I just finished reading through Jason's thread on the point of hybrids, and I have to say that I'm really disappointed with the way much of the community is handling this playtest. A few things about these classes are not going to change, most notably that they exist and that they are each going to be mechanically rooted in two existing classes. I know a lot of you don't like that (and frankly I'm not sold on hybrids without significant blending, myself), but there are only two productive ways to handle your frustration:
1) Sit this playtest out. If new classes aren't your thing, accept that this playtest isn't for you and plan not to purchase the book. If you find the concept of hybrids irredeemably repugnant, do likewise. They're happening, and all complaining serves to do is increase the volume of text the designers have to wade through to get the useful feedback. If you think these concepts are awful, it's childish to actively contribute to making them worse by gumming up the data. You've written them off. Let people who haven't have their shot at helping to improve them.
2) Playtest. Endure for the greater good, and provide feedback, suggestions, and data that will help improve each of these classes. I happen to quite like the concept of hybrids, but I believe many of the new classes as-written need some mechanical massaging to help their individual components more seamlessly integrate. I've picked my favourites and I'm diligently working to provide useful (not pointlessly critical) opinions, feedback, and suggestions to help make these classes the best they can be. It's the only sure road to meaningfully improve anything about these classes. I'll admit that I'm struggling to stay positive with the investigator, but I'm trying. Maybe for some of you who really aren't taken by these classes, working to improve your least favourites would be more productive? Just try to focus on improvement since "tearing down" isn't an option.
We know that the ACG is going to have archetypes for each of the new classes. List some suggestions you have for archetypes so Paizo knows what the people want!
Arcanist 1) a metamagic specialist, 2) a tinkerer
Bloodrager 1) a dedicated debuffer, 2) a shapeshifter that focuses on polymorphing to augment combat capabilities, 3) maybe a version that skews more toward sorcerer than barbarian and can use actual sorcerer bloodlines, so that some of the more martial and obscure bloodlines (Orc, I'm looking at you) can have their day in the sun
Shaman 1) a build focused much more heavily on augmenting and improving the familiar, maybe with early access to improved familiars or an alternate list of improved familiar options (I'd love to see a similar option for the witch for that matter), 2) a more druidy shaman with a few unique nature spirits and access to the druid spell list (or at least witch) instead of cleric, 3) for that matter, a creepier or more witch-doctor-like shaman
Skald 1) a debuffer, maybe who inspires rage in enemies instead of allies, maybe as some sort of modified Antagonize/tanking plan
Slayer 1) a sniper/gun-oriented slayer
Swashbuckler 1) obviously a gun swashbuckler (which they've already said is happening), 2) a more rogue-like/skillful swashbuckler
Warpriest 1) a debuffer (I know, I know, I like cursing, hexing, and debuffing way too much)
I just did some combats with a 10th level bloodrager, and I have a few observations. First of all, I love the concept and I think the class is a great start. As the author of epic thread "Dear Paizo, please give us a gish base class!" I think I've demonstrated my love for the arcane warrior niche. I'm a big fan of the magus and have played many of them, but I've been super stoked to play a class that trades the magus's more learned and tactical style for something a little more primal and instinctive. Here's what I learned:
1) The spells feel sort of stapled onto a barbarian. The ability to cast while raging is awesome, and the bloodline powers are really cool and interesting, but the bloodrager gets so few spells and seems so focused on hitting things, that the spells get lost in the shuffle. I rarely had occasion to use them. This leads to the class playing almost exactly like a barbarian with way more limited rage powers that don't allow for rage-cycling. The magus gets Spell Combat and Spellstrike which allow it to combine its casting with its combat in a way that feels seamless. Those methods feel more tactical, though. I don't think a bloodrager should drink from that well, but it should have some way to blend casting with its fighting style that still rewards it being a combatant primarily, maybe akin to the following:
Example Ability wrote:
The bloodrager has a pool of points that begin at 0 each day. Whenever he confirms a critical hit or takes damage in excess of 1/2 of his hit points, he gains 1 point. The bloodrager can spend any number of points to cast a spell he knows of a level equal to or lower than the number of points he spent as a swift action.
