Rules and concept discussion

All are welcome to comment, but of course, I am mostly looking for rulings\house rules from GM Matt.

Let's assume for a minute that the scenarios are possible and that the aggressor can do the maneuvers I am proposing.  Let's also assume that the aggressor has Freedom of Movement and would not be affected by an adverse conditions himself and can perform the combat maneuvers on the opponent (no size, 10 legs, etc).


1)  What happens to an opponent that is simultaneously the victim of a Bull Rush and a Trip?

2) Does being Prone have any affect on a continuing Bull Rush?

3)  Does being Bull Rushed "downhill" have any affect on the victim?

4) Does being Bull Rushed through an area with another effect trigger that effect?  
   -  for example, being Bull Rushed into a Grease area, would the victim have to save or fall as if moving w\o an acrobatics check?



Here are the Bull Rush rules:
Bull Rush

You can make a bull rush as a standard action or as part of a charge, in place of the melee attack. You can only bull rush an opponent who is no more than one size category larger than you. A bull rush attempts to push an opponent straight back without doing any harm. If you do not have the Improved Bull Rush feat, or a similar ability, initiating a bull rush provokes an attack of opportunity from the target of your maneuver.

If your attack is successful, your target is pushed back 5 feet. For every 5 by which your attack exceeds your opponent's CMD you can push the target back an additional 5 feet. You can move with the target if you wish but you must have the available movement to do so. If your attack fails, your movement ends in front of the target.

An enemy being moved by a bull rush does not provoke an attack of opportunity because of the movement unless you possess the Greater Bull Rush feat. You cannot bull rush a creature into a square that is occupied by a solid object or obstacle. If there is another creature in the way of your bull rush, you must immediately make a combat maneuver check to bull rush that creature. You take a –4 penalty on this check for each creature being pushed beyond the first. If you are successful, you can continue to push the creatures a distance equal to the lesser result. For example, if a fighter bull rushes a goblin for a total of 15 feet, but there is another goblin 5 feet behind the first, he must make another combat maneuver check against the second goblin after having pushed the first 5 feet. If his check reveals that he can push the second goblin a total of 20 feet, he can continue to push both goblins another 10 feet (since the first goblin will have moved a total of 15 feet).

and Trip

Trip

You can attempt to trip your opponent in place of a melee attack. You can only trip an opponent who is no more than one size category larger than you. If you do not have the Improved Trip feat, or a similar ability, initiating a trip provokes an attack of opportunity from the target of your maneuver.

If your attack exceeds the target's CMD, the target is knocked prone. If your attack fails by 10 or more, you are knocked prone instead. If the target has more than two legs, add +2 to the DC of the combat maneuver attack roll for each additional leg it has. Some creatures—such as oozes, creatures without legs, and flying creatures—cannot be tripped.

and Prone

Prone: The character is lying on the ground. A prone attacker has a –4 penalty on melee attack rolls and cannot use a ranged weapon (except for a crossbow). A prone defender gains a +4 bonus to Armor Class against ranged attacks, but takes a –4 penalty to AC against melee attacks.

Standing up is a move-equivalent action that provokes an attack of opportunity.

Most of these questions would be subject under the purview of DM adjudication.

Normally, any combat maneuvers are resolved when they occur. A character can only perform one maneuver per combat round, but the effects would be cumulative assuming both maneuver checks were successful.

Robyo wrote:Most of these questions would be subject under the purview of DM adjudication.

Yup, read the first line

I just found the subject interesting and something we had never really discussed.

whit10 wrote:Normally, any combat maneuvers are resolved when they occur.  A character can only perform one maneuver per combat round, but the effects would be cumulative assuming both maneuver checks were successful.  

