Simple Q&A for Pathfinder 3: Find With a Vengeance

[Kuhara]

Q246:

Is there a Love's Pain equivalent or bizarre damage-people-other-than-the-one-you-hit spell in Pathfinder? I'm having trouble finding one in the rulebooks.

[FabulousFizban]

Q247

Spoiler: Greater Grapple

Show

Benefit: You receive a +2 bonus on checks made to grapple a foe. This bonus stacks with the bonus granted by Improved Grapple. Once you have grappled a creature, maintaining the grapple is a move action. This feat allows you to make two grapple checks each round (to move, harm, or pin your opponent), but you are not required to make two checks. You only need to succeed at one of these checks to maintain the grapple.

Does this mean that if I fail the check as a move action, I can try again as a standard without losing control of or releasing the grapple? (Matters because of a bunch of other weird rules interactions like the +5 to maintain or grab)

[Callum]

A263 [contention]

Other expensive third level spells include:
Restore Eidolon (1000 GP)
Sequester Thoughts (500 GP)
Snake Sigil (500 GP)
Symbol of Healing (500 GP)

But those all make horrible potions.

Symbol of healing can't be made into a potion at all, as it doesn't have any targets.

[Yanisa]

A218 [Contention]
You couldn't make a potion of fireball, as fireball doesn't target one or more creatures or objects.

Debatable but strict RAW you are right, but it was kinda besides the point, the point being you can make self destructive potions by the rules. Magic Missile is a valid one for potions, who wants to drink that?

A263 [contention]
Symbol of healing can't be made into a potion at all, as it doesn't have any targets.

It indeed has no target line, but it does target creatures. Not relevant for that discussion either way. Also Snake Sigil shouldn't work, but does, even though it is also a symbol-esque spell.
I do wonder how potions interact with rays. Scorching is a good examples, lacks a target line, but mentions targets in the description, so it does target creatures. Same idea goes for the fireball, lacks a target line, or the mention of target, but does target creatures and objects in order to deal damage.

I still don't advise any of the mentioned spells as potions regardless. (Although some might work as oils, like an oil of magic missile.)

A246
I wouldn't bet on it, there isn't a corrupt like system in pathfinder anyways. But you can also important it via the 3.0 -> 3.5 -> PF conversion rules, it wouldn't change the spell much, except it needs a school, maybe goes up a level and looses the 1d6 int damage to the caster.

If it stays level 3 you can make it into a potion, sell it as a love potion for double the evil.

A247
I don't see any ground for rolling maintain twice. As soon as your maintain fails, you loose the grappled condition, greater grapple does nothing to change that. In fact, the bolded line is there to prevent you from rolling double maintain, the second grapple action (to move, harm or pin) is a freebie.

[Cieyrin]

A247
I don't see any ground for rolling maintain twice. As soon as your maintain fails, you loose the grappled condition, greater grapple does nothing to change that. In fact, the bolded line is there to prevent you from rolling double maintain, the second grapple action (to move, harm or pin) is a freebie.

A 247 Contention I don't see how you can interpret Greater Grapple to mean that if you flub one of your 2 Grapples (Standard or Move) that it all comes tumbling down. That bolded line means exactly that if you use both actions to maintain and only one succeeds, you have successfully maintained a grapple. If you only succeed once, you naturally only get to do one grapple action (Move, Damage or Pin) besides successfully maintaining instead of two that you potentially had available to you. It doesn't even matter what kind of action you use to do that maintain (as long as it's a Move or Standard), as long as you use one of those actions and successfully beat your grappled target's CMD, you maintain the Grappled condition on the target, as well as that +5 against that target in that same grapple.

[Yanisa]

A 247 Contention I don't see how you can interpret Greater Grapple to mean that if you flub one of your 2 Grapples (Standard or Move) that it all comes tumbling down.

That's the normal grapple rule, when you fail to maintain, you fail to maintain

A 247 Contention That bolded line means exactly that if you use both actions to maintain and only one succeeds, you have successfully maintained a grapple.

