Lipstick Enchantment: How Magi Kiss Makes Every Kiss Magical

Magi Kiss Lipstick is a popular brand of lipstick that is known for its long-lasting formula and vibrant colors. This lipstick is designed to provide a smooth and even application, leaving the lips looking and feeling moisturized. It is enriched with ingredients such as shea butter and vitamin E, which help to nourish and protect the lips. One of the key features of Magi Kiss Lipstick is its long-lasting formula. This means that once applied, the lipstick will stay in place for hours without fading or smudging. This is especially beneficial for those who lead busy lifestyles and don't have time for constant touch-ups throughout the day.

I dunno maybe it is regional language differences but to me, stacking implies groups of the same thing. I try to never use stacking when talking about powers in Pathfinders since pretty much nothing of the same type does with the only exeptions that immediatley come to mind being Dodge & competence bonuses.

You would get 5 to hit, 5 to damage, have double the range increment, affect incorporeal creatures, have a doubled threat range, and deal 4d6 bonus energy damage another d8 on a critical. It hasn t come up mouch, but I d houserule that enchanted ammo adds a damage bonus that stacks with the bow s enhancement bonus, but there may be some reason to disallow this.

This is especially beneficial for those who lead busy lifestyles and don't have time for constant touch-ups throughout the day. Another great aspect of Magi Kiss Lipstick is the wide range of colors available. Whether you prefer bold and bright shades or more subtle and natural hues, there is a shade to suit every preference and skin tone.

Magic bow vs magic arrows

When you use a magic bow and magic arrows what bonuses get applied to the attack. Example: You have a +1 Flaming Burst Longbow and you fire out of it a +2 bane Cold Iron arrow. What I want to know is do they just not stack or what happens?

As I understand it (and I might be wrong, so take this with a grain of salt, lol), you get a +2 enhancement bonus on attacks and damage from the arrow (superseding the +1 on the bow so that does not apply), and the attack deals +1d6 bonus points of fire damage, ignoring damage reduction based on cold iron.

The enhancement bonuses do not stack but additional weapon special abilities apply (but don't stack with like abilities).

So +2 giant bane arrows fired from a +1 flaming burst longbow would have an enhancement bonus of +2 (+4 versus giants) and the flaming burst and giant bane special abilities.

Edit: For clarity regarding stacking.

As I understand it (and I might be wrong, so take this with a grain of salt, lol), you get a +2 enhancement bonus on attacks and damage from the arrow (superseding the +1 on the bow so that does not apply), and the attack deals +1d6 points of fire damage will ignoring damage reduction based on cold iron.

Master Arminas

bow: +1 (enh) + (flame)
arrow: +2 (enh) + (x-bane)
total: +2 (enh) + (flame) + (x-bane)

If anything in parentheses matches, take the higher of the two.

When you use a magic bow and magic arrows what bonuses get applied to the attack. Example: You have a +1 Flaming Burst Longbow and you fire out of it a +2 bane Cold Iron arrow. What I want to know is do they just not stack or what happens?

Nothing STACKS but the best or better abilities/modifiers always apply.

So from your example" +2 Enhancement from the Arrows, Flaming Burst, Cold Iron, Bane as applicable.

The higher Enhancment + always applies, either from the bow or from the arrow. Different special abilities all apply from the bow AND the arrow.

But a Flaming Burst Arrow shot from a Flaming Burst bow does not give you Flaming Burst twice. Only once since they are the same ability and nothing STACKS if it is the same.

Nothing STACKS but the best or better abilities/modifiers always apply.

So from your example" +2 Enhancement from the Arrows, Flaming Burst, Cold Iron, Bane as applicable.

The higher Enhancment + always applies, either from the bow or from the arrow. Different special abilities all apply from the bow AND the arrow.

But a Flaming Burst Arrow shot from a Flaming Burst bow does not give you Flaming Burst twice. Only once since they are the same ability and nothing STACKS if it is the same.

To be clear, cold-iron has to be on the arrow. Firing from a cold-iron bow would do nothing for you :P

Nothing STACKS but the best or better abilities/modifiers always apply.

