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


Off-Topic Discussions

6,601 to 6,650 of 6,818 << first < prev | 127 | 128 | 129 | 130 | 131 | 132 | 133 | 134 | 135 | 136 | 137 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mark Seifter wrote:
Dark Midian wrote:

Hey Mark, simple question this time.

In Starfinder, whenever the core rulebook says something like, "You pay 110% of the item's base cost", does that mean you simply pay an additional 10% over the item's base cost or do you actually pay double the item's cost and then 10% extra?

I am really really not an official source for Starfinder, even more so than being not an official for Pathfinder. That said, 110% of something mathematically means 10% more than full.

See, I knew that math degree would count for more than being an SF guy. ;)

I guess saying "Pay the full cost + 10% extra" would have been too much wordage.

Paizo Employee Designer

4 people marked this as a favorite.
DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:

What class do you think Sonic The Hedgehog would have?

What about Knuckles the Echidna?

Sonic and Shadow are clearly the same character who is a stalker vigilante switching identities. That's why he's always moving really fast through his enemy's space!

Knuckles seems like a brawler, maybe a mystery of unfolding wind winding path renegade.

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Alex Chan wrote:

Hey,Mark! I have a problem about the spell Merge with Familiar. It explicitly says, "the target can separate or merge at will as a move action." Does it mean the familiar merged still have its own action? If so, what exactly can it do? Can it cast spells? Can it use magical items? Can it use domain power?Can it split the damage for its master?

Besides, what happens if a familiar casts shield other to its master or someone else and then merge?

This is another one of a group of spells that target one creature but really also target more creatures than that, and might have done well with a "see text" in its target line because it talks about what "you and the target" can do. My best read is that either of you can merge as a move action, but once it's merged, it isn't around at the time, so you, as the possessor of actions for the conglomerate, need to separate.

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Alex Chan wrote:

Hello again, Mark. Here is 2 questions about spell combat.

1. Consider the Wand Wielder arcana. Can a two-armed magus use spell combat while wielding a longsword in one hand and a wand in the other hand? If the answer is no, what's the purpose of the arcana?

2. Consider the skirnir archetype. Its shielded spell combat class feature says a skirnir gains the spell combat ability only when wielding his bonded shield, and may use his shield hand to perform somatic components for magus spells. Does it implies a two-armed skirnir CAN'T use spell combat when wielding a longsword in one hand and his bonded shield in the other hand,since a shield hand is not free even if the shield is a buckler? If the answer is no, does it implies that a two-armed skirnir can ONLY use spell combat with shield bash or a weapon wielding in the buckler hand?

1) Looks like the wand is explicitly replacing the "pseudo off-hand weapon" thing that the spell normally does, so you'd be fine.

2) The specific overrides general and it says you can do it with your shield at 8th level, but this one is less carefully worded because it doesn't explicitly state that this means the other hand can be occupied too (the author might have thought that the somatic component bit is enough, but it isn't or else you would always be able to do spell combat on Still spells with the hand full). It seems like that's what it's meant to do though.

Paizo Employee Designer

Rysky wrote:

Hello Mark! I haz a question ^w^

Illusory Wall wrote:
This spell creates the illusion of a wall, floor, ceiling, or similar surface. It appears absolutely real when viewed, but physical objects can pass through it without difficulty. When the spell is used to hide pits, traps, or normal doors, any detection abilities that do not require sight work normally. Touch or a probing search reveals the true nature of the surface, though such measures do not cause the illusion to disappear. Although the caster can see through his illusory wall, other creatures cannot, even if they succeed at their Will save (but they do learn that it is not real).
Quote:
Saving Throw Will disbelief (if interacted with)

... how the hell does this work? :3

It's an Illusion, so it can't bar you if you fail the save.

Dudemeister is correct. Essentially, fail your save and you think the wall is real. Succeed, and you know it's fake but it is still an opaque image blocking your vision.

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Atalius wrote:

This thread truly is a boon and thanks for doing this for so long Mark. I had a question which seems to have a mixed consensus. We play a homebrewed game and wanted to ask you about this domain power and metamagic feat and how they interact with one another. Since you are the authority I would love to hear from you. It is in regards to casting Touch Of Chaos (For the next round, anytime the target rolls a d20, he must roll twice and take the less favorable result) and a Quickened Persistent Spell (Whenever a creature targeted by a persistent spell or within its area succeeds on its saving throw against the spell, it must make another saving throw against the effect) together. Would that force the enemy to make four saving throws or?

Thanks Mark for all you do.

This is exactly why I added a section into Starfinder about stacking these kinds of rules. They are hairy, they could lead to extremely complex dice rolling situations, and they are often wording sliiiightly differently. My suggestion is that your group work together to figure out how to handle multiple reroll situations like "You have to roll twice and take the higher and also roll twice and take the lower, then reroll if you succeed, and you can choose to reroll if you fail." In this case, if your group doesn't have an official way to resolve it and you want to resolve it directly based on the individual text of the two abilities, it's probably only going to get totwo saves (because they'll fail on the worse of the two original saves) but could be up to four (if they get lucky on the first pair and have to roll again twice and take the lower). You might want to have mercy on your players and not throw an NPC at them who combines so many misfortune effects, though.

Paizo Employee Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Grandlounge wrote:

Hey Mark,

Question one

This has come up a few times in a few different ways, do you count as your own ally for teamwork feats? Or, is this an area that would "make no sense or be impossible."