Still, nothing in the feats overrides the default rule. when you fail to maintain a grapple, the grapple fails.

If you only succeed once, you naturally only get to do one grapple action (Move, Damage or Pin) besides successfully maintaining instead of two that you potentially had available to you.

Again, I see no evidance of this. The only thing the second check allows you to is to pin, damage or move. The second grapple doesn't mention you could potential use it to maintain to grapple if the first one fails. There is nothing in the feat that says you can pick follow up a first failed grapple.

It doesn't even matter what kind of action you use to do that maintain (as long as it's a Move or Standard), as long as you use one of those actions and successfully beat your grappled target's CMD, you maintain the Grappled condition on the target

Nitpick: You cannot maintain as a standard action anymore, but you can still double move, so it's a moot nitpick.

as well as that +5 against that target in that same grapple.

I also fail to see the relevance of +5 grapple. That is only to maintain, which does not happen until the next round. Neither moving (maybe moving an foe into a dangerous situtation triggers a maintain check, but by RAW isn't defined as such), pinning or attacking triggers a maintain roll, so the +5 is moot within the same round.

[Cieyrin]

That's the normal grapple rule, when you fail to maintain, you fail to maintain


Still, nothing in the feats overrides the default rule. when you fail to maintain a grapple, the grapple fails.

Incorrect, specific overrides general. You have to roll a combat maneuver check to do a maintain and the feat itself says you only have to succeed on one of the two checks (should you take two) to maintain. That is the benefit of Greater Grapple, as once you're in a Grapple, you can use your Move action to make a second attempt, something you aren't normally allowed to do. The second grapple action doesn't just automatically happen if you use your Move, it is not a freebie, as you put it. There would be no reason to write that last sentence if you only rolled once.

Again, I see no evidence of this. The only thing the second check allows you to is to pin, damage or move. The second grapple doesn't mention you could potential use it to maintain to grapple if the first one fails. There is nothing in the feat that says you can pick follow up a first failed grapple.

It doesn't have to, that's why the feat says you only succeed at one check to maintain the grapple. A benefit of maintaining besides keeping the condition on the target is doing one of the mentioned actions above.

I also fail to see the relevance of +5 grapple. That is only to maintain, which does not happen until the next round. Neither moving (maybe moving an foe into a dangerous situtation triggers a maintain check, but by RAW isn't defined as such), pinning or attacking triggers a maintain roll, so the +5 is moot within the same round.

The +5 was to address the original poster's question, as they made mention of it. I did not suggest you get it immediately, either.

Should you wish to discuss this further, as this is becoming not Simple, I would move to an actual thread before continuing further.

[CockroachTeaParty]

Q 248

When taking a prestige class that advances caster level/spells per day, does an Arcanist also gain an increase in spells prepared?

To say it a different way, does an Arcanist that takes a prestige class that advances caster level, such as Eldritch Knight, also gain an increase in unique spells they can prepare?

Since they have a spell book like a wizard, clearly they don't gain the 2 free spells to their spell book, but by the RAW as far as I can tell, they also wouldn't get more spells prepared, just higher level spell slots... Can anyone confirm this? Is there something I'm perhaps missing?

[Psyren]

A247: My own interpretation is that if you succeed at the initial maintain check, subsequent failures will not cause you to lose your hold. I agree it's not clear though.

A248: Eldritch Knight increases spells known and therefore will increase spells prepared for an Arcanist. While it technically limits the spells known provision to spontaneous casters, Arcanist overrides that (similar to how a Warlock's override for "arcane spellcasting class" worked in 3.5.)

"Feats and other effects that modify the number of spells known by a spellcaster instead affect the number of spells an arcanist can prepare."

[killem2]

Q 249: When a tumble attempt is made, and the player needs to make a check against one of the following:

Move through a threatened area Opponent's Combat Maneuver Defense
Move through an enemy's space 5 + opponent's Combat Maneuver Defense

Is one check made for each square or just once for the entire movement that the tumbling player can make?

[Spore]

A249 If it's only a threatened square then DC = CMD. If it is the square the monster stands in then 5+CMD. The roll has to be made for each threatened square. If the check is high enough to counter threatening guy A but not B then B still hits.

