Rule you never see used though it is RAW

[Rycaut]

My nomination is a rule that until earlier today I didn’t know was rules as written - on a 1 when saving against a spell you are supposed to apply the spell damage to one item chosen amongst four selected per a chart of the order of most likely to be hit by a spell (assuming it could in theory damage an item) and then the item needs to also save against the spell (saving throw being the same for all three types at 2 + 1/2CL rounded down unless intelligent in which case use the item’s own wisdom score for will saves)

I don’t think I’ve ever seen this rule invoked in PFS or home game play.

(And not unrelated I’ve rarely seen AoE spells cause damage to unattended objects in a room - ie loot or a horde or a key clue etc)

[Azten]

Boiling water deals scalding damage, not fire.

[Hubaris]

Having to activate the command word for Flaming, Corrosive, Frost, Shocking on weapons enchanted with them.

[wraithstrike]

There was a thread on unknown rules a few years ago. This was a rule that not many were aware of. I have always known about it, but I dislike it so much that I don't use it as a GM.

[deuxhero]

Hubaris wrote:

Having to activate the command word for Flaming, Corrosive, Frost, Shocking on weapons enchanted with them.

I've seen "they need to be turned on but never need to be turned off", which makes it come up if you voluntarily suppress it or it gets dispelled.

[Hubaris]

deuxhero wrote:

Hubaris wrote:

Having to activate the command word for Flaming, Corrosive, Frost, Shocking on weapons enchanted with them.

I've seen "they need to be turned on but never need to be turned off", which makes it come up if you voluntarily suppress it or it gets dispelled.

Or if you're a Magus, or any other type of character with a floating weapon bonus (Transmutation Occultist, Divine Bond, etc). You can apply Flaming but technically still need the standard to activate it.

[Rycaut]

a related rule I see many many many people (even very experienced players and GMs - perhaps especially them) is that many magical items actually have a very short duration for their effects and need to be renewed even if able to be used unlimited times a day - i.e. a "ring of invisibility" actually has a short duration as it has the effect of casting invisibility at the CL of the ring which is actually quite low.

(I think many many people house rule magic items with a continual effect to work differently however - but quite a few items that generate an effect "as a spell" don't actually have any language in the item about having a longer than usual duration for those effects. Cap of Disguise is another item which this rule technically limits quite a bit.

(related to this is the visual signs of spell casting/activating a magical item) which is another rule often forgotten by many players and GMs.

[Mr. Bonkers]

Hubaris wrote:

deuxhero wrote:

Hubaris wrote:

Having to activate the command word for Flaming, Corrosive, Frost, Shocking on weapons enchanted with them.

I've seen "they need to be turned on but never need to be turned off", which makes it come up if you voluntarily suppress it or it gets dispelled.

Or if you're a Magus, or any other type of character with a floating weapon bonus (Transmutation Occultist, Divine Bond, etc). You can apply Flaming but technically still need the standard to activate it.

I've seen this rule come up with a Druid player, and he wasn't happy when I told him that yes, it is an activated ability. No matter if it was already activated beforehand, your Corrosive Amulet of Mighty Fists stops functioning the moment you Wild Shape into an Octopus (as it is an activated item, and therefor not a constant effect). Stupid Polymorph rules...

[Coidzor]

Rycaut wrote:

(related to this is the visual signs of spell casting/activating a magical item) which is another rule often forgotten by many players and GMs.

That's more like a rule that many people don't know due to how it was made a rule.

[WhiteMagus2000]

That coins are actually pretty damn heavy. 50 coins per pound, so 2000gp to enchant your sword weighs 40 lbs! IRL 40lbs of gold = $816,640. I did have one GM that would occasionally audit weights on all that characters, chart days of food remaining, and make us find water every day or two.

By the way, IRL its 291.667 penny weights (one copper) per pound, so pathfinder coins are HUGE, like 1/3 of an once.

[Tinalles]

Lesser Restoration has a casting time of 3 rounds. Which almost nobody knows because it's so weird.

I've got a little database of 2,758 Pathfinder spells, and only seven of them have a casting time of "3 rounds":

Find the Path
Lesser Restore Eidolon
Lesser Restoration
Restoration
Rune Of Jandelay
Snare
Surface Excursion

So it's quite common for people to assume that it's a standard action.