For example can broken wing gambit be used solo?

I lean towards no as teamwork is "the the combined action of a group of people" but it keeps coming up.

Question two

How does the urban barbarian's rage (+4 STR) interact with amplified rage?

Thanks!

1)

"...these feats require an ally who also possesses the feat"

So you aren't an ally who also possesses the feat because you aren't the "also," you're the original person to whom the also is appended. It would have been easier and probably more natural if we were to have just not had a person count as their own ally, like in Starfinder, but that ship has sailed!

2) Seems like you have a morale bonus to Strength to increase by 4 but not a morale bonus to Con to increase, so you do what you can.

Paizo Employee Designer

EmeraldTails wrote:

Hello, Mark. A friend of mine has decided to build an archer-like Warpriest, and seems to have a bit of a wonder about how two~three feats interact. Specifically the Point-blank Master, blind-fight, and Snap-shot.

My friend wants to know if Point-blank master can gain the rerolling benefit of blind-fight if they missed via concealment if the enemy is within 5ft of them due to invisibility(Or the like). Or is it specifically Melee only, since point-blank master still means you're firing off an arrow instead of stabbing them with an arrow or the like, or that snap-shot can still 'threaten each other' if within 5ft.

It still isn't a melee attack, which is also why you can't make a flanking attack (though you do threaten, so you can help allies flank!)

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Protoman wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
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.
Thanks for the input, Mark! Puts my mind to ease about picking up Detonation for the pyrokineticist.

Awesome! And I'm not sure if I said this before, it's been a while, but I really appreciated your detailed playtest feedback during the Occult Adventures playtest (and also Intrigue, but hey, this post is about kineticist). They stood out to me even these years later as some of our top-tier comprehensive session reports from public playtesters in that cycle, and I enjoyed reading them too. I hope you'll continue with them next time around!

Paizo Employee Designer

Oyabun_Kyuubi wrote:

Hey ya Mark I have a question for ya well more of a clarification needed as I have a couple possible answers.

Previous thread: Hardness of Silkweave?

So I am currently making a character in Pathfinder that wears a Spider-silk Bodysuit

Looking in The special materials section the closest thing I can find that matches the description of Spider-silk is Silkweave

Unfortunately in both there and Damaging and breaking objects there is nothing stating a Hardness of Silkweave armors or things made of Alchemically treated spider silk.

Answer 1: Zarius Stated: I'd fall back to the hardness/HP of leather or cloth. There's a 3pp (Silk, Aranea) that has stats, though... 5 HP per inch, 0 hardness. Which is fair, since it's 2.5x the HP of cloth, but easier to damage than leather.

Answer 2: Dark Midian Stated: The trouble though is that it specifically says that silkweave is super durable. I would also recommend going with the rules for leather for the hardness and HP.

With a further Reply from Graystone: I'd go a bit further than that once you take into account the price of the armor [850gp]: for me that puts it up there with Darkleaf Cloth [750gp + armor cost] and that's 20 hit points per inch of thickness and hardness 10. Note that the description of darkleaf says it's "tough as cured hide", and hide has 5hp/inch and 2 hardness so the number are greatly skewed towards the special materials.

So my question I guess is Which of these if Either are correct for the hardness of Silkweave and or Spider-Silk Bodysuit? Thanks for your time!

I'm not really aware of a silkweave that we've published, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Can't find it online either. There's what looks like a 3.5 3rd party material called silkweave with no listed hardness that is on d20pfsrd though I'm not sure why, butif that's the one you mean, you'd probably have to ask the author of that book what he thinks it should be.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Mark you're great!


2 people marked this as a favorite.

As the author of the spidersilk bodysuit, I'm still working on an (entirely unofficial) decision regarding the appropriate hardness and hp. ^_^


Mark Seifter wrote:
Oyabun_Kyuubi wrote:

Hey ya Mark I have a question for ya well more of a clarification needed as I have a couple possible answers.

Previous thread: Hardness of Silkweave?

So I am currently making a character in Pathfinder that wears a Spider-silk Bodysuit

Looking in The special materials section the closest thing I can find that matches the description of Spider-silk is Silkweave

Unfortunately in both there and Damaging and breaking objects there is nothing stating a Hardness of Silkweave armors or things made of Alchemically treated spider silk.

Answer 1: Zarius Stated: I'd fall back to the hardness/HP of leather or cloth. There's a 3pp (Silk, Aranea) that has stats, though... 5 HP per inch, 0 hardness. Which is fair, since it's 2.5x the HP of cloth, but easier to damage than leather.

Answer 2: Dark Midian Stated: The trouble though is that it specifically says that silkweave is super durable. I would also recommend going with the rules for leather for the hardness and HP.

With a further Reply from Graystone: I'd go a bit further than that once you take into account the price of the armor [850gp]: for me that puts it up there with Darkleaf Cloth [750gp + armor cost] and that's 20 hit points per inch of thickness and hardness 10. Note that the description of darkleaf says it's "tough as cured hide", and hide has 5hp/inch and 2 hardness so the number are greatly skewed towards the special materials.

So my question I guess is Which of these if Either are correct for the hardness of Silkweave and or Spider-Silk Bodysuit? Thanks for your time!

