|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
But cloud does get materia... so he has that going for him which is nice.
IF you are using an intelligence based caster and you want fast progression into arcane trickster and you used some combination of vivisectionist and mindchemist to get your first sneak attack die then a level of assassin might be a good choice. This is only because you are stating the intelligence already and a death effect rider isn't a horrible choice -- but it's still not good.
Otherwise I might consider a level of assassin with some levels in master spy -- but again, this is not exactly an optimal prestige class either, so meh (this is only worth considering if you plan to max out your death attack DC by having at least 9 levels in master spy and the rest in assassin plus a maximized intelligence, probably leading into the mix with a mindchemist vivisectionist).
Mark Seifter wrote:
To clarify -- I'm not mad about it (and apologize if I seemed that way) -- I'm just trying to get a feel for what the design team is about with the sniper one. Normally I can see why the team went the way it did even if I disagree with it -- the sniper one was simply a case I didn't follow and was trying to get my head around.
This fear/morale one is spot on in my opinion. It's clear, it's concise, and it is easy to follow mentally. Even if I didn't agree with it it's plain as day where it stems from and how it gets there.
Evangelist works well for a buffing type. Theologian and Scroll Scholar makes sense as well. Following Nethys would make some sense for her too.
Oracle could be nice too for 'divine not religious' -- heck maybe she's on her way to her own accession!
For bard spells I would consider:
Sorry Rungok, I missed this bit in there:
Instead of rapier she can use a whip -- it's finesse-able and slashing grace works with it, she'll already be proficient. You might want to look into whip mastery.
She qualifies for it.
For levels in investigator(sleuth) might be something she likes as well. swashbuckler would mix well with that too.
Well... a different thought would be to use the rapier, then burn the rogue talent on a feat and instead get:
This would burn a move action (ouch) but allow you to get a +4 insight bonus to hit and to damage for your intelligence modifier number of rounds.
Also shows she's a thinker.
I'm taking it from the OPs description that she out of the 'regular combat' cycle for the time being (granted that's not to say she wasn't in it before or might not be again).
Why dueling sword over a rapier with fencing grace? It gets similar results, but you need one less feat (exotic weapon proficiency).
Because I didn't realize the feat existed. No other reason.
As to the armor -- only costs. Getting a breastplate makes some sense if you can afford to get it to +1 glamored that would work fine -- doing so would increase the character to 35,000~ish gp instead of 27,000~ish gp.
Breath weapons are (SU) form based (as is unnatural aura, some poisons, natural invisibility, see in darkness, Curse of Lycanthropy, damage reduction, and some diseases).
In my opinion the following (SU) traits are not form based:
Arguable (to me):
Fate's Favored primarily.
Fate's Favored increases any luck bonus you receive by 1. Since the archaeologist gives a luck bonus with this trait that would be increase.
If she also had a Jingasa of the fortunate Soldier it too would benefit. A luck stone for when she didn't have her own luck going and she would be +2 to saves, ac, skills and ability checks all the time. This would eat up 25,000 gp of wealth, with a +1 sword and a mithril chain shirt that would put her at about 8th level PC wealth (a bit over double what she should have as a 'heroic' NPC).
For feats I recommend:
That gives her dex to damage (if you drop her NPC monster with class levels boost here and her +1 from 4 levels that means she would have a Dex of 22 giving her +6 to hit and damage), arcane strike to damage (based on her caster level with her spell like abilities meaning +4 to damage), and her luck bonus to damage (+2) meaning she should be getting around +13 to damage with a +1 magical sword.
If you gave her one more level she would have +3 bonus on her archaeologist luck ability.
@Tacticslion -- polymorph doesn't change your type just your form. So while she will have the form of a humanoid she would still be an outsider so wouldn't lose any HD/BAB and I would argue that change shape is not form dependent (since it changes your form it can't be predicated on you having that form -- such an argument doesn't make sense).
Edit there was a thread in the rules forum about the lich recently that covered this. It is likely she wouldn't lose her energy drain.
Basically polymorph spells are magical Iron Man suits.
If she isn't a magic user (instead being magical) my suggestions would be:
Ninja -- Charisma based with pseudo-magic
I think the Ninja works better personally, the ability to vanish seems to fit in my opinion and a bit of sneak attack damage doesn't hurt her either. She could take minor magic as well for some spell-like abilities.
An couple of archaeologist bard levels would be good on her too, especially if she has a few traits. This would offer up the cantrips others are recommending too (as well as a couple of utility spells and a rogue trick).
Just a thought but a mounted archer would still be an archer on foot. It's going to take all of two extra feats for going mounted (mounted combat and mounted archery).
Also: Mounted archery only really comes in if your mount makes a double move or more so even without that you aren't in bad shape if your mount sticks to single moves.
Read the entire line -- anyone can become a spellcaster -- but again like I said you don't get to guarantee why type that they'll be or that in practice they will.