Just using the term stacks slightly differently. If you add special abilities it is stacking, they just don't stack with like abilities.

Ranged Weapons and Ammunition: The enhancement
bonus from a ranged weapon does not stack with the
enhancement bonus from ammunition. Only the higher of
the two enhancement bonuses applies.
Ammunition fired from a projectile weapon with an
enhancement bonus of +1 or higher is treated as a magic
weapon for the purpose of overcoming damage reduction.
Similarly, ammunition fired from a projectile weapon with
an alignment gains the alignment of that projectile weapon.

So that's the RAW. They're kinda stupid, though. Why pay for enchanted ammo that gets used up, when you can enchant the bow and it lasts forever. It hasn't come up mouch, but I'd houserule that enchanted ammo adds a damage bonus that stacks with the bow's enhancement bonus, but there may be some reason to disallow this. I can imagine rich rangers with +5 bows firing +5 ammo for a total of +10 to damage.

Otherwise, I'd rule that enchanted ammo doesn't have to first be +1 before it can be given a special ability. Flaming arrows, not +1 flaming arrows for example. Otherwise, enchanted ammo is just silly.

Ranged Weapons and Ammunition: The enhancement
bonus from a ranged weapon does not stack with the
enhancement bonus from ammunition. Only the higher of
the two enhancement bonuses applies.
Ammunition fired from a projectile weapon with an
enhancement bonus of +1 or higher is treated as a magic
weapon for the purpose of overcoming damage reduction.
Similarly, ammunition fired from a projectile weapon with
an alignment gains the alignment of that projectile weapon.

So that's the RAW. They're kinda stupid, though. Why pay for enchanted ammo that gets used up, when you can enchant the bow and it lasts forever. It hasn't come up mouch, but I'd houserule that enchanted ammo adds a damage bonus that stacks with the bow's enhancement bonus, but there may be some reason to disallow this. I can imagine rich rangers with +5 bows firing +5 ammo for a total of +10 to damage.

Otherwise, I'd rule that enchanted ammo doesn't have to first be +1 before it can be given a special ability. Flaming arrows, not +1 flaming arrows for example. Otherwise, enchanted ammo is just silly.

What you do is buy an uber bow and a bunch of (relatively) cheap +1 X-bane arrows. Just use the correct arrow for the situation (at 160g a shot), and remember to go retrieve your missed arrows afterwards.

To be clear, cold-iron has to be on the arrow. Firing from a cold-iron bow would do nothing for you :P

Very true. Special materials always have to be on the ammunition themselves.

Just using the term stacks slightly differently. If you add special abilities it is stacking, they just don't stack with like abilities.

I dunno maybe it is regional language differences but to me, stacking implies groups of the same thing. I try to never use stacking when talking about powers in Pathfinders since pretty much nothing of the same type does with the only exeptions that immediatley come to mind being Dodge & competence bonuses.

But we are both right, just saying it different ways.

The way I look at it, the additional cost of magical ammunition is balanced by the fact that ammunition adds special abilities to an existing weapon. If you wanted to add dragon bane to a great axe, you are out of luck. If you want to add it to a long bow, you have this great option.

One house rule I might consider is letting damage from enhancement bonuses stack. So a +1 arrow fired from a +1 bow would do +2 damage. That would make magical arrows have at least some value combined with magic bows.

I dunno maybe it is regional language differences but to me, stacking implies groups of the same thing. I try to never use stacking when talking about powers in Pathfinders since pretty much nothing of the same type does with the only exeptions that immediatley come to mind being Dodge & competence bonuses.

Well I edited my above post for clarity because I definitely agree it's not as clear as I'd like the way I said it.

Very cool stuff everyone. Thanks for clearing that up. It definitely makes people with bows a whole hell of a lot more threat to my party now lol.

