[2e]
Could a Talisman or Spellheart be affixed to a Gate Attenuator, potentially affecting a Kineticists Elemental Blasts?
I know that the Gate Attenuator isn't technically a weapon, but it's primary purpose is to act as a "Striking" rune for Kineticists so they can keep up with attack bonuses.
What would be a good level to start experienced DnD 5e players in Pathfinder 1e? I was thinking 6 to give them access to level 3 spells so they can feel the power difference without overwhelming them.
3 IMO; one extra feat so people can be more fleshed out in terms "doing their thing" and combat has less random lethality potential (but not zero).
There is an argument for just starting at one though, depending on how many of your players will be spellcasters and how savvy they are in spell selection.
[1e] An investigator finds a scroll... how does he decipher what spell is on it? Usually a wizard casts read magic, which investigators don't have. Does an investigator just use the Spellcraft skill (DC 20+spell level)?
The last line in the Alchemy ability says:
>An investigator does not need to decipher arcane writing before copying that formulae.
does that mean an investigator never has to cast read magic or use Spellcraft?
Reading the whole thing
> An investigator can also add formulae to his book just like a wizard adds spells to his spellbook, using the same costs, pages, and time requirements. A formula book costs as much as a spellbook. An investigator can study a wizard’s spellbook to learn any formula that is equivalent to a spell the spellbook contains. A wizard, however, cannot learn spells from a formula book. An investigator can also learn formulae from another investigator’s or an alchemist’s formula book (and vice versa). An investigator does not need to decipher arcane writing before copying that formulae.
Yeah, you don't need to roll or use read magic to add to your formula book.
But what if I don't want to write it in my formula book (let's say I already have it) do I just automatically decipher the scroll? What if the scroll has a cleric spell, do I decipher that automatically? That seems way too powerful as the only class that automatically sees a scroll and what spell is on it.
It says specifically the investigator never needs to decipher the scroll *before copying it*, so that would seem to be the only purpose the investigator can use the scroll for without deciphering.
1e, I'm champion of irori paladin about to get my ki ability from the prestige class. It says the level for my ki stacks with other classes that grant it. Does that mean I need to have the ki ability from my monk levels for it to stack or will it count my monk levels even if I don't have ki yet?
https://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fm#v5748eaic9qt8
As I understand things, your class doesn't count as "a class that grants (class feature)" until you reach the level that it grants that class feature
\[1e\] Just finished up a session and I've got a question about Prismatic Sphere from a player disagreement. The party fought a foe who placed the Prismatic Sphere down and caught two party members (the paladin and fighter) in it but walked away to deal with the rest of the group, the Paladin managed to succeed on their saves and walk through the Sphere unfazed, but on the Fighter's turn he swing his weapon at the Sphere to which I assume would activate the spell causing him to be subject to all 7 layers. This resulted in his death.
He's arguing that since he wasn't attacking anyone he shouldn't trigger the effect, and if it does trigger it should only affect his weapon and not him. I think that's silly since then that argument could just be applied to normal weapon attacks made against targets in the sphere.
So who's in the right here with the ruling? Should a player inside a Prismatic Sphere who attacked the wall of the Prismatic Sphere be subject to the spells effects?
Prismatic Sphere acts as Prismatic Wall except for the area/shape.
Prismatic Wall only affects people that "try to pass through it or attack you (caster)".
The fighter did not attack the caster, or as I understand it attempt to pass through the wall.
He should not be dead. Now, I get trying to make things interesting when people do unexpected things, but killing a player like that was essentially DM fiat.
It's less-so about making things interesting and more-so I warned him, he saw someone else almost be effected by it(saw the rough damage), had low HP (around 50), and still decided to take a swing at it out of frustration. Eventually consequences have to happen.
Other than that though I see the argument for him not trying to pass through or attack somebody, mostly want to see where other people stand on that specific ruling.
Bare minimum though that weapon is destroyed.
I'm not saying it does, that's why I'm trying to figure out whether he's effected or the weapon that made contact with the spell. Because by the written rules of the spell the weapon should still be subject to it's effects.
Last thing I'll say on this.
You put the dude in a situation where they were effectively out of the game for the rest of the encounter- I know of no way for a paladin to get out of the inside of a prismatic sphere. Is this correct? Do they have some way to teleport or dimension door?
I'm making an assumption here, but I'm betting the player was a bit frustrated at the time and decided since there was nothing else they could do, he might as well swing at the wall. Is that accurate?
So now you feel like the character needs to suffer some kind of consequence for this. Is it interesting? Does it make the game more fun? Does it make the story better?
