[PF] Disadvantages of permanent reduce person?

[Red Bear]

I'm an archer and I was thinking about having someone cast on me a permanent reduce person in order to get (considering the +2 dex) +2 AC, + 2 Atk roll, +1 Ref Save, + 5 stealth. So many nice bonuses for an archer. I'm aware that I will get -2 Str, -1 CMB, reduced carrying capacity and reduced dice for weapons, but I think the bonuses definitely outweigh these penalties.
Are there some other disadvantages I'm not considering?

[Spore]

You mean BESIDES being called names? Besides potentially risking several thousand gold to a dispel magic?

No, not really.

[Red Bear]

You mean BESIDES being called names?
Why? who would call me names? people in general just because I would be small?



Besides potentially risking several thousand gold to a dispel magic?

This is my biggest fear, if it happens, I'll have to take comfort from killing the caster and any person related to him...

Other problems I had in mind are like not be able to reach something or having my view completely blocked by a 4 ft tall "wall"/parapet or similar stuff

[Benthesquid]

Hmm, let's see. There are a few spells and effects that will hit you based on size. What size are you starting at? If you're Medium to start with, have you considered playing a Halfling, Gnome, or other small race instead? If you're Small to start with, you'll now be tiny. You'll have to make a strength check to move in strong winds, and to avoid being blown away in severe winds (or severe to move, and windstorm to avoid being thrown away). You'll also face worse effects from spells such as Gust of Wind and Wind Wall.

If you're Tiny, you'll also have no reach- you'll need to be in an opponent's square to hit them with a melee attack.

It's also quite probable that you'll be subject to various indignities from your party members, such as being stuffed into a backpack to save money on your ticket when you have to infiltrate an opera.

[Red Bear]

Hmm, let's see. There are a few spells and effects that will hit you based on size. What size are you starting at? If you're Medium to start with, have you considered playing a Halfling, Gnome, or other small race instead? If you're Small to start with, you'll now be tiny. You'll have to make a strength check to move in strong winds, and to avoid being blown away in severe winds (or severe to move, and windstorm to avoid being thrown away). You'll also face worse effects from spells such as Gust of Wind and Wind Wall.

If you're Tiny, you'll also have no reach- you'll need to be in an opponent's square to hit them with a melee attack.

It's also quite probable that you'll be subject to various indignities from your party members, such as being stuffed into a backpack to save money on your ticket when you have to infiltrate an opera.

I'm starting medium, I'm already level 7th and we've already played many sessions and my DM isn't a fan of switching race mid-campaign, in addition I liked the elf race stats more, but still I guess that it could have been a good idea to start small, but at the moment I'm medium.

I can live with being put in backpack :)

[Slipperychicken]

It depends on your build. If you're a strength-based bruiser, it's bad. If you're an archer or a caster, it's good. If you're a finesse fighter like a Rogue, it's probably good. What is your build, anyway?

As for carrying capacity, you should have extradimensional storage by the time you can afford a permanent spell.

Don't forget that a small (or smaller) character can ride a wolf (100gp, medium size, 50ft land speed) into the dungeon and be much more mobile than before. It has a different set of actions than you, so you could, for example, have it take a normal move immediately before or after you cast a spell (even a full-round action spell) without needing a concentration check.


Casting Spells While Mounted (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/gamemastering/combat#TOC-Mounted-Combat)

You can cast a spell normally if your mount moves up to a normal move (its speed) either before or after you cast. If you have your mount move both before and after you cast a spell, then you're casting the spell while the mount is moving, and you have to make a concentration check due to the vigorous motion (DC 10 + spell level) or lose the spell. If the mount is running (quadruple speed), you can cast a spell when your mount has moved up to twice its speed, but your concentration check is more difficult due to the violent motion (DC 15 + spell level).