So like you said not everyone will be a sorcerer, not everyone will find a deity that will allow them to be a cleric for them, or become an oracle. Likewise you might not find a patron to be a witch, and nature might abhor you. However it's likely that you can learn to cast a cantrip as a wizard (int 10 is all that's needed) or a few bits as a bard.
So I stick with in theory anyone can become a spellcaster. After all there is no reason you cannot learn magic as a wizard, bard, magus, skald, or shaman. However there can be some practical points in the way of everyone doing so.
Again notice the difference in words:
In practice, not everyone -- and not guaranteed as what they want.
So while the guy might want to be a bard, he might not have the aptitude. He could have it for wizard, but not want to take the time. So while he could become a spellcaster, there is no guarantee he will or will want to with the means available to him.
By the rules there is no reason NPCs cannot become spellcasters, and do so in a class that will allow them to cast cantrips other than having below 10 in each and every mental stat plus constitution for humans, half-orcs, half-elves, orcs, and aasimar.
By the setting -- well you might as well admit you are invoking rule zero.
That's 240 gp if his wife does little and his kids do less though.
Again I point out however it's generally better to hire a doctor than it is to grab the closest low level cleric to cast cure disease. Much higher success rate that way (which dovetails nicely into why *everyone* doesn't always follow a god -- even those that really do and do get some divine power are not guaranteed success -- so not exactly all powerful).
If you go with anti-plague and a doctor you'll spend about 102 gp for both saves you'll need to make (if you need to make 2) and have a higher success rate. Which is why I think in general even the "healing" clerics are more likely to go with mundane means of curing disease in non-critical cases.
Some of those assumptions are not so unfounded:
1. Well anyone can -- in theory. Of course this doesn't mean everyone will, it also doesn't mean you will have pick of what type of spellcaster you'll be. Long term I agree the argument is neither here nor there.
Like an internet tough guy with only 26 minutes to get to the gym he swoops in url at the ready to fight the good fight! Can I just say as a guy who has built simulations of the pathfinder economy so I'm really getting a kick out of these replies.
was that enough memes? Should I gone for more? I would have but again I've only got 26 minutes!
Alright for the first part it's because all classes stack for your class ability familiar, it's part of the familiar class feature itself.
Second you can't 'double count' any level for the level of your familiar. There was a recent FAQ that talked about 'double ups' recently and at one point there was some other talk by the developers on it.
Searching the forums with the term "Multiple Familiars" or "Multiple Animal Companions" will give you plenty of information for your own research on it, as I'm wiped for the night.
IF I was going to do something to make a single entity Boss and try and change it up to where he was more of a challenge I would do the following:
Maximum HP for his type (typically this will lead to the sorts of increases people are talking about here).
Extra Actions -- for every 2 PC's I give him another set of actions on a different initiative order.
So for a 'standard' party of 4 the boss will get to go twice in a round, whereas against a party of 6 he'll get three actions in a round. In both cases the extra actions are on separate initiatives.
That will generally handle what you need.
I generally prefer using mooks, underlings and terrain instead of giving extra actions to one creature.
Ms. Pleiades wrote:
Remind me; which party worked to end slavery?
The radical and progressive Republicans. A party which no longer exists and instead has dog whistles so loud my dog is deaf, calling people (humans) things like, "deportables" or "thugs" and regularly engages in the devaluation of life while claiming their practice of shaming women and the poor is somehow based on Christian principles.
Also while claiming that the nation is Christian in nature -- which it plainly is not and never has been.
Ms. Pleiades wrote:
The same way that it allows for slavery, not letting women vote, Jim Crow laws, and the Japanese Concentration camps -- by ignoring that other people are human and the "No true Scotsman" fallacy.
Technically it's more conservative because it's "returning to what was" instead of moving in a more progressive direction.
That's the only excuse for this...
Anyways, my rapier is oddly weighted for stop thrusts and heavy parries. The balance is about a full six inches to the front of furniture.
This tends to only be a problem if you don't keep it on point, and lends strength to the parry and thrust. I need a lot less power to deflect (because the forte is so far forward) and to parry my thrusts tends to take a lot more effort than people are expecting allowing blows to power through easily.
I would not recommend this set up for the 'average' swordsman though.
There is no "Situation" helpless though. The worse you will be is flat footed, and detected still means No Dex which is all that's needed for the sneak attack I am offering.
You are using a system (and rules) that simply doesn't exist and therefore there is no reason to give it attention.
Once a month they can have a "prison break" -- the wardens release them and the prisoners are free for as long as they can keep from being recaptured!
Seems like something a wolf god would approve of.
The wardens try and catch them as fast as possible and such -- it's a big religious event. Perhaps security on the actual prison is a bit less when this is on going...
Knowing you are being attacked is not enough to retain your dex bonus though -- I would argue just for the full round single attack (with ability to hide afterward) that allows sneak attack on the attack in the weapon's first range increment would be the right balance.
Sure it's a little harder to shoot someone that knows someone hostile is in the area but it's not as hard as hitting someone that knows you are right beside them even if they can't see you, and that's supported by the idea you are only getting one attack.