Is this the character's prized weapon? Does the character who's entire class is based around being a brave weapon person have anything to do if that weapon is destroyed?
I'm trying to communicate to you that it sounds, to me, like you're making some real big mistakes here.
P.s. Prismatic Wall specifically states if affects CREATURES that try to pass through it or attack the caster. So I can't stress strongly enough even your fundamental assumption about the sword being affected in any way is you as a DM filling in the blanks. Does this really seem like the right way to make it work to you? What is the upside, for the game, to stick to your guns on this?
If a player has low AC am I not supposed to attack them if their poor positioning got them in the front line? If a player dumps their Wisdom to buff another stat am I supposed to never target them with a Will saving throw?
There are four other players at the table, 2 of which were literally talking to him about plans to free him (dispels, disjunction, working through the layers, etc), he chose to ignore them and attack the barrier. I asked him if this was something he wanted to do twice, and played it as the spell dictates. I wasn't sure on whether a weapon held sends the effects to him as well as the weapon or not and that's what I wanted more clarification on.
If a ranged weapon gets shot at the barrier it gets destroyed as per the layer's effects, If a player swings a weapon at someone inside they are affected by each layer as per the rules. So I thought in this situation they would be affected, if that's wrong then the weapon gets affected.
He could have not swung and waited for his friends to help him. There are actions that have consequences and at no point did he pull back from what he did, he committed, and he's even okay with the weapon being destroyed but he's arguing that he shouldn't be affected.
So quit being so personal over this, I've discussed this with my players and the player in question, I just wanted a wider opinion on how other people would handle the rules of a tended weapon passing through a Prismatic Barrier.
But for some reason you've decided to give me a lecture on DMing, so is everything alright with your evening? you seem a bit on edge and projecting.
You're a single person mate.
I'm also aware the spell says creatures that attempt to pass through or attack you but the layers also specify things and objects at certain layers. They clearly are effected by the magical effects of them and at no point during the spell description does it say it **only** affects creatures.
If it's numbers that matter - the prismatic sphere will destroy objects passing thru (violet: Energy field destroys all objects and effects.) but won't have any effect on the creature swinging the weapon unless they decide to wave a hand through it at the same time - and someone who's made it to a level where they might face prismatic spheres should have the experience to not do so. Also the sword would get a save, and the swinger's will save would be used there in the likely event that it is higher.
Make that two. Spells do what they say and prismatic sphere does not say it affects characters attacking it or triggers on anything but creatures, so why invent these additional effects? Your player is right to be irritate by that, to him it feels like you are bending the rules to target him.
Your call seems to make the game less fun and is not covered by the rules. This should be enough to tell you that it was a bad call. Happens to all of us.
\[1e\] I'm playing a Shaman and I was looking over wondrous magic items for the him and they are limited could is it possible to rework items for the witch and oracle to make them work for a shaman.
Here is a bench-pressing document:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Pathfinder_RPG/comments/6pmjgh/benchpressing_character_creation_by_new_numbers/
It of course depends on whether you are in melee, have other defenses or something similar.
My question was primarly to see if I should keep the Shield spell or switch to the better Mighty False Life spell later? (I have only limited known spells available)
Shield will 99% of the time be useless. A player needs to invest into AC for it to stay relevant. Regarding Mighty False Life: I'd use something that prevents being hit or targeted to avoid rider effects, but it is better than Shield in your Scenario.
\[1e\] I don't think this warrants a post. Basically I looked into the Grandmother Spider entry of AON. IT says that N/A for subdomains. However when I looked into the section of Faiths of Golarion, I found a bunch of Subdomains. The same subdomains are listed in the Pathfinderwiki. What I'm saying is that AON probably missed it.
\[1E\] Recently discovered deific/demoinc obieidnce feats. for an intimidate bloodrager, would any be useful? Seem thematic and fun, but wanna make it work as well!
There's 4 guides to obediences on [Zenith's guide to the guides](https://zenithgames.blogspot.com/2012/11/the-comprehensive-pathfinder-guides.html). A quick search suggests that Angazhan, Baalzebul and Besmara might have relevant boons, though only at high levels.
[2e] Could a Talisman or Spellheart be affixed to a Gate Attenuator, potentially affecting a Kineticists Elemental Blasts? I know that the Gate Attenuator isn't technically a weapon, but it's primary purpose is to act as a "Striking" rune for Kineticists so they can keep up with attack bonuses.
What would be a good level to start experienced DnD 5e players in Pathfinder 1e? I was thinking 6 to give them access to level 3 spells so they can feel the power difference without overwhelming them.
