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

Atarlost's page

5,546 posts (5,547 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 1 alias.


RSS

1 to 50 of 5,546 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

The AC progression doesn't work properly against natural attacks without shields because of the CL limits and the +5 cap. All this does is charge a tax to fix a legacy issue that should have been corrected in the CRB by changing prices, caster level requirements, and bonus caps on other armor bonus items.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The Samsaran alternate racial ability Mystic Past Life is really the only good option.


Aelryinth wrote:

I told you feats were hugely erratic in power.

20 FC = 1 toughness feat.
20 FC = 17 spells known + 3 cantrips, if you care.

I don't think you're going to argue that 17 spells known from levels 1 to 8 are worth a LOT more then 1 feat. Even if we take it down to 2 spells = 1 feat, that's still 10 Feat-Equivs.

And I believe for human spon casters, that FC option is by far the most common. It's simply too nice, and that's even with all the options to buy or acquire new spells known via magic items or pseudo-prep casting.

==Aelryinth

It's commonly taken, but it's not actually good since it doesn't give you spells known at the level you're actually short on. I think people massively overvalue it compared to other options. When you're level 10 the FCB you spent on cantrips up to third level spells at levels 1-8 are practically wasted. You could have more bonus hitpoints than you get each time you level up. At any level only the last two or three FCB bonus spells have much value. At level 20 you find yourself with a bunch of extra 8th level spells that are your fourth choice at best and your seventh and lower spells are lagging in DC so much only the handful of spells you didn't need the FCB to get are any good and the guy who got an extra HP or skills actually has something for his first 17 levels.


Aelryinth wrote:

Feats have HUGE balance problems.

Consider Favored Class bonus: 1 Hp/level. That's equal to toughness.
1 skill point/level. That's been a feat in a 3.5 and several 3rd parties. AWT took this to 2 skill points...but a bunch of limits on it.

Aaaand then we have something like Extra Spell Known. Which is a feat for spon casters. And an FC point for human spon casters.

Yeah. so 20 levels of FC = 1 feat, and for human oracles, bards and sorcs, 20 levels of FC = 20 bonus feats.

Huzzah. And you wonder why melees don't have nice things?

==Aelryinth

There are feats and there are feats. I've seen a lot more builds with toughness than expanded arcana. You've established that a spontaneous caster specific feat is at least 1/10 as good as a mediocre filler feat. (the human FCB is equivalent to taking expanded arcana 10 times and never taking the highest level spell known). I only remember seeing expanded arcana once in a build. It was the spells known equivalent of a travel domain cleric 1 monk 18 barbarian 1 who took fleet for every feat.


Ssalarn wrote:
Quote:


Fighters benefit from feats.
They are not unique in this regard. Everyone benefits from feats, and there are very few that only the Fighter can select.

Well, there'd be some truth to this if a feats were better. If a feat were worth four spells and the sorcerer bonus feat lists remained terrible a fighter would be as good as a sorcerer without changing his chassis at all.

I don't think that's the ideal solution, but the concept of more feats as a worthwhile class feature is not fundamentally unsound, just the implementation.


DoomOtter wrote:
A friend of mine came up with the orb of self seeing. It allows you to see your present self, and nothing else.

Not a mirror of self seeing?


SirPeter wrote:

@Atarlost: why Cha so down? How can I channel to heal my poor friends, only one time per day? :/

A interesting note: none of the builds takes the "Selective Channeling" feat. Is this a so bad choice?

Ah! And now we have a skald in the party, so, I don't need to be an evangelist, and I'm thinking in a reach cleric build... Maybe a Crusader?

Suggestions? :)

Channeling isn't worth the stat points. You'll do most of your HP healing with a wand of cure light wounds. You'll probably memorize one cure for emergencies if your archetype doesn't spontaneously cast them until you switch to keeping breath of life and heal as your emergency death prevention spells.

Channel isn't worth the standard action unless someone is about to die that you couldn't reach with a single target cure/heal. That won't happen more than once a day in Kingmaker. It probably wouldn't happen more than once a day in any AP. A high initiative channeler can help if there will be lots of undead or haunts in a single day, but Kingmaker isn't that AP.