Running for political office?  you have mastered the art of answering a question, without actually answering anything  

Also, it is incorrect to say that a character can only perform 1 CM per round.  (I quoted the Trip rules for a reason) Trip\sunder\disarm replaces a melee attack, if you have 5 attacks in a round, you can attempt 5 trips or 5 disarms or 5 sunders.

sorry my answer wasn't clear enough...

what exactly are you trying to do then? The rules are pretty clear, do your maneuver checks and the effects apply. If someone is already tripped, I kinda doubt you can Bull Rush them

whit10 wrote:sorry my answer wasn't clear enough...

what exactly are you trying to do then?  The rules are pretty clear, do your maneuver checks and the effects apply.  If someone is already tripped, I kinda doubt you can Bull Rush them

I don't think the rules are clear, that is why I am asking the questions. This is what I am trying to do

Chirs2 wrote:
1) What happens to an opponent that is simultaneously the victim of a Bull Rush and a Trip?

2) Does being Prone have any affect on a continuing Bull Rush?

3) Does being Bull Rushed "downhill" have any affect on the victim?

4) Does being Bull Rushed through an area with another effect trigger that effect?
- for example, being Bull Rushed into a Grease area, would the victim have to save or fall as if moving w\o an acrobatics check?

For example, using a Forceful Hand spell with metamagic Toppling is BOTH a Bull Rush and a Trip. So if I Bull Rush the guy 20ft, but he drops prone from being tripped after the first 5 ft..... what happens?

what happens if he gets Bull Rushed into a Grease spell?

The rules don't give answers for stuff like that, what I would call combo-fields or spel combos

I would think that if you Bull Rush someone into an area effect spell or whatever that the effects would happen normally.

Not sure what to tell you on the other one... never heard of it coming up before.

In the event of a tipping bullrush i would argue that the big magic hand rolls the guy along the ground the distance of the bullrush... Or rushes him landing him prone.

Downhill bullrush could either apply "difficult terrain" penalty or some sort of higher ground advantage for the attacker.

Agree with josh on #4.

The effects happen sequentially, and separately from each other. They may take place within the timeframe of a single round's action for a character, but they ARE separate and sequentially resolved.

Bull Rush, then trip = resolve the rush, then resolve the trip.

Trip, the bull rush = resolve the trip (target is prone, and suffers penalties as normal, then gets pushed/tumbled along the ground by the bull rush. The end result is prone AND relocated.

Neither will interfere with each other.

Downhill does not incur an special or differing effect/modifier.

Yes, being bull rushed or otherwise moved into an effect zone would require that effect to be resolved as well. It would be resolved as it is encountered - sequentially.


Does that answer the question?

whit10 wrote:
Not sure what to tell you on the other one... never heard of it coming up before.

Me either.... that's why I am asking   

navyik wrote:In the event of a tipping bullrush i would argue that the big magic hand rolls the guy along the ground the distance of the bullrush... Or rushes him landing him prone.

That is kind of what I thought too. But I figured it would be better to hash stuff out in it's own thread, outside of combat, than bog down an encounter talking about it mid fight.

This thread can be a repository for Matt's official GM responses regarding spell combos and effects

MAS wrote:The effects happen sequentially, and separately from each other. They may take place within the timeframe of a single round's action for a character, but they ARE separate and sequentially resolved.

Bull Rush, then trip = resolve the rush, then resolve the trip.

Trip, the bull rush = resolve the trip (target is prone, and suffers penalties as normal, then gets pushed/tumbled along the ground by the bull rush. The end result is prone AND relocated.

Neither will interfere with each other.

Downhill does not incur an special or differing effect/modifier.

Yes, being bull rushed or otherwise moved into an effect zone would require that effect to be resolved as well. It would be resolved as it is encountered - sequentially.


Does that answer the question?

GREAT! thanks for the detailed response

Under skill CLIMB, it says you lose your Dex bonus to AC, since you can't avoid a blow

Would you also lose the Dex bonus to CMD while climbing?

You have to make a new climb check if you take damage while climbing.... what happens if you are Tripped, knocked prone or bull rushed while climbing?

If your CMD is overcome, do you just fall?

Chirs2 wrote:Under skill CLIMB, it says you lose your Dex bonus to AC, since you can't avoid a blow

Would you also lose the Dex bonus to CMD while climbing?

You have to make a new climb check if you take damage while climbing.... what happens if you are Tripped, knocked prone or bull rushed while climbing?

