Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Varisian Wanderer

Aelryinth's page

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16. RPG Superstar 6 Season Star Voter, 7 Season Star Voter. 10,312 posts (10,375 including aliases). 3 reviews. No lists. 1 wishlist. 1 alias.

1 to 50 of 1,417 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Two differences: First was their ability scores. I don't see them as particularly intelligent or dextrous. Wolves have the reputation of being cunning, which is Wis, and tough, which is con. So, I'd go +2 Wis and +2 Con, -2 Cha before anything. Domesticated archetype, just swap wis and cha bonuses.

Second, they should be humanoid (Lupine) just like catfolk and ratfolk are. They aren't gnolls. vast majority of monstrous humanoids have racial hit die, and I think you want this to be a PC race.

I probably just missed it, but did they have a racial favored class? Probably Ranger or Hunter.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Your link to your lupine is not working.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Nicos wrote:
And was the Jingasa the guilties thing for that AC? because without it AC 34 is still beyond the number you are giving.

Meh, he's using not just a shield, but a TOWER SHIELD.

reduce that 34 to a 28. How many serious shield users are there? Although Unfettered shield will definitely see the buckler users going up.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.
James Risner wrote:

I also am happy it's removed (Jingasa), it was an item that everyone with 20 or more AC had to buy (required purchase.)

It hurt because it worked on the high AC folks.
** spoiler omitted **

From a design point of view, if they want to keep a luck bonus AC item in the game, it needs to conflict with armor. So it needs to use that slot.

Gotta ask, why do you have two armor bonuses in there?

Is that +2 Darkwood full plate supposed to be a Tower Shield? :)

And anyone who uses a Tower shield is going to be nigh ineffectual in an actual fight.

As for the AC...hey, people, the best way to get a high AC has always been to grab as many bonuses as possible, rather then shoot a single bonus to the moon.

Being able to add +2 Luck AC for 5k and a trait is BELOW dirt cheap.

Seriously, just make yourself a +5 DISMAL Ring of Protection. Deflection, Insight, Sacred, Morale and Luck, +1 each. 2k, 2.5k, 2.5k, 2,5k, 2.5k.

Even after the +50% pricing for secondary effects, that's 2.5k +3.75k +3.75k +3.75k, +3k, a whopping 16.75k for the exact same protective effect on your AC as a +5 Ring of Deflection. For less then a third of the price. It's why you grab the Ioun stones for +1 Competence and Insight to AC...they are cheap ways to grant AC.

A +2 DISMAL Ring is 8k/10/10/10/10k, or rather, 10K +12+15+15+15, or 67k for a +10 bonus to your AC and TOuch AC.

The more low bonuses you can add to your AC that stack, the more costs go down and the more your AC goes up.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Cavall wrote:
Sundakan wrote:

All this talk about Fate's Favored and nobody stopped to think that maybe it's the trait that's the problem?

"10k is too cheap for the Jingasa because a trait can double its AC bonus!"


I think it's safe to say EVERYONE knows that's the problem.

Fate's Favored is worth a 40-50k item by itself.

The Jingasa is worth 10-15k BY ITSELF in its original form, just based on similar items. Fate's just made it worse.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Oh, Lordy, jawa, don't tell them FF is gonna get nerfed. Do you know how much gnashing of teeth is going to go on for PFS when they do that?

Just because it's worth a 40-50k magic item?


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Meh, just be a switch hitter. Greatsword and longbows. Easy to play and effective.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Wonderstell wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:

+3 Competence bonus on Percept Checks, 900 gp.

+1 Competence bonus on all ranged attacks. 2500 gp, based on dusty rose prism ioun stone? Maybe 2k gp, since restricted to missile weapons?
keen on all bows and crossbows, stacking with weapon enhancements...?? 10k? 20k?

Unaffiliated slot for all of this? x 1.5, x2?

There's no way you can justify the Bracers of Falcon's Aim being the price they were. You have to ignore ALL the pricing guidelines and go right to the dumbest one to get the price they were at.


Sorry for being overbearing with the corrections, it's just that I've discussed the pricing of Bracers of Falcon's Aim/Archery alot the last two days.

A +1 competence bonus to hit has a price of 2000 gp.

Okay, so you based it on the pale green cracked instead of the dusty rose. Difference 500 gp.

Perfectly fine going along with that.

Still doesn't explain a 4k price for all of that. The stacking Keen/Crit mod+ effect ALONE is worth at least 10k. Add on the unaffiliated slot, and you're at 20k EASY.

More amusing, Fortune's Favored can grant a STACKING +1 Luck bonus on AC, saves, skill checks, ability checks, to hit and to damage (and formerly to AC). A luck bonus is priced like an insight bonus, so the dusty rose is a good guideline, but it doesn't affect damage rolls. It modifies one more thing the luckstone does (attack rolls) which is priced at 20k. So, another 10k for that +1 damage? Or just 5k? With AC on top, you're talking another 5-10k.

That means the trait is worth the same as a probably 35-40k magic item, 40-50k with AC included.

That's one hell of half a feat.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

2 people marked this as a favorite.

If you know what you are going to fight, Wizard is better. You can tailor spells to meet challenges.

In real play, that seldom happens. In such event, a sorceror with a diverse spell selection that they can spam as appropriate for an encounter is often more suitable.

Magic items for sorcerers, such as Pages of Spell Knowledge, Mnemonic Vestments, Rings of Spell Knowledge, and the Feat Versatile Spontanaeity allow Sorcerors to expand, spontaneously access, and memorize extra spells to give them the versatility of Wizards. In addition, the human Favored Class bonus of an extra Spell Known starts rapidly expanding their spells on hand, reducing the need for customizing even further.

I think you will have more fun playing a sorcerer. The ARcane and Destined Bloodlines are both great for general play. You can BUY the versatility of a wizard.

The one difference you will find is in skill points. Because Wizards have Int as primary, they end up with lots of skill points and can play a brain character. Sorcs can't do that. But, since you have magic, that shouldn't be much of an issue.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Review posted as promised!


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I am always interested in different versions of the fighter, with so many bouncing around the boards.

If you would like to send me a review copy, I'll read it and post a review as soon as I am done.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Umbral Reaver wrote:

That's what I mean. There is a lot of talk of them being primal forces, but what they are actually described as actively doing is pretty damn evil.

No matter how much people want them to be transcendent beings beyond morality, the poor writing does not hold that up.

While it is true that the methods of the Chaos Gods are unremittingly evil, there are definitely apologists for it.

For instance, the main power of the Chaos gods is humanity. Take away humanity, and their power falls rapidly.

Humanity's rise could all be part of the manipulations if the Chaos Gods, given how 'fast' it was. Khorne forced them to have fighting spirit, Tzeentch gave them ambition and cunning, Nurgle gave them tenacity and survivablity, and even Slaanesh is giving them non-conformity and innovation.

Tzeentch, for instance, is considered the great schemer, and from a perspective, he's playing against himself as much as the Emperor or anyone else...he wants to play the game, not win the game.

Khorne has insured that humanity is always ready and able to make war...if they aren't, he punishes them for it. This readiness has enabled humanity to survive in a VERY hostile galaxy.

