Compilation of Campaign Clarification requests


Pathfinder Society

351 to 400 of 512 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | next > last >>
5/5 ⦵⦵⦵

Cunning pantomime is especially hillarious on a snake.

But that one is pretty straightforward. Animal tricks only have DCs when the trick is being taught, when they perform a trick the dc is 25 to push or 10 if they know the trick, ability strongly implies that they either just do it or they know the trick so they don't need to roll

Silver Crusade 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Pennsylvania—Pittsburgh aka Terminalmancer

BigNorseWolf wrote:

Cunning pantomime is especially hillarious on a snake.

But that one is pretty straightforward. Animal tricks only have DCs when the trick is being taught, when they perform a trick the dc is 25 to push or 10 if they know the trick, ability strongly implies that they either just do it or they know the trick so they don't need to roll

Oh! I never realized they changed that! My hunter has been teaching his animal companion skirmisher tricks since the ACG came out. Well, that's one less thing to throw on the list. Thanks for clearing that up for me.

5/5 ⦵⦵⦵

A hunter may teach her companion hunter’s tricks from the skirmisher ranger archetype (Pathfinder RPG Advanced Player’s Guide 128) instead of standard tricks. The animal companion can use skirmisher tricks when commanded, a number of times per day equal to half its Hit Dice plus its Wisdom modifier.

AHHH. I see. you still need to know what the DC to teach them is. (unless you pick them up as bonus tricks) After that the DC will be 10 (and you probably can't push an animal to do these at all) so... that will cut the table variation down to when the animal gets trained in the trick at least, and at that point in your career you should just be getting bonus tricks anyway

Silver Crusade 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Pennsylvania—Pittsburgh aka Terminalmancer

BigNorseWolf wrote:

A hunter may teach her companion hunter’s tricks from the skirmisher ranger archetype (Pathfinder RPG Advanced Player’s Guide 128) instead of standard tricks. The animal companion can use skirmisher tricks when commanded, a number of times per day equal to half its Hit Dice plus its Wisdom modifier.

AHHH. I see. you still need to know what the DC to teach them is. (unless you pick them up as bonus tricks) After that the DC will be 10 (and you probably can't push an animal to do these at all) so... that will cut the table variation down to when the animal gets trained in the trick at least, and at that point in your career you should just be getting bonus tricks anyway

Ha. Now I see what happened. Yes, I missed that part. Seems a little crucial. You got my hopes up for a minute there!

Hunter Class wrote:
A hunter may teach her companion hunter’s tricks from the skirmisher ranger archetype (Pathfinder RPG Advanced Player’s Guide 128) instead of standard tricks. The animal companion can use skirmisher tricks when commanded, a number of times per day equal to half its Hit Dice plus its Wisdom modifier.

It seems like a good candidate for the Campaign Clarifications since there are simply... mechanics missing here. There was an errata that added the uses per day bit, but I guess they couldn't squeeze in a DC to teach the trick.

I don't know about bonus tricks only... that 9th level bonus-to-a-stat could easily turn into another 3 tricks.

Silver Crusade 5/5 ⦵⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Captain, Indiana—Southern aka CanisDirus

Linda Zayas-Palmer wrote:
Mike Bramnik wrote:

General / Scenarios:

When new items are introduced or listed in their entirety on chronicle sheets (#6-03 and #8-15 being two recent examples) but not listed in the item list for sub-tiers, are these considered to be items a PC with that chronicle sheet can purchase as if it was on the Additional Resources page, or is it a limit 1?

We try to list everything in the subtiers, but sometimes those non-standard items slip by.

Generally, these special items would be limit 1.

Seeing as this has come up numerous times since your answer, Linda, would it be possible for your above statement/ruling to be codified in either the Campaign Clarifications document or the next release of the Guide? Thanks!


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Calistria's Deific Obedience for Sentinels reads

Inner Sea Gods p. 28 wrote:
1: Lucky Strike (Sp) divine favor 1/day, align weapon (chaotic only) 2/day, or keen edge 1/day

I believe the Divine Favor 1/day is an error and that it should be 3/day. Every single other deity (to my knowledge) has its 12 HD benefits as a choice between: 1st level spell 3/day, 2nd level spell 2/day, 3rd level spell 1/day.

