Compilation of Campaign Clarification requests


Pathfinder Society

51 to 100 of 516 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Sczarni 5/5 5/55/5 ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Let's take that discussion to the thread that BNW linked to, and not bog down this one with it.

(otherwise we'll have 200+ different discussions going on here)

4/5

DM Beckett wrote:
Lau Bannenberg wrote:
I don't see any ambiguity. Harm cannot reduce the target's hit points to less than 1. Ever.

In 3.5 it could.

Harm wrote:
Harm charges a subject with negative energy that deals 10 points of damage per caster level (to a maximum of 150 points at 15th level). If the creature successfully saves, harm deals half this amount, but it cannot reduce the target’s hit points to less than 1.

PF specifically changed that so that Harm could not outright kill, and if you are familiar with older editions, it's a very easy thing to miss.

PF Harm wrote:
Harm charges a subject with negative energy that deals 10 points of damage per caster level (to a maximum of 150 points at 15th level). If the creature successfully saves, harm deals half this amount. Harm cannot reduce the target's hit points to less than 1.

Uhm, the only difference between the 3.5 version and the PF version is a 3.5 has comma and Pathfinder has a period. And if you read the 3.5 FAQ they were clear that Harm was suppose to work the same way it does in Pathfinder. Pathfinder just has better grammar.

Silver Crusade 4/5

6 people marked this as a favorite.

So you got me curious, and I pulled out the old Players Handbook. The really old Players Handbook. First edition, AD&D.

In that version, Harm wiped out all but 1d4 of the target's hit points. So it couldn't get the target down below 1 HP back then, either.

4/5

Fromper wrote:

So you got me curious, and I pulled out the old Players Handbook. The really old Players Handbook. First edition, AD&D.

In that version, Harm wiped out all but 1d4 of the target's hit points. So it couldn't get the target down below 1 HP back then, either.

And it could give a disease, but yeah Harm has never been meant to kill outright.

Lantern Lodge 3/5 5/5

Regarding the kitsune feat fox shape.
1. Is it once per day or at will?
2. Is the duration indefinite like the kitsune's change shape ability or is it minute per level per beast shape II?

In a recent game, a player had to change his character because the feat was a significant part of his build, but the GM was of the view that as worded, the feat only allowed the fox shape to be taken once per day and that it would only last 5 minutes. The player's character-concept depended substantially on the understanding that it was an extension of the kitune's change shape ability (at will, indefinite duration).

I told him there was probably a clarification somewhere on the boards, but to my surprise I could not find one.

Liberty's Edge 5/5 5/5 ** Venture-Lieutenant, Indiana—Martinsville

The Kitsune assumes, I think, the same usage as the human form, which only limits the time it takes to change from one form to another. If read strictly by the letter of the feat, one can only change to Fox form from a Kitsune (Anthomorphic fox) form. So if in the human form, one would need to change to Kitsune then to Fox.

Even that seems like it is reading more than what is on the page, but then you have humans taking the feat (Racial Heritage) to take on a Fox Form that they shouldn't be able to effect. (No Shapechanging ability to add to, ability is not specified as given in feat)

To me, it is at will (and will play it that way with my Carnivalist Kitsune), but I can see the confusion when it is written with as few words as it is.

Clarification on that would be nice.

1/5 Venture-Agent, Utah—Provo

1 person marked this as a favorite.
DM Beckett wrote:
Thomas Hutchins wrote:
It could be useful to add a clarification on Wild Shields and giving their shield bonus while wildshaped to the clarification doc.

You are assuming that it was supposed to, which might not be the case. Shields don't have a long period to remove or equip like armor does, and a shield could be much more easily used as a weapon, too, and despite what BNW says one down, there is no ambiguity as to if you can apply the magical property to a shield, just if it does what you want it to, which is different than what the property actually says.

I could see it very easily allowing Armor, and only Armor bonuses to AC to remain while Wild Shaped, even if it's a property you put on your shield.

I assume nothing. Adding a clarification as to whether or not wild shields give a their shield bonus is something that could easily be clarified and would be helpful to have a consistent play experience.

Shadow Lodge

DM Beckett wrote:
Thomas Hutchins wrote:
It could be useful to add a clarification on Wild Shields and giving their shield bonus while wildshaped to the clarification doc.