Nurgle has enabled the quadrillions of humans out there to multiply and spread across the galaxy, to endure countless trials and tribulations, and come back from them.

Slaanesh ensures there's always people who buck the system to get what they want, which prevents apathy and decay by giving an outlet for passions which otherwise would be suppressed and destroyed.

Yes, 'good' things about each god. It's the totally uninhibited extremes each goes to, because they ARE those extremes, which drives makes them the totally insane from a mortal perspective things that they are.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Crag_Irons wrote:

I have been working on "unchaining" the fighter for my games. This is what I am running with right now.

** spoiler omitted **...

Too much in the way of DPR, or combat buffs?

I assume the 5th level martial versatility keeps the feats changed until you change them again. Even if you upgrade it to multiple feats by level, only letting it be done 1/day with a timer is a good limiter on such things.

That is one HELL of a first level dip for feats.

By the reading of sterner stuff, he can suppress for one round, get a save by ending it, suppress for another round, get another save to end the effect, etc etc etc. that's a LOT of saves to get rid of any continuing effect. Might want to put in limits on it?

Ehhhh, standard weapon groups and still no att/dmg mod at level 1.

Weapon mastery cap at 20 should treat all weapons equally, not dependent on weapon type. I suggest treating it as the chosen weapon is considered 19-20/x4.

I'd go with a LOT less condition infliction, especially stuff that a save merely cuts in half, and more with versatility.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Summoning wouldn't be so bad if it had more limitations to it.

Go back to 1e.
You could only have one summon spell out at a time.
Dispel Magic could take control of your summons.
Dispel Magic could remove the control of your summons, who would then probably turn back on you. Summons didn't bring in 'friendly' creatures, it brought in forced slaves.
Plus monsters were relatively weaker and more easily dealt with.

If all other spellcasting was impossible while you had a summoned creature under control, or maybe you had to spend a move action to maintain control of it, it wouldn't be so awesome.
But now, you can dump out as many summons as you want, direct them as basically a free action, and throw other spells out at the same time. And they can't be turned back against you, only banished, which is much more difficult then summoning them in the first place.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

2 people marked this as a favorite.

It would render bleeding absolutely useless as a combat ability.
It would affect resource management. 275 HP can be gone through in ONE FIGHT without too much trouble. CLW's snapping like twigs.

You'd probably do it better if you were using the Health/Vitality argument, and let Vitality recharge fast, but left health alone. that would put a cap on how useful the ability is.

The ability to keep healing without expenditure of resources has always been a powerful ability. Useful in combat? Well, to the extent of stopping bleed. But as you noted, the out of combat uses are VERY good. You essentially create a bunch of tireless hackmonsters.

It's also an ability that is MUCh better for PC's then monsters, as in combat regen/fast heal has never affected combat much, except for inability to keep something dead and having to find a way to do so.

I dunno, it's your game, do what you like. But the implications on the broader game, I'd say no.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Well, come on, 4 attacks for 8-32 at high level was VERY impressive. Low levels, not so much. and they got those d4's all the way through, as I recall?

Of course, nobody used the classic 1e monk once Oriental Adventures came out. Karate monks could end up with 6 attacks doing 5-30 damage each at top level!...and other such fun stuff.

But, talk about qualifying for a class...hehe, yep, monks were pretty bad, right up there with the 17 Cha req for the paladin. Only the 1e bards were worse then that (15 str, 17 Dex, and bard reqs, too!).


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Actually, the nerfing of shield damage WAS an intended effect of the ruling. I know JJ thought the idea of H Shields doing 2-12 dmg was out of place, but he isn't on the rules team. But the devs when questioned on it just referred back to the shield spikes description, and there it all ended.

If they didnt' want them to stack, all they had to say was "A Spiked Shield is its own entry" and they were done. Feh.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Lemmy wrote:
Harleequinn wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:

They only thing they can do is hit pointWalk away from the group... At lesst 'til the other players reach their 16th birthday. :P

Alternatively, if you really, really don't want to leave... Do the suggested advice of calling them silly/embarassing nicknames and kill anyone who has a problem with it. Not a very mature solution, but when in Rome... damage, and they are not even always the best at that.

Barbarians are right with them and sometimes ahead, and they have out of combat utility without having to go into archetypes.

Barbarians can also have a decent AC, and if they go with the cookie-cutter build that boost DR they are ahead better in hit point defense. They can also get higher saves with superstition. They also have more hit points.

The fighter is better at archery, but that is not "everything". It might be the only thing they can claim as being consistently better at than a barbarian.

Overall the fighter is behind rangers, especially when you know hat enemies you will be fighting. Paladins are also ahead, unless the GM goes out of his way to mess with them.

From my perspective that just means Barbarians need toning down a tad.... perhaps a "Chaining"?!
Right... How dare those martials have fun, useful features... Only casters are allowed to do stuff other than hit enemies with a pointy stick...

Barbarians are not considered overpowered.

As far as melees go, they are excellent. Good damage, mobile, excellent defenses, not weapon dependent, decent skill points. They can't heal themselves very well, and they've got little narrative ability, but they can even give away rage at high level.

It's not that barbs are too good, but their base chassis is better at what the fighter does then the fighter, mostly because of better defenses.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Speccing for evo dmg...that fireball the example cast at 24 is a 7d6 fireball.

MY wizard was a standard rote blaster caster, speccing in fireball, one level of sorc for dual bloodline for additional dmg, and two traits to lower metamagic cost of empower to 0. With signature spell, at leve7 he's got 6th level casting +2 for sig spell, + Empower, and +2/die.

There's a significant difference, and he's just doing the same thing as a fighter who access the Weapons Handbook.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

12 people marked this as a favorite.

Here's a small list of what fighters lost going from 2e to 3e.

1) Exclusive access to high Str score bonuses.
Everyone can get as strong as a fighter.

2) Exclusive access to high Con score bonuses. Other classes limited to +2!
Now everyone gets the same bonuses.

3) Stat bonuses started at 15. Maybe.
Before, it took MAJOR investment in a stat to be good at it. A 15/14/13/12/10/8 character literally had NO bonuses if that 15 was in Str. To be a fighter or ANY kind of melee, you had to have serious investment in the appropriate stats.

4) Stats were limited, and stat boosters were rare.
Seriously, when you're limited to 18, and +Stat items aren't everywhere, hit die and what bonuses you DO have become very important.

5) Everyone else's BAB improved.
Wizards went for 1/3 to 1/2. Rogues went from 1/2 to 3/4, and clerics went from 2/3 to 3/4.

6) Saves crashed and burned.
Everyone knows this one. They didn't have the best starting out, but were neck and neck at 'Name' level, and the best at the end.

7) Got to move and full attack.
Not anymore, they can't.

8) Exclusive access to multiple attacks.
Only TWF allowed other classes to do the same.

9) The only class to get reliable damage bonuses via Weapon Spec

10) 'Unlimited' Dex in armor. ACP? What's that?

11) Monsters were given more hit points. Hugely more. Devastatingly more. Which makes fighters that much less effective against them (and direct damage in general).