Furthermore, Milani offers Divine Favor 3/day as part of her Exalted 12 HD boon, as do Falayna and Irez for Celestial Obedience.

If this indeed a typo, I was hoping that a Campaign Clarification would be issued.

1/5 ⦵⦵⦵⦵

Starfinder Superscriber
FiddlersGreen wrote:
Campaign Clarifications wrote:
Page 8—Any time a feysworn is targeted by an effect that would restore her to life (e.g. raise dead or breath of life), she must immediately expend 4 Prestige Points or the effect fails. This expediture covers the drawback of feymarked.
Feysworn wrote:
Upon death, a feysworn is immediately resurrected and transported to a location on the first world.

Am I understanding this correctly?

1. Feysworn dies.
2. Feysworn gets immediately targeted by a resurrected spell, but it fails unless the feysworn pays 4pp.
3. If the feysworn paid 4pp in step 2, the feysworn is now alive, bodily (with his/her gear) on the first world and still needs to find his/her way back from the first world.
4. If the feysworn chooses, he/she can refuse to pay the 4pp in step 2, which leaves the body where it is and available for being the target of a breath of life spell.

The clarification is exceedingly confusing to me, I think it raises more ambiguity than it attempts to solve. Specifically, how could a Feysworn ever be the subject of a resurrection spell?

Upon death, a Feysworn is immediately resurrected. This does not offer an opportunity for an ally to cast Breath of Life, Raise Dead, etc.

The upside is their fey immortality precludes ever needing these spells. The downside is the character is now by their self in the First World.

In a home game, this could lead to the party traveling to the First World to rescue their comrade and/or a solo adventure for them return, but the PFS isn't structured for this.

Spending 4pp for their return, rescue, and/or performing some service to whichever of The Eldest they venerate makes total sense for balance. Unless this is spent the PC is either lost in the First World or deemed unworthy by The Eldest they venerate (either way, no longer available for PFS play).

Sovereign Court 3/5

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Companion, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

The whole sentence is the drawback. In PFS, Feysworn are not immediately resurrected on the First World. Instead, they must pay PP to be returned to life on the material plane.

Grand Lodge 2/5

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite.

Could we get a definitive answer on the use of Dragon Form using variant bloodlines for the Dragon Disciple for PFS play?

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite.

Id like a ruling on retraning as it relates to Alternate classes going into the parent class (Ninja -> Unchained Rogue) for example

1/5 ⦵⦵⦵⦵

Starfinder Superscriber
KingOfAnything wrote:
The whole sentence is the drawback. In PFS, Feysworn are not immediately resurrected on the First World. Instead, they must pay PP to be returned to life on the material plane.

I would love to read what sources or thinking has lead you to this interpretation.

The disagreements and confusion as to what this does is exactly why I'm saying the clarification needs to be fixed. I've asked 4 different GMs with our local group and each had a radically different interpretation.

I think this prestige class has some wonderful flavor potential, but few players will embrace it with such a huge ambiguity around its primary power.

Quote:
Any time a feysworn is targeted by an effect that would restore her to life (e.g. raise dead or breath of life), she must immediately expend 4 Prestige Points or the effect fails. This expediture covers the drawback of feymarked.

The power is not needing such services. Ever. Upon death, you are immediately resurrected by The Eldest that they venerate. Even a readied Breath of Life should fail as the caster's hand sweeps through the empty space their dying body once occupied. If the above text was intended to alter this, it should have done so explicitly.

In no reasonably interpreted way does "This covers the drawback of feymarked" mean that the Feymarked resurrection power is replaced with an additional 4PP cost beyond "return to life" spellcasting costs.

Especially since this is the Prestige Class's primary benefit and most of the other powers (Breacher, Plane Swap) are generally useless in PFS. As it stands, I believe this prestige class is already underpowered for PFS play given that much of its powers are focused on travel to/from the First World, whereas future PFS scenarios in the First World will almost certainly have such travel provided by other means.