You are assuming that it was supposed to, which might not be the case. Shields don't have a long period to remove or equip like armor does, and a shield could be much more easily used as a weapon, too, and despite what BNW says one down, there is no ambiguity as to if you can apply the magical property to a shield, just if it does what you want it to, which is different than what the property actually says.

I could see it very easily allowing Armor, and only Armor bonuses to AC to remain while Wild Shaped, even if it's a property you put on your shield.

Wild armor wrote:
Armor with this special ability usually appears to be made from magically hardened animal pelt. The wearer of a suit of armor or a shield with this ability preserves his armor bonus (and any enhancement bonus) while in a wild shape. Armor and shields with this ability usually appear to be covered in leaf patterns. While the wearer is in a wild shape, the armor cannot be seen.

The enchantment explicitly refers to shields having it, so we have two possible interpretations:

1. You can put it on a shield, but it does nothing.
2. You can put it on a shield, and it works as common sense would dictate.

Anyone who tries to insist that #1 is the correct interpretation needs to be struck by the Clue-by-Four.

Shadow Lodge 4/5

I'm not going to argue it here. The only point I was trying to make is that it doesn't seem to be an issue that needs official clarification, especially from PFS. The CRB FAQ seems a better place for this.

5/5 5/55/55/5

Tuillen wrote:


I told him there was probably a clarification somewhere on the boards, but to my surprise I could not find one.

Whether it's an add on to shape change (like i think it is) or a spell like ability you need to use every 10 minutes is pretty irrelevant, as they'd have the same effect. But there is NO way to get from the text to once per day.

Sczarni 5/5 5/55/5 ***

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Number 26a on this list was just answered.

Lantern Lodge 3/5 5/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tuillen wrote:

Regarding the kitsune feat fox shape.

1. Is it once per day or at will?
2. Is the duration indefinite like the kitsune's change shape ability or is it minute per level per beast shape II?

In a recent game, a player had to change his character because the feat was a significant part of his build, but the GM was of the view that as worded, the feat only allowed the fox shape to be taken once per day and that it would only last 5 minutes. The player's character-concept depended substantially on the understanding that it was an extension of the kitune's change shape ability (at will, indefinite duration).

I told him there was probably a clarification somewhere on the boards, but to my surprise I could not find one.

From memory, James Jacob had a big hand in shaping Tian Xia.

Yes, I know, he's stated before that he's not 'the rules guy'.

Nonetheless, here's JJ's take on the feat.

Hopefully that will help get this to campaign clarifications.

4/5

An old new question: "Does the Spirit Guide Oracle archetype allow someone to add arcane spells to their list of spells known via the Arcane Enlightenment hex"?

Archetype wrote:

Bonded Spirit (Su): At 3rd level, a spirit guide can form a temporary bond with a spirit, as the shaman's wandering spirit class feature. She must make this selection each day when she refreshes her spells. A spirit guide cannot bond with a spirit that is incompatible with her alignment, ethos, or mystery (GM's discretion).

A spirit guide gains one hex of her choice from the list of hexes available from that spirit. She uses her oracle level as her shaman level, and she switches Wisdom for Charisma and vice versa for the purpose of determining the hex's effects.

Arcane Enlightenment wrote:
Arcane Enlightenment (Su): The shaman's native intelligence grants her the ability to tap into arcane lore. The shaman can add a number of spells from the sorcerer/wizard spell list equal to her Charisma modifier (minimum 1) to the list of shaman spells she can prepare. To cast these spells, she must have an Intelligence score equal to at least 10 + the spell's level, but the saving throw DCs of these spells are based on her Wisdom rather than Intelligence. When she casts these spells, they are treated as divine rather than arcane. Each time the shaman gains a level after taking this hex, she can choose to replace one of these spells with a new spell from the sorcerer/wizard spell list.

Scarab Sages 2/5

DOT

Liberty's Edge 5/5 5/5 ** Venture-Lieutenant, Indiana—Martinsville

Tuillen wrote:
Tuillen wrote:

Regarding the kitsune feat fox shape.

1. Is it once per day or at will?
2. Is the duration indefinite like the kitsune's change shape ability or is it minute per level per beast shape II?