I'm not really aware of a silkweave that we've published, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Can't find it online either. There's what looks like a 3.5 3rd party material called silkweave with no listed hardness that is on d20pfsrd though I'm not sure why, butif that's the one you mean, you'd probably have to ask the author of that book what he thinks it should be.

Yes the Silkweave is the same that's on Pfsrd. First off thanks for taking the time to respond to my post and give your insight. I just found out yesterday while asking some friends about it and didn't even realize both were Third party additions. I will try to get in touch with the Author of them so I can see about it for sure :D.

Isabelle Lee wrote:
As the author of the spidersilk bodysuit, I'm still working on an (entirely unofficial) decision regarding the appropriate hardness and hp. ^_^

Oh I do feel embarrassed now. I didn't even realize you were the author on it :D. Are you also the Author of the silkweave item because if so then awesome two birds one tarrasque.

The hp portion of armor if it helps any is easy enough as its AC * 5 with magic items and whatnot adding 10 hp per +1 so regardless of the material as far as I can tell the suit hp will always be 15/15 with an ac of 3. As to the hardness I guess I shall await the Author verified Errata with bated breath and follow the current Unofficial recommendation from my friend and the others in the forum thread. It really is a Awesome and inventive armor though.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I don't have anything to do with silkweave, I'm afraid. ^_^

Also, as noted above, anything I produce will be an unofficial recommendation, rather than any sort of errata. I'm just a freelance contributor, and have no actual authority to produce official rulings - at best, I can provide you with my opinions or intentions. The final decision is up to Paizo (or in the case of ambiguous rules elements like this, individual GMs).


Isabelle Lee wrote:

I don't have anything to do with silkweave, I'm afraid. ^_^

Also, as noted above, anything I produce will be an unofficial recommendation, rather than any sort of errata. I'm just a freelance contributor, and have no actual authority to produce official rulings - at best, I can provide you with my opinions or intentions. The final decision is up to Paizo (or in the case of ambiguous rules elements like this, individual GMs).

Interesting. So even though you contributed the spider-silk body suit. Its your baby your creation. Your say on its hardness or lack there-of isnt official? Learning new things every day :D

Paizo Employee Designer

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Oyabun_Kyuubi wrote:
Isabelle Lee wrote:

I don't have anything to do with silkweave, I'm afraid. ^_^

Also, as noted above, anything I produce will be an unofficial recommendation, rather than any sort of errata. I'm just a freelance contributor, and have no actual authority to produce official rulings - at best, I can provide you with my opinions or intentions. The final decision is up to Paizo (or in the case of ambiguous rules elements like this, individual GMs).

Interesting. So even though you contributed the spider-silk body suit. Its your baby your creation. Your say on its hardness or lack there-of isnt official? Learning new things every day :D

If you looking for something official, the author (a freelancer contracted by Paizo to send in initial text) is definitely not something you want. It is even more likely to be contradicted than my personal opinions in this thread (which are also not official). Here's a post I wrote recently about this topic, which shows some of the reasons why, starting with the post I quoted for context:

Thomas Hutchins wrote:
N N 959 wrote:
Thomas Hutchins wrote:
PDT Spoiler wrote:
The PDT don't really make FAQs for softcovers because the PDT don't make those books.

The PDT didn't write the rules that govern spiked shield, but they had no problem telling us that it doesn't work with Bashing, despite the fact that it did in 3.5. The PD also told us how a [i]Sleeve of Many Garments[/] worked, despite not writing it.

Dude, I don't know what you're talking about. All of those come PDT books, Core, ultimate equipment.

N N 959 wrote:
Quote:
So that means that the need to meet up with the softcover team AND the freelancer who wrote it and stuff to find out what was intended on writing and what was intended when released and then the PDT can take that info and come to a solution

And yet, when authors have posted that they wrote and intended for a rule to say X, the PDT has come along and said not X.

The PDT will certainly overrule author intent, so that kind of undermines any requirement that they need to understand it. Reading between the lines, the PDT simply doesn't want to be held accountable and be expected to answer questions on all the softcovers, it's simply too much work.

The PDT has told us what would be needed for a FAQ on a softcover, that's what they said. Sure they don't need to follow the intent of the author, but they want to know it because they want to preserve their intent if possible, sometime it was just poor wording that ended up with people having a view that is opposite and OP so the FAQ could clarify to make the correct intent clear by people.

Hey everybody. Just want to comment here quickly because there's been some inaccuracies as to the process, even though many of you have done a great job at relaying the PDT's stance.

I want to separate something out here about process that I think has led to the greatest confusion:

For our current process, each book has many people who work on it:

Process:
1) Someone outlines the book, usually after several brainstorm meetings. Ideally this is someone who is later going to work on developing the book, though not always.

2) The outline is divided among usually many talented freelancers, though sometimes only a few (like Amber Scott and I freelanced all of Aquatic Adventures). These are the "authors." They sometimes work at Paizo incidentally, but mostly they don't, and either way, this isn't done during work hours. They submit raw text for the next steps of the process.

Stage 2 Exception: Some mission critical components in the Pathfinder RPG line are designed in house during work hours by the Pathfinder Design Team.

3) One or more talented developers get to work on that initial text, shaping it up into an amazing final product during the development process; in only the Pathfinder RPG line, the Pathfinder Design Team performs this step rather than developers most of the time, but sometimes you'll see Paizo rockstars like James Jacobs or John Compton.