Selective channeling would distort your stat array to the extent that you would be unable to function as a combatant. You need those stat points for con and strength and/or dex. In an undersized party you need int. Even with someone switched to a skald you're still going to need to cover some skills in a three person party. You need to dump something as a MAD class And you'll probably be bored if you dump int.


Goth Guru wrote:
It might be simpler to have the bearer call out Red Light! or Green Light. In the cone shaped area the red light casts hold person while the green light hastes everyone in the area. The cone is 60 feet long and DC20.

That wouldn't be useless.


Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:

t is the sort of thing Pharasma would do, because it HAS been done. There are actual story mechanics which will get your character's soul sent to a plane where he or she would not otherwise belong.

Pharasma is not the Abrahamic Yahweh or Yeshua. Good, Evil, Law, and Chaos are irrelevant to her. When you stand to her in judgement she is not judging how good, or evil, or orderly you were. She is judging as to which plane or deity has the best claim on your soul. And there are rituals and monsters which will put an overriding claim on your soul. Such as the altar golems dedicated to Lissala, or the rite of ritual sacrifice.

Just because Pharasma is a judge, does not mean her main concern is justice.

That would require Pharasma to act in violation of her alignment. Either she must consider "claims" of such overriding authority that she cannot fail to be lawful or she shows such a complete lack of mercy and justice that she cannot fail to be evil.

But she's supposed to be true neutral. Neutral might not go out of its way to fight evil, but neutral doesn't sign off on great and unambiguous evils when they cross its desk either.


Dave Justus wrote:

I don't think I have ever seen a campaign with more than maybe a single haunt or two in it anyway so choosing a character class based on a once in a campaign problem seem a little extreme.

If your GM says, this is going to be the haunt game, all haunts all the time it might be different of course.

RotRL is that game. Book 2 has scads and there's a couple later on that are not designed to mildly inconvenience you while delivering exposition.

And you don't just choose cleric for haunts. You choose cleric for shadows and mummies and wizards who memorized blindness/deafness and haunts and all the other crap like that.

If it were just one problem oracles would be better (except maybe mummies because mummy rot requires two spells). It's that there are so many problems that all need different solutions.


TriOmegaZero wrote:

Channel isn't even a good way to deal with haunts. As you go, they get stupidly high HP that a channel isn't going to burn through. My team has just taken to tanking whatever happens and moving on.

Condition removal is f$#@ed either way, with the changes to most removal spells.

Nothing else works at all unless someone with heal prepared is leading the party because haunts operate in a surprise round, which means no move action to get into range if you don't start there. Cures are even more anemic than channel and nobody who doesn't cast them spontaneously would have them available. Some things you really don't want to tank. I think I remember seeing a dominate without the against its nature or suicide clauses. Something along the lines of murder an ally and commit suicide if prevented. Someone like an alchemist or ranger isn't going to tank something like that reliably.

Purge Spirit is a highly situational spell needed on no notice. Channel is an ability with general utility that you just get (or pay a revelation for as a life oracle). Heal is a generally valuable spell you prepare anyways, but you usually have to expect a haunt to put a non-cleric healer in front.


It kind of is a required class. No list other than cleric and witch+healing patron has all of the remove condition spells and no cleric list user other than the cleric itself can get them in a timely fashion. Also, haunts. Haunts are a pain without channel. Cures effect them now, but aren't ranged.

Now, if one person is a druid and another is a shaman that's fine. Except for the lack of channel for dealing with haunts. Or a witch and a shaman.

There is still after all these years and other niches opened to everyone and his dog, no other class that gets all the remove condition spells on schedule except witch with one specific patron and samsaran druids and shamans using mystic past life.

I believe RotRL brings up all of the condition removal spells. And haunts. Maybe you'll get lucky and nobody will fail a save against anything nasty, but I wouldn't count on that.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Aelryinth wrote:

Any day to day modularity/ability to customize?

A good set of changes.

==Aelryinth

The fighter can change out his feats as easily as a sorcerer can change out her spells. That's not the problem. Unless you think that all spontaneous casters except the arcanist are also unplayably bad.

The problem is that feats with BAB 16 prerequisites are not as good as 8th or even 6th level spells and the fighter gets less than a third as many bonus feats as a bard or inquisitor gets spells known and just over a quarter as many as a sorcerer.