2) They're really MAD. The magus can get away with being a little more MAD because it lowers its need for Intelligence by use Spellstrike to take advantage of touch spells that don't allow for saving throws. The bloodrager has no such benefit, leaving the need for good physical stats across the board and good Charisma.
3) The spell list is also a little awkward, though I understand why it was chosen. This leads into the first two points, but bloodragers just don't have the Charisma or the action economy to support this list, which was designed for a class with Spell Combat and Spellstrike. I don't know what the solution is here, though. I understand that a whole new spell list sucks from a perspective of backwards compatibility.
4) They don't necessarily need all the barbarian abilities they have. They desperately want some way to blend their casting with their combat better than they currently are, so I can see Uncanny Dodge (Improved or otherwise) or Fast Movement getting the boot to make space.
Those are my early observations, and I'll keep reporting as I keep playtesting.
Here is the text of the Prehensile Hair hex (emphasis mine), found on page 81 of Ultimate Magic:
Ultimate Magic wrote:
The witch can instantly cause her hair (or even her eyebrows) to grow up to 10 feet long or to shrink to its normal length, and can manipulate her hair as if it were a limb with a Strength score equal to her Intelligence score. Her hair has reach 10 feet, and she can use it as a secondary natural attack that deals 1d3 points of damage (1d2 for a Small witch). Her hair can manipulate objects (but not weapons) as dexterously as a human hand. The hair cannot be sundered or attacked as a separate creature. Pieces cut from the witch’s elongated hair shrink away to nothing. Using her hair does not harm the witch’s head or neck, even if she lifts something heavy with it. The witch can manipulate her hair a number of minutes each day equal to her level; these minutes do not need to be consecutive, but must be spent in 1-minute increments. A typical male witch with this hex can also manipulate his beard, moustache, or eyebrows.
Is the hair actually a secondary attack or does she just "use it as" one?
Or asked another way:
Normally, when a creature has no other natural attacks and attacks only with a secondary attack, it forgoes the secondary attack penalty and applies 1.5 Strength to damage. When a witch with no other natural attacks uses only his or her hair to attack as a standard action, does that witch take the -5 penalty to his or her attack and apply half Strength (really Intelligence) to damage, regardless?
The way I'm reading the spellslinger archetype (Ultimate Combat, pg.74), when you use your arcane gun, you don't actually shoot your gun or use your gun's stats in any particular way. You merely use your spell as normal, but add the gun's enhancement bonus to either the attack roll or the DC of the spell, but add the caveats of 1) possibly misfiring and 2) having a x3 crit multiplier on your spell if you only have one arcane gun.
So, is there ever a reason to have two arcane guns? Is it just so you have a back-up gun in case you get disarmed or something? Shooting a spell doesn't seem to use the gun in any conventional sense. It's not an attack action, you don't need to load any bullets (and you don't deal any extra damage from bullets being part of the equation), you don't care if you're within any particular range increment in terms of figuring out whether your attack roll is against touch AC, and you don't even need to make an attack roll unless the spell calls for it. The rules therefore don't seem to support being able to two-hand a pair of pistols and shoot two spells in a round unless I'm missing something.
I just can't see why anyone would ever choose two arcane guns instead of getting the x3 crit multiplier on the single one. Am I misreading, or missing something?
How does the spell storing magical armour property actually work? It's listed on page 122 of Ultimate Equipment and states "anytime a creature hits the wearer with a melee attack or melee touch attack, the armour can cast the spell on that creature as a swift action if the wearer desires". However, usually it isn't your turn when you're getting hit, which would make spending a swift action impossible.
Please flag for the FAQ!
Is a bladebound magus automatically proficient with his or her black blade? It seems there are a number of exotic weapons that meet the black blade's requirement of being a one-handed slashing weapon, and it would be awkward not to be proficient with your bonded intelligent item.
If an animal companion has a type other than animal (such as magical beast or undead), does it use the statistics (HD, BAB, saving throw progressions, etc.) appropriate for its actual type, or is the Animal Companion Base Statistics chart on page 52 of the Core Rulebook the final arbiter of companion statistics regardless of type?