12) Stats are Uncapped.
Similar to 1, but not only can other classes be as strong as fighters, they can be HUGELY MORESO, via magic. +3/+3 Double weapon spec was awesome, back in the day. ++16 Str from turning into a grizzly bear is moreso.

13) Loss of class abilities.
Main one for a fighter, the ability to found a keep and gather followers. Major impact on the narrative possibilities.

14) The most weapon proficiencies.
Back in the day, you actually had to choose what you were proficient in. Now everybody and their brother gets access to martial weapons.

15) Weapons were relatively stronger.
d8/d12 longswords. d10/3d6 Greatswords. Combined with lower monster hit points, weapons were simply stronger.

16) Spellcasting got sped up.
used to be, you could interrupt a caster anytime during the period his spell was being cast. Now, you have to hit him ON HIS ACTION to stop it, unless it's a rare full-round casting.

17) You hit a caster, he lost the spell.
One hit. No concentration checks, thanks.

18) Just as many skills as everyone else, no more.
Class skills, what? Major shafting here.

19) Fighter only magic items went away.
Tellingly, Girdles of Giant Str.

20) Less Healing magic.
If there's less healing magic around, the guys with the most hit points are the best to have. With healing magic, the main difference is how well you recover between fights, not how many you have in this one.
Basically, Wands of CLW made it easy to ignore having 20 less hit points then the guy next to you, if you all just got healed back up by the next fight.

21) Everyone now gets hit dice for all levels.
Like monsters getting more hit dice, and everyone getting the high Con bonuses, getting more Hit Die just made the HP advantage fighters used to have get sucked away.

22) The best hit die.
Wizards and rogues both got HD improvements in PF. Instead of making fighters better, they intro'd barbarians.

23) Potion miscibility.
Yeah, this. You were very careful of taking potion buffs, because you couldn't suck down a potion of healing while under a potion of giant strength, you know?

24) Magical armor had no move restrictions and was half weight.
Now? Unless it's made of mithral, suck it for some levels.

25) Bastard swords were awesome.
Bastard swords now suck.

26) Haste aged you a year.
When other classes get easy access to multiple attacks, it devalues the fighter types having them. Haste is everywhere now. Everyone gets multiple attacks at full BAB!

27) Casters couldn't move and cast. They had to sit on their butt and be a target until their spell went off.

28) Multiple attacks were all at the same hit rate.
Now, multiple attacks are less and less likely to hit.

29) Varying xp advance tables. Weak classes tended to advance faster.
Everyone advances the same in level, but not the same in power now.

30)Spell Resistance worked!
Spell resistance is now a small impediment with the right build, or not at all.

31) Save or suck spells got less and less effective with level.
Save and suck now gets more effective with level. This means Fighters having crappy saves is now doubly high levels, save-or-die spells were a loser's game. Now, it's ALL the game. Fighters cannot inflict these, and find it hard to defend against these.

32) Spells took a LONG time to get back.
Spells take an hour to get back...or less, with the right feats. This removes another limitation on casters.

I'm sure there are others, but that's all I could come up with in 15 minutes.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Forcing roleplay motivations on clerics above and beyond vague alignment guidelines?!? The horror.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Fighter, definitely.

the armor and weapon feats are little more then a form of feat consolidation and power up for combat...which is the last thing a fighter needs.

Movement options.
Better defenses.
Something to balance the scales against the fact it is the ONLY baseline class with NO magical ability.
More and better skills. There is NO reason why the ranger, who is a spellcaster, gets more of both then the fighter. None at all. You can explain it away for the barb as being uneducated, the paladin as being a caster and relying on faith...but all a fighter does is train and learn. They have to have SOMETHING to make up for not casting.
Narrative power that can affect the campaign, that makes fighters a power in the campaign world for real, rather then a 'yeah, sure' because the spellcasters don't want to do it.
Saying that fighters are great because they have damage output is ignoring everything that is wrong with the fighter.

Sorcerers evening out bloodlines would be nice. Other then that, they don't need anything. They have spells that can sub for skills, they rely on their magic, not their learning, and with feats adn magic items they can get access to all the versatility of a wizard while retaining their excess number of spell slots.

Clerics? Get real. Clerics need NOTHING. They are prepared casters with full access to their entire spell list, without cost. They are a Tier1 class out the door, they don't need improvement. Really, they should be demoted to a d6 1/2 BAB 4skpt caster, and warpriests take over their martial role.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think you will find a great many GM's unwilling to buy this set of actions "Okay, at the beginning of the round, I put my shield away, automatically, before ANYTHING else I may declare. Then I take whatever actions I take, and at the very end of the round I quickdraw my shield. I do this every round of combat unless I say otherwise."

I know I'd just lift an eyebrow and say 'No.' I can't even picture such a ridiculous set of actions being repeated over a character's career. That's not sword and board. That's blatant rules cheese. Nobody in their right mind EVER recommends trying to get this past a GM.

Unhindered Shield only affects bucklers. Sword and Board users don't benefit from it. 'Oh, they can now use longswords with two hands' means they are now a 2h'er using a shield. And an inferior 2h weapon. So, they are now STUPID 2h'ers.

'Oh, they can now grasp things in the hand with the buckler.' Great! Now they are ONE HANDED WEAPON USERS who can now use a buckler. Still not Sword and Board. And STUPID ones at that, if they aren't using a One Handed Weapon Style.

Sword and Board users use a shield, and a one handed weapon, they make the tradeoff of AC for damage. Spell Combat makes the trade off of casting for shield AC. TWF makes the tradeoff of more attacks with matched weapons that do more dmg for Shield AC.

Sword and Board has always been the poor cousin (well, one handed weapon is even poorer...but not anymore!) to the glamorous attacks of TWF and the mighty power of 2h'ing. It lacked damage, and the superior AC against monsters promptly spewed out tactics of 'avoid him cause he can't do dmg' as ridicule, and 'his AC don't mean crap against touch attacks' as more ridicule, ignoring the fact that touch attacks are a tiny fraction of the attacks in a standard game.

But now, you can rest and bury him.
Shield Bashing is a STUPID attack form. It's an inferior weapon, it doesn't dovetail with your primary weapon to the extent you have to do something crazy like a dual shield build to make it partially effective, and it forces you to eat TWF penalties. It's only there to get some little bit of extra dmg out of your shield, to close a little bit of the damage gap.
Shield Master, the feat, only exists to reduce the gold cost of having your shield be a level-appropriate inferior weapon. Very tellingly, it doesn't reduce the TH penalty to your MAIN, superior weapon, but to your inferior weapon.

But now, we can avoid all that.
We can gain all the best benefits of one handed style (Crane Wing and co, yay!). We can gain a stacking shield benefit instead of taking 2 weapon Defense for TWF'ers (and gods, don't ever have to use Shield bashing again. Talk about sunk feats!). Or we can just use the biggest and best weapons in the game, do all that mighty 2h'er weapon damage, and still gain the shield AC we gave up for. We can stack shield ac onto class ac and monk wis AC and have the highest AC in the game for our IUS guys.