In a recent game, a player had to change his character because the feat was a significant part of his build, but the GM was of the view that as worded, the feat only allowed the fox shape to be taken once per day and that it would only last 5 minutes. The player's character-concept depended substantially on the understanding that it was an extension of the kitune's change shape ability (at will, indefinite duration).

I told him there was probably a clarification somewhere on the boards, but to my surprise I could not find one.

From memory, James Jacob had a big hand in shaping Tian Xia.

Yes, I know, he's stated before that he's not 'the rules guy'.

Nonetheless, here's JJ's take on the feat.

Hopefully that will help get this to campaign clarifications.

Yeah, basically the same thing as what I posted above, though a bit more clear on being a part of the monster ability instead of being a "spell effect."

5/5 5/55/55/5

Can drakes use wands with Use Magic device?

5/5 5/55/55/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Can dervish dancers use bucklers?

Silver Crusade 1/5

Can everybody purchase spells from NPCs between scenarios?

Okay, hear me out here. We all know that we do (Pay NPC wizard, pay scribing costs if you have them, done), but not everybody does. Because the word "rare" is still in the FAQ entry, suggesting that this is not the usual way to do it. I told a VL about it recently and he was surprised that this was even an option - he had advised a player to buy scrolls to do it. Not so bad on level 1, pretty horrible for level 4 spells.
Also, I noticed I brought this up before when looking for threads I could show him. A had completly forgotten that o_o
Another problem: That feature is hidden in a question discussing scribing between players, suggesting that the last sentence applies to PC wizards. Which is obviously not the case.

Grand Lodge 4/5

Anyone can purchase access to spells, or scrolls. You have to do your own scribing, which becomes relevant for certain cases.

Silver Crusade 1/5

Starglim wrote:
Anyone can purchase access to spells, or scrolls. You have to do your own scribing, which becomes relevant for certain cases.

Yes, I know. But not everybody knows. To figure it out you have to consult the forums and read a wild mixture of FAQ and messageboard clarifications. That's my point. ;)

Silver Crusade 1/5

Blackbot wrote:
Starglim wrote:
Anyone can purchase access to spells, or scrolls. You have to do your own scribing, which becomes relevant for certain cases.
Yes, I know. But not everybody knows. To figure it out you have to consult the forums and read a wild mixture of FAQ and messageboard clarifications. That's my point. ;)

Indeed. It took me many months to discover this.

5/5 5/55/55/5

Blackbot wrote:

A had completly forgotten that o_o

Another problem: That feature is hidden in a question discussing scribing between players, suggesting that the last sentence applies to PC wizards. Which is obviously not the case.

witches definitely can

I always picture it looking like this

Silver Crusade 4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Blackbot wrote:

A had completly forgotten that o_o

Another problem: That feature is hidden in a question discussing scribing between players, suggesting that the last sentence applies to PC wizards. Which is obviously not the case.

witches definitely can

I always picture it looking like this

I always picture the two familiars sniffing each other's butts. Maybe I've just spent too much time around dogs in my life.

5/5 5/55/55/5

Can a magus Dervish dance with spell combat/spellstrike/the magusflurry interaction between the two?

3/5

BigNorseWolf wrote:

Can a magus Dervish dance with spell combat/spellstrike/the magusflurry interaction between the two?

Until it gets hit with the same errata that Fencing Grace and Slashing Grace got, yes it functions.

Silver Crusade 1/5 Contributor

Given the multi-page thread on Dervish Dance magi, it's obviously a rather contentious issue. It may be better to keep the argument in its own thread (other than a note here for Leadership).

Grand Lodge 3/5

I humbly request a clarification of the Dwarves of Golarion "pantheon" spells now that Oracles exist, most pantheon requirements have been removed. If they're not adjusted, it would be nice to clarify whether clerics of that specific god (vs. clerics of Torag) still need to perform an extra ritual to use their diety's spells.

Shadow Lodge 5/5

Fast healing granted from Infernal healing and the fast healer feat

Sczarni 5/5 5/55/5 ***

Kalindlara wrote:
Given the multi-page thread on Dervish Dance magi, it's obviously a rather contentious issue. It may be better to keep the argument in its own thread (other than a note here for Leadership).

