| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Thematically, druids and wizards should have equal mastery of material essence spells. What should differentiate them is that the druid's magic is vital and the wizard's magic is mental.
How is this a rules question?
|
Does multiple attack penalty apply to spells with DC? Or you can throw fireballs without penalty after the attack with the sword?No, MAP only applies to attack rolls, spells or otherwise. It alters absolutely nothing else.This isn't exactly right, there are spells with no attack rolls that have a DC, that DO count toward MAP. Such as Chill Touch, Goblin Pox, Spider Sting. Basically if the spell has the "ATTACK" trait then it counts toward your MAP penalty regardless of whether you actually roll an attack.
Fireball does NOT have the attack trait, so there would be no penalty on that particular spell.
Yeah, derp, should have said Attack Trait, was too focused on “MAP does not negatively affect this spell”.
I have rules questions! I'll start by trying to avoid the super nitty gritty ones...
Q1: Can animal companions use magical items without the companion trait?
Q2: Can specific magic shields be made with special materials for more HP/Hardness?
Q3: Have you considered a framework for making powerful races (like Dragons) into playable ancestries?
Q4: Will there be rules for creating custom weapons (like a trait weighting system)?
Q5: Can a familiar with the Manual Dexterity ability use their hands to wield a weapon, wand, or bomb?
These are a bit more nitty gritty.
Q6: Hypothetically, if you added a weapon with a magazine, like a repeating crossbow, would that count as a reload 0 weapon for feat requirements?
Q7: The Ranger ability "Wild Stride" is obtained at level 11, but is required for the "Terrain Master" level 8 feat. Is this intentional?
Thematically, druids and wizards should have mastery of material essence spells. What should differentiate them is that the druid's magic is vital and the wizard's magic is mental.
How is this a rules question?
Emphasis added. It's a rules question because either:
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This rule is in need of tweaking, Paizo! ;)Take a look at the Falling rules.These Look fun. One Flying Character Vs Army. Flyer has a bag of holding full of bags of caltrops. Flies 1500 ft above army, and starts dumping the bags of caltrops out on top of the troops below. Safely out of bow/spell range hundreds of spiked objects fall to the ground making troops have to perform dozens of reflex saves to avoid 187 dmg on a success, 375 dmg on a fail, and 750 dmg on a crit fail. on the off chance that someone should actually survive, they are now also surrounded by a field of caltrops to cross!
"Landing exactly on a creature after a long fall is almost impossible." CRB 464
New to Pathfinder, so my apologies if the answers to the following issues should be obvious. I’m running into confusion regarding Skeleton Abilities (Bestiary pg 298). First, Screaming Skull says “jaws attack” and gives range, but there’s no entry for jaws attack type in the attack stats section below. Also, Explosive Death gives dmg but doesn’t designate a target DC for the reflex save. Any guidance would be much appreciated.
These abilities do need a bit more rules text, but I think for Explosive Death we should just take the Level-based DCs.
Is there a distinction between an attack with a grasping appendage with the unarmed trait and a weapon with the free-hand trait? If not, could the free hand trait be added to the relevant attacks in place of the unarmed trait for clarity?
A similar question, are monk style attacks free hand?
Following that, are all instances of the "fist" weapon, such as those gained from polymorph spells and used by monsters, identical to the one listed in the weapon chart? Specifically, do they belong to the brawling group?
Is there a distinction between an attack with a grasping appendage with the unarmed trait and a weapon with the free-hand trait? If not, could the free hand trait be added to the relevant attacks in place of the unarmed trait for clarity?
Unarmed attacks aren't weapons while weapon attacks are: this matters for actions that specify weapon.
A similar question, are monk style attacks free hand?
As long as they are unarmed and are described as using a hand/arm this applies: "It also doesn’t take up a hand, though a fist or other grasping appendage follows the same rules as a free-hand weapon."
Following that, are all instances of the "fist" weapon, such as those gained from polymorph spells and used by monsters, identical to the one listed in the weapon chart? Specifically, do they belong to the brawling group?
I'd say "fist" is just like saying "shortsword": the traits and other things mtch the weapon no matter what the base damage is.
The rules seem to suggest that you can fit 70 days of rations in a single belt pouch. Is this a typo?
No, belt pouches can only hold 4 L, so 28 days rations. It can also hold 4 javelins, 4 sets of winter clothes, 4 pup tents, 4 bucklers or 4 Sawtooth Saber...
I find it more interesting that a whole halfling can fit in my backpack with 1 bulk to spare even if the backpack in being worn by another halfling...
Honestly that is not too surprising. My frame pack could easily hold a halfling with room to spare.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Is there a distinction between an attack with a grasping appendage with the unarmed trait and a weapon with the free-hand trait? If not, could the free hand trait be added to the relevant attacks in place of the unarmed trait for clarity?Unarmed attacks aren't weapons while weapon attacks are: this matters for actions that specify weapon.
As long as they are unarmed and are described as using a hand/arm this applies: "It also doesn’t take up a hand, though a fist or other grasping appendage follows the same rules as a free-hand weapon."
My question concerns how your second rules quotation impacts the first question.
If:"a fist or other grasping appendage follows the same rules as a free-hand weapon"
then an unarmed strike with a fist or grasping appendage can, when not wielding something or otherwise being used:
"use abilities that require you to have a hand free as well as those that require you to be wielding a weapon in that hand."
Am I missing something that makes this not true?
edit: This is possibly irrelevant as I can't be sure that you can do anything more than basic strikes with weapons granted by polymorph as you are restricted to specific attacks rather restricted to using those weapons when ever you make a strike.
