Quick question to try and get us back on topic, annoying/delighting Mark with questions! =D
Can an alchemist use extracts or infusions on a Sipping Jacket?
Piggybacking off the above question, can an alchemist benefit from Urgathoa's feat when drinking extracts? (The exact name escapes me - Potion Glutton?)
Interestingly that feat states that its a move action to drink a potion, which as far as I know is incorrect.
|
I just have their readied action be their surprise round action. Because sometimes people react before you can get your action off.But that's the thing, a readied action supersedes all other actions.
Quickened spell? Doesn't matter, readied action.
Attack of opportunity? Doesn't matter, readied action.
Immediate action? Doesn't matter, readied action.Readied actions trigger in response to another action, but before the triggering action takes place. If you're walking through jungle in enemy territory and you know they are nearby, but haven't attacked, how long can a person keep readying an action? Rules say they can do so infinitely, so that means there is never a surprise round as the party is always readied.
As long as they can come up with a justifiable readied action, they can stay readied.
Luckily, readied actions are one of the few actions that can only be taken during initiative.
Hey Mark, hopefully a straightforward question here, how would you run this? Does a Barbarian using Intimidating Glare normally provoke an AoO?
Hey Mark, hopefully a straightforward question here, how would you run this? Does a Barbarian using Intimidating Glare normally provoke an AoO?
Why would it? Intimidating someone in combat doesn't provoke an attack of opportunity, and intimidating glare doesn't call out that it provokes.
Hey Mark, hopefully a straightforward question here, how would you run this? Does a Barbarian using Intimidating Glare normally provoke an AoO?Why would it? Intimidating someone in combat doesn't provoke an attack of opportunity, and intimidating glare doesn't call out that it provokes.
Using a skill that takes a standard action usually provokes an AoO (according to the combat section). I take that to mean that unless a skill says specifically it doesn't provoke, that it does. There are a few example of such skills, Intimidate isn't one of them.
Now Intimidating Glare makes Demoralize a move action, and there is no entry on whether or not skills that take a move action provoke an AoO. Thus, I'm not sure if it should provoke an AoO or not.
|
What you have to determine is, is Demoralize a Distracting Act?
Performing a Distracting Act: Some actions, when performed in a threatened square, provoke attacks of opportunity as you divert your attention from the battle. Table: Actions in Combat notes many of the actions that provoke attacks of opportunity.
If Demoralize is not a Distracting Act, it does not provoke.
The giant slayers handbook says that you can hide behind larger creatures. The core book says that other creatures can not be used for stealth purposes because they are only soft cover.
Is this rule an addition to the core rules or an optional add-on?
Contributor
|
The spell Polymorph Familiar says that it acts as Beast Shape I, except that the familiar can only become a Small animal. When you reach caster level 7, it functions as Beast Shape II instead, and so on as it levels up.
Does it keep the restriction? If so, forgive me for asking, but what's the point of using a higher-level spell effect?
Archetypes and Gaining Powers: If an archetype like wildblooded sorcerer grants new class features like bloodline powers, domain powers, or the like, if I don’t have that archetype, can I use feats like Eldritch Heritage or Believer’s Boon and choose the powers granted by the archetype.
No. These powers only exist for the archetypes that grant them. This is particularly important because in some cases, the archetype might trade out non-parallel features to gain those powers. For example, a fey sorcerer with the wildblooded archetype trades out both her bloodline arcana and her 1st-level power to gain a new 1st-level power, but a non-sorcerer using a feat to gain a 1st-level power never had the bloodline arcana to begin with.
Yea.... it is because of this stuff that I believe that the Wildblooded archtype should have just been a list of normal bloodlines. Sure, some information would have been repeated, but it would have been more compatable with the other rules.
Thanks for the FAQ though! I could have sworn that there was already a FAQ on this topic, but I guess this is a wider reaching one than the Wildblooded specific FAQ that I am thinking of.
|
Contributor
|
Yea.... it is because of this stuff that I believe that the Wildblooded archtype should have just been a list of normal bloodlines. Sure, some information would have been repeated, but it would have been more compatable with the other rules.Archetypes and Gaining Powers: If an archetype like wildblooded sorcerer grants new class features like bloodline powers, domain powers, or the like, if I don’t have that archetype, can I use feats like Eldritch Heritage or Believer’s Boon and choose the powers granted by the archetype.