4) Our meticulous editing team comes through in multiple stages to find the ambiguous wording choices, confusing language usage, and more, ensuring that the final result is easier to read.

5) The art team lays out the product and makes it look gorgeous, after which various folks work together to make sure the final product is copyfit (fits on the pages).

OK, so why does this process matter to this conversation? It matters because as soon as a product hits the beginning of stage 3 of the process, the freelance author is no longer the authority over the rules text, the developer is (for Pathfinder RPG products, the PDT fills this role). The developer might significantly change what she received in the turnover, but in a case that might be more challenging for the author, the wording might barely change or not change at all, but the developer's intent is different. Here's an example of this.

Example:
For whatever reason, Fred the freelancer decides to write a super powerful feat that will make whoever takes it extremely strong against all major enemies, so he starts with

Combat Genius
You gain a +2 bonus on all attack rolls and saving throws against all humans, undead, magical beasts, and outsiders.

But then the freelancer plays a scenario where his character dies to a dragon member of the Aspis Consortium, so he decides to specifically add only dragons who are members the Aspis Consortium to that list (but all the other creatures whether or not they are members), winding up with a feat saying.

Combat Genius
You gain a +2 bonus on all attack rolls and saving throws against all humans, undead, magical beasts, outsiders, and dragons who are members of the Aspis Consortium.

The developer receives the feat and reads it as +2 against Aspis only, across all those creature types, and decides the feat's power level is OK based on that reading, leaving the wording as is. Now both the developer and the freelancer have a contradictory reading on the same text. But which one counts?

The developer's intent is what matters; the freelancer cedes ownership upon submission. Now this is complicated by freelancers posting their intent as "the author", a term that, while correct, in the absence of a thorough look into our process is certain to lead most people who read it to misunderstand what that entails (as seen in the chain of posts I quoted above). In many ways, while it isn't inaccurate, it might be much less confusing if freelancers were to avoid doing this.

As to the question of the various lines of products and FAQs, there's an added wrinkle. The PDT are the gatekeepers for the ruleset as a whole. For an RPG line product that the PDT also developed, the chain of custody for rules adjudication is clear and simple: The PDT are the arbiters of the rule in question, and of the rule set as a whole, and so the PDT hashes out answer. But for any other book, there's more of a stumbling block: The PDT doesn't have custody over the specific rule in question, so it would be inappropriate to make a decision on that rule, but any decision can have rippling implications for the ruleset as a whole, so what that means is that both the design team and the development team have to get involved, and it becomes even more complicated to balance. Nonetheless, it is not accurate to say that there have never been FAQs for the other lines, it is simply very rare as they have to rise high enough in the FAQ queue for the more involved process to trigger, but due to their lower circulation among players, they usually don't. This is what Thomas means about "The PDT has told us what would be needed" in the post I quoted.


What he said. ^_^

Thank you for the much more detailed and informative explanation!


yes that is much more clear. I can see why that little caviet of the author handing it over basically makes sense too.

if someone makes a Sword of Tarrasque slaying that has all these wonderful amazing perks but unbalances the game as a whole it makes more sense to think of the game before that particular authors desires.

Thank you Mark for taking the time to explain it out.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Companion, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

You could take a good portion of that and put it in your profile, Mark. Save yourself the copy and paste :)

Paizo Employee Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Hey everyone, you should take a look at this exciting news! I am beyond excited that this is finally announced!!!

Dark Archive

Oh, hi Mark! (I'm sure that'll never get old)

Since arrows can be used as improvised melee weapons, why don't archers naturally threaten the squares around them?
Does it take an action to "ready/draw" the arrow to be used as an improvised melee weapon?

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ectar wrote:

Oh, hi Mark! (I'm sure that'll never get old)

Since arrows can be used as improvised melee weapons, why don't archers naturally threaten the squares around them?
Does it take an action to "ready/draw" the arrow to be used as an improvised melee weapon?

Generally I'd say it would take an action to pull out an arrow into your hand in a way to stab someone, same as if you had daggers in your quiver instead.

Paizo Employee Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.

New action economy blog is up!


So, Mark, I was wondering. With the announcement of a second edition what impact is that likely to have on getting FAQ answers for first edition? Will we ever learn how bardic masterpieces are supposed to work? Will the Simulacrumm blog post ever see the light of day?

Genuinely curious here.

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
andreww wrote:

So, Mark, I was wondering. With the announcement of a second edition what impact is that likely to have on getting FAQ answers for first edition? Will we ever learn how bardic masterpieces are supposed to work? Will the Simulacrumm blog post ever see the light of day?

Genuinely curious here.

I imagine in the short term that it should have the same impact as any other project that eats up large amounts of design team time would have, slowing us down on FAQs. For the long term, I don't really know. I mean if nothing else, I'd like to put up the simulacrum blog info somewhere as a personal unvetted answer if we can't get full eyes on the big old thing.

Grand Lodge

Hey Mark,I've got a question about Whirlwind Attack.
Whirlwind Attack mentions
'When you use the Whirlwind Attack feat, you also forfeit any bonus or extra attacks granted by other feats, spells, or abilities.'
So what's the meaning of 'bonus' here?
Can I get a damage bonus from PA?

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jack Yang 737 wrote:

Hey Mark,I've got a question about Whirlwind Attack.