We don't need a vancian fighter. Paizo already did that in the form of the brawler. We just need a fighter that's a complete class. And feats with level 4+ prerequisites that are actually good.


Arklore wrote:
Based on the item description, what is accounting for the additional weight? Even if you toss in the weight of a complimentary infantry helmet and a leather/padded subarmalis you still don't get to 25 pounds.

Because decades ago some schmuck didn't do the research and nobody can be arsed to fix things.

Or possibly the weight of a coin changed from something reasonable to the preposterous tenth of a pound at some point between writing the weapon and armor tables and the original rulebook going to print. And nobody since has bothered to fix things.


Charlie Bell wrote:
It has to do with the CR system. For a bruiser type monster, having a lower BAB allows it to have a higher STR score for the same expected to-hit value, meaning it also has higher damage. Having a smaller hit die allows it to have a higher Con for the same hp value, which also increases Fort saves. If you had full BAB and larger hit die, you'd need lower STR and CON scores, which would drive down your damage per hit and Fort saves. Take a look at Table: Monster Statistics by CR and it will make more sense.

I think stats are always standard array (or elite array for special stuff like dragons and outsiders) with size bonuses. Otherwise there'd be no odd values on monsters. What lower BAB types have is more hit dice. There's another table for how many HD per CR each monster type should have.


The only caveat is that if you're leveling up the players without giving them corpses to loot you have to be Monty Hall to keep them appropriately geared. Wealth is effectively a second XP track that you can't neglect without making all the CR guidelines completely useless.


Ryan Freire wrote:

Frederina the Archer Fighter is a HUMAN fighter with 14 con who takes FCB hp also because human skills, but also has the toughness feat Frederina gets 9.5 hp a level.

Why would an archer have 14 con or toughness? She has separate attack and damage stats and needs wisdom even more than other fighters because as an archer she's more dangerous to her companions if dominated. And archery takes tons of feats. And then there's iron will.


8 people marked this as a favorite.
Sarcasm Dragon wrote:
Mudfoot wrote:
I dislike alignment because it causes alignment threads, which are Evil.
You're Objectively wrong.

No he's not. They're in Bestiary 6 as one of the new daemons.


Unless you're trying to avoid people most famous for military exploits Andrew Jackson, Ulysses Grant, and George Washington are obvious choices to continue the Presidents theme. Oliver Cromwell is similar but obviously had a different title in a different nation.


Dave Justus wrote:
Erastil is the good deity most featured in the path. He is all about converting wilderness into civilized land, Adabar likes cities, while Erasil prefers more rural communities, but he is definitely about settlements, farmers, basically pioneers, which is exactly what the AP is focused on. And the Animal(feather) domain is one of the strongest.

Erastil is the featured deity, but he was a bad choice on their part and while he turns up it's not actually important to have anyone in the party follow him. Knowledge (religion) covers the same ground no matter who the character rolling it worships. There are no Erastil keyed items that don't suck.

BadBird wrote:
To be fair, if dropping a single level of Cleric spell progression was a critical issue then the Oracle would be junk.

I consider the oracle to be junk. At least as a cleric substitute. They make a pretty good sorcerer variant. But SirPeter isn't just doing a cleric's job. Sorcerers are even worse at spells known than oracles so he's going to have to carry almost all the utility casting for the group.

SirPeter wrote:
@Atarlost: thank you for the suggestions! Can you show a build as an example of your suggestions?

"non-reach battle cleric"

Human Theologian of Abadar (travel domain)
16+2 str
12 dex
14 con
12 int
16 wis
7 cha

Traits: fate's favored, {any campaign trait; noble or bastard provide the most likely backstories for going into the church}

1: heavy armor proficiency, scribe scroll
3: power attack
5: quickdraw*
7: craft wondrous item or leadership
9: quicken metamagic
11+: other craft feats are nice

* if your GM doesn't allow free action wielding and grip shifting to get AC from a shield outside your turn while wielding a weapon two handed during your turn instead take craft wondrous item here.

Morningstar is the best non-reach one or two handed simple weapon. Spear (two handed) has a higher crit multiplier, but is only a small advantage and only has one damage type.

You will have time to craft if you want it and scribe scroll is extremely valuable with the cleric list.