And if you're a ranged character, you go from being a stationary arrow-turret (5ft step between full attacks) to moving your mount's speed without penalty while full-attacking. Having the mount go more than a normal move while full attacking does incur penalties, but it's well worth it when you need to GTFO. Also, you can score that x2 damage lance charge when you want to enter the fray.

[Edits]


This is my biggest fear, if it happens, I'll have to take comfort from killing the caster and any person related to him...


This is a good idea anyway. Kill the mage!


Why? who would call me names? people in general just because I would be small?

A small-sized Elf? People would probably just assume you're some kind of Elf/Halfling hybrid. Just hang out with Halflings. They'll probably understand.

[Stux]

Depending on your current strength and what kind of bow you are using you may drop some damage if your strength goes down. For instance if you are on 11 strength and using a longbow, then dropping to 9 strength will mean you have a -1 penatly to damage. Combined with the fact you are using a smaller bow anyway you want to be careful you aren't seriously gimping your damage.

Other than that I don't think there is much mechanical downside. I probably wouldn't do it personally, because it makes no sense to me that being smaller inherently makes you better at hitting targets at long range. It is a major change for a character to make and I can't see a reason in character that I would do it. I get hung up about that kind of thing haha. If you were going for stealthy close range sneak attacking though, that makes sense I suppose.

[Spore]

A small-sized Elf? People would probably just assume you're some kind of Elf/Halfling hybrid. Just hang out with Halflings. They'll probably understand.

Ha! Elf(lings). And just in time for christmas, too!

Seriously, I see the main problem in the fluff. It is just no sane decision to have yourself permanently shrinked to the size of a child.

I play a standard halfling and have sometimes problems to state my sovereignty. I have it easier because this halfling is a renown war veteran and high ranked military.

[Ravens_cry]

One thing that should be noted is, unlike enlarge person, your arrows do not resize back to original size, so you are taking something of a damage hit.

[EvilJames]

Remember that when you are small, you are also puntable, so watch out for ogre football and or soccer teams.

[Slipperychicken]

Seriously, I see the main problem in the fluff. It is just no sane decision to have yourself permanently shrinked to the size of a child.


It makes sense in a world where small-sized creatures are considered normal (as opposed to the real world, where dwarfism deviates from the norm). Besides, he can always go back if he wants. In any case, here are some explanations:


Maybe his sweetheart is/was a Small sized creature (halfling, kobold, gnome, etc)? That kind of size difference can pose difficulties. It would be pretty adorable for someone to shrink himself down for his lover. Maybe he was separated from her at some point, but was so used to his height that he didn't bother dispelling it?

Maybe it was a curse? An evil magician might have hexed him to be short out of revenge or spite. Then, after a long enough time without access to dispelling, he started to accept it.

I could see someone willingly doing that kind of thing while super-drunk, much like people sometimes get tattoos while wasted. One night of heavy drinking, then wake up 3 feet tall on the other side of the city.

Maybe he's trying it out to give himself a new perspective on the world. Short people see the world differently than tall folk, and maybe there's some insights to be had.

Maybe he read a book about the Halfling experience, and wants to try it out for himself (or he wants to write that book himself).


Our Elf is an adventurer after all. That implies some degree of deviance and curiosity which make such a decision plausible.

[NightbringerGGZ]

1) You'll do less damage. Your base dice on the weapon goes down and if you're using a composite bow your strength modifier has been reduced as well.

2) A significant reduction in your max carry weight which may lead to encumbrance problems.

3) Your CMB is reduced by 2. That's a -1 for small size and a -1 for your strength going down. Not a big deal unless you're a Fighter (Archer).

4) Your CMD goes down by 1 for being small sized.

5) If your GM uses dispel magic frequently you'll probably lose the effects at some point, resulting in a waste of money.

You gain a +1 bonus to ranged attack rolls, initiative and reflex saves. You also gain a +2 bonus to AC. You can also rude a medium sized critter into battle for a mobility boost.