Whirlwind Attack mentions
'When you use the Whirlwind Attack feat, you also forfeit any bonus or extra attacks granted by other feats, spells, or abilities.'
So what's the meaning of 'bonus' here?
Can I get a damage bonus from PA?

Damage is fine. This is a fix Jason put into the CRB to handle the exploit in 3.5 where you Whirlwind Attack against a bag of rats (or other group of crappy mooks) with Great Cleave (a 3.5 feat that lets you get a bonus attack every time you killed something on a different target) and similar abilities; the idea was that you kill 100 rats and thus get 100 attacks on your true target, the dragon that was also in your reach.

Grand Lodge

Impressive combo with tragic rats.
Thank you for asking my question so late.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Mark Seifter wrote:
Hey everyone, you should take a look at this exciting news! I am beyond excited that this is finally announced!!!

It must have been hard keeping this under your collective hats all this time!

Now we have to tap our feet until August... :)


Hi Mark, super excited about the second edition! I agree that now is the exact right time to do it, and am excited to see how PF will look with the rigor and expertise that I see in the later products.

Until then, do you have any input about how overrun works as part of a charge? It’s explicitly allowed, but I’ve seen wildly different interpretations of how it works.

Paizo Employee Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Steve Geddes wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
Hey everyone, you should take a look at this exciting news! I am beyond excited that this is finally announced!!!

It must have been hard keeping this under your collective hats all this time!

Now we have to tap our feet until August... :)

Yeah, we've been holding this under our hats for years now. It was tough! I can't believe we actually managed to collectively hold a lid on it up to the announcement though. I would not have predicted that.

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kaboogy wrote:

Hi Mark, super excited about the second edition! I agree that now is the exact right time to do it, and am excited to see how PF will look with the rigor and expertise that I see in the later products.

Until then, do you have any input about how overrun works as part of a charge? It’s explicitly allowed, but I’ve seen wildly different interpretations of how it works.

It's a bit weird in the wording. Since it's usually a standard action done during a single move, I've always read "part of a charge" to mean you go twice your move in a straight line and overrun someone as the attack part of the charge. Otherwise the non-charge overrun doesn't make any sense and you don't really have a standard action left to take during a charge. It's really too ambiguous though.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Mark Seifter wrote:
Steve Geddes wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
Hey everyone, you should take a look at this exciting news! I am beyond excited that this is finally announced!!!

It must have been hard keeping this under your collective hats all this time!

Now we have to tap our feet until August... :)

Yeah, we've been holding this under our hats for years now. It was tough! I can't believe we actually managed to collectively hold a lid on it up to the announcement though. I would not have predicted that.

It’s funny. I heard more chatter about an upcoming PF2 announcement just before Starfinder was announced than I did this year. In retrospect, there were some clues - totally caught me by surprise though. :)

I’m disappointed I will probably never get to play a vigilante (I was looking forward to that!) but I am excited to see what you folk come up with.


Hi Mark!Greeting for Pathfinder the second edition!
There are two questions:
1.there is a faq for UM Magus said:
Magus: When using spell combat, can the weapon in my other hand be an unarmed strike or a natural weapon?
Yes, so long as the weapon is a light or one-handed melee weapon and is associated with that hand. For example, unarmed strikes, claws, and slams are light melee weapons associated with a hand, and therefore are valid for use with spell combat. A tail slap is not associated with a hand, and therefore is not valid for use with spell combat.
So may I consider a natural weapon which associated with hand as "wielding a light or one-handed melee weapon in the other hand" in Spell Combat,and use the natural weapon for Spellstrike?May I use a natural weapon that isn't associated with hand for Spellstrike while Spellstirke says "he can deliver the spell through any weapon he is wielding as part of a melee attack"?
2.which can be used to describe a natural weapon:wielding/holding/using?

Dark Archive

Greetings, Mark, I have met a few new questions while playing pathfinder games with my friends. And I check numbers of sources and couldn't find precise answers Thus I pray for your wisdom again.

【1】、How does the 【Thistle Arrow】 in 【Adventurer's Armory】 actually works. According to the text, it will "deal damage as a bleed effect for 1d6 rounds after a hit". But it doesn't describe the actual damage of this "bleed effect". So I wonder how should I deal with it.

Someone believe that this "bleed damage" is equal to the damage of the range attack (which means bleed damage = weapon damage + damage from other sources - DR(if couldn't passed) - hardness (if couldn't ignore)). And it wouldn't deal the normal damage in the attacker's round. Instead, the target will take the bleed damage at the beginning of its turn.

But I couldn't find any evidence to support or deny this opinion. Thus I wonder the design purpose of this equipmet and suggestions from you.

【2】Do nature attacks such as claws or other options count as "wielded"? This question really puzzle me since there is no clearly statement about it in Pathfinder Games(Although it is clear in Starfinder).

Sincerely thanks and looking forward to your reply.

(I have check the whole text before it was submitted to the thread thus there will be no more "Second Question One" this time ^0^)


Mark Seifter wrote:
Crest wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
Crest wrote:

Mark, thank you for the answer above.Here are two more questions about the Furious Finish feat.

1, Can I declare to use the feat after hit? If not, when the attack didn't hit, will I end rage and become fatigued?
2, The feat says "when you use the Vital Strike feat", does it apply to Improved Vital Strike or Greater Vital Strike feats?