"reach summoning cleric"
Human evangelist of Caiden Caylean (travel domain)

16+2 str
14 dex
14 con
14 int
14 wis
7 cha

1: combat reflexes, scribe scroll
3: power attack
5: spell focus conjuration
7: augment summoning
9: sacred summons
11: discordant voice

Sacred Summons is critical to making summons good, but there are just way too few options for it. The Azatas are at 6/7/9. There are Archons at 3/4/9, but you'll find the early game far easier than the later game, especially with your party composition. And No one lawful good has the travel domain.

Important skills for both are knowledge (religion), knowledge (history) and spellcraft. The evangelist also needs perform (orate or sing) to qualify for discordant voice. Your rounds/day on perform is reduced by the low charisma, but the stat you would normally skimp on is intelligence and you need that to make up for no one in the undersized party having any skill points.


Ross Byers wrote:
The ENTIRE POINT of different alignments is they have different ideas of what the best thing to do is. The 'Powers that Be' have different alignments and different agendas. Asking Iomedae if you did the 'right' thing will result in a different answer than if you ask Desna (because Iomedae prefers order) or Asmodeus (being he's Evil).

But you will also get a different answer if you ask Erastil because Erastil is not Iomedae even though they share an alignment.

Alignment is too simplified to answer complicated questions and too complex to provide any useful abstraction.


I'd suggest forgetting Erastil. He kind of sucks both thematically and in terms of domain choices. You're building a civilization in the wilderness and he favors hunter gatherers and subsistence farming. You'll never make a good kingdom based on his tenets.

Abadar is the best thematic fit and offers the travel domain. If you can only have one domain that's the domain you want with one of the best domain powers anywhere and lots of off-list stuff that will partially make up for your sorcerer not being a wizard. Your second domain if not an evangelist or theologian is nobility. You're almost never going to want to prepare a non-travel spell in your domain slot, though. And you may want to go theologian instead. The travel domain's spell list is that good.

If not an evangelist or theologian, Desna (travel and liberation) has better domains, but isn't a thematically appropriate goddess for city builders.

I wouldn't dip out. Just go straight evangelist cleric. Getting spells on schedule is important. You can't get crane wing, but you can get similar defensive benefits from quickdraw and a quickdraw shield and a morningstar is good enough as a melee weapon. That's 1 feat for proficiency and 1 for quickdraw rather than 1 for dodge and 2 for crane style/wing. Also, you don't need as much wisdom as BadBird suggests. Your best spells don't offer saves. You'd do better with an extra feat than dual talented.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Snowblind wrote:

I strongly suspect that if you tried to implement archetypes as a mix of classes and talents, you would end up with a bloated 100+ class mess that still manages to be a thinly veiled classless system. The game would be better off moving to a completely classless system in that case.

That's not to say that there aren't problems with archetypes, but I expect that you would need something like them to give the classes modularity without allowing excessive bleed between classes.

We have a bloated 100+ class mess now. You just have to check across multiple books because most of them don't have complete write ups and aren't printed in the same book as the class they reference.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
memorax wrote:
Archetypes. Not so much the Archetypes themselves. That so many are poorly designed. Either their not taking at all. Too strong. With the devs refusing to find a proper middle ground on designing them. I mean really the Brute Vigilante. At the very least write that such archetypes are mean as npcs.

No, it's archetypes themselves. There's no need for them. Paizo already had a class customization mechanic. They just didn't apply it across the board.

Rogue talents and rage powers make any rogue or barbarian archetype that doesn't change rage (so one first party and one third party barbarian) something that could have been done better as a rage power chain. Fighter archetypes could have been fighter only feats that don't suck. Wizard archetypes all suck, but if there had been any good ideas they could have been wizard discoveries.

Sorcerer and Cleric archetypes could have come as special bloodlines and domains. Wildblooded had no reason to be printed as an archetype instead of independent bloodline variants. Druids also have domains.

Only the over-themed ranger, paladin, and monk ever had any use for the archetype mechanic, and they would all have been better off being modularized once.

Any archetype that can't fit into a modular class chassis like barbarian is better off as an alternate class with a full write up.


BigNorseWolf wrote:
Atarlost wrote:

A creature can squeeze (with squeezing penalties) into an area as small as the size of a creature one size category smaller.