This is relevant with regard to the Celestial Servant feat found on page 88 of the Advanced Race Guide.
Please flag for FAQ review.
I've read the FAQ regarding animal companions and familiars and their ability to wear magic items. It makes sense to me, but I have a gripe with it.
The idea of uniformly allowing neck and barding options I like, and I don't at all mind having to own Animal Archive or take Extra Item Slot to gain access to additional item slots (even though I'm pretty much never in favour of house rules, since they're frequently hard for players to remember and they needlessly complicate an already complicated game).
What I do mind is that by campaign RAW (table variance not withstanding) snakes are the only animals not benefiting from neck and barding options. As an owner of the Animal Archive, I can infer from the FAQ that piscine, serpentine, and verminous animal companions/familiars would all fail to benefit from the barding and neck slot rule, but this leaves people in the peculiar pickle of having to own Animal Archive in order to know that their animal companion is not capable of wearing armour or necklaces.
I realize the intent of the FAQ is to ask players and GMs to make reasonable educated guesses about which anatomies can support which item slots, but I think that's a taller order than it may at first blush seem. For instance, even with the explicitly stated snake example, there's just no part of my being that believes a neck slot for a snake is less realistic than a belt or headband slot (both of which appear on the Animal Archive item slot list for serpentine bodies, opening them up for Extra Item Slot availability in PFS). I mean, how is a headband in any way realistic for a snake? They don't have foreheads. And in what way is a belt different than a tight-fitting necklace? Or for a snake, isn't a headband effectively the same as a necklace or belt? Magical items explicitly resize themselves to fit their wearers, don't they?
Looking through the animal companion lists, there are precious few animals whose anatomy seems incompatible with being able to wear a necklace. The only ones I'm seeing are manta rays, stingrays, and crabs. And I can't think of a single animal that couldn't wear armour specifically fitted for them.
I guess I'm just saying that the FAQ as-written is pretty ambiguous, and I think the main reason more people haven't voiced confusion over the issue is because most people don't realize they can't just equip their animals however they want, and haven't seen the FAQ. I also think it's always in the interests of the campaign to be as clear, concise, and uniform as possible. A specific list of which animals can't wear barding and neck-slot items would do the trick, but I honestly think it would be a much healthier ruling (not to mention a smaller workload for the campaign staff) to just fully uniformly allow neck and barding slots. The few cases which would test suspension of disbelief would be well worth the fewer player headaches and table variation that would result.
John, Mike, et al.: as always, I think you're doing a great job, so I hope you read this in the spirit of helpful feedback and not mean-spirited griping and nit-picking. Thanks!
I have a nagaji naga-aspirant character in PFS. He's a GM-credit character who I only began playing upon his reaching 4th level when his animal companion bumped up to Large size. I've played him exactly once. I won't bore you with the details of his build and character, but needless to say he's all about snakes, up to and including worship of Ydersius.
I already knew about the alternate summoning lists in various adventure paths, but I was on the PRD the other day and noticed that summon nature's ally actually has an alternate list that allows you to summon some sort of snake at every spell level. Imagine my surprise at how perfectly this slotted into my character concept.
Looking over the additional resources list, though, it seems Serpent's Skull, Vol. 6: Sanctum of the Serpent God (AP.42) isn't a legal source for PFS and I'm trying to understand why. The following appears to be all that could possibly be legal for PFS from this AP volume:
And I recognize this isn't a whole lot, but it's honestly on par with the quantity available in many of the other volumes of Serpent's Skull (and other APs), many of which are legal for PFS. So, I guess I just wondered whether this was intentional and whether it would be possible to have this book added as a legal source.
The only reasons I can think why this book wouldn't be allowed are:
1) Ydersius is an evil god, and not just a little bit evil either. Nevertheless, he is a legal PFS deity, and I feel like a player willing to come up with a creative solution to worshiping an evil god without being (or acting) evil shouldn't be denied access to rules like these, especially when they're comparable to rules open to worshipers of several other gods.