3 IMO; one extra feat so people can be more fleshed out in terms "doing their thing" and combat has less random lethality potential (but not zero). There is an argument for just starting at one though, depending on how many of your players will be spellcasters and how savvy they are in spell selection.
[1e] An investigator finds a scroll... how does he decipher what spell is on it? Usually a wizard casts read magic, which investigators don't have. Does an investigator just use the Spellcraft skill (DC 20+spell level)? The last line in the Alchemy ability says: >An investigator does not need to decipher arcane writing before copying that formulae. does that mean an investigator never has to cast read magic or use Spellcraft?
Reading the whole thing > An investigator can also add formulae to his book just like a wizard adds spells to his spellbook, using the same costs, pages, and time requirements. A formula book costs as much as a spellbook. An investigator can study a wizard’s spellbook to learn any formula that is equivalent to a spell the spellbook contains. A wizard, however, cannot learn spells from a formula book. An investigator can also learn formulae from another investigator’s or an alchemist’s formula book (and vice versa). An investigator does not need to decipher arcane writing before copying that formulae. Yeah, you don't need to roll or use read magic to add to your formula book.
But what if I don't want to write it in my formula book (let's say I already have it) do I just automatically decipher the scroll? What if the scroll has a cleric spell, do I decipher that automatically? That seems way too powerful as the only class that automatically sees a scroll and what spell is on it.
It says specifically the investigator never needs to decipher the scroll *before copying it*, so that would seem to be the only purpose the investigator can use the scroll for without deciphering.
1e, does the jinx standard for cavalier affect enchantment AND necromancy spells, or you choose?
Enchantmnent, necromancy and hexes, nothing to chose you get it all !
1e, I'm champion of irori paladin about to get my ki ability from the prestige class. It says the level for my ki stacks with other classes that grant it. Does that mean I need to have the ki ability from my monk levels for it to stack or will it count my monk levels even if I don't have ki yet?
https://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fm#v5748eaic9qt8 As I understand things, your class doesn't count as "a class that grants (class feature)" until you reach the level that it grants that class feature
\[1e\] Just finished up a session and I've got a question about Prismatic Sphere from a player disagreement. The party fought a foe who placed the Prismatic Sphere down and caught two party members (the paladin and fighter) in it but walked away to deal with the rest of the group, the Paladin managed to succeed on their saves and walk through the Sphere unfazed, but on the Fighter's turn he swing his weapon at the Sphere to which I assume would activate the spell causing him to be subject to all 7 layers. This resulted in his death. He's arguing that since he wasn't attacking anyone he shouldn't trigger the effect, and if it does trigger it should only affect his weapon and not him. I think that's silly since then that argument could just be applied to normal weapon attacks made against targets in the sphere. So who's in the right here with the ruling? Should a player inside a Prismatic Sphere who attacked the wall of the Prismatic Sphere be subject to the spells effects?
Prismatic Sphere acts as Prismatic Wall except for the area/shape. Prismatic Wall only affects people that "try to pass through it or attack you (caster)". The fighter did not attack the caster, or as I understand it attempt to pass through the wall. He should not be dead. Now, I get trying to make things interesting when people do unexpected things, but killing a player like that was essentially DM fiat.
It's less-so about making things interesting and more-so I warned him, he saw someone else almost be effected by it(saw the rough damage), had low HP (around 50), and still decided to take a swing at it out of frustration. Eventually consequences have to happen. Other than that though I see the argument for him not trying to pass through or attack somebody, mostly want to see where other people stand on that specific ruling. Bare minimum though that weapon is destroyed.
"Consequences have to happen" don't trump the written effects of the spell.
I'm not saying it does, that's why I'm trying to figure out whether he's effected or the weapon that made contact with the spell. Because by the written rules of the spell the weapon should still be subject to it's effects.
Last thing I'll say on this. You put the dude in a situation where they were effectively out of the game for the rest of the encounter- I know of no way for a paladin to get out of the inside of a prismatic sphere. Is this correct? Do they have some way to teleport or dimension door? I'm making an assumption here, but I'm betting the player was a bit frustrated at the time and decided since there was nothing else they could do, he might as well swing at the wall. Is that accurate? So now you feel like the character needs to suffer some kind of consequence for this. Is it interesting? Does it make the game more fun? Does it make the story better? Is this the character's prized weapon? Does the character who's entire class is based around being a brave weapon person have anything to do if that weapon is destroyed? I'm trying to communicate to you that it sounds, to me, like you're making some real big mistakes here. P.s. Prismatic Wall specifically states if affects CREATURES that try to pass through it or attack the caster. So I can't stress strongly enough even your fundamental assumption about the sword being affected in any way is you as a DM filling in the blanks. Does this really seem like the right way to make it work to you? What is the upside, for the game, to stick to your guns on this?