I believe that most recent thread was locked.

Silver Crusade 1/5 Contributor

Indeed, sir. I did say it was contentious. ^_^

Scarab Sages

If a spell lists an "or" in the component costs, and one is without a listed cost, and the other has a cost, is the spell considered to be without component cost for scrolls, wands, and feats/class abilities/equipment which ignores component requirements based on cost?

Just looking for clarification of how the PFS GM is supposed to handle this. This one has several threads, most of which get lost in the evil/good debate of Infernal healing.

Shadow Lodge 5/5

any chance we can get this thread stickey'd so that it stays at the top for developers to reference ?

Sovereign Court 3/5 **

Pathfinder Card Game, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Society Subscriber

Do the corrected Dhampir heritages in Inner Sea Races supersede the heritages in Blood of the Night? Or are both versions legal?

Sczarni 5/5 5/55/5 ***

Both versions are legal.

Additional Resources specifies that you may use either.

Grand Lodge 2/5

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Just a quick **bump** for a one-way-or-the-other ruling on how Pyromaniac interacts with classes that have been released since Advanced Race Guide. Specifically Kineticist.

Sovereign Court 4/5 5/5 ** Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden

Darrell Impey UK wrote:
Just a quick **bump** for a one-way-or-the-other ruling on how Pyromaniac interacts with classes that have been released since Advanced Race Guide. Specifically Kineticist.

Well, it wouldn't do a lot for them. Just because a new class is released with fire-themed choices (kineticist) doesn't mean old material is adapted to include it. There's racial traits in the ARG that give stuff to sorcerer bloodlines and cleric domains but not to oracle mysteries, too.

Pyromaniac wrote:
Pyromaniac: Gnomes with this racial trait are treated as one level higher when casting spells with the fire descriptor,

This part works for new classes. Though those classes don't have a huge amount of spells with the fire descriptor.

Pyromaniac wrote:
using granted powers of the Fire domain, using the bloodline powers of the fire elemental bloodline or the revelations of the oracle's flame mystery, and determining the damage of alchemist bombs that deal fire damage (this ability does not give gnomes early access to level-based powers; it only affects the powers they could use without this ability).

This part doesn't do anything for that.

Pyromaniac wrote:
Gnomes with Charisma scores of 11 or higher also gain the following spell-like abilities: 1/day—dancing lights, flare, prestidigitation, produce flame. The caster level for these effects is equal to the gnome's level; the DCs are Charisma-based. This racial trait replaces gnome magic and illusion resistance.

Class doesn't matter for this part.

Grand Lodge 2/5

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Preempting the (hopeful) release of material from Blood of the Beasts, there are a number of potential rulings needed imo.

For starters, whilst a number of options specifically call out for x-race only or open to all, about half of them say nothing on the matter.

Also, does a human, or other race with a variable ability bonus, choosing to put that bonus into Dexterity count as "having a racial bonus to Dexterity"?

Grand Lodge 2/5

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Lau Bannenberg wrote:
Darrell Impey UK wrote:
Just a quick **bump** for a one-way-or-the-other ruling on how Pyromaniac interacts with classes that have been released since Advanced Race Guide. Specifically Kineticist.
Well, it wouldn't do a lot for them. Just because a new class is released with fire-themed choices (kineticist) doesn't mean old material is adapted to include it. There's racial traits in the ARG that give stuff to sorcerer bloodlines and cleric domains but not to oracle mysteries, too.

Whilst I understand your points the situation would in a home-campaign come under "GM's ruling", and those are the situations that should enter the CC document. (Note that I don't play a kineticist myself.)

Sczarni 5/5 5/55/5 ***

I don't believe the Campaign Clarifications document should be used to create houserules.

If it was, there'd be a flood of requests for this or that. Potentially everything that somebody thinks appropriate could be turned into a request.

The document should be utilized to provide clarifications on ambiguous rules situations.

In the case of Pyromaniac Gnomes, the rules are clear.

Sovereign Court 4/5 5/5 ** Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden

I agree with Nefreet on this. On the one hand it's desirable to "repair" broken rules; on the other hand there's a price to be paid because every sub-rule and clarification people need to learn and that needs to be documented makes the game harder to learn and keep up with.