2) Grandfathered source selection from the Josh Frost era. And if this is the only reason, could the current campaign leadership please take a second look at this book? There's so little material in this book, it would only take ten or fifteen minutes to give it a thorough look. I'm sure in the grand scheme of things it's not adding much to PFS, but even if only a small handful of people benefit from its addition, it's probably worth it at that sort of a time investment. And this alternate summoning list would really add a lot to my character and his story, if nothing else.
Thanks in advance!
I live in Philadelphia, but I'm going to be in London from September 25th until October 4th and in Dublin from October 4th until October 8th. Does anybody know of any regular PFS games in either city that would be open to a walk-in or one-time out-of-towner? Maybe two of us? My girlfriend plays Pathfinder too, and while she hasn't played PFS in a long time, she'll be with me and may prefer to just do what I'm doing that day rather than figure out stuff to do on her own.
I'd love to play a game while I'm out of the country, though!
I have the following characters I could play:
Baku Tazzi half-elf undead scourge paladin 2/oracle of wind 7
My girlfriend has a bard, but I'm not sure what level. Probably somewhere around 4 or 5. Anyway, any tips would be great!
I need some modern gun stats. I'm not half bad at coming up with custom stats, but I know nothing about guns. I figured if anybody would know a thing or two about guns it was the internet, so here are some existing Pathfinder gun stats that seem relevant:
Double-Barreled Shotgun* 1d8, x2, 80 ft., misfire 1-2, capacity 2, 15 lbs., B+P, scatter, move action to load
Automatic Weapon Quality A weapon with the automatic weapon quality fires a burst of bullets with a single pull of the trigger, attacking all creatures in a line. This line starts from any corner of your space and extends to the limit of the weapon's range or until it strikes a barrier it cannot penetrate. When an automatic weapon attacks all creatures in a line, it makes a separate attack roll against each creature in the line. Each creature in the line can only be attacked with one bullet from each burst. Each attack roll takes a -2 penalty to account for recoil, and its attack damage cannot be modified by precision damage or damage-increasing feats such as Vital Strike. Effects that grant concealment, such as fog or smoke, or the blur, invisibility, or mirror image spells, do not foil an automatic weapon's line attack. If any of the attack rolls threaten a critical hit, confirm the critical for that attack roll alone. An automatic weapon misfires only if all of the attack rolls made misfire. A single attack with an automatic weapon fires 10 bullets. An automatic weapon cannot fire single bullets that target one creature. When taking a full-attack action with an automatic weapon, you can fire as many bursts in a round as you have attacks.
Scatter Weapon Quality A weapon with the scatter weapon quality can shoot two different types of ammunition. It can fire normal bullets that target one creature, or it can make a scattering shot, attacking all creatures within a cone. Cannons with the scatter weapon quality only fire grapeshot, unless their descriptions state otherwise. When a scatter weapon attacks all creatures within a cone, it makes a separate attack roll against each creature within the cone. Each attack roll takes a –2 penalty, and its attack damage cannot be modified by precision damage or damage-increasing feats such as Vital Strike. Effects that grant concealment, such as fog or smoke, or the blur, invisibility, or mirror image spells, do not foil a scatter attack. If any of the attack rolls threaten a critical, confirm the critical for that attack roll alone. A firearm that makes a scatter shot misfires only if all of the attack rolls made misfire. If a scatter weapon explodes on a misfire, it deals triple its damage to all creatures within the misfire radius.
* Ultimate Combat
Using these stats as the comparative basis, and bearing in mind that the Reign of Winter guns are all World War I era and the Ultimate Combat guns are all earrrrlly versions of those sorts of guns, I need present day versions of the following:
And really any other common modern handheld weapon I might be missing. What sorts of guns are modern day gangsters, mercenaries, and militaries using?
I feel like the fundamentals are all designed by Paizo already. What I need to know are how modern guns compare to these early guns. Does a modern handgun do more damage than a World War I revolver? Does it have more accurate range? Etc. If those of you with extensive real world gun knowledge could help me tweak all these numbers to get stats for modern weapons, I'd really appreciate it.