No. These powers only exist for the archetypes that grant them. This is particularly important because in some cases, the archetype might trade out non-parallel features to gain those powers. For example, a fey sorcerer with the wildblooded archetype trades out both her bloodline arcana and her 1st-level power to gain a new 1st-level power, but a non-sorcerer using a feat to gain a 1st-level power never had the bloodline arcana to begin with.
I COMPLETELY AGREE. (Sorry.) I'm not usually the sort to beg for errata, but please go back and change the Wild bloodlines to not involve the archetype system. Part of it is that I rely on Herolab pretty heavily, which makes houserules a pain.
So in short, please please please. That is all. :)
Are we getting a FAQ today?Something relatively weighty is coming, but due to some interesting factors, it will likely be swapped for something else that's lighter but higher up on the FAQ queue. Swapping takes time, so stayed tuned!
I wonder if the weighty stuff is the long awaited erratas for Mythic Adventures? :D
|
|
Mark. why do animal companions have to learn light armor to wear heavy armor its not like bob the bear puts on leather armor before his master buys him full plate and puts it on him and trains bob the bear in its use.
AN AC is not a martial like a fighter or a ranger. IF the AC's master is proficient with the type of armor he wants his companion to use he should be able to train his companion in its use.
Will there be templates for psychic magic? It's a common theme when dealing with psychic characters in stories or games or video to have them suddenly manifest only a single type of power.
For example, having a Goblin be exposed to some breach between planes and manifesting telekinetic powers. He's not truly a kineticist, but he has gained some psychic abilities.
One of the downsides of doing psychic magic as a class system is it tends to make these types of stories really difficult to pull off. It'd be nice if there were templates that boil some of the psychic classes down into the 'core' abilities of each class. Kind of like Mythic Templates.
For example, a Pyrokinetic Template that manifests in being able to take a number of burn points equal their Cod mod (or Cha mod if undead with undead taking a penalty to hp or something) and a small selection of pyrokinetic wild talents.
This would let one tell the story of something like a 1 HD commoner manifesting psychic abilities and being able to take on, say, 5 city guards, each second level warriors, without actually possessing the fighting skill to do so.
Mark. why do animal companions have to learn light armor to wear heavy armor its not like bob the bear puts on leather armor before his master buys him full plate and puts it on him and trains bob the bear in its use.
AN AC is not a martial like a fighter or a ranger. IF the AC's master is proficient with the type of armor he wants his companion to use he should be able to train his companion in its use.
1. Because the way the game works creatures all use the same rules of if creature X needs a feat, then creature Y needs a feat unless it has a specific rules exception.
2. Just because you as a human can wear armor that does not mean you should be able to teach(train) the animal companion who is less intelligent and a different shape than a human to use it without a resource(feat) being used. If anything, it would be easier to train the human to use it for free. Also tricks that animals are trained are not for things such as armor usage, but to follow certain commands. Feats are a different type of learning/training.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wraith strike, what I am saying is that an AC should only have to buy one feat for the type of armor the master wishes it to wear, not the ful chain as that is a feat tax that is far to high. Martial feats are all trained feats the game just assumes you get training when you acquire the feat.
I get that, but what I am saying is that due to how the game works nobody gets an exception to the rule, and there is no reason why an AC should get an exception, but not any other creature. The AC is trained by having the feat just like any other creature.
What happens if I use a sarissa and enlarge person?
Also, do you accept cookies as sacrfices for putting up with all of us?
You have 20 feet of "blind spots" and then threaten 25 and 30 (within your cone). I only accept delicious cookies.
My personal favorite is, "I ready an action to shoot non-party members." No duration on how long a 'readied state' lasts so he wakes up and takes a readied action so he can never be flat footed.The style section states that "you cannot use a style feat before combat begins", but I find it a little hard to accept that you can't prepare yourself by assuming a style stance immediately before a fight.I think that's kind of the same issue as "I can be the one who started the fight but still be flat-footed until I act".