1) The choice is made when you are rolling damage, which despite best practice for quick combat, is technically something you don't do until after you hit, so yes.

2) Weirdly, and I had to check this to notice, IVS and GVS don't refer to their parent but instead reiterate all the rules with more dice added on, particularly odd since it would save a lot of unnecessary words to handle it the other way around. However, due to this fact, technically you are not using the Vital Strike feat when using its stronger versions. Nonetheless, it's pretty likely that the author of Furious Finish forgot that IVS and GVS were written in this unusual way, as it seems very unlikely to intend to block off these uses. Nonetheless, most other feats use tighter language (for instance, the Vital Strike feats in Advanced Class Guide all specify they work with VS, IVS, and GVS).

What happens if make a crit while using Furious Finish? Is the critical damage maximized?
That's part of the damage, so personally I'd say it would be.

So what about bane weapon or sneak attack? Do them works the same way?


Hi Mark
The challenge of Order of the Eastern Star says "He must be wearing light armor and carrying no more than a light load to receive these bonuses."
If I wearing no armor, can I receive these bonuses?


Pathfinder Companion, Maps Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Lico wrote:

【1】、How does the 【Thistle Arrow】 in 【Adventurer's Armory】 actually works. According to the text, it will "deal damage as a bleed effect for 1d6 rounds after a hit". But it doesn't describe the actual damage of this "bleed effect". So I wonder how should I deal with it.

Someone believe that this "bleed damage" is equal to the damage of the range attack (which means bleed damage = weapon damage + damage from other sources - DR(if couldn't passed) - hardness (if couldn't ignore)). And it wouldn't deal the normal damage in the attacker's round. Instead, the target will take the bleed damage at the beginning of its turn.

But I couldn't find any evidence to support or deny this opinion. Thus I wonder the design purpose of this equipmet and suggestions from you.

I am not Mark, but the thistle arrow was reprinted/updated to PfRPG in Adventurer's Armory from the old, out-of-print 3.5 Pathfinder Chronicles Campaign Setting book, where it read like this:

Thistle Arrow wrote:
These arrows are a specialty of the Ekujae shamans, who craft the arrowheads out of the thistles of a toxic plant that most creatures find highly caustic. They deal normal damage but then become embedded in the wound and deal an additional 1 point of damage each round for 1d6 rounds from their irritating sap. Creatures immune to poison are immune to this extra damage. A creature can remove an embedded thistle arrow as a move action without provoking attacks of opportunity, but doing so deals an additional 1d3 points of damage as the thorny barbs are pulled free. A DC 12 Heal check (made as a standard action) can pull free a thistle arrow's head without dealing any additional damage. A single thistle arrow costs 1 gp.

Knowing the original text might help you make a ruling on the PfRPG version.

Dark Archive

Been pondering the unchained action economy with PF2 using basically that same system, and now I have a few questions regarding TWF and ranged feats:

1.) If you use TWF on your first attack, do you continue to take the -2 on subsequent attacks (assuming you're using a light off-hand)? If not, is this an intentional buff to TWF and flurry of blows?

2.) How does rapid shot work? My guess is that it works exactly like TWF, but that feat is never mentioned in the rules. Are you locked into taking 3 attack actions to use rapid shot or flurry of blows?

3.) How does the manyshot feat work?

4.) I'm guessing any feat or ability that lets you do something as a full-round action, you have to spend all 3 actions to use that ability? ie: spring-attack, whirlwind attack, flurry of blows? With TWF being an explicit exception.

I really like this system, but PF wasn't built for it. I'm super excited for PF2, where this is the default, baked in system and all the rules and classes are built with it in mind.

Dark Archive

Joana wrote:
Lico wrote:

【1】、How does the 【Thistle Arrow】 in 【Adventurer's Armory】 actually works. According to the text, it will "deal damage as a bleed effect for 1d6 rounds after a hit". But it doesn't describe the actual damage of this "bleed effect". So I wonder how should I deal with it.

Someone believe that this "bleed damage" is equal to the damage of the range attack (which means bleed damage = weapon damage + damage from other sources - DR(if couldn't passed) - hardness (if couldn't ignore)). And it wouldn't deal the normal damage in the attacker's round. Instead, the target will take the bleed damage at the beginning of its turn.

But I couldn't find any evidence to support or deny this opinion. Thus I wonder the design purpose of this equipmet and suggestions from you.

I am not Mark, but the thistle arrow was reprinted/updated to PfRPG in Adventurer's Armory from the old, out-of-print 3.5 Pathfinder Chronicles Campaign Setting book, where it read like this:

Thistle Arrow wrote:
These arrows are a specialty of the Ekujae shamans, who craft the arrowheads out of the thistles of a toxic plant that most creatures find highly caustic. They deal normal damage but then become embedded in the wound and deal an additional 1 point of damage each round for 1d6 rounds from their irritating sap. Creatures immune to poison are immune to this extra damage. A creature can remove an embedded thistle arrow as a move action without provoking attacks of opportunity, but doing so deals an additional 1d3 points of damage as the thorny barbs are pulled free. A DC 12 Heal check (made as a standard action) can pull free a thistle arrow's head without dealing any additional damage. A single thistle arrow costs 1 gp.

Knowing the original text might help you make a ruling on the PfRPG version.