As for Advanced Defensive Training: A cardinal rule is you try hard not to blow feats for what you can get for gold, and a scaling, permanent shield AC is merely a matter of pumping gold into your shield. You know, just like all SAB guys have always done.
ADT gives you +1 Shield AC, +2 at 9th, and +4 at level 17.
Unhindered Shield gives you +2 AC basically the instant you take it (+3 if you took Shield Focus), +3-4 3k gp later (i.e. by 8th), and by 12-14 will top out at +6-7. So, not only a larger benefit, but you get it much, much SOONER. The feats are definitely not equal, and towards the later career, 25k total invested in your AC is indeed quite minor (12.5k if you happen to be a crafter!)

Take your light and heavy shields, and just put them away, you don't need them anymore. You can get the shield AC, and put all the other shield enhancements on your buckler, that any SAB guy can, but you've got the better weapons to use, or a superior style. You don't have to trade offense for defense.

You've got it all.

This feat is already known, and it already existed in 3.5 under Improved Buckler Defense. Every build designer alive realized it spelled the end of Sword and Board, and so nobody EVER used it, it was considered a broken feat as it was published. The exchange of AC for damage was real and sensible, and IBD totally destroyed it.

This feat does the exact same thing.

I will be very, very interested if PFS lets this slide. I can see the power level of melees take a very nice hike up if it does.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

It's +7, not +6. Don't forget Shield Focus.

And a 'moderate' AC boost. Mmm, yeah. Moderate, all right, sure. I think we already posted how huge a swing in damage mitigation +7 to AC can be for CR 20 monsters. Going from 50% hits to 15% hits. Yeah, moderate.

Which shield users already knew, and its why they gave up damage for it. Now, I guess you don't have to give up damage at all, and nobody needs to build a Shield Bash build for crappy TWF synergy anymore.

I'm not sure where this +4 bonus you're talking about is coming from, Jolly. Costwise, it's not going to happen. You're going to have a +5 shield and armor set before you have a +3 amulet and ring (because it costs 10k for 1 pt of ac, going from +2 to +3 for Nat Armor and Deflection, but it only costs 9k each to go from +4 to +5 for the armor and shield).

As for the's got the damage of a bastard sword, with a better threat range. It's absolutely better then a falchion. It should be an exotic weapon by that standard. The curveblade being finessable is on top of that. There's a reason Tuv picked that specific VERY SPECIFICALLY is the best 2h weapon of its type...and its a polearm, too!

At least the naginata only does a d8, it's just equal to a scythe.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Jamie Charlan wrote:

Shields are no good, this helps them be of use sometimes when the shield gets to apply and instead of putting it to use people get a conniption.

Not like it'll help when the bear-druid casts Flamestrike(something he coincidentally gets to do for just one feat!), and you could've had fortification on your armor already; don't pretend it was impossible without a shield; I can't remember the last time I saw a two-hander user that didn't have it "despite no shield"

1) Faulty logic. This doesn't make shields good. This makes builds that DID NOT USE SHIELDS even BETTER. It does absolutely nothing for shield users.

That's your disconnect.

2) But did that 2h'er also have Ghost Ward, Imperivous and Guardian on his armor, also?

No? Oh, because now he has ANOTHER ITEM SLOT which gives him that protection, too.

Shield users get NOTHING out of this feat. It's good for builds which formerly COULD NOT USE SHIELDS.

It's have your cake and eat it, too. BLeh. It was broken in 3.5, and it's broken here.

As for a familiar...That's a very useful choice, but the AC bonus is less from the get go, limited in the number of attacks, and yes, it IS more likely to die then a buckler is to get sundered. It also has other uses.
I'm not sure of the feat cost to get and advance a familiar, but I do know it's a General Feat, not a combat feat. Or are you now restricting every Fighter build to Eldritch Guardian archetypes?


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mrakvampire wrote:

I agree that this feat should be banned.

It's no-brainer feat for every THW or TW builds. We need more OP must have feats? I don't think so.

I was going to say the barbazu beard, but I held off for pure cheese. It was moving from cheddar to mozarella.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

And saying Good is stagnant is idiotic.

Good can be competitive. It will simply draw bounds on the competition. The Olympics are one of the Great Goods of the modern world, and they are all about the spirit of competition, substituting fair, non-lethal contests for war. There's nothing wrong with wanting to be the best, and with the way Good shares, and Evil hoards, Good tends to win that competition over time.

Good is opposed to Evil. What are 'vices'? There's this thing called 'moderation' which exists. Vices are basically Good things taken to excessive extremes. LAW is the alignment that brings down the banhammer and thinks it will solve problems. Good tries to treat the addiction, not ban alcohol.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Ah ah. They are using defender on the SHIELD...and don't care if they hit with it. It doesn't impact their main weapon at all. They can spend their last iterative on it if they wish. Don't even have to use TWF.

Also, heard of the Guardian enhancement? Put it on the shield. +5 to saves if you don't want the AC.

They are using a one handed weapon. The falcata is the best DOT weapon in the game. A longsword, or bastard sword/katana used 1h also work fine.

And that's the rub. They are exchanging 2h'er dmg for single hand damage and a great, great AC.

And fighting defensively is an OPTION, that gets them even MORE AC (and dodge AC to boot). It doesn't affect the base AC of 47/55.

As for touch AC...his touch AC is as good as just about every other character in the game, except for a Monk or others with secondary stat to AC bonuses (a solid 29). He can also take feats or magic that let his shield and armor apply against touch attacks (or at least incorporeal, such as the vastly overpriced Ghost Ward).

To put it another way, a classic sword and boarder fighting a 2h'er, can use Power Attack and hit the 2h'er MORE OFTEN then the 2h'er hits him WITHOUT using Power Attack.

But, if you give the 2h'er shield ac...there is NO tradeoff. All the AC, and the best dmg. You can be the turtle, the tank AND the don't need to choose.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Nocte ex Mortis wrote:

Aelryinth, a serious question for you:

For the classes who could use this the most, it is cripplingly feat-intensive to take. What THREE FEATS out of TEN are you going to sacrifice on a Magus or Monk for this, and how do you think that is going to effect everything you do with that character from then on?

Before you go off on a rant about it 'not being three Feats,' keep in mind that neither of those two classes have Shield proficiency, which means they have to take that, then Shield Focus, THEN Unhindered Shield.

One level in fighter, brawler or any other class that offers shield prof and a bonus feat at level 1; two levels of ranger or stalker. Or three levels in fighter if you want to skip shield focus.

Above they recommended Bloodrager.

And while AC may seem less relevant at high levels, a +7 AC bonus is a massive swing in how often you get hit. Normal AC tends to max out in the neighborhood of AC 40 or so, sans defensive fighting or class bonuses. Shield use instantly pops this to 47.

A standard pit fiend has a TH bonus of +30. It will go from needing a 10 to hit you to needing a 17...which is a 60% reduction in damage.
A CR 20 balor has +31 to hit, and isn't much better off.

A CR 20 Red Dragon has +38. It basically went from only missing you on a 1 to missing you 40% of the time. That is a HUGE amount of damage mitigation.

And this isn't even taking into account something like Defender shenanigans, where you use an Uber Shield for ANOTHER +5 typeless bonus to AC on top of the shield ac. Or standard buffs from Haste, Greater Heroism, etc.