Others have given some good answers, and my personal take on is similar to some; if you want to ready an action, you'll have to do that on the surprise round, if you act in the surprise round. In case it matters (particularly for characters who "always act on the surprise round"), I rule the surprise round to be the first round where one side that knows about the other side takes an action that is guaranteed to be noticed by the unaware side. So like if you're five rooms away unnoticed and casting buffs, that isn't a surprise round yet, but if you plan on somehow teleporting a delayed blast fireball into the middle of your enemies five rooms away, the round when you want to do that is the surprise round.
Quick question to try and get us back on topic, annoying/delighting Mark with questions! =D
Can an alchemist use extracts or infusions on a Sipping Jacket?
From reading it, definitely not.
Piggybacking off the above question, can an alchemist benefit from Urgathoa's feat when drinking extracts? (The exact name escapes me - Potion Glutton?)
As Kudaku says, the "Normal" line is off, and I think this led to the whole feat becoming off-kilter. Clearly if it's "Quicken Spell on every extract and you don't have to raise the effective spell level" then it's up there in the off bucket with Sacred Geometry. And it does seem to say that, or at least something similar, to my reading.
What you have to determine is, is Demoralize a Distracting Act?
Performing a Distracting Act: Some actions, when performed in a threatened square, provoke attacks of opportunity as you divert your attention from the battle. Table: Actions in Combat notes many of the actions that provoke attacks of opportunity.If Demoralize is not a Distracting Act, it does not provoke.
Yup, that would be the case. Most skills tend to provoke in combat because if you decide to do some Craft (basketweaving) right in front of the orc's face, you're not paying attention to it. Most combat uses of skills would involve paying attention, rather than diverting. For instance, feinting or demoralizing an enemy involves focusing on that enemy.
The giant slayers handbook says that you can hide behind larger creatures. The core book says that other creatures can not be used for stealth purposes because they are only soft cover.
Is this rule an addition to the core rules or an optional add-on?
It's most likely an oversight.
The spell Polymorph Familiar says that it acts as Beast Shape I, except that the familiar can only become a Small animal. When you reach caster level 7, it functions as Beast Shape II instead, and so on as it levels up.
Does it keep the restriction? If so, forgive me for asking, but what's the point of using a higher-level spell effect?
The point is to gain better options from the menu.
Any teasers for us on what the "weighty" FAQ topic on the horizon is?
Let's see, three teasers:
*It'll be a FAQ within the next 24 hours.
*It's a mistake that we can finally fix.
*Based on my analysis of your (singular you here) posts, I don't think you will enjoy it as much as you have some of the other FAQs.
what would you do if someone released a group of hyper and destructive puppies into your office while you were absent?
Well, my important stuff is on the server, so mostly I'd make them pay damages for the value of the other things there, I guess.
Will there be templates for psychic magic? It's a common theme when dealing with psychic characters in stories or games or video to have them suddenly manifest only a single type of power.
For example, having a Goblin be exposed to some breach between planes and manifesting telekinetic powers. He's not truly a kineticist, but he has gained some psychic abilities.
One of the downsides of doing psychic magic as a class system is it tends to make these types of stories really difficult to pull off. It'd be nice if there were templates that boil some of the psychic classes down into the 'core' abilities of each class. Kind of like Mythic Templates.
For example, a Pyrokinetic Template that manifests in being able to take a number of burn points equal their Cod mod (or Cha mod if undead with undead taking a penalty to hp or something) and a small selection of pyrokinetic wild talents.
This would let one tell the story of something like a 1 HD commoner manifesting psychic abilities and being able to take on, say, 5 city guards, each second level warriors, without actually possessing the fighting skill to do so.
The class templates in Monster Codex but for occult classes? It certainly could be useful to have those, I agree.
Mark, I have an idea for a new weapons enchantment.
Flexible Bane: Requires Studied target class ability. Your weapon gains the bane weapons enchantment vs. your studied target.what would you say the + cost for the enchantment would be?
Well it's an enhancement that always gives you a +2 increase in the weapon's enhancement bonus (which can break the +5 cap) and 2d6 extra damage. If the weapon is at least +3 aside from this enhancement, it is strictly superior to adding +2 and holy (or your favorite alignment enhancement, or two elemental enhancements or anything else that adds 2d6) so clearly it would be extremely powerful as a +4 equivalent. That said, it's probably not the best idea, since bane is "better against certain foes" and if you remove the "against certain foes" part of it, you're left with "better," which is a boring concept for an enhancement.