I wound up getting a permanent Enlarge Person on a small-sized melee character in a previous game. While the damage bonus was nice, it wound up being offset by the penalties incurred with the size change. I wound up wishing I had saved the cash for an item that that only provided bonuses. You may want to keep that in mind.

[Grams]

This is my biggest fear, if it happens, I'll have to take comfort from killing the caster and any person related to him...

You could get a ring of counterspell (reduce person) Or two rings of counterspell if you want to be extra safe.

Edit: If you have a party sorc/wizard they can just cast reduce person into your ring to replenish the effect. Free of charge or not... if not it's only a 1st level spell.

[Red Bear]

It depends on your build. If you're a strength-based bruiser, it's bad. If you're an archer or a caster, it's good. If you're a finesse fighter like a Rogue, it's probably good. What is your build, anyway?
Archer Gish, homebrew ranged magus archetype (spell combat works like rapid shot, can add special qualities to a bow with arcane pool, spellstrike deliver spells through the bow) + arcane archer in the near future.



As for carrying capacity, you should have extradimensional storage by the time you can afford a permanent spell.

I do have extradimensional storage for regular equipment, but I will decrease my capacity to carry a single heavy item.



Don't forget that a small (or smaller) character can ride a wolf (100gp, medium size, 50ft land speed) into the dungeon and be much more mobile than before. It has a different set of actions than you, so you could, for example, have it take a normal move immediately before or after you cast a spell (even a full-round action spell) without needing a concentration check.
And if you're a ranged character, you go from being a stationary arrow-turret (5ft step between full attacks) to moving your mount's speed without penalty while full-attacking. Having the mount go more than a normal move while full attacking does incur penalties, but it's well worth it when you need to GTFO. Also, you can score that x2 damage lance charge when you want to enter the fray.

This is probably the main reason I'm thinking about doing this. A medium wolf rider can go almost anywhere, while a large horse has many problems. Actually I'm thinking about riding a leopard for his nice stealth and climb stats.


Depending on your current strength and what kind of bow you are using you may drop some damage if your strength goes down. For instance if you are on 11 strength and using a longbow, then dropping to 9 strength will mean you have a -1 penatly to damage. Combined with the fact you are using a smaller bow anyway you want to be careful you aren't seriously gimping your damage.
I have 12, so I will lose a +1 to damage, but considering deadly aim a -1 damage, +2 attack roll = +3 damage and in general the str is not my main source of damage.



Other than that I don't think there is much mechanical downside. I probably wouldn't do it personally, because it makes no sense to me that being smaller inherently makes you better at hitting targets at long range. It is a major change for a character to make and I can't see a reason in character that I would do it. I get hung up about that kind of thing haha. If you were going for stealthy close range sneak attacking though, that makes sense I suppose.


Seriously, I see the main problem in the fluff. It is just no sane decision to have yourself permanently shrinked to the size of a child.

I play a standard halfling and have sometimes problems to state my sovereignty. I have it easier because this halfling is a renown war veteran and high ranked military.
Probably the main reason I have doubts is because of Fluff and logic, although I'm casting on myself reduce person very often in combat so I guess it wouldn't be crazy to do it permanently, especially considering that in that world small people are "normal", halfing and gnome are standard race after all.



3) Your CMB is reduced by 2. That's a -1 for small size and a -1 for your strength going down. Not a big deal unless you're a Fighter (Archer).

I missed a -1, but as you said non Fighters rarely need to use a CMB



4) Your CMD goes down by 1 for being small sized.

+1 for dex, so CMD remains the same



I wound up wishing I had saved the cash for an item that that only provided bonuses. You may want to keep that in mind.
You may have a valid point, I'll keep this in mind.


You could get a ring of counterspell (reduce person) Or two rings of counterspell if you want to be extra safe.

Edit: If you have a party sorc/wizard they can just cast reduce person into your ring to replenish the effect. Free of charge or not... if not it's only a 1st level spell.