People don't generally know this, but a sword and boarder with a good shield can often kill a 2h'er in one and one combat, simply because their shield offsets all of the greater damage of the 2h'er.

A bog standard fighter with 24 Dex (+7) (Starting 13, Dex belt, +Inherent,) wearing mithril full plate +5 (+14, using

+4 Armor training), and using an Uber Lg shield (+7 Shield, +5 defender for +12), with +5 ring and Amulet (+10), a +1 jingasa and +1 dusty rose stone, hits a 55 AC with NO other buffs...haste, greater heroism, fighting defensively, DODGE, expertise, etc etc.

That means that a Great Wyrm red dragon with + 37 to hit needs an 18 to hit him! If he merely fights defensively, it needs a natural 20!

Shields and the AC they bring can be HUGE. AC is only less significant at high levels if you are incapable of reaching a high AC. Since normal AC plateaus around a base 40 for most characters, its an understandable misconception that it is not important at high levels.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Envall wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:

There's that 'LG' alignment for you, interfering with alien cynicism since the dawn of creation.


Well Good does not have to be Nice.

And personifications of ideals can be hostile to mortal fickleness, but I digress.
FF13 had a nice concept with the godlike Fal'Cie and their servants L'Cie, who would gain immense power to complete a task, or be reduced to mindless beasts if they tried to forsake the task. And the prize for doing said task? Become just a rock for your hard work.

Even if you did something noble as save the world.

THe fal'cie were LN extremists. They valued the humans under them like ants, they were basically sentient constructs who had to do a job and who ended up really hating their creators for giving humans free will and all that, to the extent they planned events to destroy everything just to get rid of the humans they were supposed to be taking care of.

Definitely not LG!


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Ignores non-living matter is not DEFINED. What exactly does this ability do?
It doesn't say. It's just thrown out there. It's fluff.

What Brilliant energy DOES is ignore armor and shield bonuses, and cannot harm undead, constructs and objects. That's it. Anything else is an add-on.

that's it. That's the hard mechanics. Anything else is undefined, and a 'the rules didn't say I can't do this, so I can!' justification.

Logic has nothing to do it. WIggling your fingers and muttering something so a ball of fire explodes four hundred yards away is not logical, either.

If you try to take it as a rule, and start making up OTHER rules, it contradicts that rules that are already there, AND forces you to add in other rules that are powerful enough that they are quoted elsewhere when they apply...but obviously aren't, here.

'Able to stab people on the other side of walls'. Not worth noting in the weapon descrip?
'Ignores cover bonuses from non-living matter.' Also not worth mentioning?
'Can't be kept in a normal scabbard because it would fall right through it.' Also not worth mentioning?
'Can't be parried or sundered.' Definitely not worth mentioning?
'Is still stopped by force effects that grant shield and armor bonuses.' Since it contradicts written rules, that might be important to mention.

Yeah, I don't think so. Brilliant is a hugely powerful effect...against PC's. It doesn't need to be made any stronger.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

6 people marked this as a favorite.

The feat is basically useless if you already use a shield.

What it is is a blatant gift to those who do NOT use a shield. Specifically, TWF'ers (includes monks) and 2hf'ers. Even one-handed archetypes can now jump on the bandwagon.

With this feat, sword and board is dead. You have NO reason to use a normal shield and a one handed weapon, and trade damage for defense.

You can TWF and get all your attacks, and your shield AC.
You can use a Greatsword and deal the best damage in the game, AND get your Shield AC.

It takes Shield Focus to take this feat. Ergo, what happens is that someone who wouldn't normally use a shield takes shield focus, then this feat.

instantly, their AC increases by 2, because they can now wear a shield without penalty. Enter la buckler.

Armor is THE cheapest way to raise your AC. Making the shield +1 requires 1k gp, 500 if you are a crafter. So, basically, instant +3 bonus to AC. Raising it to +2 takes 3k gp more, 1.5 if you are a crafter. +4 to AC. At max power, and for the minimum possible price, you get +7 to AC.

Secondly, you get access to the shield slot. Not only +5 enhancement, but, say, Heavy fortification. Or an extra elemental resistance. You didn't have access to that slot before.

Thirdly, you can use shield defensive feats you couldn't before. Like, ray shield, missile shield, the one that lets you sacrifice your shield to intercept a blow, the one that gives your shield AC away to an adjacent ally, etc etc. All immaterial, because you didn't wear a shield before.

This feat does NOTHING for melee people who already used sword and board. What it does is make sword and board obsolete. If you're good with falchion and greatsword guys getting AC as good as the sword and board guys, then there's no complaints. If you don't have a problem with monks having +4 to +7 more AC then they did before, then there is not a problem.

This feat is Improved Buckler Defense for Pathfinder, a feat that was basically broken in 3.5 as soon as it came out. It is worth noting on the WoTC Char Ops boards that NOBODY used this feat for builds, because it was considered broken on printing. You had no reason to EVER play a sword and board character once you could have your Greatsword damage and fine shield AC at the same time.

have your great Shield AC and the enemy eating your best damage build, too. What is there not to love? I don't have to make the choice between solid AC and trading off damage again, ever.

And you know what's even MORE fun? IT kills TWF'er builds, too. You know those extra three feats that TWF'ers all have to spend to get those extra attacks? Well, now we know what 2 of em are being spent on by the Greatsword guys...shield AC!

So when you do your build comparisons, not only does the Greatsword wielder deal out more dmg then the TWF'er, his AC will be 2-7 points higher, as good as a sword and board guy, and he STILL hasn't spent as many feats as the TWF'er!


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Remember that younger folk don't have the boredom with classical choices. It's all new and fresh.

As you get older you want more choices and so your horizons expand. Mixing genres, grabbing content from other styles and pop culture, it's all part of the same effect.

And it's magic. It doesn't have to make sense. As long as it is enjoyable and you have fun, go with it. If that means you're playing My Little Pony and Friendship is Magic...there's a Campaign for That.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

3 people marked this as a favorite.

'ignores' does not mean 'passes through'. It means it ignores it. The mechanical text says 'it does no harm to it'. Not that it passes through it.

Maybe the blade of light is like a flashlight beam, and simply trails along the surface.
Maybe it bends around and through it.
Maybe 'armor' isn't thick enough to stop it, but 'cover' of any kind is.
Maybe there's a magical difference between armor and shield bonuses, and normal obstructions. Remember, it ignores non-living matter. Mage Armor and shields are force effects...they are not 'normal matter' by any stretch of the imagination. Brilliant Energy still ignores them because it ignores armor and shield bonuses, NOT matter that grants armor and shield bonuses.

it's magic. It doesn't have to make sense. It merely has to do what the mechanics say it does.
And not dealing damage to objects is what it does. Not 'passes through harmlessly', which opens up all kinds of worms.

And yes, being dead also doesn't mean you can't get up and start attacking again, because they didn't bother to define what being 'dead' is, because people know what being dead is.

But 'ignoring non-living matter' has to be fluff, because it can be interpreted in many ways, and the very mechanics of the brilliant effect do NOT match that statement. Furthermore, the blade would ignore cover and total cover, things which are specifically called out elsewhere in the rules, and it does NO such thing. 'Ignoring matter' is neither self-defining nor matching what Brilliant does, and so does not make an argument.