[graystone]

Having to search 10'/round or traps are undetectable especially in overland travel... 10' open pits are invisible if you move overland speeds... :P

[Dαedαlus]

WhiteMagus2000 wrote:

That coins are actually pretty damn heavy. 50 coins per pound, so 2000gp to enchant your sword weighs 40 lbs! IRL 40lbs of gold = $816,640. I did have one GM that would occasionally audit weights on all that characters, chart days of food remaining, and make us find water every day or two.

By the way, IRL its 291.667 penny weights (one copper) per pound, so pathfinder coins are HUGE, like 1/3 of an once.

I actually did some calculations regarding coin weight. While there is quite a bit of rounding to get to 1 pound/50 coins (the actual figure is closer to .8 of a pound/50 coins), the coins are actually of a realistic size while still being heavy (metals are dense. Just be glad we didn't go with Tungsten way back when instead of gold).

[TriOmegaZero]

The fact that your allies provide soft cover, which prevents AoOs.

[Saldiven]

WhiteMagus2000 wrote:

That coins are actually pretty damn heavy. 50 coins per pound, so 2000gp to enchant your sword weighs 40 lbs! IRL 40lbs of gold = $816,640. I did have one GM that would occasionally audit weights on all that characters, chart days of food remaining, and make us find water every day or two.

By the way, IRL its 291.667 penny weights (one copper) per pound, so pathfinder coins are HUGE, like 1/3 of an once.

Better than it was 30-odd years ago in original AD&D where coins weighed 1/10th of a lb.

[Quandary]

Getting Lost rules.

[Doodpants]

graystone wrote:

Having to search 10'/round or traps are undetectable especially in overland travel... 10' open pits are invisible if you move overland speeds... :P

Eh, I would argue that anything that could reasonably be called a "trap" would be concealed in some way. A 10' open pit is more of a terrain feature.

[Rysky]

Quandary wrote:

Getting Lost rules.

I have used the “realise you are lost” rules a couple of times before :3

[Ventnor]

XP. None of the pbp or face-to-face D&D/Pathfinder games ever uses XP.

[Klorox]

eh? I'd use them, I don't have the right feel for when to let the PCs rise in level without that kind of a yardstick.

[Rycaut]

other rules people forget:

1) anyone can do any combat maneuver with any weapon or unarmed strike. You don't need a "trip" weapon to make a trip attack (it just has some benefits) etc - and though if you don't have the improved feat it may trigger a potential attack of opportunity there are many cases when that won't have any effect (using a reach weapon against an opponent without reach, an opponent who is flat footed, an opponent who has already taken an AoO without Combat Reflexes etc)

2) likewise there are many actions people can take in combat - aid another is one many people (and GMs) forget about - though used well it can be extremely useful either for defense or offense. But also attacking defensively or taking the total defense action

3) related to the later, acrobatics may impact the value of using those two actions - specifically "Special: If you have 3 or more ranks in Acrobatics, you gain a +3 dodge bonus to AC when fighting defensively instead of the usual +2, and a +6 dodge bonus to AC when taking the total defense action instead of the usual +4." (and notably that ALL Dodge bonuses STACK)

responding to some comments - I use XP all the time in my home games (mostly to calculate roughly where the party is - I use it as a guideline to keep the party in line with the expectations of the AP I'm running to minimize my future need to adjust encounters.

And likewise in PFS and in my home games wilderness and difficult terrain are frequently a big deal in combats (and are one of the things i advice GMs to be sure to include to help make combats and encounters more difficult and challenging w/o upping CR etc.

[Andy Brown]

TriOmegaZero wrote:

The fact that your allies provide soft cover, which prevents AoOs.

But moving through an ally's square doesn't prevent an AoO from movement

[TriOmegaZero]

I said nothing about moving through their square.

Cover wrote:

When making a melee attack against a target that isn't adjacent to you (such as with a reach weapon), use the rules for determining cover from ranged attacks.

Soft Cover wrote:

Creatures, even your enemies, can provide you with cover against ranged attacks, giving you a +4 bonus to AC. However, such soft cover provides no bonus on Reflex saves, nor does soft cover allow you to make a Stealth check.

Allies can prevent AoOs from opponents with reach.

[Andy Brown]

Probably badly phrased on my part; I wasn't arguing with your statement, I was pointing out that moving through an ally didn't give cover (and I know from experience that it's a difficult rule to find when somebody isn't aware of it), even though standing behind them does.