The rules for magic arrows (or other ammunition) are too draconian for most players to utilize them. Most characters by level 5 or so (when they could hope to purcahse magic ammo) already have a magic bow, so the only value of magic arrows is if they are at least +2, which is 8,000g for 50 if the GM is a hard case or 160g each even if the GM is being very nice. All for a +1 bonus or, at best, a d6 of some energy type.

Ammo should not have to have the +1 magic weapon preruquisite to add enchantments like flaming or shocking or even bane. And they should be freely available in small amounts.

I house rule ammo in my games so that characters can actually benefit from their use. The main rule I have is that you can add enchantments without the +1 pre-requisite, but I don't let what enchantments exist stack, so no +5 bows shooting +5 arrows for a +10 attack bonus.

Would the Bane ability just be added to the whole, or would it only boost the enhancement of the arrow vs its bane?

for example: firing a +1 dragon bane arrow from a +2 bow at a dragon.
Do you get +3 (arrow's bane bonus) or +4 (bow's bonus plus bane bonus)?

+3. In this case, the arrow is treated as a +3 weapon against creatures of the appropriate Bane, and overrides the bow's +2. At least, that is how I would run it.

Here's a question:

If I have a bow with a +5 enhancement bonus and +5 worth of special properties (let's say distance, ghost touch, and keen), and I fire a +1 arrow with flaming, shock, corrosive, thundering, and frost, will the arrow gain ALL of those benefits, essentially making the arrow have a number of bonuses beyond the max of +10?

If not, how would you determine what gets cut?

Here's a question:

If I have a bow with a +5 enhancement bonus and +5 worth of special properties (let's say distance, ghost touch, and keen), and I fire a +1 arrow with flaming, shock, corrosive, thundering, and frost, will the arrow gain ALL of those benefits, essentially making the arrow have a number of bonuses beyond the max of +10?

If so. dang. :(

If not, how would you determine what gets cut?

Personally, in the case of ties, I'd let the player choose which applied up to the +10 limit.

Yes. You would get +5 to hit, +5 to damage, have double the range increment, affect incorporeal creatures, have a doubled threat range, and deal +4d6 bonus energy damage (+ another d8 on a critical). And each individual arrow would cost you 1,440 gold. 72,000 gold for fifty arrows. Plus the 200,000 gp bow. Note that you cannot reuse arrows that hit their target.

Yeah, archery is capable of inflicting pretty good damage.

Allowing a bow to be enhanced just like any other weapon, with the option to buy arrows for situational use. is draconian?

If you took away magic ammunition entirely, bows would be on an even keel with every other weapon in the game.

@Dennis- The thing is bows aren't on the even keel with every other weapon in the game in the least really. The amount of damage done by someone in melee out strips someone with a bow quite handily. Magical ammunition helps balance it considering that they are paying the cost of a +2 weapon to add a +1 bonus to their attacks. So unless your games treasure scale is way out of sync the person using the bow will almost always be behind in damage and money due to trying to compete.

I often house rule that ammo is crafted in batches of 200 (instead of in batches of 50). This cuts the overall price into a value that I think is reasonable for the effect. It also makes the cost per arrow for enchantments come out to really pretty numbers.

I recommend doing this for Shuriken if nothing else, as they get all the penalties of being ammo without the benefits of a launcher to go with it.

Most arrows are destroyed post use, so you know. The durable arrow from Elves of Golarion fixes this.

Most arrows are destroyed post use, so you know. The durable arrow from Elves of Golarion fixes this.

By RAW you have a 50% chance of recovering an arrow that misses its target. The 50% you don't recover are considered "destroyed or lost". It doesn't say which, nor does it give a ratio of destroyed to lost arrows. So "durable" is of dubious value if your GM rules that missed arrows are "lost" instead of "destroyed." Durable doesn't fix "lost."

However, durable arrows are supposed to be reusable if you hit, and RAW says nothing about whether arrows you hit with are "lost" so it's reasonable to assume you can reuse the ones you hit with.

So the value of durable arrows is essentially directly proportional to how reliably you hit with them.

Using durable arrows only stops the arrow from breaking, but the magic still disappears when the arrow is fired. You'll still have a masterwork arrow left, but you would have to re-enchant it.