If your CMD is overcome, do you just fall?

Yes, dex bonus to cmd would be lost while climbing.

It makes sense that any of those would result in a fall.

So far, I have only found 1 magic item that increases CMB

Gauntlets of the Skilled Maneuver

Price 4,000 gp; Aura faint transmutation; CL 3rd; Weight 1 lb.

The wearer of these gauntlets gains a +2 bonus on one type of combat maneuver check (such as bull rush, disarm, or steal) chosen by the creator when the item is created.


If anyone happens to find something else, as you are looking for your own stuff, let me know

grazie


*edit, any chance for a Greater Gauntlets of Skilled Maneuver?

maybe +4 or +6 20,000gp or something?

also, question about the aerial toupee.....

I am assuming that this works like a mount?  

Meaning it uses its own move action to move and not a character's move action.  

From "Mounted Combat"

Your mount acts on your initiative count as you direct it. You move at its speed, but the mount uses its action to move.

It doesn't really say, but I highlighted what I think is the relevant part of the text concerning how the carpet is controlled.

Carpet of Flying

Aura moderate transmutation; CL 10th

Slot none; Price varies; Weight —

Description

This rug is able to fly through the air as if affected by an overland flight spell of unlimited duration. The size, carrying capacity, and speed of the different carpets of flying are shown on the table below. Beautifully and intricately made, each carpet has its own command word to activate it—if the device is within voice range, the command word activates it, whether the speaker is on the rug or not. The carpet is then controlled by spoken directions.
Size Capacity Speed Weight Market Price
5 ft. by 5 ft. 200 lbs. 40 ft. 8 lbs. 20,000 gp
5 ft. by 10 ft. 400 lbs. 40 ft. 10 lbs. 35,000 gp
10 ft. by 10 ft. 800 lbs. 40 ft. 15 lbs. 60,000 gp

A carpet of flying can carry up to double its capacity, but doing so reduces its speed to 30 feet. A carpet of flying can hover without making a Fly skill check and gives a +5 bonus to other Fly checks.  

leave it to Chris to find the obscure rules questions... lol.

Since Chris has sort of reminded me of this... I would suggest that everyone have at least one way to fly, even if it's just a Fly potion (probably the easiest for the Fighter). I just wanted to make sure I'd pointed this out

Chirs2 wrote:So far, I have only found 1 magic item that increases CMB

Gauntlets of the Skilled Maneuver

Price 4,000 gp; Aura faint transmutation; CL 3rd; Weight 1 lb.

The wearer of these gauntlets gains a +2 bonus on one type of combat maneuver check (such as bull rush, disarm, or steal) chosen by the creator when the item is created.


If anyone happens to find something else, as you are looking for your own stuff, let me know

grazie


*edit, any chance for a Greater Gauntlets of Skilled Maneuver?

maybe +4 or +6   20,000gp or something?

Find a similar progression item, and post a comparison, and we will take a look at it as a group.

Chirs2 wrote:also, question about the aerial toupee.....

I am assuming that this works like a mount?  

Meaning it uses its own move action to move and not a character's move action.  

From "Mounted Combat"

Your mount acts on your initiative count as you direct it. You move at its speed, but the mount uses its action to move.

It doesn't really say, but I highlighted what I think is the relevant part of the text concerning how the carpet is controlled.

Carpet of Flying

Aura moderate transmutation; CL 10th

Slot none; Price varies; Weight —

Description

This rug is able to fly through the air as if affected by an overland flight spell of unlimited duration. The size, carrying capacity, and speed of the different carpets of flying are shown on the table below. Beautifully and intricately made, each carpet has its own command word to activate it—if the device is within voice range, the command word activates it, whether the speaker is on the rug or not. The carpet is then controlled by spoken directions.
Size Capacity Speed Weight Market Price
5 ft. by 5 ft. 200 lbs. 40 ft. 8 lbs. 20,000 gp
5 ft. by 10 ft. 400 lbs. 40 ft. 10 lbs. 35,000 gp
10 ft. by 10 ft. 800 lbs. 40 ft. 15 lbs. 60,000 gp

A carpet of flying can carry up to double its capacity, but doing so reduces its speed to 30 feet. A carpet of flying can hover without making a Fly skill check and gives a +5 bonus to other Fly checks.  