If a smaller creature is sharing space with a larger the larger does not have its full space to occupy because some of that space is taken by the smaller creature. At least the larger and possibly both creatures must be squeezing, just as a giant would have to squeeze when passing a statue of a halfling in a 10' wide corridor.

There should be a special exception for riding, but there don't seem to be any rules for riding in the third printing CRB, just actions that can be taken while riding. Language relating to space sharing when mounted isn't under the ride skill, in the additional rules chapter, or in the combat chapter.

A horse (not a pony) is a Large creature and thus takes up a space 10 feet (2 squares) across. For simplicity, assume that you share your mount's space during combat.

There are FAQs that say that, and it may be in the 4th printing, but in 3rd it's just as reasonable to assume the rider occupies a space above the mount. The high ground bonus even suggests as much.


A creature can squeeze (with squeezing penalties) into an area as small as the size of a creature one size category smaller.

If a smaller creature is sharing space with a larger the larger does not have its full space to occupy because some of that space is taken by the smaller creature. At least the larger and possibly both creatures must be squeezing, just as a giant would have to squeeze when passing a statue of a halfling in a 10' wide corridor.

There should be a special exception for riding, but there don't seem to be any rules for riding in the third printing CRB, just actions that can be taken while riding. Language relating to space sharing when mounted isn't under the ride skill, in the additional rules chapter, or in the combat chapter.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Duncan7291 wrote:

Have the skulls contain Prions and get the party sick. Nothing like a Bard with Mad Cow Disease!

Prions

Prion diseases are transmitted by eating nervous tissue, not by hanging bones on the wall.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Aelryinth wrote:
If I attack you with a weapon made of mithril, adamantine, gold, and steel, does it overcome your DR/Adamantine? Your DR/Silver?

Whichever is on the surface, just as with weapon blanches. Hint: if the surface wasn't adamantine the Adamantine golem woundn't be called an adamantine golem and wouldn't have more DR than the mithril golem.

Aelryinth wrote:
The answer is...no, it does not. YOu need a weapon made of adamantine to bypass DR/Adamantine.

No you don't.

CRB p.154 first paragraph wrote:
Weapons and armor can be crafted of materials that possess innate special properties. If you make a suit of armor or weapon out of more than one special material, you get the benefit of only the most prevalent material. However, you can build a double weapon with each head made of a different special material.
Aelryinth wrote:

For instance, another counter-example: A giant picks up the fighter in adamantine armor and starts clubbing you with your friend. Should HE get to bypass DR/Adamantine, as well? The armor is ALL adamantine, after all!!

The answer is no, he's hitting you with a fighter in armor, and fighters in adamantine armor are not adamantine weapons, and do not bypass DR/Adamantine (probably because their bones break).

Where do you get this idea? Of course an improvised weapon with striking surfaces of a special material counts as that special material. The flexibility of the body within the armor means nothing, or would you claim that adamantine flails do not penetrate DR/adamantine or ignore hardness? And what's your excuse for a gnome in mithril armor being used to bypass DR/silver?

Your "counter" example is nothing of the sort.


The most important narrative power I think the fighter needs is the ability to say "I shrug off the Balor's dominate person SLA, use a free action to mock it for wasting its turn, and then do whatever."

More effective standard action combat options would be nice. More skill points and better class skills are actually pretty important. But the most important thing the fighter needs is to be able to continue to function as a vehicle for player interaction even if he does so badly.


8 people marked this as a favorite.

Does a silver teapot used as an improvised weapon bypass DR/silver? Of course it does.

If an NPC entry lists an adamantine longsword in its inventory but neglects to note that it bypasses DR/adamantine in its attack block does it bypass DR/adamantine? Of course it does.

If an NPC with Throw Anything is serving tea from a silver service but its throw improvised weapon entry doesn't note it does it bypass DR/silver? Of course it does, at least until it runs out of silver tea service components to throw.

Do we really need to be told that an adamantine golem made of adamantine counts as adamantine? It's in the name. It's in the monster description. Is our reading comprehension that bad? Apparently in some cases it is.

A golem or construct made of a material is made of that material. How is this difficult?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Purple Dragon Knight wrote:
Atarlost wrote:
Purple Dragon Knight wrote:
That's a three feat chain useable at level 10, only during a full attack, and it provokes an AoO. Potion Glutton is useable at level 1, anytime, without an AoO. I am hoping the devs consider this if they get around to write an FAQ on Potion Glutton, in regards to allowing it for extracts for low level characters.
That just proves that feat chains suck. Also that dex builds aren't allowed to have nice things unless someone sneaks something into a setting book that will never be reprinted.