Brilliant does what it says it does, and not a jot more. That's what the rules do for you. Reading extra abilities into the weapon because of a statement with no attached rules is NOT what is happening here.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Actually, failing her tests means taking the sonic damage. Acting like jerks generates MORE of it.

MECHANICALLY, the set up is just done all wrong for a LG goddess of paladins. LN, you could get away with it, harsh and unbending standards with no mercy, etc. But LG? Testing people who may not know anything about her faith and deeds and punishing them for it?

AS WRITTEN, Captain America would fail the encounter and get hammered repeatedly.

It's poorly written and inappropriate. What should have happened is rewards for passing the tests, not punishment for failing them. Granted, no high level characters worth their salt are possibly going to be killed by the trifling damage they take, and she heals them of all of it anyways...but it's still the wrong way to do things.

And was so utterly not in line with people's expectations of Iomadae, it generated more controversy then the whole rest of that AP put together.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.
CBDunkerson wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:
This is a classic case of reading too much into the Brilliant weapon ability.

<snip classic case of rewriting the Brilliant weapon ability>

Only the "significant portion" of the weapon is transformed into light. For a sword, that would be the blade. The hilt and pommel are still quite solid. Ergo, no falling out of scabbards or through the floor.

Nor is, "A brilliant energy weapon ignores nonliving matter" just 'flavor text'. The idea that the blade would be non-existent to armor, shields, constructs, and other non-living creatures but completely solid to all other nonliving matter directly contradicts the description.

"A brilliant energy weapon cannot harm undead, constructs, and objects."

Other weapons are objects. Ergo, a brilliant energy weapon cannot harm (e.g. sunder) other weapons... because it "ignores non-living matter"... like other weapons.

All that being said, the previous responses about non-blade parries are valid. Maybe impose a penalty for having fewer parry options than normal, but it would still be quite possible to parry an effectively incorporeal blade.

Actually it would fall out of the scabbard, because you don't put the hilt or pommel into the scabbard for most swords.

For many weapons, the significant portion of the weapon might well be the entire weapon (i.e. a staff, a chain, a jo stick, shurikens are all weapon, etc etc.).

People seize on the 'ignores non-living matter' to declare the light of the blade actually passes through such stuff harmlessly...which is not the case. It simply does no damage to them. It does not mean Brilliant striking surfaces are incorporeal - it means they do no harm.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mavrickindigo wrote:

So, I enjoy reading through the lore of Pathfinder, and I have come to wonder just how "Good" the alignment of "Good" really is. Throughout the history of Golarion, there are some points where the alignment doesn't seem as shiny as it should be, and this is mostly evident when it comes to Good outsiders.

1. Torag breaks a chip off of Rovagug's prison to punish people with it
2. Iomedae pretty much kills PCs if they don't do what she says
3. The Celestial host wants to kill the guy who wrote the Book of the Damned because he did what they told him to do.
4. Angels have stolen souls to create new angelic soldiers

I'm sure there are more examples of the "Goodest" of "Good" deciding to use not so good tactics to do what they think is right. In an objectively moral universe, it seems weird that they would dip into subjective gray areas.

1) I have no clue what you are talking about here, but I'd need more details. If it doesn't weaken the prison, what is the issue here? That a LG god will punish people?

2) This is probably the worst depiction EVER of a god of paladins, and the uproar over it basically soured James Jacobs on Mythic level stuff and deities appearing again ever. He admitted it was done poorly and should be entirely re-written. As someone noted, Captain America would fail every single test.

3) Explained above. Note the Host is anathemic to him because he let himself be corrupted, and is no longer one of them. Instead of ending his job before it could happen, his obsession made him carry it through to its end.

4) The angels in question were also corrupted by an evil tome, and the fact the other angels were opposed to what they were doing was indication enough of this.

Lastly, keep in mind that Good doesn't mean Nice. Tough Love is a definite thing, and 'war on evil without remittance or mercy' is also entirely permissible for a martial Good entity.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

5 people marked this as a favorite.

This is a classic case of reading too much into the Brilliant weapon ability.

It's not a lightsaber. It's a magical weapon that does exactly what it says it does, and no more.

It cannot harm non-living matter, and it ignores armor.
That's it.
So, it doesn't ignore swords or weapons used to parry it. It ignores armor bonuses, and nothing else. You can't use it to hack through a wall at something on the other side, or stab somebody on the other side of a door. a tower shield being used to provide total cover is completely effective against it, because it's not an armor (shield) bonus.

'Extrapolating out' from what it can do makes it more powerful then it already is. It's already the best PC slaying enhancement in the game, ignoring armor and shields like it does, and nigh useless against undead, and constructs. It doesn't need a buff.

It ignores armor and shields. ANything else still works perfectly against it.

If it 'ignored all non-living matter', then the problem takes care of itself.
You sheath it. The scabbard is non-living. The sword falls right through. The floor is non-living matter, the sword falls right through, and is gone forever into the depths of the world.

If you use TWDefense to get a shield bonus to AC, it ignores your weapons. If you parry, it works fine.
It ignores the shield spell and mage armor, both force effects, not matter, because they are shield and armor bonuses. It still can't penetrate a wall of force.

A skeleton wrapped around you providing you an armor bonus gives no benefit against the weapon. Undead wearing armor could still be attacked with the weapon to deliver touch spells. Even if the sword has elemental kickers like flaming, once put on a brilliant weapon, they can't hurt undead. If you use the 'ignore non-living' language, they can't set anything on fire unless it's alive.

As such,'Non-living matter' is flavor text. It has the mechanical ability it was given, and nothing else.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Bigguyinblack wrote:
I have heard that this book allows monks to use a shield. Could someone please tell me how?

There is a feat called Unhindered Shield which makes a buckler count as completely not occupying the other arm, as if it 'isn't there', allowing monks to get Shield AC, and Greatsword Wielders as well, as well as One handed Fighters, one handed fencers, and the like.

In other words, Sword and Board just died, exactly like what happened when they introduced Improved Buckler Defense in 3.5.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Actually, it makes spellcasters more valuable.

As long as non-fighters have access to their own 'feats' (Rage Powers, rogue talents, etc) or spells, all it does is punish the very feat-reliant fighter more.

Remember, he ONLY gets his defensive feats from general feats. Combat feats simply don't compare to things like Rage Powers, for instance.

And the Brawler, who can go feat fishing on command, likely won't even notice it.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ranishe wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:

ah, ah. Fighters by default get combat feats. All the saving throw feats are GENERAL feats. So just increasing fighter's feats wouldn't solve anything in that area. :P Although I wouldn't have to spend general feats on combat feats anymore...

and the Improved Feats are so horrible I don't know how anyone can stomach taking them. :P It should at least have been one reroll for each save feat you have, instead of having to purchase 1 reroll/day for each save! Just, ugh.


That's been a thought I've that I'm going to experiment with. Basically have feats that synergise with each other. One example would be like an improved combat expertise that would let you make a free combat maneuver on a hit if a) you have the "greater" version of that combat maneuver and b) the weapon you're using has an ability relevant to that combat maneuver. So for example if you have greater trip & this feat, and hit someone with a scythe, you can attempt a free trip maneuver (as a swift action so it doesn't become absurd) as part of that hit.