Durable Arrow: These arrows are tightly wrapped in strands of some kind of alchemical glue. Durable arrows don’t break due to normal use, whether or not they hit their target; unless the arrow goes missing, an archer can retrieve and reuse a durable arrow again and again. Durable arrows can be broken in other ways (such as deliberate snapping, hitting a fire elemental, and so on).

If crafted with magic (such as bane), the magic only lasts for one use of the arrow, but the nonmagical arrow can still be reused or imbued with magic again.

Durable masterwork arrows were my best friend for the first few levels.

I'd only shoot them if I knew they couldn't go too far if I missed, and avoided using them on fire elementals or oozes. The DM never gave me grief about recovering them.

The rules for magic arrows (or other ammunition) are too draconian for most players to utilize them. Most characters by level 5 or so (when they could hope to purcahse magic ammo) already have a magic bow, so the only value of magic arrows is if they are at least +2, which is 8,000g for 50 if the GM is a hard case or 160g each even if the GM is being very nice. All for a +1 bonus or, at best, a d6 of some energy type.

Ammo should not have to have the +1 magic weapon preruquisite to add enchantments like flaming or shocking or even bane. And they should be freely available in small amounts.

I house rule ammo in my games so that characters can actually benefit from their use. The main rule I have is that you can add enchantments without the +1 pre-requisite, but I don't let what enchantments exist stack, so no +5 bows shooting +5 arrows for a +10 attack bonus.

I also use the same house rule (no +1 enhancement bonus pre-requisite for ammunitions) in my game, but I also made a house rule stating that only magic arrows with an enhancement bonus of +1 or greater can bypass DR/magic. Mundane arrows fired by a magic bow will not bypass DR/magic. This may seem a little harsh, but it's the only way I have found to make magic ammunitions relevant in my game.

Durable adamantine weapons are a 1st level character's best friend.

The rules for magic arrows (or other ammunition) are too draconian for most players to utilize them. Most characters by level 5 or so (when they could hope to purcahse magic ammo) already have a magic bow, so the only value of magic arrows is if they are at least +2, which is 8,000g for 50 if the GM is a hard case or 160g each even if the GM is being very nice. All for a +1 bonus or, at best, a d6 of some energy type.

Ammo should not have to have the +1 magic weapon preruquisite to add enchantments like flaming or shocking or even bane. And they should be freely available in small amounts.

I house rule ammo in my games so that characters can actually benefit from their use. The main rule I have is that you can add enchantments without the +1 pre-requisite, but I don't let what enchantments exist stack, so no +5 bows shooting +5 arrows for a +10 attack bonus.

I also use the same house rule (no +1 enhancement bonus pre-requisite for ammunitions) in my game, but I also made a house rule stating that only magic arrows with an enhancement bonus of +1 or greater can bypass DR/magic. Mundane arrows fired by a magic bow will not bypass DR/magic. This may seem a little harsh, but it's the only way I have found to make magic ammunitions relevant in my game.

My concern is that you've now made magic arrows "relevant" at the expense of making magic bows irrelevent against DR/magic monsters. That is penalizing your archers disproportionately compared to your melee characters. Essentially you're saying "OK, melee characters can use their weapons all the time, but you bow users better invest in magic arrows in addition to your magic bows if you want to keep up against certain creatures."

The rules for magic arrows (or other ammunition) are too draconian for most players to utilize them. Most characters by level 5 or so (when they could hope to purcahse magic ammo) already have a magic bow, so the only value of magic arrows is if they are at least +2, which is 8,000g for 50 if the GM is a hard case or 160g each even if the GM is being very nice. All for a +1 bonus or, at best, a d6 of some energy type.

Ammo should not have to have the +1 magic weapon preruquisite to add enchantments like flaming or shocking or even bane. And they should be freely available in small amounts.

I house rule ammo in my games so that characters can actually benefit from their use. The main rule I have is that you can add enchantments without the +1 pre-requisite, but I don't let what enchantments exist stack, so no +5 bows shooting +5 arrows for a +10 attack bonus.