I didn't know this item, but from the description I think I should have a ring of counterspell (dispel magic), right? Can you cast dispel magic to counter dispel magic? By the way I am the party "wizard", to be more precise I am the party arcane caster, but I have a Bard-like spell progression (Magus).

[Baroncognito]

Besides potentially risking several thousand gold to a dispel magic?

Get a tattoo, hide it somewhere on your body that won't give a caster line of sight to it. It costs double what a magic item would cost.

So a tattoo of reduce person would be

Caster level 1, Spell level 1, minutes per level, x2000 for continuous.

1x1x2x 2000gp x 2 = 8000 gp.

It's a tattoo, so you don't really want to sell it, make it so it can only be used by fighters (or whatever class your archer is) for a 30% reduction in cost.

That would bring it down to just 5,600 gp.

[Dalebert]

There is a ring of invisibility which is arguably significantly more useful than this. Why aren't there rings of any particular spell you might want to have unlimited use of? This should be cheaper.

I guess if they made it as generic as things like wands and potions, it could get out of hand.

[Slipperychicken]

It's a tattoo, so you don't really want to sell it, make it so it can only be used by fighters (or whatever class your archer is) for a 30% reduction in cost.


Though it's clearly in the rules, I consider this kind of cost-reduction to be abusive.


If you go with a continuous item of Reduce Person (and if your GM approves of such an item), I would recommend something removable like a ring. That way you can "get big" essentially at will by removing the item, which would make smallness considerably easier on your character. Then, decreasing in size is just another part of gearing up for a dungeon crawl.

As for fluff, only you can decide what your character would choose and why. It would seem like an easier choice if he's trying to do something seriously important, like if lives are at stake.

[Baroncognito]

Though it's clearly in the rules, I consider this kind of cost-reduction to be abusive.

This is actually one of the few situations I don't consider it abusive. Magic Tattoos are priced like slotless items but they have slots. Also, with spells like Transfer Tattoo, you can actually sell them.

[Drachasor]

This is actually one of the few situations I don't consider it abusive. Magic Tattoos are priced like slotless items but they have slots. Also, with spells like Transfer Tattoo, you can actually sell them.

Yeah, Magic Tattoos are pretty awful normally. It's like Craft Wondrous Item but worse in every way.

[Red Bear]

It's a tattoo, so you don't really want to sell it, make it so it can only be used by fighters (or whatever class your archer is) for a 30% reduction in cost.


Where is this rule?

[Drachasor]

Where is this rule?

It's under the pricing guidelines for magical items. Though, designers as recommended against using it for custom player-made stuff.

[Occasional Sage]

Why? who would call me names? people in general just because I would be small?

Yes. Clearly you and I play with different groups, because this would happen from the moment the plan was mentioned until... forever really.



It's also quite probable that you'll be subject to various indignities from your party members, such as being stuffed into a backpack to save money on your ticket when you have to infiltrate an opera.

I would submit that if you're carrying a backpack to the opera, you have bigger social issues than carrying a person in it.



One thing that should be noted is, unlike enlarge person, your arrows do not resize back to original size, so you are taking something of a damage hit.

Yeah but really, the difference between d8 and d6 is one point of damage. That shouldn't be noticed at seventh level.

[Greenish]

I would submit that if you're carrying a backpack to the opera, you have bigger social issues than carrying a person in it.Adventurers care not for society's constrictive norms! They also wear full armour and a sword to any event.

[Spore]

Probably the main reason I have doubts is because of Fluff and logic, although I'm casting on myself reduce person very often in combat so I guess it wouldn't be crazy to do it permanently, especially considering that in that world small people are "normal", halfing and gnome are standard race after all.

You could even turn the argument around and DM the gnome NPCs as insulted. If you know the figure 'Blackface' from the 19. century you know how insulting disguising yourself as a member of another "race" can be.

Still I am not sold on that concept. It can also be seen as "powergamey" because Reduce Person is a temporary buff for combat and takes an action. If you make it permanent and don't have a very very good reason fluff-wise it is powergaming.