I have already read that text. But according to the Adventurer's Armory, it says "This book updates several items from the Pathfinder Chronicles Campaign Setting to the Pathfinder RPG rules.Items not listed may be used without conversion." Which means the effect of this equipment has already been changed to some extent. However it doesn't provide a clear statement (not as clear as the old version) about how it works. Thus I want to know the design purpose of these special arrows.


Mr. Mark Seifter,

I have a flesh warper character that uses the bloodrager and the 3.5 prestige class flesh warper from Lords of Madness along with the associated grafts and implants.

While this is unlikely, using the just the corebook of the 2nd edition, how possible is it to replicate this character? At least in broad strokes.

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
GeneralChiang wrote:

Hi Mark!Greeting for Pathfinder the second edition!

There are two questions:
1.there is a faq for UM Magus said:
Magus: When using spell combat, can the weapon in my other hand be an unarmed strike or a natural weapon?
Yes, so long as the weapon is a light or one-handed melee weapon and is associated with that hand. For example, unarmed strikes, claws, and slams are light melee weapons associated with a hand, and therefore are valid for use with spell combat. A tail slap is not associated with a hand, and therefore is not valid for use with spell combat.
So may I consider a natural weapon which associated with hand as "wielding a light or one-handed melee weapon in the other hand" in Spell Combat,and use the natural weapon for Spellstrike?May I use a natural weapon that isn't associated with hand for Spellstrike while Spellstirke says "he can deliver the spell through any weapon he is wielding as part of a melee attack"?
2.which can be used to describe a natural weapon:wielding/holding/using?

1) As long as you have a hand that is only for the spell, a natural weapon sounds like it's fine for Spell Combat via the FAQ. Spellstrike any hand should be fine unless it was also part of Spell Combat where the hand is occupied with the spell, I guess. Same as how you can't use a greatsword to spellstrike in the middle of a Spell Combat

2) "Wielding" is a big can of worms that has been used inconsistently throughout the rules over the years. We hope to make it crystal clear in PF2!

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lico wrote:

Greetings, Mark, I have met a few new questions while playing pathfinder games with my friends. And I check numbers of sources and couldn't find precise answers Thus I pray for your wisdom again.

【1】、How does the 【Thistle Arrow】 in 【Adventurer's Armory】 actually works. According to the text, it will "deal damage as a bleed effect for 1d6 rounds after a hit". But it doesn't describe the actual damage of this "bleed effect". So I wonder how should I deal with it.

Someone believe that this "bleed damage" is equal to the damage of the range attack (which means bleed damage = weapon damage + damage from other sources - DR(if couldn't passed) - hardness (if couldn't ignore)). And it wouldn't deal the normal damage in the attacker's round. Instead, the target will take the bleed damage at the beginning of its turn.

But I couldn't find any evidence to support or deny this opinion. Thus I wonder the design purpose of this equipmet and suggestions from you.

【2】Do nature attacks such as claws or other options count as "wielded"? This question really puzzle me since there is no clearly statement about it in Pathfinder Games(Although it is clear in Starfinder).

Sincerely thanks and looking forward to your reply.

(I have check the whole text before it was submitted to the thread thus there will be no more "Second Question One" this time ^0^)

1) It's probably 1 bleed like the original version, though it's completely absent in AA.

2) Same answer as last question that also asked about 'wielding'.

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Crest wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
Crest wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
Crest wrote:

Mark, thank you for the answer above.Here are two more questions about the Furious Finish feat.

1, Can I declare to use the feat after hit? If not, when the attack didn't hit, will I end rage and become fatigued?
2, The feat says "when you use the Vital Strike feat", does it apply to Improved Vital Strike or Greater Vital Strike feats?

1) The choice is made when you are rolling damage, which despite best practice for quick combat, is technically something you don't do until after you hit, so yes.

2) Weirdly, and I had to check this to notice, IVS and GVS don't refer to their parent but instead reiterate all the rules with more dice added on, particularly odd since it would save a lot of unnecessary words to handle it the other way around. However, due to this fact, technically you are not using the Vital Strike feat when using its stronger versions. Nonetheless, it's pretty likely that the author of Furious Finish forgot that IVS and GVS were written in this unusual way, as it seems very unlikely to intend to block off these uses. Nonetheless, most other feats use tighter language (for instance, the Vital Strike feats in Advanced Class Guide all specify they work with VS, IVS, and GVS).

What happens if make a crit while using Furious Finish? Is the critical damage maximized?
That's part of the damage, so personally I'd say it would be.
So what about bane weapon or sneak attack? Do them works the same way?

I'd say those are separate from the weapon damage since they don't multiply with the rest on a critical, but I wouldn't bat an eye if another GM ruled otherwise.

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Crest wrote:

Hi Mark

The challenge of Order of the Eastern Star says "He must be wearing light armor and carrying no more than a light load to receive these bonuses."
If I wearing no armor, can I receive these bonuses?

Strictly as written, looks like no. I'd probably allow it in no armor.

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ectar wrote:

Been pondering the unchained action economy with PF2 using basically that same system, and now I have a few questions regarding TWF and ranged feats:

1.) If you use TWF on your first attack, do you continue to take the -2 on subsequent attacks (assuming you're using a light off-hand)? If not, is this an intentional buff to TWF and flurry of blows?

2.) How does rapid shot work? My guess is that it works exactly like TWF, but that feat is never mentioned in the rules. Are you locked into taking 3 attack actions to use rapid shot or flurry of blows?