[killem2]

A249 If it's only a threatened square then DC = CMD. If it is the square the monster stands in then 5+CMD. The roll has to be made for each threatened square. If the check is high enough to counter threatening guy A but not B then B still hits.

Re: A249 1 But if say I was moving around a medium creature and I had to move 5 spaces to get into the position I want, and the goblin threatens all of them, I would have to make 5 tumble checks?

Re: A249 2And would all of those be considered one move action each, or just one total move action (or double move depending if I exceed my normal movement speed)?

[deuxhero]

Q250
Does an Eidolon or other creature with natural attack evolutions (such as a AC/familiar under Evolved Companion/Evolved Familiar) retain them under the effects of a polymorph effect?

Q251
Can the Evolution Surge line be used on a polymorphed Eidolon to give it evolutions in its new form?

[pi4t]

Q252: Does the mystic theurge class count as arcane, divine, both arcane and divine, or neither, for the purposes of other prestige classes which give "+1 level of arcane spellcasting class" casting progression?

[unseenmage]

Q253

Can a Golem still use its Slam attack if it is carrying something? Or would it have to drop what it's holding in order to slam?

[Psyren]

A249 continuation 1: If you keep moving around in its threatened area, then yes - you will keep leaving squares it threatens and have to make multiple checks. Your best bet, if you want to run along the goblin's perimeter, is to tumble 5' out of reach, move normally around it to where you want to be and then move back in.

The idea is that if you're facing a monster in melee you want to do as little moving around within its threatened area as you can. This is one reason why larger monsters can be so scary.

A249 continuation 2: It's a single move action no matter how many checks you make (though again, your best bet is to tumble out of reach, reposition to where you want to be and then move back in.) Ideally you should only be making a single check, unless there are a lot of other enemies around or little room to maneuver or you're fighting something with a large threatening area.

A250: Polymorph effects cause you to lose all natural attacks of the original form. Abilities that let you add features can be used to regain them - however, this refers to activated abilities like spells or supernatural abilities, rather than "always on" abilities like feats

A251: Yes, because the evolution surge spell would be "adding features." You would have to cast it after the polymorph effect however, otherwise it would be overwritten.

A252: None of the above. Mystic Theurge is not a spellcasting class itself, it just advances the spellcasting of your base class(es). Once you hit MT10, nothing will advance MT itself any further.

A253: If a natural attack's limb is occupied you can't use it. Slam is sufficiently vague though that I'd say it's a DM call.(Perhaps it could be replaced with an elbow or headbutt?)

[Platymus Pus]

Q254
There is a set of armor called Bond Leaf wrap that is as such.
Bondleaf wraps are each crafted from a single enormous leaf found on magical trees. A bondleaf wrap is inactive until worn for 24 hours.
During this time, it grows into the skin,drawing water and nutrients from its host. Afterward,as a standard action, you can command it to wrap around your body.
Arms and equipment.
Would spells like defoliate destroy it rather easily or not despite it being armor?

[Fenryr]

Q255

Ranger has Combat Style. It says "He can choose feats from his selected combat style, even if he does not have the normal prerequisites." If you read Point Blank Master it says "Starting at 6th level, a ranger with the archery combat style may select Point Blank Master as a combat style feat, but he must have Weapon Focus instead of Weapon Specialization in the selected weapon."

So, do I need the prerequisites or not? What I think it's that you may select it as an odd feat (1, 3, 5, 7, 9, etc) once you reach level 6. Am I right?

[Psyren]

A254 clarification: Where is that from? I would need to read the full entry to be sure of anything. It seems like it would be a DM call though.

A255: Point Blank Master is a special case - it was added to the archery style (a core style) in APG. So technically it is not on the list, save for the provision given in APG, which also adds the WF prereq as a stipulation. Thus it is a specific exception to the general rule that you can take combat style feats without needing the prereqs. The way the PFSRD presents it, it seems like it was always on the list, which can appear confusing.