All depends on the mentality of your group. One group sees your choice as smart, the other could condemn you for powergaming. One DM could see your character as racist towards small people, the other could accept your logic of trying to see the world as a smaller character.

My tip would be: Play this problem out or ask your group if they're comfortable with it or not. Have a good reason fluffwise. Otherwise just don't.

And another thing that wasn't mentioned: I am not sure but don't you loose range on smaller weapons?

[Greenish]

And another thing that wasn't mentioned: I am not sure but don't you loose range on smaller weapons?Nope, and you don't lose any range either.

[TuggyNE]

Still I am not sold on that concept. It can also be seen as "powergamey" because Reduce Person is a temporary buff for combat and takes an action. If you make it permanent and don't have a very very good reason fluff-wise it is powergaming.

Just like getting a +3 weapon permanently instead of having a wizard cast greater magic weapon in combat is powergaming, and just like a wizard who permanencies arcane sight is powergaming.

Oh wait. No it isn't, because "I want to be more effective at fighting for a couple months or years, so I will get a permanent boost that can be dispelled when I no longer need it" is not powergaming, it's perfectly reasonable in-character logic!

[Fitz10019]

Swallow.

By making yourself smaller, you increase the number of creatures that can swallow you, so you should never ever bathe in salt water.

[elonin]

It was implied that you can ride a mount and get a full attack while using it's move? I recall hearing otherwise but that might have been in 3.5

I'd advise against being small sized in archery. Hit bonuses are easy and damage is harder.

[Greenish]

It was implied that you can ride a mount and get a full attack while using it's move? I recall hearing otherwise but that might have been in 3.5You can't full attack with melee if your mount moves more than 5' step (at least in 3.5, probably also PF). You can full attack with a ranged weapon in both systems while your mount moves (though if it moves more than one move, you get penalties.


I'd advise against being small sized in archery. Hit bonuses are easy and damage is harder.Well, PF does have Deadly Aim (ranged Power Attack), and probably some other tricks for ranged damage.

[Drachasor]

Just like getting a +3 weapon permanently instead of having a wizard cast greater magic weapon in combat is powergaming, and just like a wizard who permanencies arcane sight is powergaming.

Oh wait. No it isn't, because "I want to be more effective at fighting for a couple months or years, so I will get a permanent boost that can be dispelled when I no longer need it" is not powergaming, it's perfectly reasonable in-character logic!

It is power gaming.

Of course, in real life people involved in deadly or dangerous work powergame all the dang time. It certainly isn't uncommon to find people in such professions that would gladly trade some dignity for a higher effectiveness and improved chance of survival.

I'd also note that all of science and engineering throughout human history has basically been about us gaming the system as much as possible.


It was implied that you can ride a mount and get a full attack while using it's move? I recall hearing otherwise but that might have been in 3.5

I'd advise against being small sized in archery. Hit bonuses are easy and damage is harder.

No, if the mount moves you just get a standard action. If you are standing on Tensor's Floating Disk or the like though, then you'd apparently get a full attack though. Technically.

[Slipperychicken]

You can't full attack with melee if your mount moves more than 5' step (at least in 3.5, probably also PF). You can full attack with a ranged weapon in both systems while your mount moves (though if it moves more than one move, you get penalties.


This. PF basically copy-pasted 3.5's mounted combat rules.

[TuggyNE]

It is power gaming.

Of course, in real life people involved in deadly or dangerous work powergame all the dang time. It certainly isn't uncommon to find people in such professions that would gladly trade some dignity for a higher effectiveness and improved chance of survival.

I'd also note that all of science and engineering throughout human history has basically been about us gaming the system as much as possible.

I can accept that rephrasing. :smallcool:

[Fitz10019]

Is having Reduce Person permanenced on yourself cheaper than getting a ring that does it as needed?

[Stux]

Is having Reduce Person permanenced on yourself cheaper than getting a ring that does it as needed?