The power's drawbacks are, again, that you're expected to provide services to The Eldest you venerate and that you're transported the First World. If the clarification is intended to only cover the drawback, then the wording about being targeted by a spell should be removed.

A simple fix to this clarification could be, "Whenever a Feysworn is returned to life by the Feymarked power they must pay 4PP which covers the services demanded by the Eldest to maintain their living state. Failure to pay this results in their utter destruction."

This leaves the power and the flavor intact, most important that this isn't just "reduced cost resurrection" - they continue to live on the whim of the Eldest responsible for the power, something the GM can impress on them each time.

Sovereign Court 3/5

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 are kind of ignoring most of that ability.

Quote:
From that point forward, the character is held in her living state only by the Eldest’s will. While the amount of service the Eldest demands in exchange varies, if at any point the Eldest becomes displeased enough to revoke this status, the feysworn is immediately and utterly destroyed, her soul energy permanently reabsorbed into the First World.

Instant resurrection to serve an Eldest's will on another plane is not "free resurrection power". That is the equivalent to perma-death. Four prestige is a cheap price to pay to avoid utter destruction.

1/5 ⦵⦵⦵⦵

Starfinder Superscriber
KingOfAnything wrote:

You are kind of ignoring most of that ability.

Instant resurrection to serve an Eldest's will on another plane is not "free resurrection power". That is the equivalent to perma-death. Four prestige is a cheap price to pay to avoid utter destruction.

I'm not ignoring this at all, I believe we're interpreting the Eldest's will and the expected amount of service differently.

I do not read this as becoming permanent servants of the Eldest, forced to serve in the First World until the end of time. I believe anything so harsh would be explicitly be written out and certainly wouldn't be listed as a prestige class power.

However, clearly the Eldest expects some service be performed in exchange for the resurrection and leaves it to the GM to determine. This could be wonderful flavor for home games.

I agree that a 4PP cost is more than reasonable to cover performing services to the Eldest since the PFS isn't structured for playing through that. If you re-read my last post you'll see I suggested this.

The major problem here is the current clarification text's ambiguity will turn character death, an already an emotional powder cake, into a source of drama between players, GMs, and event coordinators.

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

Some PP cost as a downpayment on eternal service to the Eldest that raised you; and maybe the cost of a Plane Shift if you don't have powers to come back from the First World on your own strength yet?

But the upside, that your death was effectively cancelled, so less hassle about Restorations?

1/5 ⦵⦵⦵⦵

Starfinder Superscriber

Feysworn are already sworn into the service of the Eldest, this is literally the name of the prestige class. This prestige class is a close analog to a cleric from the daily Obedience requirement (akin to hour of prayer), losing all class abilities should they act against their Eldest (resolved by atonement), and the dedication to serve their Eldest even after death.

The difference is that fey in the First World do not die, the Eldest have no afterlife, no rank of outsiders for them to strive to earn a place among someday. Instead, akin to fey in the First World, you cannot be killed.

Nothing in RAW indicates that the service expected by the Eldest in exchange for the resurrection be eternal. It says the amount of service varies, leaving it to the GM to determine (likely a plot hook) and you'd do as your Eldest requests to stay in its favor.

I hope that even if you disagree with me over how this should work, we can at least agree that further clarification is needed. As it stands I would never choose to play this, and as a GM I would politely ask players not to play it at my table until we get further clarification over how death should be resolved. I don't think any of us want that kind of drama at our table or events.

Sczarni 5/5 ⦵⦵

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Can this discussion about the Feysworn please be moved to the linked thread?

Remember, the point of this parent thread is to simply bring awareness to issues that need to be clarified. Not to hash them out here.

Silver Crusade

This might be the silliest question yet.

Ranged Tactics Toolbox wrote:

SHADOW FLETCHING

These small black feathers appear to have been stripped off an arrow and crafted into a token. By braiding a shadow fletching into her hair, a character can imbue herself with the magic of the Shadow Plane. Three times per day by touching the fletching as a swift action in an area of dim light or darkness, the wearer can enshroud her next ranged attack in shadowy extraplanar energy. As long as the wearer makes this attack before the end of her turn, the target of the attack is denied its Dexterity bonus to AC as if the attacker were invisible. This doesn’t affect creatures with low-light vision, darkvision, or any ability that allows them to see invisible creatures.