That's about the only idea I've had on the matter so far, but I've yet to comb through the lot of combat feats to come up with more.

Feat Synergy is a wonderful thing, and Expertise is THE feat to showcase it...since it is supposed to represent an Intelligent Fighter.

Here's how I wrote it out.

Expertise (Combat)
You may take a penalty to hit to increase your AC, starting at -1/+1, and increasing all the way up to -6/+6 by +1/-1 every 4 levels (4th,8th, etc). This bonus from Expertise is a Dodge bonus.
You may not use Expertise at the same time as Power Attack (they are the same effect in different directions) or its variants. Any condition that denies you use of Expertise (such as Rage) also denies you use of variant Expertise bonuses and synergy for other purposes.
Fighter: Expert Defendant: You may gain the AC bonus from Expertise, Full Defense, and/or Defensive Fighting at the beginning of your turn, even if you are not engaged in combat, but you must have a melee weapon drawn/prepared and be able to attack.
Defensive Master: You may choose the amount of -/+ you gain from using Expertise, from minimum to maximum, if you desire (with DM’s approval - note the reason it is fixed is to speed combat along by not having to recalculate numbers).
Offense or Defense: You may change your base melee fighting style to be more offensively minded and less mindful of defense. When using Reckless Offensive, you take a -4 penalty to AC and gain a +2 bonus to hit (this is the opposite of Defensive Fighting).
Expert Footwork: Your number of Skill Ranks in Acrobatics is considered to be at least your Fighter level for purposes of the AC benefits for Defensive Fighting and Total Defense. At 12 Ranks/Level, the AC benefits for the Defensive Fighting/Total Defense options increase by +1 and +2 AC respectively.
Go Easy On Them: You may choose to deal non-lethal damage instead of lethal damage when attacking someone without a TH penalty.
Expertise and its bonus modifies many other Techniques.
(Mundane) Constant Expertise: You add your Expertise bonus to your Combat Maneuvers and CMD if you are not actively using it defensively. This replaces the bonus from most Improved Combat Maneuver Feats. (A light armored fighter is not considered to be actively using Expertise for his automatic AC bonus).
Bonded Expertise: If you are wielding a Defender or Guardian Named Weapon, you may gain the AC/Save bonus swap as long as the weapon is openly held unsheathed and you are not flat-footed (like TWF).

(Mundane) means you have chosen your character to not have and never have magical ability. As a result, you gain additional benefits from feats due to your greater focus on them for your strength.

And having Expertise gives minor bonuses to other techniques. For instance, Imp Initiative is increased by your Expertise bonus. Quickdraw lets you slam potions down as part of another move action, and subsumes both Rapid Reload (xbows) and Ammo Drop (slings). At level 9, a fighter with Expertise adds his Expertise to relevant skill checks dealing with matters of combat and war. Etc etc. FOr Combat Reflexes, you can use your Dex mod OR your Expertise mod for figuring # of AoO's you get.
Instead of Dex to damage, Finesse fighters can add their Expertise modifier to their damage instead. It does effectively the same thing, but keeps the focus on Str as the core damage, and the fact that the Finesse style takes an expert to really work well.

Expertise is a VERY good Technique to have IMC, and is designed to help other feats scale nicely.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Welcome to the murky world of spiked shields!

And we all thank you for not mentioning the obfuscatory disaster that is the Klar.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Firewarrior44 wrote:

I like the idea of fighters being master's of training, possibly having a special interaction with the retraining rules allowing them to retrain a large number of combat feats very quickly if need be.

Something like being able to retrain combat feats at no cost, without a mentor in 1/5th the time (1 per day), plus an additional combat feat per point of weapon training.

Perhaps reduce the time needed per day to only 4 hours - Weapon highest training bonus, minimum of 15 min.

The ability to retrain HP without a mentor / monastery / whatever other dumb restriction would be nice too. Maybe for each point of armor training he gains an additional Hit point per completed session, letting himself become more durable than a barbarian through discipline eventually (assuming you use average HP).

Also adding half his level to ability scores for the purposes of qualifying for combat feats.

That and like 4 Skill ranks per level. And maybe a good will save while were at it.

Not super sure on specifics just an idea, but it speaks to the Charles Atlas heroic fantasy. It doesn't do much to address narrative power though, it's really just an increase in WBL assuming you use retraining rules.

Basic combat feats are like cantrips to a fighter.

1) Fighters need Techniques, or Talents, or whatever, that are on a par with Rage Powers.
2) basic combat feats should be something they are massively trained on, and can swap in and out at will.

I.e. the Martial Mastery system from the Brawler. Just tweak it so that the feats you 'go and get' STAY THERE until you go and get other ones.

If you want to add Intelligence synergy to the fighter, you could even 'restrict' Martial mastery to a 'feat pool' based around 3+Int per level, or something. So, more intelligent fighters have more feats they can go grab. Rewarding the intelligent fighter! (and at the same time adding complexity because they now need a 'feat book' of feats to track).
'Expertise' could have the side effect of adding, say, 2 feats/level to that 'feat book'.
In short, Techniques/Talents permanent, combat feats mutable.

HP training rules are already in the rules, just costs money.
I'd let them train at half price, i.e. two for one.
I tied the Toughness feat to 'training up' their hp/hd...such improves at every level of Armor Training past the first. So, Toughness adds more HP on top, where Armor Training would start moving the average hp up. At higher levels, they'd have more avg hp/hd then any other class, although a barb spending lots of money would still have the most MAX hp possible.

Just ignore ability score reqs is easier. It's what rangers do, and fighters should be better at feats then rangers.

The fighter is an Olympian of combat. He SHOULD have a good Reflex save, no question. He should have the OPTION of improving his Will save tremendously, and his overall saves likewise.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The role that fighters perform better then other classes is units of professional soldiers.

Warriors are like cops, city guards, and militia. Guys who might have to fight for a living.

Fighters are those that actually go out and look for fights for a living.

The large amounts of feats and reliance on particular weapons is ideal for soldiers who can use teamwork feats and are grouped in units with similar arms and armor.

Nothing exceptional, just a little more competent and tougher then a warrior. They actually get a TH/dmg class feature at level 4 vs never! Woo!


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

make all spells that are not evocations take a minimum of one full round to cast (i.e. they go off at the beginning of the next turn).

Not only will you see a LOT more direct damage spells, but huge changes in how wizards act in combat. Being only able to 5' step until the beginning of your next turn, and attracting attention during a full combat round until your spell resolves will hugely change the way casters play.

Y'know, more like 1/2e.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mad Master wrote:

FIrewarrior already responded to most of this, but the gist of it is, you're reading the rules wrong, and your eyes are wide shut, Mad.

First: You're right on Tree Stride, I was mistaking it for Transport Via Plants, which is effectively teleport w/o Error for Druids. Tree Stride is merely a Dimension Door equivalent for rapid escape from enemies.