Yes, it would work like a mount.

So I was chatting with the GM about using a Metamagic feat to make a spell that functions like a Combat Maneuver bigger, to add a size modifier to the spell's CMB roll.

There are lots of Metamagic Feats alter different of properties of a spell - Extend = duration increase, enlarge = double range, empowered = x1.5 roll of the dice, etc


I think the closest feat would be:

Widen Spell (Metamagic)
You can cast your spells so that they occupy a larger space.
Benefit: You can alter a burst, emanation, or spread-shaped spell to increase its area. Any numeric measurements of the spell's area increase by 100%. A widened spell uses up a spell slot three levels higher than the spell's actual level.


Instead of making the spell's area of effect larger, I was thinking that a Widened spell (or other MM named feat) would make the spell function as if it were a larger sized creature, since size is a modifier to CMB.

Right now CM spells just uses my caster lvl as my BAB, plus my Cha (as my str), but there is no way to add "size".  A fighter (or Josh or Alan) can make themselves bigger to perform CMs with a size bonus.

The proposed feat would probably be very specific to just those spells that function like a CM, but it could act like Widened Spell - the actual size of the spell effect (torrent of water, Bigby's Hand, etc) is made bigger to represent a size modifier to the spells CMB.  

Matt suggested that I just use Widen as an either\or feat.  either it Widens the AoE OR it increases the CMB by a size bonus.  

Widen is already a +3 lvl MM feat to double the spells area of effect.  a 20ft fireball becomes a 40ft fireball
This is a very powerful effect and thus the +3 spell levels to cast it.

I was thinking something like either a +1 size bonus per +1 spell level (+3 CMB for +3 spell levels) or a +2 size bonus per +1 spell level (+6 CMB for +3 spell levels)

Here is the size chart from the book on CMB

CMB = Base attack bonus + Strength modifier + special size modifier

Creatures that are size Tiny or smaller use their Dexterity modifier in place of their Strength modifier to determine their CMB. The special size modifier for a creature's Combat Maneuver Bonus is as follows: Fine –8, Diminutive –4, Tiny –2, Small –1, Medium +0, Large +1, Huge +2, Gargantuan +4, Colossal +8.

a +3 bonus would be less than the 3rd size category increase (+4)
a +6 bonus would be more than the 3rd size category increase (+4)

What about something like..... saying that each +1 spell level makes the spell function as 1 size bigger, but let the caster choose how many spell levels to add.  So you could add +1 spell level for a +1, +2 for a +2.... all the way up to +4 for a +8 bonus.


Since this is kind of a custom use of an existing feat, Matt suggested I post it here for feedback and to see if everyone thought something like this was fair.

thoughts?

MAS wrote:

Chirs2 wrote:
Gauntlets of the Skilled Maneuver
Price 4,000 gp; Aura faint transmutation; CL 3rd; Weight 1 lb.
The wearer of these gauntlets gains a +2 bonus on one type of combat maneuver check (such as bull rush, disarm, or steal) chosen by the creator when the item is created.

*edit, any chance for a Greater Gauntlets of Skilled Maneuver?

maybe +4 or +6 20,000gp or something?

Find a similar progression item, and post a comparison, and we will take a look at it as a group.

All of the attribute increasing items work this way:

Headband of Alluring Charisma

Slot headband; Price 4,000 gp (+2), 16,000 gp (+4), 36,000 gp (+6);

Chirs2 wrote:

MAS wrote:

Chirs2 wrote:
Gauntlets of the Skilled Maneuver
Price 4,000 gp; Aura faint transmutation; CL 3rd; Weight 1 lb.
The wearer of these gauntlets gains a +2 bonus on one type of combat maneuver check (such as bull rush, disarm, or steal) chosen by the creator when the item is created.

*edit, any chance for a Greater Gauntlets of Skilled Maneuver?

maybe +4 or +6   20,000gp or something?