Can you explain?

Unchained rogues are a great dex build, and for martials, you can use certain feats and an agile weapon to get there pretty quick. Combine that to Dex affecting AC, Ref saves, Initiative and Acrobatics, and I'm not so sure this is justified.

STR gets you there right away, but the rest will suck if you dump dex.

Also, which setting book option are you referring to?

Dervish Dance. The only dex to damage feat that doesn't require you to metaphorically chop off your left arm. Because it's in a book that the design team can't errata.

Agile is requires waiting for +2 equivalent weapons. That's not "pretty quick".

The urogue is still a rogue. Crappy BAB with no boost and sneak attack is still weak. D8 hit dice and no good save except the least important doesn't help. They're no longer completely and irretrievably useless, but decent front line combatants they're not.

Dex to AC is a lie. Any dex mod between +3 and +12 gives the same maximum AC and it's achieved in mithril full plate. Reflex is the least important save. Acrobatics is a skill almost no one needs. Jump doesn't work and tumbling is just a way to lure rogues into suicide. Ledges come up rarely. Also, if you don't have strength you're under medium or heavy load, which cripples your acrobatics anyways. Maybe if you're around 10 and have a handy haversack you're okay, and unarmored arcane casters and monks might be okay, but if you dumped strength you're not and if you have stuff ready where you can access it in spite of extradimensional space interference you're not. Initiative is useful, but not so much to front liners who are going to delay until after the arm and anvil casters unless they're stupid.


BigNorseWolf wrote:
The enemy is not squeezing. Thats a completely random and arbitrary complication to add to the system. If the mouser added the squeezing condition it would have said it added the squeezinig condition.

If the movement rules tell you to apply penalties when two creatures share the same space an individual feat doesn't need to repeat them any more than Fleet needs to tell you that you take movement AoOs as applicable for the extra 5' of movement.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Purple Dragon Knight wrote:
That's a three feat chain useable at level 10, only during a full attack, and it provokes an AoO. Potion Glutton is useable at level 1, anytime, without an AoO. I am hoping the devs consider this if they get around to write an FAQ on Potion Glutton, in regards to allowing it for extracts for low level characters.

That just proves that feat chains suck. Also that dex builds aren't allowed to have nice things unless someone sneaks something into a setting book that will never be reprinted.


Dropping point buy below 15 has more effect. 5 is probably low enough to be -1 APL. You have to really scrimp to get even a wizard working at full power and martials are definitely not going to reach their stat cap.


According to the art hide armor has a bare midriff and barbarians with 8 charisma are cheesecakes.

If anything I would take magic lights in the art as undeniable proof that they don't exist.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

This is the sort of thing that really shouldn't be a feat. The kind of shield with which a sarissa can be used is a different kind of shield.

There are way too few kinds of shields in Pathfinder. All small shields are strapped. All large shields are both strapped and gripped. There are no centergrip shields and none of whatever the Macedonian neck strap shield is called and the buckler rules seem to be for a shield as un-buckler-like as a shield can be. We don't have any dueling shields either. They make at least as much sense as any other performance weapon.

We have hundreds of weapons with the tiniest distinctions and only four shields that fail to cover even the most basic distinctions between shields. It would be like if the weapon list consisted entirely of dagger (which used the armor spike rules to parallel the buckler screwup), mace, greataxe, and longspear.


Alex Mack wrote:
As you seem to know what you are talking about... do you know of any videos or imagry of folks fighting with a two handed spear and a shield?

Probably not, but I found a picture of folks posing in an aggressive manner with Macedonian and Greek phalanx kit.

http://i52.tinypic.com/11jufyv.jpg

You can see that the guy on the left has a shield with a neck strap and a strap near the elbow and has both hands on his long spear.


On the other hand the lack of +1 bonuses almost completely devalues odd values at character creation. If you build optimally they're only useful on the one stat you will be putting level up boosts into and only at half of your levels. I'm pretty sure the game would be better if they existed.