Mr. Mark Seifter,
Do you have an idea about how Mediums will be viewed and treated in nations such as Rahadoum and their antitheistic brethren?
Yup, that would be the case. Most skills tend to provoke in combat because if you decide to do some Craft (basketweaving) right in front of the orc's face, you're not paying attention to it. Most combat uses of skills would involve paying attention, rather than diverting. For instance, feinting or demoralizing an enemy involves focusing on that enemy.What you have to determine is, is Demoralize a Distracting Act?
Performing a Distracting Act: Some actions, when performed in a threatened square, provoke attacks of opportunity as you divert your attention from the battle. Table: Actions in Combat notes many of the actions that provoke attacks of opportunity.If Demoralize is not a Distracting Act, it does not provoke.
Hahaha, I enjoyed this answer and thank you to both of you. That really helps clear up my understanding!
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
My guess is they are about to reverse the SLA early entry FAQ.*Based on my analysis of your (singular you here) posts, I don't think you will enjoy it as much as you have some of the other FAQs.Hmmm, if it's what I'm now thinking, then I'd wager a guess you're wrong.
That's the first thing that came to my mind as well.
That's the first thing that came to my mind as well.My guess is they are about to reverse the SLA early entry FAQ.*Based on my analysis of your (singular you here) posts, I don't think you will enjoy it as much as you have some of the other FAQs.Hmmm, if it's what I'm now thinking, then I'd wager a guess you're wrong.
If that's what they're fixing, then thank goodness! I hope they clarify how spell-like abilities interact with everything else while they are at it.
Mr. Mark Seifter,
Do you have an idea about how Mediums will be viewed and treated in nations such as Rahadoum and their antitheistic brethren?
Medium rare? *ow ow ow ow*
Hey, Mark.
From what I understand you're primarily working on dev line for the core stuff rather than the Golarion-specific books, so this one would probably not be aimed at you.
Who would we need to petition if we wanted to ask for updates to some of the "orphaned" things that were introduced in the Campaign / Companion lines of books?
Specifically I'm considering things like the void alternate school of magic, where it was mentioned once, but there have been many, many spells published since. I know that sometimes in the Companion books, they go through and mention stuff from prior books and how it might relate to something in that book, so I'm hoping there's a chance we may see either something like that or a blog post similar to the old Golarion-day posts updating some of the "orphaned" systems, but I have no idea who I could petition to do so.
Any suggestions?
-TimD
Mr. Mark Seifter,
Do you have an idea about how Mediums will be viewed and treated in nations such as Rahadoum and their antitheistic brethren?
As a designer, I don't often make decisions on Golarion lore. I would imagine, however, that since the medium's spells are psychic, that they would be OK unless they were openly devout to a deity aside from being a medium or flaunting obviously religious spirits.
I don't have any cookies, but I do have cupcakes!
Would the slayer be overpowered if he started with sneak attack and a combat style? I currently have slayers running like that, but are allowed to pick any rogue talent that modifies sneak attack damage
The slayer would definitely be overpowered compared to other benchmark classes if it started with sneak attack and combat style. However, as long as the only people in your games playing those kind of characters only play slayers anyway, and in that way it isn't limiting their choices if they don't want to take a hit, it's not going to be enough of a boost that you can't make up for it easily by mildly increasing the opposition.
Hahaha, I enjoyed this answer and thank you to both of you. That really helps clear up my understanding!Yup, that would be the case. Most skills tend to provoke in combat because if you decide to do some Craft (basketweaving) right in front of the orc's face, you're not paying attention to it. Most combat uses of skills would involve paying attention, rather than diverting. For instance, feinting or demoralizing an enemy involves focusing on that enemy.What you have to determine is, is Demoralize a Distracting Act?
Performing a Distracting Act: Some actions, when performed in a threatened square, provoke attacks of opportunity as you divert your attention from the battle. Table: Actions in Combat notes many of the actions that provoke attacks of opportunity.If Demoralize is not a Distracting Act, it does not provoke.
No problem. Glad to help!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hey, Mark.
From what I understand you're primarily working on dev line for the core stuff rather than the Golarion-specific books, so this one would probably not be aimed at you.