Find a similar progression item, and post a comparison, and we will take a look at it as a group.

All of the attribute increasing items work this way:

Headband of Alluring Charisma

Slot headband; Price 4,000 gp (+2), 16,000 gp (+4), 36,000 gp (+6);

Im down with that.

I posted a new stickied thread, with rules clarifications from Paizo

please discuss HERE, not there!

Given that new information, I withdraw all requests to modify Widen. There is no need and it would be very OP.

I don't think the gauntlets are as big of a deal, but to the GM. There are now LOTS of ways to increase the CMB roll, so it is just gravy if the gauntlets go over +2

Some nice clarifications but I'm confused on something. "Paladin double of smite against some creatures is on first attack only."

WTF does this mean? So you do normal smite damage (pally's level) vs. all evil (target of smite) but double that damage only on the first attack on Dragon, Undead or Outsider targets? That makes 0 sense!

If a Rogue gets their Sneak Attack damage on all attacks where someone is flat-footed, then the pally should NOT have a restriction like this.

...unless I'm totally misunderstanding this, which is possible.

Where did u find these?

I have hardcopy of core book. I see now. PRD is incomplete... Maybe we should get pdf's if we r gonna try to use all of that.

whit10 wrote:
WTF does this mean?  So you do normal smite damage (pally's level) vs. all evil (target of smite) but double that damage only on the first attack on Dragon, Undead or Outsider targets?  That makes 0 sense!  

Like I said, use this as a guide to re-reading the rules more carefully.  Here is the rules you are questioning

Smite Evil (Su): Once per day, a paladin can call out to the powers of good to aid her in her struggle against evil. As a swift action, the paladin chooses one target within sight to smite. If this target is evil, the paladin adds her Charisma bonus (if any) to her attack rolls and adds her paladin level to all damage rolls made against the target of her smite. If the target of smite evil is an outsider with the evil subtype, an evil-aligned dragon, or an undead creature, the bonus to damage on the first successful attack increases to 2 points of damage per level the paladin possesses. Regardless of the target, smite evil attacks automatically bypass any DR the creature might possess.

That is clearly what the rules says, directly in the Core Rule Book.  If you (or your Charleston group) was playing with it and incorrectly applying that double bonus to ALL your smite attacks, then you were doing it wrong.  

I understand why you would be upset, since you would think you are getting nerfed, but the the reality is (clearly) that you never read the rule carefully in the first place.


As for Rogues... I am not sure why you so offended at this.  Rogues have gotten SA dice on all their attacks going back to 3.0
I don't recall 2e, but it wouldn't surprise me if Rogues sucked in 2e.  This change is 15yrs old and not news

navyik wrote:I have hardcopy of core book.  I see now.  PRD is incomplete... Maybe we should get pdf's if we r gonna try to use all of that.

You are misunderstanding - all of this is IN the CRB, APG, UM, UC = the books we are using.

This is a guide to focus our reading of those rules, since clearly people carry forward a LOT of false assumptions and mis-interpretations of the PF rules.

This is nothing new, it is just making a point of rules that people mis-read or are unfamiliar with.

For example, I was positive that Rogue SA did NOT affect undead or constructs.... because that is how it has always been.  Clearly, I never the CRB\Bestiary carefully enough.

I bought him an Undead Bane and a Construct Bane dagger for this very reason.

Well, when you're right... I'll be damned. I never saw that before and if I did, I forgot it. Oh well.

The sneak attack thing is just slightly broken IMHO. I'm not really making a big deal out of it dude. I was wrong about pally's, my bad. It doesn't change my thinking on SA.

In fact, I suggest that we play with only the rules contained in the PDR we all share:

Core Rule Book
Adv Player Guide
Ultimate Magic
Ultimate Combat
Ultimate EQ
Mythic
and the GM books for Matt.

This makes a transparent, fair and level playing field for everyone.  Most of us have 0 experience with PF.

I am looking at this as a new set of rules and trying (hard) not to think in 3.x terms, since it is obviously wrong on a lot of rules.

