class could have created the scroll following the rules in the Guide, you may choose the class. For example, endure elements is a 1st-level spell on the cleric, druid, and sorcerer/wizard lists. You may choose to purchase a scroll crafted by a cleric or druid to use Wisdom, a scroll crafted by a sorcerer to use Charisma, or a scroll crafted by a wizard to use Intelligence."

From the Guild Guide:
"All potions, scrolls, wands, and other consumables are
made by clerics, druids, wizards, or psychics in Pathfinder
Society Roleplaying Guild play."

These seem to contradict one another, as Sorcerer couldn't have created the scroll following the rules in the Guide, yet its listed as an option in the FAQ.

What was the intention here? Is the FAQ incorrect? Is the intention to say that any class that could have created the scroll at that either caster level, or possibly spell level, can be purchased/used as the primary casting stat for UMD? Also, if this is meant to discuss what can be *purchased* this feels like an odd place for this ruling.

That's not something I directly work on. I think that FAQ though might be a bit off in wording, since to my best reading, the scroll's creator isn't the one that demands a particular stat, say Charisma for UMD, but rather you choose which stat you want to UMD at the time of the UMDing by deciding which caster class you're faking, subject to whether the scroll is the correct type of magic (which PFS handwaves out as part of its special scroll rules).

Paizo Employee Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
ForestDew wrote:
Hi, I saw the Nature-Bonded Magus archetype and I'm perplexed with that it removes the Arcana Pool, partly with that most of the Magus Arcanas discoveries spend points from this pool. Is it an error? or how is the archetype balanced versus a regular magus?

I wasn't deeply involved in the "Other Class Archetypes" except for the work on the leshy caller (which grew from a pre-Unchained summoner archetype in HotW that really wanted to be an Unchained archetype despite that not being a thing at the time), but it would appear to be a tradeoff for the ability to cherrypick some really useful druid spells onto your list. I know from our herbalist alchemist (the leshy archetype from UW, of course played by Linda) who can do something similar that you can get some excellent spells that way, and the magus isn't limited to targeted spells so can take some great battlefield control. I'm always interested how many people assume that spell combat rounds should always involve spellstriking a damaging spell like shocking grasp, when full attack + battlefield control or buff is also pretty amazing.

6,401 to 6,450 of 6,818 << first < prev | 124 | 125 | 126 | 127 | 128 | 129 | 130 | 131 | 132 | 133 | 134 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Off-Topic Discussions / >>Ask *Mark Seifter* All Your Questions Here!<< All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.