I run PFS games at my store every week. We have over 50 regular players, and we've gotten to a point where we're running eight tables per week on-schedule, and usually another two to six tables off-schedule. I recently announced to our Google Group that I was going to begin cracking down on people not owning the books they were using for their characters, and unfortunately this has generated a bit of an issue.
I understand that if someone sits down to a table and they're using a feat or a piece of equipment from a book they don't own, they should just switch that feat out or get their gold back for that piece of equipment. That makes total sense to me. But I apparently have customers (and I'm using the term loosely here) who don't own a single Pathfinder book, and I'm not sure what to do about them.
Can someone who's using ten different books he doesn't own for a character effectively rebuild nearly every aspect of his character to be core only? Or does he have to make a choice between buying the books and losing his character? What am I supposed to do about this?
I'm putting together a shadowdancer for Pathfinder Society. My main draw to the class is the ability to have a shadow companion, so I've been trying to figure out what else to do with the character to support that aspect of it. This is what I've come up with so far:
Magus as my main base class Magus has decent BAB and hit points to support the shadow, has access to darkness as a second level spell to help with hiding in plain sight, and gets a bonus feat at fifth level to help with how feat heavy this build is.
Chill touch as my main spellstrike spell I know there's some debate about how chill touch interacts with spellstrike, but it seems pretty unfounded to me, and the rules as written currently support this working favorably. I have to take Combat Reflexes anyway and I like the idea that I could cast and deliver, then deliver three or four more times with attacks of opportunity to get the most Strength damage for my buck to help support my shadow. Going into shadowdancer from 6th level on will leave me with precious few spell slots anyway, and I like that I'll get a lot more hits out of each casting than I would with the more traditional shocking grasp.
Combat Patrol as a vehicle for delivery. Combat Patrol has prerequisites in common with shadowdancer, and just seems so good if I can find or make an area of dim light, as it will give me way more options for making attacks of opportunity. The way I'm reading it, every time I move I can make a stealth check, so I should be able to re-hide using hide in plain sight every time I move to take an AoO. Expeditious retreat is on the magus spell list too. It just all feels so cohesive, and I've never seen another character that operates like this before.
2) I have a wayang boon and was planning on using it, but is there a compelling reason I should go human instead? I'm feat tight, but am I that tight? I need Dodge, Mobility, and Combat Reflexes for shadowdancer. Counting my magus bonus feat at fifth, I can take all that and Weapon Finesse in time, plus Dervish Dance at seventh, and Combat Patrol at 9th. Can anyone think of a reason I'd need more feats before then? Or a class level I should take instead of magus 5 that would leave me a feat short?
3) How important are my spells? Right now I'm in need of ways to be faster, ways to generate dim light, and chill touch. Obviously I'm in need of some pearls of power, but right now my only reasons for taking that fifth level of magus are more spells, the ability to enhance my weapon on the fly, and the bonus feat. If I went fighter instead I'd still get the feat and I'd qualify for Combat Patrol two levels earlier, plus my shadow'd be a little better. Are my speed and dim light needs accomplishable enough with fewer spells and the right equipment?
4) Is hexcrafter worth it? I was going to go that route for some hexes, but I'm action-starved enough that I'm having doubts. Which hexes are even worth it if my plan is to kill with Strength damage? I was considering Fortune and Cackle, but I just don't see having the actions free.
5) Does anyone have equipment recommendations? Or other recommendations? Or see complications I'm missing? I just want to make sure this character is fun, so I'm trying to be careful.
If a character's Intelligence modifier improves, either through ability score increases every four levels or through a permanent bonus from a Headband of Vast Intelligence, does it result in the sudden and mysterious learning of a new language?
I'm not much interested in an argument about this, and I'm pretty sure I understand how this works, but I need an official (and specific) response from a Paizo staffer in order to either 1) get Hero Lab fixed to reflect the way I believe this works, or 2) add additional languages to many of my PFS characters.
Please mark this post for FAQ inclusion, so we can lay this years-old issue to rest!