Note the bolded part of the description. Since there are several non-mammal races that are PFS legal, with or without boons (nagaji, tengu, grippli, etc), I just have to ask: Does this work if you don't have hair to weave it into?

For the sake of fairness, I'd let anyone wear it on their head in a home game. It takes up the head slot, after all, so that should be enough. But the description specifically calls out weaving it into the wearer's hair.

Grand Lodge 4/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Maybe, with sufficient abuse of the language, you can braid it into a length of some other creature's hair that you happen to have and make a headband from it.

Silver Crusade

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

Works for Hobgoblins ^w^

Silver Crusade

Here's one that just came up in the rules subforum that doesn't have a consensus, and it affects pretty much everyone who plays a warpriest to a non-evil god.

Advanced Class Guide wrote:
As a swift action, a warpriest can expend one use of fervor to cast any one warpriest spell he has prepared with a casting time of 1 round or shorter. When cast in this way, the spell can target only the warpriest, even if it could normally affect other or multiple targets. Spells cast in this way don't require somatic components and do not provoke attacks of opportunity.
Advanced Class Guide wrote:

Spontaneous Casting: A good warpriest (or a neutral warpriest of a good deity) can channel stored spell energy into healing spells that he did not prepare ahead of time. The warpriest can expend any prepared spell that isn't an orison to cast any cure spell of the same spell level or lower. A cure spell is any spell with "cure" in its name.

An evil warpriest (or a neutral warpriest of an evil deity) can't convert prepared spells to cure spells, but can convert them to inflict spells. An inflict spell is any spell with "inflict" in its name.

A warpriest who is neither good nor evil and whose deity is neither good nor evil chooses whether he can convert spells into either cure spells or inflict spells. Once this choice is made, it cannot be changed. This choice also determines whether the warpriest channels positive or negative energy (see Channel Energy).

So can a warpriest spontaneously change one of their prepared spells to a cure, and then use fervor to cast it on himself as a swift action?

Because of the part I bolded in the first quote above, I'd think not, but others disagree. It kinda depends on whether you think spontaneous casting changes your prepared spell, or just lets you cast an unprepared spell by giving up a prepared one. I could be convinced either way, and I'd probably rule in favor of a player if it actually came up at a table.

But a definitive answer from Paizo would be nice to have, especially for my own warpriest.

Scarab Sages 4/5

I'd like an answer on that one, too. I've assumed not and run my Warpriests that way. I prep an Inflict Light Wounds on my Warpiest/Oracle of Bones with Negative Energy Affinity just so I can us it with Fervor without any potential table variation.

Grand Lodge 5/5 Venture-Captain, Arizona—Phoenix aka TriOmegaZero

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I've always run it as yes, but it does make the healing option of fervor redundant unless you've spent all your spell slots before your fervor.

Shadow Lodge 4/5 Venture-Captain, California—San Francisco Bay Area South & West aka JohnF

I've always assumed my warpriest couldn't do that, because a spontaneously-cast spell isn't a prepared spell.

Silver Crusade

John Francis wrote:
I've always assumed my warpriest couldn't do that, because a spontaneously-cast spell isn't a prepared spell.

That was my thinking, as well. I was surprised when others disagreed in that other thread. Apparently, there's no consensus here on the forums.

Scarab Sages 5/5

I'd say no.

Shadow Lodge

That was discussed when the ACG first came out. Not sure where to look, but the official answer is yes, even if its normally better than there Channel Energy dice, they felt most Warpriests would like to keep their spells in all but dire circumstances. It did put Negative Energy Warpriests at a disadvantage, who normally can not do the samevwith Inflict spells if not Undead.

Shadow Lodge 4/5 Venture-Captain, California—San Francisco Bay Area South & West aka JohnF

DM Beckett wrote:
That was discussed when the ACG first came out. Not sure where to look, but the official answer is yes . . .

If anyone can provide a link to the relevant answer I'd very much appreciate it.

Silver Crusade 2/5

John Francis wrote:
DM Beckett wrote:
That was discussed when the ACG first came out. Not sure where to look, but the official answer is yes . . .