[graystone]

Doodpants wrote:

graystone wrote:

Having to search 10'/round or traps are undetectable especially in overland travel... 10' open pits are invisible if you move overland speeds... :P

Eh, I would argue that anything that could reasonably be called a "trap" would be concealed in some way. A 10' open pit is more of a terrain feature.

it JUST has to be called a trap to be invisible. A published trap, with a DC 5, was an open pit. It was meant to be super easy to find but now ruled invisible if you travel 11'+... Traps under DC 15 exist and are meant to be easy to find. All you have to do slap a nametag of something and call it a trap to make it disappear. :P

Another trap is a bear trap the PC's can buy. It's technically invisible in their backpack as the rules don't distinguish between set off and set traps for finding.

[Owen K. C. Stephens]

Fireball sets fire to combustibles within the area. There's no save against that part of the spell. You know what's combustable? Hair. Clothes. Your magic cloak.
It can melt metals with low melting points. Gold and silver are called out. But gp never seem damaged by the spell.

[Dαedαlus]

Owen K. C. Stephens wrote:

Fireball sets fire to combustibles within the area. There's no save against that part of the spell. You know what's combustable? Hair. Clothes. Your magic cloak.

It can melt metals with low melting points. Gold and silver are called out. But gp never seem damaged by the spell.

Aren't those all considered Attended, though? And thus only at risk of being affected if you roll two Nat 1s on your save?

[graystone]

Owen K. C. Stephens wrote:

Fireball sets fire to combustibles within the area. There's no save against that part of the spell.

The issue with that is, what isn't "capable of catching fire and burning" with enough heat? Your armor straps are leather. You weapon grips too. Heck the PC's and metals are combustibles...

What the spell SHOULD say is 'easily combustible' and even that leaves questions as to what applies. I can see good reason to skip over this part of the spell.

[Ross Byers]

Items getting damaged by AoE spells if you roll a 1 on your saving throw.

Yes, I totally want to stop the game, consult a bunch of charts, figure out exactly what the HP and hardness are of your magic hat, because rolling a 1 isn't bad enough.

[Tarondor]

Ineffective Weapons: Certain weapons just can’t effectively deal damage to certain objects. For example, a bludgeoning weapon cannot be used to damage a rope. Likewise, most melee weapons have little effect on stone walls and doors, unless they are designed for breaking up stone, such as a pick or hammer.
- p. 174 of the Core Rulebook

I usually see people who want to use magic swords to hack through stone walls.

[Talonhawke]

Ross Byers wrote:

Items getting damaged by AoE spells if you roll a 1 on your saving throw.

Yes, I totally want to stop the game, consult a bunch of charts, figure out exactly what the HP and hardness are of your magic hat, because rolling a 1 isn't bad enough.

I actually had a GM that did want to, probably at least part of my obsession with Vow of Poverty monks in 3.5.

[graystone]

Tarondor wrote:

I usually see people who want to use magic swords to hack through stone walls.

I don't see this much, unless we're talking about an adamantine weapon. Being able to cut through things like butter changes what's effective for a lot of people.

[Bruce Leeroy Jethro Gibbs]

graystone wrote:

Tarondor wrote:

I usually see people who want to use magic swords to hack through stone walls.

I don't see this much, unless we're talking about an adamantine weapon. Being able to cut through things like butter changes what's effective for a lot of people.

I'm having rules forum flashbacks.

[blahpers]

graystone wrote:

Tarondor wrote:

I usually see people who want to use magic swords to hack through stone walls.

I don't see this much, unless we're talking about an adamantine weapon. Being able to cut through things like butter changes what's effective for a lot of people.

Adamantine or not, an arrowhead isn't going to get through a foot-thick stone wall in a reasonable time frame. No, I don't care what your Strength score is. Now, if you want to use it to spoon your way out of a jail cell over time, go for it.

[Slim Jim]

TriOmegaZero wrote:

The fact that your allies provide soft cover, which prevents AoOs.

Many GMs and players forget the -4 penalty to attacks through soft cover as well, particularly in the case of archers, who are like "Yay! I have Precise Shot now and my penalty for shooting into melee went away" (when they should have been at -8 half the time, not -4).

[graystone]

blahpers wrote:

graystone wrote:

Tarondor wrote:

I usually see people who want to use magic swords to hack through stone walls.

I don't see this much, unless we're talking about an adamantine weapon. Being able to cut through things like butter changes what's effective for a lot of people.