3.) How does the manyshot feat work?

4.) I'm guessing any feat or ability that lets you do something as a full-round action, you have to spend all 3 actions to use that ability? ie: spring-attack, whirlwind attack, flurry of blows? With TWF being an explicit exception.

I really like this system, but PF wasn't built for it. I'm super excited for PF2, where this is the default, baked in system and all the rules and classes are built with it in mind.

I am too much in the mindset of the similar but not identical PF2 system to be able to adjudicate nuances in the PFU system without crossover blocking me.

Paizo Employee Designer

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

Mr. Mark Seifter,

I have a flesh warper character that uses the bloodrager and the 3.5 prestige class flesh warper from Lords of Madness along with the associated grafts and implants.

While this is unlikely, using the just the corebook of the 2nd edition, how possible is it to replicate this character? At least in broad strokes.

The playtest document doesn't have everything that will be in the 2nd edition CRB (it's important that people know that and don't worry too much if something particular isn't in the playtest yet), so I can't speak beyond the playtest doc. As to mimicking a 3.5 WotC PrC with a big subsystem of grafts and implants, obviously you won't be able to do this directly. That said, I can easily dream up a character that fits that theme of aberrant weird stuff and raging using the playtest CRB.

Dark Archive

Mark Seifter wrote:
Ectar wrote:

Been pondering the unchained action economy with PF2 using basically that same system, and now I have a few questions regarding TWF and ranged feats:

1.) If you use TWF on your first attack, do you continue to take the -2 on subsequent attacks (assuming you're using a light off-hand)? If not, is this an intentional buff to TWF and flurry of blows?

2.) How does rapid shot work? My guess is that it works exactly like TWF, but that feat is never mentioned in the rules. Are you locked into taking 3 attack actions to use rapid shot or flurry of blows?

3.) How does the manyshot feat work?

4.) I'm guessing any feat or ability that lets you do something as a full-round action, you have to spend all 3 actions to use that ability? ie: spring-attack, whirlwind attack, flurry of blows? With TWF being an explicit exception.

I really like this system, but PF wasn't built for it. I'm super excited for PF2, where this is the default, baked in system and all the rules and classes are built with it in mind.

I am too much in the mindset of the similar but not identical PF2 system to be able to adjudicate nuances in the PFU system without crossover blocking me.

Dang. I guess I'll have to make house rules. Some friends are trying to talk me into converting our current game to unchained action economy, amid the hype of the PF2 announcement.


Hi Mark! In the Levelling Up! Blog comments, you made the following comment about the fact that all classes now receive max hp per level in PF2:

Mark Seifter wrote:


In general it will help you perform awesome feats and avoid rocket tag situations where the bad guys one-shot you with regular attacks (especially if your character couldn't afford to pump Con). I still strongly recommend raising your Con, but the less you do, the more this is going to help you survive and flourish (for instance, at 10 Con, it basically does double your HP, but the higher you go, the less of a percentage more this gives you). Ask anyone about the stats for Reiko, the iconic ninja, and the first thing you usually hear is "I wish she didn't have 10 Con." The way the math worked, those first few points in Con had an outsizedly big impact (raising your HP by nearly ~30% for going from 10 up to 12 on a low HD class). And it was sort of a secret hidden feature that many newbies learned at the end of a killing blow before making their second character (before someone mentions, yes, in PF1 you can focus on various defenses heavily enough to try to avoid taking HP damage in the first place and survive just fine on 10 Con, but you have to be experienced enough to get that up and running)."

The D&D 4E designers used the same rationale for the similarly inflated hit points in that edition. This HP inflation was largely responsible for the "every combat is a 4 hour slog" criticism that gets levelled against 4e so frequently.

Is this on your radar and are you taking steps to ensure you don't make the same mistake? Thanks!

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bardic Dave wrote:

Hi Mark! In the Levelling Up! Blog comments, you made the following comment about the fact that all classes now receive max hp per level in PF2:

Mark Seifter wrote:


In general it will help you perform awesome feats and avoid rocket tag situations where the bad guys one-shot you with regular attacks (especially if your character couldn't afford to pump Con). I still strongly recommend raising your Con, but the less you do, the more this is going to help you survive and flourish (for instance, at 10 Con, it basically does double your HP, but the higher you go, the less of a percentage more this gives you). Ask anyone about the stats for Reiko, the iconic ninja, and the first thing you usually hear is "I wish she didn't have 10 Con." The way the math worked, those first few points in Con had an outsizedly big impact (raising your HP by nearly ~30% for going from 10 up to 12 on a low HD class). And it was sort of a secret hidden feature that many newbies learned at the end of a killing blow before making their second character (before someone mentions, yes, in PF1 you can focus on various defenses heavily enough to try to avoid taking HP damage in the first place and survive just fine on 10 Con, but you have to be experienced enough to get that up and running)."

The D&D 4E designers used the same rationale for the similarly inflated hit points in that edition. This HP inflation was largely responsible for the "every combat is a 4 hour slog" criticism that gets levelled against 4e so frequently.

Is this on your radar and are you taking steps to ensure you don't make the same mistake? Thanks!

Logan put it well in his response over in the other thread.

6,601 to 6,650 of 6,818 << first < prev | 127 | 128 | 129 | 130 | 131 | 132 | 133 | 134 | 135 | 136 | 137 | 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.