[Yanisa]

A254
Bondleaf wraps is a 3.0 item. In general though there are plant based armors in pathfinder, but those are clearly armors, as the plant is dead from the RAW perspective. How Bondleaf wraps would interact in PF is a DM Call, most likely it will count as a armor rather then a plant or plant creature for the purpose of spells.

Also Defoliate, the spell, removes cover, concealment, difficulty terrain and "so forth" based on plant life. I suspect the "so forth" is for entangle and things like those, but non of these sound like "instantly destroys armor". You can also case a targeted Defoliate at a plant creature to deal 2d8. Personally I would rule that is also how it interacts with plant-based armor, being a fast way to sunder those types of armor. But your DM ruling may vary.

[Oneris]

Q256
Does Protection from Evil spells break an evil necromancer's control over their minions through Command Undead spell or feat, or Animate Dead?

[Psyren]

A256: No - none of those effects are compulsions. A necromancer's control of undead is different.

[Togath]

Q257
can Claw Pounce* and Vicious Claws* be used when wielding claw blades*?

*alternate catfolk link

[unseenmage]

Q258

Can an Astral Construct be conjured inside a suit of armor?

Especially in such a way that one's allies won't notice?

[Psyren]

A257: Yes. Though the claw blades change your claws from being natural weapons into manufactured ones, they are still actually your claws. This is a fairly unique area of the rules.

"The blades grant the wearer a +1 enhancement bonus on claw attack rolls with that hand and change the weapon type from a natural weapon to a light slashing weapon."

Thus, effects that function "with your claws" - like the two you linked - will still work with claw blades.

If that weren't enough, note also that the claw blades do not have weapon stats of their own. Thus, you are still attacking with your claws.

EDIT:

A258: I assume you mean "created" rather than "conjured" - and no, metacreativity powers have the same rule as conjuration spells i.e. whatever you create must appear in an open space capable of supporting it. You cannot form them inside of another thing or being.

"A creature or object brought into being cannot appear inside another creature or object, nor can it appear floating in an empty space. It must arrive in an open location on a surface capable of supporting it. The creature or object must appear within the power’s range, but it does not have to remain within the range."

You can make it and then put the armor on it, but not form it inside the armor.

[Togath]

Q259
does the poison use ability let you apply poison to natural weapons safely?

[Psyren]

A259: Yes and no. Poison Use only protects you from the 5% chance of poisoning yourself when applying poison to a weapon. If the poison you're using is contact poison, then smearing it on your claws or other natural weapons will still poison you no matter how careful you are, for obvious reasons. Injury poison, on the other hand, will be perfectly safe.

I assume, however, from your previous question and your ongoing thread that you will be using your poison with Claw Blades. The good news is that CBs should protect you from contact poison as well. They effectively turn your claws into manufactured weapons, thus you should be able to smear contact poison on them without risk. (Basically, they are metal tips that fit over your regular claws and therefore, applying poison to them should prevent you from being exposed to it.)

[Oneris]

A259 Addendum:
There's a specific Catfolk Rogue talent (Deadly Scratch (Ex)) that covers applying poison to claws. It requires Poison Use class feature in addition to itself, so I feel that applying poison to claws directly is not included in Poison Use. Then again, applying poison to claw blades should count as applying to a weapon instead of claws, to that could bypass it.

[Kurald Galain]

Q260 The bloodrager's Destined Bloodline has the ability to give a bonus to your attack roll as a free action. Do you have to declare this before rolling, or can you retroactively apply it to a roll you just made, or is that up to your DM?

[Psyren]

A259 correction: That may have been their intent, but by RAW poison use does apply to natural weapons as well as manufactured because it does not distinguish between the two. Thus, Deadly Scratch is a wasted talent. (Also, neither Poison Use nor Deadly Scratch will protect you from smearing contact poison on a body part.)

A260: You can (and indeed must) use it after you roll, so it would apply to the roll you just made. "You must decide to use this ability after the die is rolled, but before the GM reveals the results. You must take the second result, even if it’s worse." Basically you would use it if you feel the roll is low (e.g. you roll 7 or less.)