3rdclass's page

I know it has been six years, but any movement in the rest of the books? I played book one with the author at GenCon some years back, but haven't played it since.

So, until level 4, are they considered not to have the channel energy ability. i.e. can a war priest take channel smite at 1st level?

Say I sprinkle some unholy water on Casper the Friendly ghost (LG). That isn't going to hurt him, because ghosts are made of negative energy, even if they are good, right?

You only get the one domain as a merciful healer, that is the healing domain.

While it is true that the merciful healer only allows one domain, the variant channeling is based on the "deity's portfolio", not what the cleric has chosen. In theory, a non-merciful healer with two domains could choose a third domain of the deity for the variant channeling. For example, a cleric of Erastil could choose the Animal and Plant domains, but select the Law domain for variant channeling. Some might suggest that his is a better representation of the deity's favor, as it better shows the deity's complexity and reach of power.

Playing Asmodeus' advocate: Since Divine spells also have somatic components, why are they not encumbered by the armor as well, just like the arcane spellcasters?

Was it intended that Merciful Healers were not intended to use the harm feature of the variant channeling, since they are only allowed to channel positive energy, and cannot use said energy to harm undead? Or should they be able to channel positive energy to harm, even if they are of good alignment, and only get the harm benefit from the variant.

Example:
Cleric of Milani: Healing Domain to satisfy Merciful Healer requirement; Additional domain includes Protection, for variant Channeling (Heal:+2AC/Harm:-2AC)

Can this cleric use the Harm variant at all?

Some would say that a good-aligned cleric can only use negative energy to harm (and cannot, due the Merciful Healer requirement).

Some would said that a good-aligned cleric can only use positive energy to harm undead creatures. So does reducing the AC of the undead creature qualify as "harming"? (if yes, again, not allowed under the merciful healer requirements)

Some would say that due to the variant channeling, the cleric's deity allows the cleric to channel it power with more flexibility and so should be able to "harm" with positive energy even against living creatures (but only with the variant ability, not the normal half *d6 positive energy damage).

So WSY (what say you)?

Why or why not? And please provide references?

Reading through the new Guide to PFS play, on page 22, it talks about getting a chronicle sheet for reading Pathfinder Tales Novels. I just finished Prince of Wolves and didn't see anything in there. Has anyone found any of these yet?

I'm going to be in the Cocoa Beach area for about a week (starting today) for work, and am willign to GM, or join an existing PFS or homebrew group. Shoot me an email at jeffriegle@hotmail.com. Or if anyone can point me in a direction of a regular game at a game store, that works too. Seems like between Cocoa and Orlando, there should be plenty of folks.

Correct, but this is the issue. It doesn't say how much to increase it by. +1, +2, +1 twice? I get that it is supposed to be +1 (per old 3.5 rules), but I have not seen any thing that states this explicitely. If you agree, please select for FAQ to bring it to the writers attention.

Great! Not that I don't believe you, but where is this located?

Explained on page 53, but in the Animal Companion section.

So when we hit a new level we can add +2 to any ability score? I have looked in both erratas and still have not found an answer to this. On a side note, I am confused now about the companion's increase. Is it you can increase STR&DEX by +1 (at level 4) AND any ability by +1? OR is it STR&DEX by +1 OR any ability by +2? (Basically get two ability score increases to spread however wanted.)

Never played the old rules, Pathfinder is the only game I know.

If this is answered in another post, sorry for the confusion, I have marked this for FAQ.

Understood, thank you. While I welcome other comments, this seems to make sense logically.

No, that's not how the feat works.

All it does is give you the equivalent of the half-orc/half-elf "racial blood" racial feature. In other words, if you take the Racial Heritage: Dwarf feat, you count as both a human and a dwarf for the purpose of spells, feats, and so on.

So the "traits" they are refenrencing are the "half-feat" traits (combat, religious, cultural, regional, etc), not the Racial "Traits" from character creation? That make a bit more sense. But then it seems like it is under-powered by itself then?

I hope this is the right place to post this, I couldn't find any other threads that discussed it.

As an aside, LOVE the APG, kudos to the Pathfinder folks who wrote it.

The feat reads:
Racial Heritage
The blood of a non-human ancestor flows in your veins.
Prerequisite: Human.
Benefit: Choose another humanoid race. You count as
both human and that race for any effects related to race.
For example, if you choose dwarf, you are considered both
a human and a dwarf for the purpose of taking traits, feats,
how spells and magic items affect you, and so on.

The way I read this is that I create my human character, get all my human traits (including the +2 for "varied nature"), then pick my feats and if I pick something like Half-Elf or Half Orc, I get another +2 "varied nature" (total +4)...

I am not sure this feat was meant to be this powerful (in the case of HE): +2 ability score; Low-light Vision; Bonus Feat (basicially free); immune to sleep; +2 perception; and either an additional +1hp or +1 skill point. Seems out of balance compared to the other feats.

With a starting ability score of 18 (through point purchase), I was able to make a character with a level 1 Charisma ability score of 22, which seems high. Just looking for thoughts on this, if I have misread this. Any feedback would be great. My GM will likely have some things to say as well, but I wanted to get a variety of answers.

Maybe we should add,"Through your your years of adventuring, you discover that you are not a standard sample of your race. You discover that your heritage closely resembles some non-humans you have met. You cannot take this feat at character creation."

Thoughts?