Tengu isn't a great combatant. The advantages they do have are swordtrained/exotic weapon training and the good barbarian favored class bonus. Based on bastard sword proficiency rulings swordtrained should count as EWP for the Aldori Dueling Sword.

Dex to damage is available from the first level of the Aldori Swordlord PrC or 3 levels of urogue. Swordlord has some annoying prerequisites but doesn't involve a BAB drop or d8 hit die.

I think cavalier might be the best swordlord entry. It offers more skills and better class skills than fighter. A gendarme of the order of the cockatrice can qualify after level 5 with 3 feats to spare, 2 of which must be from a restricted list. Daring Champion is another possible entry with 2 feats to spare, since with exotic proficiency the ADS counts as piercing for ability restrictions. I'd only take 5 levels of Swordlord I think and only prioritize the first.

The other route is to go strength based superstitious barbarian with a falcata or some useful eastern exotic weapon.

A battle cleric of Sarenrae using dervish dance is the munchkin option, but not exactly the thematic choice for your campaign.

Archery is okay, but doesn't leverage anything but the dex bonus. In my experience archery only lives up to its reputation when you fudge the cover rules. Someone is always blocking your aim unless you line up exactly on the grid axis.


In terms of things transformation doesn't give:

(level-1)/4+2 attack and damage from weapon training and the gauntlets that boost it.

+1|2 attack at level 1-3|8 from focus
+2|4 damage at level 4|12 from specialization
No power attack penalty on the first swing from furious focus
+6 AC from wearing real armor instead of mage armor
+level/3 max +5 AC because real armor can be enhanced and mage armor can't.
+~2 HP/level from having d10 hit dice.

Transformation gives enhancement bonuses, which overlap belts. The con is useless because you lose the extra HP when the spell ends and can die like a classic barbarian dropping out of rage. A fighter or a gish equipped like a fighter will be getting at least +6 or +8 in total stats from his belt by level 12.

The orc bloodline strength boost only offsets your need to invest in charisma instead of dumping it. You'll have 14 strength or scrape for 16. A fighter would have 18 strength or scrape for 20. Eventually your bonus goes to +6, but it overlaps with what you can get from tomes and wishes. Strength of the beast only reaches +6 at the same level a wizard gets wish and inherent bonuses become cheap so you're really not gaining much from that.

So really all you're getting is Power of Giants. Size is nice, but the +6 strength is +3 attack +4 damage. Weapon training even without the boosting gauntlets is +3/+3 by the level you get that. With them it's +5/+5.


wraithstrike wrote:

The core rules do not specifiy when a move action is required.<---That is what I was trying to say.

As an example you can take a move action if you think someone is hiding, but the book never says you have to take a move action to locate a hidden object/trap/etc.

Why is this even a question? Automatic reactive searching applying to everything makes the game not a stupid slog of the rogue saying "I check for traps and secret doors" a thousand times every effing dungeon. "But you have trap spotter," the fighter says. Because the fighter is stupid. And the rogue replies "But I have to check for secret doors every ten feet frakking anyways so I might as well double check for traps too since it doesn't change the action required."

No. That's stupid and any GM that rules that way is unenlightened. Either they were taught by a sadistic jerk and never realized there were other options or they are themselves a sadistic jerk or they've never run or thought about the ramifications of running a game with traps and secret doors.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
DominusMegadeus wrote:
Mythic Flame Blade specifically calling out that it grants 18-20 makes me think standard Flame Blade must be 20/x2 like other spells.

It wouldn't be the first time Paizo published something that did literally nothing.


Probably druid. Nobody pays attention to common diminutive animals. Except in some cases to set traps that only work because rodents aren't very bright. Or they get a cat.

Poison isn't as bad as natural poisons and natural poisons produced by wildshaped druids have DCs in accordance with the druid's hit dice and con modifier. Contagion is also useful if you can re-apply it.

A level 8 druid can turn into a diminutive mouse, sneak into a bedroom, hide under the bed, and then drop wildshape and coup de grace the target with a scythe when he falls asleep. Or turn into a dire tiger and pounce and grapple him. Or turn into a tiny poisonous snake and hold a charge of pernicious poison and poison him with actual useful DC and duration. Then follow up with spit poison and maybe spam nauseating dart to keep him from fighting back. Then the druid uses his third wildshape to turn into an escape form, probably either a bird or bat to fly away or back into a mouse to sneak out.