If anyone can provide a link to the relevant answer I'd very much appreciate it.

Here's a post from a developer in the Product Page.

Owen K. C. Stephens:
So far I have very much enjoyed by final-version war priest, which I have been playing since April (advantage of working here). I've noticed a few things in-play.
Since blessings are their own pool of uses that don't get used for anything else, I'm willing to burn them when a situation seems *likely* to become a fight, even if occasionally that means a minute passes with no fight. I don't always get a blessing up before combat, but I *often* do, and that's great. Even at low levels you can lose a couple of uses a day without wasting all of them. And this strongly encourages team play, since the other PCs are learning to have stealthy folk scout potential encounters to see if they can get me a heads-up. Since the blessing can't be turned into healing or other options spells often represent, the other players never feel like I am wasting potential benefits for them, as sometimes happens with clerics who buff with spells.
Fervor is golden. It's great because with spontaneous casting I don't have to try to guess in advance which prepared spell I want up for a fight. I can afford to see if a spell is even necessary, which oddly makes it easier to conserve spells (and thus fervor). I have never cast a spell in an encounter that turned out to be APL -1 or -2, and then regretted it. While it is true a warpriest does't have as high-level a spell selection as the cleric, the ability to (effectively) quicken a wide range or spells is quite a boost. At 2nd level that's the equivalent of a 5th level spell. Even at 20th level the best a cleric can do as a quickened spell is five fifth-level spells. A war priest can do five 6th level, five 5th level, and a number of 4th equal to his Wis bonus (and those are also all effectively Still Spells).
It's true the war priest has a much, much narrower selection for those Quickened Still spells, but the option to decide you need a divine power, heal, or true seeing right NOW, can be a huge boost. This in turn helps develop new tactics and play styles that work well with the class.
The war priest operates at its best when you look at what it maximizes and work with that as a build, rather than try to make it work like an fighter, inquisitor, or cleric. For example, as a weapon focused character without a full attack bonus, Vital Strike is suddenly a more attractive option (since you don't get as many iterative attacks anyway, and they are less likely to hit). And thanks to bonus feats, you can pick it up well before an inquisitor or cleric can. Just a couple of levels after they could get Vital Strike, you are on to Improved Vital Strike if you want it. And if at that point you are fighting with a rapier, it does 1d10, or 3d10 with IVS, and still has its improved threat range.
What makes that build particularly attractive is Greater Weapon of the Chosen. It is easiest for war priests to pick up (since they get Weapon Focus and bonus feats & are less likely to be penalized for selecting their deity's favored weapon). A human war priest can pick it up by 3rd level, and everyone else can have it by 5th if they dedicate themselves to it (leaving their 6th level free for Vital Strike).
And why is this a great feat? because every time you attempt a single attack with the attack action using your deity's favored weapon, you get to roll the attack twice and take the better of the two.
Let that sink in.
If I'm a 6th level war priest of Gorum wielding a great sword, with Vital Strike and Greater Weapon of the Chosen, I can take an attack action, roll 2d20 and take whichever is better (bumping the chance of a crit), and deal 4d6 +1.5x Str on a successful strike. Power Attack and Furious Focus also play very well with this build. You don't even need fervor and blessings to be effective at that point.

Scarab Sages 4/5

That kind of reads like he's not using the words "spontaneous casting" in the game term sense, since he mentions the advantage is that he doesn't have to guess which prepared spell to have up. I think he probably meant swift casting, so he can pick which prepared spell to activate at the start of a fight, instead of pre-buffing.

Liberty's Edge 5/5 ⦵⦵

I don't think that quote means what you think it means. I could be wrong, but I read it as:

[Fervor] + [ability to Spontaneously cast cure spells] = [reduces worry about what spells to prepare]

not that

[Fervor] + [ability to Spontaneously cast cure spells] = [can use Fervor to Spontaneously cast cure spells]

I've never believed that Fervor allowed you to Spontaneously cast cure spells as a swift action.