I also use the same house rule (no +1 enhancement bonus pre-requisite for ammunitions) in my game, but I also made a house rule stating that only magic arrows with an enhancement bonus of +1 or greater can bypass DR/magic. Mundane arrows fired by a magic bow will not bypass DR/magic. This may seem a little harsh, but it's the only way I have found to make magic ammunitions relevant in my game. My concern is that you've now made magic arrows "relevant" at the expense of making magic bows irrelevent against DR/magic monsters. That is penalizing your archers disproportionately compared to your melee characters. Essentially you're saying "OK, melee characters can use their weapons all the time, but you bow users better invest in magic arrows in addition to your magic bows if you want to keep up against certain creatures."

True, and even if my players knew about that house rule before making their characters, 3 of them are exclusively ranged (alchemist, bard, summoner), one is a switch hitter (fighter) and one have no feat related to ranged combat or melee combat (cleric). Ranged combat is still very efficient in my game because it features a lot of outdoor encounters and when most of the monsters encountered by the PCs will have DR/magic, the PCs should have enough ressources to always have a handful for magic ammunitions on them.

If this is changed from 3.5, it's an exceptionally minor change, and I actually had LG campaign staff rule that a +1 bow firing non-magical arrows would not affect an incorporeal creature because the arrows were only +1 for the purposes of overcoming DR.

From classic reds and pinks to trendy purples and browns, the options are endless. In terms of application, Magi Kiss Lipstick glides onto the lips effortlessly, providing a smooth and even finish. The lipstick is designed to be comfortable to wear and is not drying or sticky. The formula is also buildable, allowing you to create different levels of intensity depending on your desired look. Magi Kiss Lipstick is also known for its moisturizing properties. The formula is infused with ingredients such as shea butter and vitamin E, which help to keep the lips hydrated and prevent them from drying out. This is particularly beneficial for those with dry or sensitive lips. Overall, Magi Kiss Lipstick is a great choice for those looking for a long-lasting, vibrant, and moisturizing lipstick. With its wide range of colors and comfortable formula, it is sure to become a staple in any makeup collection..

Reviews for "Magi Kiss Lipstick: The Missing Puzzle Piece in Your Beauty Routine"

1. Name: Sarah

Rating: 2/5

Review: I was really excited to try the Magi kiss lipstick, but unfortunately, it didn't live up to my expectations. The color on the packaging looked vibrant and long-lasting, but it ended up being dull and faded quickly on my lips. The formula also felt quite drying, causing my lips to feel chapped after just a short while. Overall, I was disappointed with this lipstick and wouldn't recommend it.

2. Name: Michael

Rating: 1/5

Review: The Magi kiss lipstick was a complete letdown for me. The color was completely off from what was advertised, and it didn't suit my skin tone at all. The texture of the lipstick was also very greasy, making it difficult to apply smoothly. Additionally, it didn't stay on my lips for more than an hour, requiring frequent touch-ups. I was extremely disappointed with this product, and I won't be purchasing it again.

3. Name: Emily

Rating: 2.5/5

Review: I had high hopes for the Magi kiss lipstick, but unfortunately, it didn't meet my expectations. While the color was decent, it had a strange chemical-like smell that was quite off-putting. The formula itself felt heavy on my lips and emphasized every line and crack, making them appear dry and unflattering. Although it did last for a decent amount of time, the overall discomfort and appearance weren't worth it for me. I won't be repurchasing this lipstick in the future.

4. Name: Jason

Rating: 2/5

Review: I had heard good things about the Magi kiss lipstick, but it simply didn't work for me. The color I chose looked beautiful in the tube, but once applied, it turned out completely different and washed me out. The lipstick also had a weird taste to it, almost like chemicals, which was very unpleasant. Additionally, it didn't glide on smoothly and settled into lines, making my lips appear cracked and dry. I was really disappointed with this lipstick and would not recommend it to others.

Magi Kiss Lipstick: Your Lipstick, Your Magic