Who would we need to petition if we wanted to ask for updates to some of the "orphaned" things that were introduced in the Campaign / Companion lines of books?
Specifically I'm considering things like the void alternate school of magic, where it was mentioned once, but there have been many, many spells published since. I know that sometimes in the Companion books, they go through and mention stuff from prior books and how it might relate to something in that book, so I'm hoping there's a chance we may see either something like that or a blog post similar to the old Golarion-day posts updating some of the "orphaned" systems, but I have no idea who I could petition to do so.
Any suggestions?-TimD
You're right that as a designer, I work on the core line. As to tying into things for the other lines, the reality is that those lines produce enough content that there wouldn't be space in their (relatively short) books to produce follow-ups. I think it's awesome that we're able to provide support for our new classes in later books of the core line, but that's mostly because there are relatively few of them, all things considered. Besides, isn't the Void school powerful enough with powerful spells, the ability to cherrypick a weaksauce opposition school, and a 1st level ability that's nearly auto-win at higher levels? ;)
|
Well, its more or less, we don't really use the rogue class much, no one really liked it.
So I gave them the option of either sneak attack at level one OR a ranger combat style.
Then I tried what I said earlier.
Im now just giving them sneak attack at first level because they are now replacing rogues completely.
You're right that as a designer, I work on the core line. As to tying into things for the other lines, the reality is that those lines produce enough content that there wouldn't be space in their (relatively short) books to produce follow-ups. I think it's awesome that we're able to provide support for our new classes in later books of the core line, but that's mostly because there are relatively few of them, all things considered. Besides, isn't the Void school powerful enough with powerful spells, the ability to cherrypick a weaksauce opposition school, and a 1st level ability that's nearly auto-win at higher levels? ;)
Void was merely an example, though admittedly one near and dear to me as I do have a void wizard who I would dearly love to have more than 3 options for a 4th level school spell.
It was more an inquiry to see if it would be the same design team folks that would address things that aren't core as they are "rules development" rather than "game world development". I understand that it's quite likely that folks at Paizo wear a lot of hats (such as the Modules Overlord working on a player companion book), it's a bit arcane cryptic to those of us on the outside looking in who does what so that we can ask the right questions of the right folks.
-TimD
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You're right that as a designer, I work on the core line. As to tying into things for the other lines, the reality is that those lines produce enough content that there wouldn't be space in their (relatively short) books to produce follow-ups. I think it's awesome that we're able to provide support for our new classes in later books of the core line, but that's mostly because there are relatively few of them, all things considered. Besides, isn't the Void school powerful enough with powerful spells, the ability to cherrypick a weaksauce opposition school, and a 1st level ability that's nearly auto-win at higher levels? ;)Void was merely an example, though admittedly one near and dear to me as I do have a void wizard who I would dearly love to have more than 3 options for a 4th level school spell.
It was more an inquiry to see if it would be the same design team folks that would address things that aren't core as they are "rules development" rather than "game world development". I understand that it's quite likely that folks at Paizo wear a lot of hats (such as the Modules Overlord working on a player companion book), it's a bit
arcanecryptic to those of us on the outside looking in who does what so that we can ask the right questions of the right folks.-TimD
It's certainly cryptic indeed. I can separate out the three most common creative department positions for you, though!
Designer: Work as a team with the other designers, with Jason as a manager. Write some of the rules for the RPG line ourselves, and also develop freelancer turnovers for it. Despite the use of the word develop, are not actually developers by name, and I think everyone calling us that makes the actual developers cross.
Developer: Develop all the other lines, with Wes as a manager. Typically a developer takes charge of a particular line and develops freelancer turnovers, but sometimes a shuffle depending on who can handle it. Possible to be more independent as a developer since you may not share an individual project with another developer and designers always do.
Editor: Work as a team with the other editors, with Sutter as a manager, serving under Wes. Make sure the language after development is as clear as possible and the formatting is solid, for all lines.
Any other title, like "Modules Overlord," is sort of a cutesy forum title and doesn't necessarily reflect what they do (in Owen's case, he's also been doing Player Companions since Patrick, who was doing them, left).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What I'm gather from this, is that Wes is a great target for a domination spell to take control of the rules teams.