I entirely agree.  And there are a few omission from the Core Book and the others on the PRD.  They are upfront about this.  The deities list is missing as is a handful of other things (can't remember off-hand just what) but we have what we need to play the game in this format.. you just need the Core book for deities unless you make up your own.

The thing about Lesser Restoration being a 3 round casting time spell is something I didn't know... always used wands and potions for that anyway.

whit10 wrote:
The thing about Lesser Restoration being a 3 round casting time spell is something I didn't know... always used wands and potions for that anyway.

Wand = No
potion = Yes

Activation: Wands use the spell trigger activation method, so casting a spell from a wand is usually a standard action that doesn't provoke attacks of opportunity. (If the spell being cast has a longer casting time than 1 action, however, it takes that long to cast the spell from a wand.)

...now they're just nit-picking. That's kinda silly

whit10 wrote:...now they're just nit-picking.  That's kinda silly

who's picking nits?

these aren't rules people are making up, I am quoting the Core Rule Book.

just because people don't actually read it, doesn't mean there is some change. it has been there in print since PF came out.

Chris, 1st of all, I don't give a flying fuck who wrote the rule. These clarifications are fine and quite needed.

What I was trying to express is my disbelief at the totally arbitrary manner in which spells get assigned their casting times. There's really no rhyme or reason for it. I just looked over about ten spells and all had a casting time of 1 standard action. I'm sure that Restoration spells are being singled out due their specific effects but I think it's nit picky and kinda bullshit. It you disagree, that's fine and I'm really just expressing an opinion.

2nd of all.... I don't really care who wrote a rule, the first thing most gaming books say is that rules as printed are not iron-clad and that players and GMs should play how they want to so that they can enjoy the game. When I see something I don't like in the rules, I point it out in case someone else thinks the same thing and maybe there can be a rules adjustment, maybe not.

Frankly, the only thing I've seen in PF that I really want changed is the Wands and Quick Draw thing I've mentioned earlier. Everything else is fine by me.. if not a bit nit-picky!!!   

Ok, sorry if I came on too strong, I thought there was still confusion about whether it was a forum-created rule or a PF printed rule.

I agree that any given set of rules is subject to a GM and the players. BUT..... I think it helps everyone to start on the same page and that page is the actual printed word of the rule books. Since none of us seem to actually know much of what is written in the books, I think we owe it to PF to give their rules a chance in most 90% of the cases.

I know we are all "veteran gamers" (read old farts), but PF was written by gamers, not WoC. So I would suggest that these rules are not "arbitrary bullshit" as you say, but are probably there for 1 of 2 reasons. Either it is there as (1) a balancing mechanism, which has been play tested for many years, including 1e, 2e, 3.x, etc. Or it is there because (2) it fits Paizo's collective vision for how they see their gaming system working.

Think about the rules we have been discussing....

Rogue SA - probably should be renamed, so people get the "sneak attack" idea out of their heads. It has NOTHING to do with "sneaking" up on someone. It is "Precision" damage that can be caused any time someone is flanked, flat footed, or denied their dex bonus. This is both a (2) vision of their game and (1) Rogues suck balls and just trap-finding monkeys if they can't do some real burst damage.

Paladin Double Smite - just a (1) since like you told me, "I am daring Matt to kill this guy". Paladin's are still very powerful, esp. vs undead\evil\dragons. They really don't "need" a double smite at all, it is sprinkles on an already frosted and yummy cake.

Lesser Restoration - (1) + (2) Ability score damage would be toothless if any classes could just cleanse it easily mid combat. This is meant to make ability score damage have some kick in the middle of a fight. Using a potion on yourself, as a Martial class is a lot more a loss to party effectiveness than just letting the Heal-bot cohort in the back cleanse every condition you get. (at least that is how I would see it as a GM). And we all know that any class, esp humans, can UMD wands VERY easily, DC20 for any wand.

Ok, new topic!


What is the best use\combination you can think of for a Contingency spell?