Mark Seifter wrote:
Hey Mark, I realize it isn't really something that generally happens, but can we get some of the backstory on how the sniper ability ended up where it is?
I feel like there is more here than perhaps I realize and I would be interested in knowing more about the process that put the ability where it is.
This is said with full realization that if such is provided there is nothing on my end to really... argue/comment on -- I'm interested in the process is all.
Yeah, there is of course more to it than I provided however it does make the point. Most the time the backstory should help fit the game to the point where you can easily argue it's incidental to the story/game but honestly those are probably some of the stronger backstories. So while it isn't going to be needed I agree it certainly can add to the entirety of the game and roleplaying.
More to the point a good backstory is not a reason to be roleplaying lazy either (I'm sure you have seen this happen too). On a few occasions I have finished up building a character, have his backstory in place and had the worse sensation in my live: I realized I was satisfied with the character. Which was horrible because I didn't feel any room for them to grow.
Hm... Biblo's family history was very salient to the plot of The Hobbit though (even if they absolutely massacred the book to make the abomination that was The Hobbit movies), and was pivotal to the lord of the rings.
If it wasn't his relation to Frodo then Frodo would have never come to inherent the One Ring and be the broody failure that Samwise had to save (again, and again...).
And if it wasn't for his family's history for 'weirdness' Gandalf wouldn't have sought him out.
So I have no idea where it's coming from, but that's different than having no idea where it's coming from but it's closer and I have more idea than no idea, so I'm more defenseless than when I have no idea where it's coming from but it's farther away.
Alright: In reference to the sniper sneak attack and "on your guard because you were shot once."
Explain to me how something like greater invisibility works for multiple sneak attacks in a round.
Because if being hidden isn't enough to allow you to continue to use the ability I don't understand how being invisible should work to do so -- especially in a melee situation.
EDIT: Ah, so you *could* still sneak attack, just not outside of the range limit, and without the bonus damage.
Which seems silly since even if they know you are there they still don't know *where* and from what angle they need to protect themselves.
I would instead offer that it should be a full round action to use this ability to snipe and attempt to remain hidden and if you succeed you can continue to use it.
This would support the idea of a sniper sniping and then continuing to snipe while hidden -- which is something snipers would do (though admittedly not every time or all the time).
And if someone spends the resources to be good at doing this -- well they did spend the resources right?
Even then it's still not a *great* option since it's only once per round.
Coup de Grace
As a full-round action, you can use a melee weapon to deliver a coup de grace (pronounced "coo day grahs") to a helpless opponent. You can also use a bow or crossbow, provided you are adjacent to the target.
You automatically hit and score a critical hit. If the defender survives the damage, he must make a Fortitude save (DC 10 + damage dealt) or die. A rogue also gets her extra sneak attack damage against a helpless opponent when delivering a coup de grace.
Delivering a coup de grace provokes attacks of opportunity from threatening opponents.
You can't deliver a coup de grace against a creature that is immune to critical hits. You can deliver a coup de grace against a creature with total concealment, but doing this requires two consecutive full-round actions (one to "find" the creature once you've determined what square it's in, and one to deliver the coup de grace).
A creature with this ability is difficult to kill. Creatures with regeneration heal damage at a fixed rate, as with fast healing, but they cannot die as long as their regeneration is still functioning (although creatures with regeneration still fall unconscious when their hit points are below 0). Certain attack forms, typically fire and acid, cause a creature’s regeneration to stop functioning on the round following the attack. During this round, the creature does not heal any damage and can die normally. The creature's descriptive text describes the types of damage that cause the regeneration to cease functioning.
Attack forms that don’t deal hit point damage are not healed by regeneration. Regeneration also does not restore hit points lost from starvation, thirst, or suffocation. Regenerating creatures can regrow lost portions of their bodies and can reattach severed limbs or body parts if they are brought together within 1 hour of severing. Severed parts that are not reattached wither and die normally.
A creature must have a Constitution score to have the regeneration ability.
Format: regeneration 5 (fire, acid); Location: hp.
A coup de grace will not kill you if you have regeneration active, as regeneration specifically states you cannot die while Regeneration is active. However while you also cannot starve to death (or suffocate) that doesn't mean it cannot render you unconscious.
There are a couple of threads on this topic from back in beta when they were originally considering what to do with regenerate, and a few others where the developers (or maybe James Jacobs) chimed in about the interaction between regeneration and diehard/ferocious, iirc.
For me character backgrounds are the beginning to a great game, and really need to be a collaborative effort between the GM and the player.
The GM knows (should know) his campaign world, and the player knows his character. By combining this knowledge the GM and player can help the character have reasons for joining the quest/adventure/whatever and have hooks to keep the character involved/be reward through. It helps because it gives a GM what sort of game the player is looking to be part of too.
This eats up a lot of time for both the player and GM but for me all my best games were when the player and GM had the time to really flesh out that background together.