Someone prone to hunting, as nobles often are, can be ambushed with stench of prey as an opener, leaving his companions too busy preventing him from being ripped apart by his own hunting dogs to prevent him from being pounced. Use charm animal to gather some minions to keep him from escaping and maybe dominate his horse.

As you advance wonderful things like greater contagion and rest eternal to make victims stay dead.


Scimitar also has the advantage over rapier of DR/slashing being more common than DR/piercing. Zombies have DR/slashing while nothing common has DR/piercing.


NenkotaMoon wrote:
You didn't see Baltimore.

Baltimore still exists too.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mayhemm001 wrote:
Revolution of the week........ Which is why I am having trouble understanding how there is any towns and cities left in Galt. Seems at the best the major communties would look like WWII French communties, ruined buildings and rumble

Revolution of the week would be an exaggeration. It's a very poor government that lasts a week, but there have been times that nations have gone through multiple governments a year and still been around afterwords. That wouldn't be sustained for half a century, but tally up all the committees, republics, empires, Bourbon restorations, communes, and the like in Paris in the fifty years starting with the first French Revolution and point out some of the shortest lived it's not hard to get the impression that Paris couldn't possibly survive such upheaval, and yet Paris did. Rome had similarly turbulent periods. Rome, too, remains.

Mobs just aren't that destructive. They don't want to burn their own communities, just the rich and even doing that properly takes more discipline than they can usually muster. Destroying a city is a lot of hard work and making it stay dead requires killing off the population, which is the mob. They're not going to just commit suicide or kill each other.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Caineach wrote:
Atarlost wrote:
The Shifty Mongoose wrote:
It could work for Arcane Tricksters, Bards who plan to make good use out of those three spells, or people who think Secred Signs and Silent Spell are enough of a feat tax to cast a spell surreptitiously, preferably in time with a team-mate's distraction.
Bard spells always have verbal components so they can't use it.
Verbal components aren't defined as to what they are. There is no reason a bard shouldn't be able to hide his spell in a perform check.

Like everything else that requires a feat and Secret Signs doesn't care whether you can hide your verbal components. It requires a spell to have only somatic components to be used at all.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
The Shifty Mongoose wrote:
It could work for Arcane Tricksters, Bards who plan to make good use out of those three spells, or people who think Secred Signs and Silent Spell are enough of a feat tax to cast a spell surreptitiously, preferably in time with a team-mate's distraction.

Bard spells always have verbal components so they can't use it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Actually, an NPC arcane necromancer of at least 10th level can have an arbitrarily large undead army with Control Undead if he has access to a source of Desecrate.

An 18-20 HD bloody or burning skeleton is of a high enough CR that on the standard XP progression its wealth budget will pay for the 2nd level pearl of power for its creator to control it. If the material component of undead creation was provided by blood money (or if you're using the fast XP progression) creating undead actually nets the NPC necromancer a small profit.


Battlecry isn't. It's a standard action for a +1 bonus until level 16. Even for a real oracle it's dubious.

Battlefield Clarity is functional. It's only once per day until level 13, but at least it's a useful effect.

Combat Healer is just bad. Quickening a cure is lame. Quickening a cure at the expense of double slot expenditure with a cleric's spells/day is really expensive. Doing so on anyone else is ridiculous.

Iron Skin the minimum level becomes 17. It's never more than once per day. That's not looking very viable.

Resiliency doesn't do anything. You need to be reduced to exactly zero HP and not negative. That almost never happens. It has no other effect until level 13 when you get a feat nobody wants.

Skill at Arms lets you qualify for prestige classes that require martial weapon proficiency. This one is maybe worth having.

Surprising Charge is probably decent. It's a once per day until level 13, but it's an effect that's actually worth having.

War Sight is good. Rolling twice for initiative is similar in value to improved initiative and at 13 you always act in the surprise round.

Nothing here is good enough to be worth a slow progression curse let alone losing your 7th and 11th level feats for basically nothing. Battle Oracle is not a viable VMC.

I suspect the answer will be the same for every revelation. None of them are anywhere near good enough to make up for a negative class feature at 1st and basically nothing at 7th and 11th even before a -6 level penalty is tacked on.

1 to 50 of 5,546 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2016 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, 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.