EDIT#1: posted with Warpriest alias so I can find it better in the future.
EDIT#2: and now I'm a victim of my own wish to take rules discussions elsewhere =(

Shadow Lodge

No the one I was thinking of was a response to the direct question of if a Warpriest could Spontaneously cast a Cure Spell with Fervor to self heal.

I'll see if I can dig it up, but it was in one of the many general discussions of the Class when after the ACG had come out, and I'm honestly not sure where it might be from a few years ago.

5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Online aka Magabeus

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bear Burning Ashes wrote:
EDIT#2: and now I'm a victim of my own wish to take rules discussions elsewhere =(

Indeed, can this discussion be taken elsewhere? Thanks!

The Exchange 5/5 ⦵⦵

What spell levels should a Pathfinder Savant use when determining their Esoteric Magic ability?


I was hoping this would be addressed in the companion slots FAQ but it wasn't.....

First Mother's Fang gives a Constrictor Snake mount. Cavalier mounts get light armor proficiency. However, Serpentine forms have have no armor slot so it does nothing for them. It gets even worse since Serpentine forms have a belt slot but no [saddle] designation. Seems silly for a class based on riding an armored mount to not actually be able to armor their mount AND have a permanent -5 to ride checks since they're forced to ride bareback.

Silver Crusade 5/5 ⦵⦵⦵ RPG Superstar 2013 Top 8 aka GreySector

Can you take 4 Constitution damage at the end of a scenario to imbue a blood reservoir of physical prowess with 4 charges, then naturally heal the Constitution damage between scenarios?

Dark Archive 4/5

Can we get the human half only racial half for assimar, tiefling and skinwalkers noted in the AR.
Got lost trying to find the confirmation on this one for races (ended up in an age old forum post)

Tiefling seems to still be in the AR but nothing Assimar or Skinwalker

*Note: Tieflings may only be half-human. Other races, including but not limited to dwarf, elf, gnome, halfling, half-orc, tengu, and any other race, are not legal in PFS.

Sczarni 5/5 ⦵⦵

Starfinder Charter Superscriber

To provide some context: the original FAQ was solely for Aasimars and Tieflings. They aren't "half-human", like Half-orcs and Half-elves. They're "descended from humans".

It was meant to prevent the creation of small-sized Aasimars and Tieflings. It's also something I listed in this thread a while back.

Community & Digital Content Director

Campaign Clarifications has been updated!

Liberty's Edge 3/5 Venture-Captain, Nebraska—Omaha

Chris Lambertz wrote:
Campaign Clarifications has been updated!

Awesome work Chris!!

hmm any word on the Guides???

Grand Lodge 2/5

Chris Lambertz wrote:
Campaign Clarifications has been updated!

I just logged in and saw this, I'm way more excited than I should be about this (and the AR)!

The Exchange 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Texas—Dallas & Ft. Worth aka Belafon

Kevin Willis wrote:

How do you qualify for the Legalistic Reading feat from Heroes of the High Court? It is legal per Additional Resources but has a prerequisite of Scribe Scroll - which no PFS characters can have. And there does not appear to be a Clarification.

I'm asking "for a friend" who has a really great Prophet of Kalistrade he's bringing to PaizoCon.

(We will leave aside for the moment the issue of how difficult it is to actually use the feat - there is only a 25% chance for a 10th level caster to successfully use it on a first level scroll.)

As of August 10th, this is still legal but impossible to take because of the Scribe Scroll prerequisite.

1/5

shaventalz wrote:

Per the entry for the Villain Codex, "the Balor Whip feat grants the ability to perform drag combat manuevers with a whip."

However, whips have the trip special feature. According to a previous blog post, that means they can already be used to perform drag combat maneuvers. Was this an oversight, or was it an intentional change to the previous blog?

This is still open, as well. And with Lore Warden reprinted, I would expect a couple PCs trying to perform combat maneuvers with weapons. Is the blog post still valid, or not?

Scarab Sages 5/5 Venture-Captain, Washington—Spokane

My thanks to everyone involved in keeping this document updated and up on the site. I do have a request for Campaign Clarifications but not an add. Is it possible to convert the PDF version of the document to a more printer friendly version similar to the Addition Resources? If this could be done, I would even more thankful. My printer, as i am sure other player's printers, will thank you (lots of yellow).