You're wrong on Barkskin. I cast it, get +3 Nat AC. Touch Attacks come flying in...the fighter is JUST AS BAD OFF as I am. IF it's normal attacks, I"m Better then the fighter.
So either you always fight with touch attacks, to make us equal, or I'm better off. Period.

On MOnkeyfish: You promptly Schroedinger'd and said the fighter will have climb ranks. Unfortunately, the fighter only gets 2 base skill points, and you can't retrain your skill ranks every day. If he doesn't have climb and swim ranks, he doesn't have them, period. Whereas I can acquire them ahead of time, or by sitting down for ten minutes and filling an empty slot.
as for him being able to armor...with pitons and ropes...who exactly is putting them spikes and ropes into place?
Oh, someone who can actually CLIMB...or fly. with spells he doesn't have.

Swift spells cast in combat don't provoke AoO's and you don't have to fight defensively. You simply cannot argue that having the ability to buff before combat, even if you don't use it, is WORSE then NOT having the ability to buff before combat.
Likewise, having the ability to buff DURING combat is NEVER, EVER a WORSE option then NOT being able to buff during combat. You are ignoring the fact that if you have the option, you can maneuver to allow you to make use of it. The Fighter does NOT have the option. ANd once the buff spell goes off, the entire fight can change VERY quickly.

As for 'losing versatility once you have the spell memorized' - so what? If the situation comes up, I'm prepped. Otherwise, I'm the same as the fighter, no better, no worse. If I leave a few spell slots free, I can BECOME PREPPED with ten minutes of time.
And I don't know if you know this, but some people take it as a challenge to find creative uses for spells in many situations. They also tailor their spell layout for maximum versatility from those spells so they DO apply. There is a REASON prepped casters are considered the strongest spell casters.
Or, they play spon casters, so the spells that are useful can be cast repeatedly, giving up their ability to customize their loadout against a foe.
Or, they can SPEND MONEY to become prepped, with scrolls or wands. Let's see the fighter do that with feats. And I can cut my costs in half compared to the fighter, and don't have to take ranks in UMD if he decides to want my versatility and prep-status, too.

A fighter does NOT have the option, and doesn't have the class resources to cover that lack easily. They don't have the skill points. Their entire class resources are combat feats which don't solve the problem. They can't customize for the day, the week or the month, without spending the maximum amount of money to buy potions to dup spells others can make for 1/2 or 1/4 the price.

The fighter can only do what ANYONE can do. And he doesn't even have any class skill bonuses to make him better at his skills then someone who can just magic up a solution. You know, like rangers have skill bonuses against their FE's, or in favored terrain.
Lastly, the HP issue.
Let's not bring up 1 and 2E. Those were very different games. Not only did wizards have a d4, they were restricted to +2 hp/level from Con, and after 12th, gained only 1 hp/level.

3e came along and gave casters HUGE buffs. Unlimited Con bonuses were the first. Toughness/Improved Toughness was the second. False Life and Temp Hp was the third.

To be a caster, you need one stat...Int, Wis or Cha. That's it. If you have a starting score of 15, one Int booster and you can cast all the most powerful spells in the game. You don't NEED a 30 Int. It's nice for the bonus spells, but you don't NEED it.

To do his job well, a melee character needs Str, Dex and Con, in variable order depending on build. Fighters and Rangers also need wis to buff will saves, and the Ranger for spellcasting.
A ranger has 4 skill points more a level then a fighter. That's equal to a fighter with 18 Int. A ranger doesn't need skill points normally, so they are free to invest in Wis while the Fighter scrabbles for skill points.

A wizard having more HP then a fighter is EASY. The difference per level is 2 hp! That's two points of Con and a False Life. yes, the fighter can take Toughness as a General feat, and HP as a FC. However, the fighter NEEDS skill points. A wizard does not...he's got a high Int and it's going to get higher. A wizard taking skill points for FC is basically rather useless...he's going to invest in them with his class, and he's going to BUY them with an Int headband. He's better off getting less squishy. A fighter is much more likely to invest in, say, Iron Will to bolster his crappy Will save, then Toughness. He's already got tons of HP, after all.

In short, a wizard investing an extra point or two in starting Con, buying the Toughness feat, and using his FC benefit for extra HP while casting False Life is totally and completely reasonable, and will result in a caster with more HP then a fighter who does NOT specifically invest in his HP.
Let's not even get into classes like a Summoner, who doesn't need to get his casting stat higher then 16, and can just pump Con to the moon. Ditto orcish Witch Doctors with Con as a casting Stat.

Seriously, the starting Feat for Wizards tends to be either Improved Init or Toughness, in my recent experience, and FC to more HP. Con is usually the second most important stat, followed by dex, and so equal to the average fighter.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

3 people marked this as a favorite.

It's being ignored because most reasonable people think the argument over the word is dumb. Extracts are obviously drinkable and are potables, and devolving into minutiae over English is one of the first signs your argument has failed.

So, we've kinda been ignoring it. No offense.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:

And I've repeatedly said, it's a good house rule, AND it can be overcome just by sticking adamantine guantlets on the golem.

It's just not in the core rules. And trying to rules lawyer that it IS by inferring things that are not stated is really bad form.

The fact is, I agree with you, I think it is dumb, and it should be errata'd, but that's not what the rules are. And at my table, that's how I'd rule it. At a PFS table, I'd follow the rules.


Its not a house rule. The mistake you're making is the assumption of perfection. You're assuming that the rules are perfect in what they say and can only be read one way, and don't contradict.

You have an argument that the rules say that the golem doesn't get through the DR. It does not matter how good that argument is if there are better arguments going the other way. And boy, are there ever better arguments going the other way. The adamantine golem getting through DR is not only an interpretation of existing rules, its a good enough interpretation to be the rule.

Unfortunately, it IS a house rule. Because the fact is, the ability should be in its stat block, and is not.

That's the absolute RAW. Everything else you are arguing is conjecture. It is 'common sense'. But it is not a rule.

And none of the rules you've quoted support your position:
Golems are creatures, not objects.
The golem itself is not made primarily of adamantium.
Material punching DR is not a universal monster ability that applies to the Golem, unlike DR/Alignment.

Conjecture like "I think they concentrated the Adamantine in its fists" is conjecture. I think they put the adamantine towards its skeleton, to give it great strength, and its natural armor, to give it defense and DR.
Neither is written, neither applies.

Is there a rule that says if a material is mentioned in a monster's description, that it ignores DR of that material?
Is there a rule that says if a monster is of the golem subtype, and a material is included in its construction, that it ignores that DR type?
If a creature ignores a certain type of DR, is that listed in its statblock, or associated universal monster abilities?
Does the adamantine golem have that language?
No. The nitwits.

Your whole argument is "Well, it just MAKES PERFECT SENSE." Which is a GREAT argument, because it does, and would apply at my table, but it's not the rules.

FAQ it. Get it errata'd. It's a DUMB absence of a rule, I freely admit it! But it is the way it is.


1 to 50 of 1,417 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002-2017 Paizo Inc.® | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
Need help? Email or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours, Monday through Friday, 10:00 AM to 5:00 PM Pacific time.

Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, Starfinder, the Starfinder logo, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc. The Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Legends, Pathfinder Online, Starfinder Adventure Path, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.