Adamantine or not, an arrowhead isn't going to get through a foot-thick stone wall in a reasonable time frame. No, I don't care what your Strength score is. Now, if you want to use it to spoon your way out of a jail cell over time, go for it.

It would be as effective as using an arrow on any 0 hardness material. It works fine on thin items like latches, hinges, chain links normally inappropriate items for arrow attacks. It might work better if the arrow is long enough to reach all the way through the barrier so you could connect 'punched' holes into a line to chisel out a block.

[TriOmegaZero]

Andy Brown wrote:

Probably badly phrased on my part; I wasn't arguing with your statement, I was pointing out that moving through an ally didn't give cover (and I know from experience that it's a difficult rule to find when somebody isn't aware of it), even though standing behind them does.

My bad. I expect people to argue it, so I was preempting you. It's why I don't bring it up at table.

[RumpinRufus]

graystone wrote:

Having to search 10'/round

Where is this rule? I assumed that one check can find any traps/items in your field of view, and you only need to account for the range penalty of -1/10ft.

[Chess Pwn]

RumpinRufus wrote:

graystone wrote:

Having to search 10'/round

Where is this rule? I assumed that one check can find any traps/items in your field of view, and you only need to account for the range penalty of -1/10ft.

here in the FAQ

[LordKailas]

Climbing into a rope trick is a bad idea if you have a bag of holding since it's an extradimenstional space.

Heck, just the fact that bag of holding reacts badly with other extradimensional spaces in general.

[Hubaris]

LordKailas wrote:

Climbing into a rope trick is a bad idea if you have a bag of holding since it's an extradimenstional space.

Heck, just the fact that bag of holding reacts badly with other extradimensional spaces in general.

I believe you're thinking of a portable hole (which causes the astral rift). However if you are in an extradimensional space, other extradimensional spaces cease to function. Which means if you're caught in a pit spell, you can't access a Haversack.

[graystone]

Hubaris wrote:

However if you are in an extradimensional space, other extradimensional spaces cease to function. Which means if you're caught in a pit spell, you can't access a Haversack.

Or would the pit stop working because a permanent extradimensional space contacts it?

[deuxhero]

Negative strength mod means you can't swim indefinitely without training/swim speed, regardless of armor.

[Athaleon]

A cast time of 1 Round (e.g. Summon Monster, Enlarge Person) is not a full round action, it takes until the start of your next turn.

[SorrySleeping]

Athaleon wrote:

A cast time of 1 Round (e.g. Summon Monster, Enlarge Person) is not a full round action, it takes until the start of your next turn.

Also the fact that Enlarge Person is 1 round casting. My group knew about 1 round vs 1 full round action, but didn't realize Enlarge Person was 1 round for the longest time.

[Lady-J]

Hubaris wrote:

LordKailas wrote:

Climbing into a rope trick is a bad idea if you have a bag of holding since it's an extradimenstional space.

Heck, just the fact that bag of holding reacts badly with other extradimensional spaces in general.

I believe you're thinking of a portable hole (which causes the astral rift). However if you are in an extradimensional space, other extradimensional spaces cease to function. Which means if you're caught in a pit spell, you can't access a Haversack.

i thought portable holes and bags of holding created black holes

[bodhranist]

Has anyone ever actually used the settlement modifiers (Corruption, Crime, Economy, Law, Lore, Society) as modifiers for the various skills? (Okay, I'm in Underbridge in Magnimar, so suddenly all thieves are +6 to pickpocket me, although I'm +6 better at detecting lies and +4 better at hiding in an alley and +1 better at making money, but if I walk 5 minutes to Dockway I've suddenly got +7 to making money, and +6 to gathering information, but -2 to intimidating someone into acting friendly....)

[Fromper]

SorrySleeping wrote:

Athaleon wrote:

A cast time of 1 Round (e.g. Summon Monster, Enlarge Person) is not a full round action, it takes until the start of your next turn.

Also the fact that Enlarge Person is 1 round casting. My group knew about 1 round vs 1 full round action, but didn't realize Enlarge Person was 1 round for the longest time.

Everyone remembers the summoning spells, but there are quite a few other common spells that people don't realize have a 1 round casting time: Sleep, Enlarge Person, Silence, Deep Slumber, Call Lightning, Dominate Person, Infernal Healing, etc.

[graystone]

Fromper wrote:

Infernal Healing

I think the vast amount of times people use this spell, the casting times doesn't matter, ie out of combat healing.