Oh yes! I believe a ring of permanent reduce person would cost about 20,000 GP. That is someone else's maths though, so might be wrong. Don't have the tables to hand. Cost to get it as a permanencied spell would be probably more than an order of magnitude lower.

[Slipperychicken]

Oh yes! I believe a ring of permanent reduce person would cost about 20,000 GP. That is someone else's maths though, so might be wrong. Don't have the tables to hand. Cost to get it as a permanencied spell would be probably more than an order of magnitude lower.

Use-Activated/Continuous (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items#TOC-Magic-Item-Gold-Piece-Values) = Spell level x Caster Level x 2,000gp.

Spell level (1) x Caster Level (1) x 2000gp = 2000gp.

Minute/level duration increases cost by x2. So 2000 *2 = 4000gp.

Total for slotted magic item: 4,000gp.

----

Hiring an NPC caster to cast Permanency on you:

5th level spell: 5gp x spell level (5) x Caster Level (minimum 9) = 450gp.

Materials cost = 2500gp.

To cast the initial Reduce Person on you:

1st level spell: Caster level (1) x 10gp = 10gp.

Total to Hire NPC to cast Permanent CL1 Reduce person: 2,960gp

[Stux]

Wow, that is a lot lower! Checking my sources it looks like the value of 20,000 GP was based on the Ring of Reduction from Lords of Madness (3.5). So not directly applicable, but as with all custom items best to ask your DM (and hope he isn't familiar with LoM!)

[Fax Celestis]

A significant reduction in your max carry weight which may lead to encumbrance problems.

Doubtful: equipment sizing weights follow an exponential progression: a Tiny item weighs 50% of its Small counterpart, which weighs 50% of its Medium counterpart, which weighs 50% of its Large counterpart, etc., etc.

Meanwhile carrying capacities follow a different exponential progression: a Tiny creature's capacity is 75% of its Small counterpart, which is 75% of its Medium counterpart, which is 75% of its Large counterpart, etc., etc.

Smaller creatures actually have a larger relative capacity than bigger ones. STR 10 light load is 33 lbs for Medium, 25 lbs for Small: if we load up on nothing but comparably sized shortswords (2 lbs for Medium, 1 lb for small), the Medium creature can hold 16 shortswords before getting to medium load, while a small creature can hold 25.

[elonin]

You can't full attack with melee if your mount moves more than 5' step (at least in 3.5, probably also PF). You can full attack with a ranged weapon in both systems while your mount moves (though if it moves more than one move, you get penalties.

Well, PF does have Deadly Aim (ranged Power Attack), and probably some other tricks for ranged damage.

Maybe that is what my friends were talking about. What is the difference between a full attack ranged and melee in the case of a mounts movement? It would seem to matter more if you could control your mount as a free action.

[Greenish]

Smaller creatures actually have a larger relative capacity than bigger ones.For gear that comes in different sizes, yeah.


What is the difference between a full attack ranged and melee in the case of a mounts movement?The difference is that you can do the former, but can't do the latter. That's it. There's no action conflict, how you control the mount doesn't matter, the rules just plain state that you can't do a melee full attack if your mount moves (more than 5' step).

There are PrCs (and probably other things) that can allow it, though. Wild Plains Outrider in 3.5, for example.

[Slipperychicken]

Maybe that is what my friends were talking about. What is the difference between a full attack ranged and melee in the case of a mounts movement? It would seem to matter more if you could control your mount as a free action.

Ranged:

Can full attack while mount takes non-move actions, no penalty.
Can full attack while mount takes a single move, no penalty.
Can full attack while mount takes double-move, -4 penalty.
Can full attack while mount takes a Run action, -8 penalty.




Melee:

Can make a full attack while mount is stationary, no penalty.
Can make a single attack while mount moves, no penalty.
Can make a single attack while the mount charges, +2 to hit.
+1 to hit if your target is a smaller size category than your mount.