Contingency

School evocation; Level sorcerer/wizard 6

Casting Time at least 10 minutes; see text

Components V, S, M (quicksilver and an eyelash of a spell-using creature), F (ivory statuette of you worth 1,500 gp)

Range personal

Target you

Duration 1 day/level (D) or until discharged

You can place another spell upon your person so that it comes into effect under some condition you dictate when casting contingency. The contingency spell and the companion spell are cast at the same time. The 10-minute casting time is the minimum total for both castings; if the companion spell has a casting time longer than 10 minutes, use that instead. You must pay any costs associated with the companion spell when you cast contingency.

The spell to be brought into effect by the contingency must be one that affects your person and be of a spell level no higher than one-third your caster level (rounded down, maximum 6th level).

The conditions needed to bring the spell into effect must be clear, although they can be general. In all cases, the contingency immediately brings into effect the companion spell, the latter being “cast” instantaneously when the prescribed circumstances occur. If complicated or convoluted conditions are prescribed, the whole spell combination (contingency and the companion magic) may fail when triggered. The companion spell occurs based solely on the stated conditions, regardless of whether you want it to.

You can use only one contingency spell at a time; if a second is cast, the first one (if still active) is dispelled.

format: spell + "worded condition"

First couple I thought of.....

1) Grt Inviso\Mirror Image\etc "when I roll initiative"

2) same spells "when I say 'Poof'" (or other easy word)

3) Teleport to my tower where flunkies have been instructed to pour healing\restoration\etc pots down my throat "If I take enough damage to be reduced to 0 or fewer hit points" (might not work if we are plane-hopping)

Lol... I was just grousing more than anything brother... it's what I do.

I actually agree with your assessment of things with PF over WoC. And I totally get WHY Restoration takes that long... it's all good. I just think it's rather funny that it's 3 rounds instead of a full turn casting or 2 rounds... Obviously you're not going to be using it in combat but. lol, anyway...


Contingency? Hmm, I like your first two options. I would also consider any spell effect that you can do that might allow you to avoid an enemy's spells or some sort of attack (forgive me, I'm NOT well read on spells outside of the Corebook and I only vaguely remember most of those). Assuming you have multiple Teleports for the day... option 3 is also awesome. "Excuse me whilst I go home, regather my powers, and come back to kick your ass."

Does it say 'how' the spell goes off? For instance, Paladins get a spell called Hero's Defiance which AUTOMATICALLY gets cast (assuming they have the prepared spell slot left) if they go below 0 HP. Does that spell automatically kick in (Swift Action or what not)? I didn't see that addressed?

One other thing (for those of you paying attention to Chris and I's bickering) does anyone have access to or plan on using the spell Silence?

Unless other spell casters have Silent Spell or get out of the radius (which can, of course, be augmented) this is a GREAT way to shut down opposing spell casters, at least for a round or two (unless they have ridiculous Spell Resistance)

whit10 wrote:One other thing (for those of you paying attention to Chris and I's bickering)  does anyone have access to or plan on using the spell Silence?

Unless other spell casters have Silent Spell or get out of the radius (which can, of course, be augmented) this is a GREAT way to shut down opposing spell casters, at least for a round or two (unless they have ridiculous Spell Resistance)

Interesting idea.....

20ft radius is less than the base move speed of 30ft if you cast it on the ground, it is 1 move to get out and then cast. Widen would turn a 2nd lvl spell into a 5th, 40ft radius, so that would take them 1 turn to either double move or dispell, unless they can move more than 40ft which is a distinct possiblity

Targeted on the caster gives them both a Will save (caster's best) and a SR.

For high levels:

I think you would have to make it a spell combo with something that restricts movement - drop wizard into a Pit spell and then silence the area, they can't cast fly to get out.

Wall of Force\Stone shaped like a ring, silence the ground.

Silence + Black Tentacles

Silence + any Riming Cold spell

Only problem here being that Silence is Cleric\Bard only. Anyone can UMD it from a scroll, but that takes a full round to draw the scroll and then use. So it either takes 2 casters working the combo together or blowing a "Quicken" on the other spell. (or Quicken Rod or Spell Perfection)

OR
I could see using Silence on us, to sneak around as a party. Silence the willing fighter and cast Inviso Sphere on the same willing fighter - we all move around Silent and Invisible, for scouting, sneaking up, etc.