I also don't think that a caster level bonus on a domain, or descriptor, is entirely equivalent to just about all your class abilities (a kineticist focusing on a single element), so apart from procedural arguments there'd be balance concerns.

3/5 5/5

When the FAQ (linked) for improved familiars item slots first came out, Mike Brock discussed it heavily with the community. One of the things that came from it was a statement that he would add a line to the faq that "familiars may trade their normal feats for Extra Item Slot on a one-for-one basis."(linked)

I checked the faq and noticed that for whatever reason, this update was never made. Was this an oversight or was the decision reversed? Is that option available in PFS?

If not, is there any other way to get the extra item slot feat for familiars in PFS?

4/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.

post#92) transfer rules in (old) Blog posts to the CmpgnClar doc or FAQs. Such as;

Can one purchase a ring of eloquence (Pathfinder RPG Advanced Class Guide 216) with any combination of languages? Are restricted or banned languages such as Druidic or Androffan options?

At this time, only two configurations of the ring of eloquence exist in the organized play campaign. The first grants the ability to speak and understand Common, Dwarven, Elven, and Gnome. The second grants the ability to speak and understand Giant, Goblin, Orc, and Undercommon. Rings with other configurations may appear as treasure on Chronicle sheets.

Silver Crusade 1/5

FiddlersGreen wrote:

When the FAQ (linked) for improved familiars item slots first came out, Mike Brock discussed it heavily with the community. One of the things that came from it was a statement that he would add a line to the faq that "familiars may trade their normal feats for Extra Item Slot on a one-for-one basis."(linked)

I checked the faq and noticed that for whatever reason, this update was never made. Was this an oversight or was the decision reversed? Is that option available in PFS?

If not, is there any other way to get the extra item slot feat for familiars in PFS?

The Extra Item Slot feat is already legal for animal companions and familiars. Check the bolded print right under Animal Archive in additional resources (I'd link it but I'm on a tablet just now).

Silver Crusade 2/5

additional resources

Animal Archive wrote:

Pathfinder Player Companion: Animal Archive

*Note: The Animal Magic Item Slots table found on the inside front cover of the book is not legal except under the following conditions. First, an animal companion, familiar, or bonded mount, may choose one slot listed under its body type when taking the Extra Item Slot feat (this feat may be taken multiple times, each time selecting a different available magic item slot based on the creature's anatomy). Second, access to specific magic item slots may be granted at a later date by another legal source.

Sczarni 5/5 5/55/5 ***

supervillan and DesolateHarmony, that's not what FiddlersGreen is discussing. The feat is legal, but the question was whether a Familiar, which normally has its feats locked, could switch one of those to Extra Item Slot. Mike Brock said "yes", and that's what should probably be added to the Campaign Clarifications document.

Furthermore, he made a statement about the repercussions of a Familiar switching out Weapon Finesse. That should also be included with the above clarification (if it isn't already in the current document).

5/5 5/55/55/5

Nefreet wrote:

Furthermore, he made a statement about the repercussions of a Familiar switching out Weapon Finesse. That should also be included with the above clarification (if it isn't already in the current document).

keep in mind that clarification is really.. really weird.

Weapon finesse is a completely redundant feat for most familiars. As familiars they attack with dexterity anyway. So what that clarification does is

Hedgehog: starts with athletic, comes with weapon finesse, athletic can be traded out (and should be...)

Weasel: Has weapon finesse, can't trade weappon finesse out without being able to hit anything.

It effectively takes a feat away from the most dexterous and combative of familiars that should be the most dexterous and combative of familiars.

Sczarni 5/5 5/55/5 ***

...or removed. Either way, it's the standing rule as of right now and some are unaware of it.

5/5 5/55/55/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Nefreet wrote:
...or removed. Either way, it's the standing rule as of right now and some are unaware of it.

I think about 5 people ARE aware of it...

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/55/55/5 ***

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Six!

Sczarni 5/5 5/55/5 ***

4 people marked this as a favorite.

With an increase of 20% in just 7 hours the whole PFS community should know by the end of the month.

51 to 100 of 516 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / Compilation of Campaign Clarification requests All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.