2/5

The Namekeeper Shaman archetype replaces all spirit magic spells with a fixed list. The first level spell replaced is Stone Shield, which is usually restricted to Oreads only in PFS per the AR's restrictions from the Advanced Race Guide.

Does this archetype bypass the usual race restriction?
If not, what spell should replace Stone Shield for non-Oreads, or should the Shaman simply not replace that spell?

Silver Crusade 5/5 ⦵⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Captain, Indiana—Southern aka CanisDirus

1 person marked this as a favorite.
cavernshark wrote:

The Namekeeper Shaman archetype replaces all spirit magic spells with a fixed list. The first level spell replaced is Stone Shield, which is usually restricted to Oreads only in PFS per the AR's restrictions from the Advanced Race Guide.

Does this archetype bypass the usual race restriction?
If not, what spell should replace Stone Shield for non-Oreads, or should the Shaman simply not replace that spell?

The answer you seek is in the Organized Play FAQ

Quote:

I took an archetype or other ability or feature that gives me access to features that are not legal as per Additional Resources. What happens?

If the non-legal options are an automatic part of the archetype, such as a feat that all characters with that archetype gain, the Additional Resources page often provides a substitution. If it does not, that option is legal for your character. However, if the non-legal options are part of a menu of choices, such as a list of feats that includes one feat that is not legal, the option does not become legal for your character.

Hope that helps!


Storm Dreamer Medium from the Adventurer's Guide replaces Spirit Surge, but not Taboo, or medium spirit powers that depend on Spirit Surge to function. This seems like a textbook example of something in need of Campaign Clarifications.

Their access to Subdomains was removed, so it's obvious that the archetype was looked at for campaign clarifications. Is it intended that the archetype results in a character with abilities that can't actually be used then?

2/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yes thank you, Mike! I'd missed that FAQ. Appreciate the response.

Silver Crusade 5/5 ⦵⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Captain, Indiana—Southern aka CanisDirus

cavernshark wrote:
Yes thank you, Mike! I'd missed that FAQ. Appreciate the response.

Glad to help - I forget about the FAQ myself on a regular basis (in fact, it took me 15 minutes of searching for the blog post I knew Linda made with that ruling until it hit me that it was in the FAQs and not the blogs lol). I love Stone Shield as a spell myself, so I'm happy to see it getting more use! :)

Dark Archive 4/5

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

With Spellslinger archetype opening on a recent chronicle sheet, I have a couple of questions about rules interactions.

1. replaces cantrips - I think this removes all wizard/sorcerer cantrips from the spell list, aside from Detect Magic and Read Magic which can be cast as 1st. i.e. no wand of Mending usage without UMD.

2. Misfire/Overload - If you gain access to the Quick Clear deed, that can be used to clear a misfire, but not an Overload. Just want to confirm.

3. Misfire expanded range - Misfires may happen on rolls of 1-4, depending on conditions and ammo - the archetype calls out roll of natural 1 - I think this would be expanded to include any misfire based on the weapon/ammo.

4. Casting a spell through the weapon - not specified, but is this similar to the Magus Spellstrike ability, where you make an attack roll and if it succeeds, you hit with both the spell and the bullet?

5. Additional attacks/round - how does this work with the full attack action - does the spell replace one attack, or the casting time does not change (Std) and you must make a choice each round between a single attack(spell) or a full attack (no spell).

Grand Lodge 2/5

Samsaran Mystic Past Life and psychic spellcasting classes:

The alternate race trait says:

You can add spells from another spellcasting class to the spell list of your current spellcasting class. ... The spells must be the same type (arcane or divine) as the spellcasting class you’re adding them to. (Emphasis added)

Since this was written before the introduction of psychic magic, then by RAW any Samsaran reborn with a talent for psychic magic has no memory of any of his previous lives' magical aptitudes, unlike those reborn with arcane or divine talents.

Please consider clarifying that the parenthetical limitation should also now include psychic.

And as a follow up, should it also include Alchemy, in spite of Alchemy not being "spellcasting?"

351 to 400 of 512 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / Compilation of Campaign Clarification requests All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.