Oh, it's not fool-proof but it's a tactical thing we did in Charleston sometimes.  If I remember correctly, it was the Rogue doing it most of the time.

Actually, I was thinking it works really well for the sneaky folks.  I would think it would hamstring you or Rob (or even me for that matter on some occasions) if used 'on the party' or something similar.  It's more one of those... "we're up against a bad-ass caster, it's still something for them to deal with".  At this point, I guess it would have to be a UMD on someone's part, (ahem, Sorcerers) or anyone who can use a wand (it's only a 2nd level spell, the Save DC would suck but, would it matter?)

... Hmm, now I'm having notions of the Bard-barian again.  Bards are underplayed anyway and I'm coming around on them.  I think Summoner is the only class left that I just can't think of any reason to play???

Ok, so I was thinking about setting up a backup character. This will be my first campaign with you guys and matt already announced that it will probably kill some of us..

What do you guys think about having a new character on standby? Is it worth the time to design? And is there something we don't we have in our party? Is there a niche my backup could potentially step in and fill in the event that Garth gets slaughtered?

I've never been anything other than a fighter.. I was thinking of multiclassing as a ranger/druid or paladin/monk.. that might be cool. Smite evil with a flurry of blows to the face! Or maybe a rogue/bard/assassin. I dunno. That might be more useful than a whimsical gnome inventor. Just thinking of what I could possibly do differently.

Oh, and tangentially to my tangent, how about the prestige classes in the APG? Are those open to use?

having a back up character or at least one in your mind isn't a bad idea but a lot of our talk is just banter about character ideas. I have about four backups at this point in various stages of development. lol

One thing about Muliti-classing. Look at how the powers work together and what you need for primary stats. A Paladin/Monk for instance would be really hard to make. Monks need just about everything but charisma (and maybe intelligence). Paladin's only really need Charisma plus Constitution and Strength to lesser degrees. There are some neat combos though... fighter/rogue is always a good one or Monk/Cleric (if you really want the divine magic). Play what you want of course but be aware of the limitations of mulit-classing. You sacrifice greater class powers for greater versatility and extra, lesser, class powers.

I think, for now anyway, we're not allowing evil characters (that's Matt's call though obviously). Assassin's have to be evil. You could always combine something with a Ninja?

I myself was eying a Ninja/witch very briefly, but that's a weird character.

whit10 wrote: I think Summoner is the only class left that I just can't think of any reason to play???

Customizable combat bio-mech!

Only at 16th level. Otherwise it's a nerfed version of Leadership and the summoner itself is kinda meh. I don't know, I see some possibilities but there's better caster types IMO. To each their own

Arcturus wrote:
What do you guys think about having a new character on standby? Is it worth the time to design? And is there something we don't we have in our party? Is there a niche my backup could potentially step in and fill in the event that Garth gets slaughtered?

It is worth it, if you enjoy the character making process, which most of us do. That is why we crunch our way into multiple possible ideas, some have merit for later use, some.... not so much and they get junked.

with 5 players, we have most things covered, except Trap disarming from a rogue, but from the sound of it, this isn't going to be much in the way of dungeon crawling. I imagine more fights like the training encounter - portals, plane hopping, not a long drawn out dungeon crawl that takes 6 months.

So tinker with whatever you think would be fun to play   

 Hey Mr. GM,


How would you deal with characters that have Item Creation Feats?

With a given Feat, for instance, Craft Wand - a crafter can make Wands for 1/2 price.  Of course, you have to have the right spells in your known\book list.  So you can really only craft a wand of something you can already cast.

If we take an item creation feat, do we get to apply the 50% discount to any magic items of that type that we buy? (assuming it is something we can create)

So I would still pay full price for Wand of Cure Critical, but 1/2 price for wand of Fireball.

Maybe between adventures in the future, we can craft for the other party members?  
(since we don't know each other yet)

To give credit where due - this is Josh's idea   

...every now and then I DO have a decent idea or two. lol