"It also doesn’t take up a hand, though a fist or other grasping appendage follows the same rules as a free-hand weapon." I'm reading that as referring to "doesn’t take up a hand". As such, nothing about it being a weapon applies, as the start of unarmed states "An unarmed attack isn’t a weapon". What this boils down to is this:
A free-hand weapon can’t be Disarmed.
You can use the hand covered by You can’t attack with a free-hand weapon if you’re wielding anything in that hand or otherwise using that hand.
The rest isn't needed as it states in unarmed "It also doesn’t take up a hand".
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So you'd say that the only carry over is that you can't use an unarmed strike with a grasping appendage if you are using that appendage for holding something or you are otherwise using that hand? That leaves the line, "it doesn't take up a hand" in a bad spot.
I think you're probably right though. That would make grasping unarmed attacks and free-hand attacks essentially 0+ hands weapons.
Is the additional damage die added by the fatal weapon trait specifically a "weapon damage die" for the purpose of calculating a pick's critical specialization effect? It seems likely because the deadly trait calls out its die as a "weapon damage die", but fatal's wording is not quite as clear.
Extra dice from anything but striking runes are not affected by stuff that counts weapon dice. There's a sidebar in the weapons chapter saying
Counting Damage Dice
Effects based on a weapon’s number of damage dice include only the weapon’s damage die plus any extra dice from a striking rune. They don’t count extra dice from abilities, critical specialization effects, property runes, weapon traits, or the like.
Q1: When do you start falling at the end of a High/Long Jump? Is it immediately after you finish the action?
For example, can someone try to perform a High Jump (2 actions) and then immediately use the Grapple action (1 action) to grab onto a flying enemy?
Before someone brings up Flying Kick or Fantastic Leap: both of them specify that you fall immediately after the action (as far as I know no rule mentions that you fall immediately after a high jump, for example). So does that prove that since one feat specifies that you fall immediately, then the general rule is that you do not?
Not to mention that both Flying Kick and Fantastic Leap seem to fall in line with the general design philosophy of class feats that just merge actions, instead of allowing you to do something completely different. For example, I'm pretty sure that Fantastic Leap simply *merges* Jump and Strike, just how Sudden Charge simply *merges* Stride, Stride and Strike, or how Running REload *merges* Interact and Stride.
Q2: Do you take falling damage if you succeed on a High Jump? Seems kinda unintentionally hilarious, if someone can just kill themselves by being *very good* at jumping and not failing any checks. That being said, I can't find any rules that'd suggest that you don't take falling damage.
Q: Can the Champion's Blade Ally class feature providing the effect of Shifting be used to turn a 1-handed weapon into a shield with a boss or spikes attached? As it merely provides the effect of a property rune but doesn't count as a etched rune itself (doesn't apply against the etched property rune limit, for one thing), this seems both sensible and thematic.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I struggle to intuit a reason why the game would present the option to hurt ourselves for no benefit
I mean it's not intended to be something you buy into. It's meant to be a limitation on how long you can sustain the same casting of a spell.
Not sure why my post ended up above the post I was quoting.
Question: When a character gains an additional ability boost after first level, is the modifier retroactive?
Example: Character starts with a CON bonus of +2, which gives him some N+2 hit points at each level up. At level five, he increases his CON by 2, which increases his bonus by 1. So for his fifth level HP increment, he gets N+3 HPs. Question is, does he get an additional 4 HP, effectively giving him the +3 CON bonus retroactively for the four levels when he didn't have it?
If the answer is yes, what is the rationale for it?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't think HP are temporally fixed "accomplishments", they are reflection of present character level. CON giving bonus per character level is affecting all of your current level, not just future "accomplishments" of HPs, so it is not matter of "retroactivity". If your CON was lowered it would also lower ALL of your level-scaled HPs.
So everything about a character is mutable? Not sure I like that idea.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm pretty sure that ability score modifiers have never not been retroactive, so I can't say I see the problem there.
Yes, though, this is specifically detailed in the Levelling Up section:
If an ability boost increases your character’s Constitution modifier, recalculate their maximum Hit Points using their new Constitution modifier (typically this adds 1 Hit Point per level). If an ability boost increases your character’s Intelligence modifier, they become trained in an additional skill and language. Some feats grant a benefit based on your level, such as Toughness, and these benefits are adjusted whenever you gain a level as well.
Bleh. I looked for something like that before I posted. Twice. And I missed it. Twice. :-(
Still not sure I like it, but at least I know it's RAW.
Not familiar with 5e, but I should have remembered that from PF1. Of course, it didn't make much sense to me then, either. I understand the "checking the math" problem, I guess, though it doesn't bother me; I'm pretty decent at arithmetic, though I balk at certain aspects of "higher math". :-)
Hey, d'you guys know that the giant octopus has -3 Int? Is that a typo? link
Giant Octopus has an Int modifier of -3, so it's INT score is 4 or 5, just as it's CHA is -2, so the score is 6 or 7.
And I don't think it's a typo.
Animals in PF2e can have INT scores above 2: "It typically doesn’t have an Intelligence ability modifier over –4, can’t speak languages, and can’t be trained in Intelligence-based skills."
I would say that you can make the check even if you haven't passed its "gate" normally. "Follow the expert" means you're benefitting from his proficiency. Note that you only get half the effect of his training proficiency bonus, so even with the boost from his proficiency you may well fail the check.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If I'm a wild shaped character, I'm limited to the attacks of the chosen form due to this wording:
One or more unarmed melee attacks specific to the battle form you choose, which are the only attacks you can use.
If as a wild shaped character I enter into one of the restrictive stances, like crane stance, I have this wording:
You gain a +1 circumstance bonus to AC, but the only Strikes you can make are crane wing attacks.
Reading strictly, these two requirements disallow one another, leaving you unable to make any strikes at all. Is this intended? Or is one intended to have priority?