If a player has low AC am I not supposed to attack them if their poor positioning got them in the front line? If a player dumps their Wisdom to buff another stat am I supposed to never target them with a Will saving throw? There are four other players at the table, 2 of which were literally talking to him about plans to free him (dispels, disjunction, working through the layers, etc), he chose to ignore them and attack the barrier. I asked him if this was something he wanted to do twice, and played it as the spell dictates. I wasn't sure on whether a weapon held sends the effects to him as well as the weapon or not and that's what I wanted more clarification on. If a ranged weapon gets shot at the barrier it gets destroyed as per the layer's effects, If a player swings a weapon at someone inside they are affected by each layer as per the rules. So I thought in this situation they would be affected, if that's wrong then the weapon gets affected. He could have not swung and waited for his friends to help him. There are actions that have consequences and at no point did he pull back from what he did, he committed, and he's even okay with the weapon being destroyed but he's arguing that he shouldn't be affected. So quit being so personal over this, I've discussed this with my players and the player in question, I just wanted a wider opinion on how other people would handle the rules of a tended weapon passing through a Prismatic Barrier. But for some reason you've decided to give me a lecture on DMing, so is everything alright with your evening? you seem a bit on edge and projecting.
*You* asked *us*, and got an answer.
You're a single person mate. I'm also aware the spell says creatures that attempt to pass through or attack you but the layers also specify things and objects at certain layers. They clearly are effected by the magical effects of them and at no point during the spell description does it say it **only** affects creatures.
If it's numbers that matter - the prismatic sphere will destroy objects passing thru (violet: Energy field destroys all objects and effects.) but won't have any effect on the creature swinging the weapon unless they decide to wave a hand through it at the same time - and someone who's made it to a level where they might face prismatic spheres should have the experience to not do so. Also the sword would get a save, and the swinger's will save would be used there in the likely event that it is higher.
Make that two. Spells do what they say and prismatic sphere does not say it affects characters attacking it or triggers on anything but creatures, so why invent these additional effects? Your player is right to be irritate by that, to him it feels like you are bending the rules to target him. Your call seems to make the game less fun and is not covered by the rules. This should be enough to tell you that it was a bad call. Happens to all of us.
If you're aware of this, why did you kill your paladin?
\[1e\] I'm playing a Shaman and I was looking over wondrous magic items for the him and they are limited could is it possible to rework items for the witch and oracle to make them work for a shaman.
If your DM says yes, then yes; if they say no, then no.
\[1e\]How bad is an AC 21 or 17 on character level 7?
Here is a bench-pressing document: https://www.reddit.com/r/Pathfinder_RPG/comments/6pmjgh/benchpressing_character_creation_by_new_numbers/ It of course depends on whether you are in melee, have other defenses or something similar.
Pure spellcaster +3 dex with mage armor and shield spell (AC 17 or 21). No fitting defensive items found.
If you take care and maybe get something alternative like Mirror Images or Invisibility going, then it is not a problem.
My question was primarly to see if I should keep the Shield spell or switch to the better Mighty False Life spell later? (I have only limited known spells available)
Shield will 99% of the time be useless. A player needs to invest into AC for it to stay relevant. Regarding Mighty False Life: I'd use something that prevents being hit or targeted to avoid rider effects, but it is better than Shield in your Scenario.
The worst thing is that Shield and Mindbarrier are not stacking at all.
\[1e\] I don't think this warrants a post. Basically I looked into the Grandmother Spider entry of AON. IT says that N/A for subdomains. However when I looked into the section of Faiths of Golarion, I found a bunch of Subdomains. The same subdomains are listed in the Pathfinderwiki. What I'm saying is that AON probably missed it.
I have reported the issue on the discord. Thanks.
\[1E\] Recently discovered deific/demoinc obieidnce feats. for an intimidate bloodrager, would any be useful? Seem thematic and fun, but wanna make it work as well!
There's 4 guides to obediences on [Zenith's guide to the guides](https://zenithgames.blogspot.com/2012/11/the-comprehensive-pathfinder-guides.html). A quick search suggests that Angazhan, Baalzebul and Besmara might have relevant boons, though only at high levels.
Thanks, by higher levels build will be 'done' anyways,so planning ahead is fun. Appreciate it!