My birthday's in early May. I'm turning 30, so to celebrate how responsible and adult I am, I'm organizing a birthday Pathfinder PvP team battle where everyone's playing an X-Men character. Rather than try to use existing classes, I'm basically putting together monster statblocks for each character that reflect the actual power sets and characteristics of each individual character. My plan at the moment is for everyone to have between 3 and 5 hit dice, and to keep the relative power level low so that the heavy hitters feel like heavy hitters, etc.
As a starting point, I decided to look at the "stat-blocks" Marvel publishes for each of their characters and see if I could port those numbers over to Pathfinder stats. So, the numbers listed after each character are their Intelligence, Strength, Speed, Durability, Energy Projection, and Fighting Skill, respectively (on a scale of 1 to 7).
Blink 2 2 3 2 1 4
How much weight should I give these numbers? Some of them feel a little weird to me. And do people have suggestions on how to implement these numbers? My gut is that the intelligence and strength scores listed should actually just be the characters' Int and Str modifiers. Maybe do the same with speed and durability? Just port them directly as Dex and Con modifiers? I had some ideas about using fighting skill to figure out BAB, but nothing's clicking so far. What do people think?
Once I have the basics worked out for the system (and I do want to stick as closely to actual Pathfinder rules as possible, not reinvent the wheel), I'll start posting my first drafts of stat-blocks here for people to critique and help me balance. I think we're going to actually play on May 12th, so I've got until then to get everything done!
I have a garuda-blooded aasimar druid with a celestial roc animal companion that I don't really want to play until the roc's big enough that it can serve as my mount. So, I've been dumping GM credits on it and I'll start playing the character once he hits 7th level. In the meantime, I have a 7th level character to put together. Here's my starting point:
And tactically, my plan is not to really wild shape often (if ever), but to ride around on my mount, letting it take full attacks when possible, and raining down lightning from the sky in the form of (sometimes empowered) call lightnings and ball lightnings. I like that I can move ball lightning as a move action, and call down lightning bolts as a standard action, allowing me to do both while either remaining mobile or letting my mount do even further damage.
It's more a concept build than a power gaming strategy. I like the idea of stormy heavenly bird druid guy, riding around on his great big heavenly bird. Consequently, I'm a little stumped on the feat slots. Celestial servant is a non-negotiable, and mounted combat makes a lot of sense since I plan to pretty much always be mounted, but after that I'm at a loss. Natural spell seems like an obvious choice since I'm a druid and I can wild shape, but it's not really a cornerstone of my strategy. And I considered ride-by attack and possibly spirited charge, but I just don't see myself charging very often. Ride-by attack isn't very clear, but it doesn't necessarily seem to involve my mount being able to attack too, and frankly my mount's the one that wants to be making melee attacks, not me. And my mount would rather be full-attacking.
I don't know. Does anyone have recommendations for feats that advance or synergize with my proposed strategy?
I have a few GM certs on a character I have yet to build and I want to put together a Hellknight Signifer. I've always been into mixed martial and magical characters and this class just seems awesome. I've looked into some options and it seems like cleric 5 is the easiest and most effective way to get into the class. Unfortunately, I'm just not that into the idea of playing this as a cleric.
I'm 99% sure I want to go wizard or witch (though feel free to try to change my mind), and the more I've looked into the two options, the more confident I am that wizard is probably the route I want to go. This is for two reasons: 1) I compiled a list of spells without somatic components and/or with swift or immediate action casting times, and the wizard just has the better list than the witch (and these spells seem important additions to the character, so I can attack and cast in the same round, and so I can cast without always having to activate those terrible arcane armour feats); 2) arcane bond just seems the better fit than a familiar (having spontaneous access to one situational spell a day seems useful, and being able to enhance my own weapon in PFS where NOBODY can normally enhance their weapons seems massive).
If I'm going wizard, I want to go teleportation-specialist wizard for the swift dimension door ability, but 15-foot teleporting is a huuuuge step-up from 10-foot teleporting, which makes me want to take 6 levels of wizard. Unfortunately, given that this is PFS, I just can't fathom taking more than 6 levels of anything before I start my prestige levels, so I can actually get decent play-time with the prestige class. And unfortunately, I'd have to take two armour proficiency feats and a weapon proficiency feat to reasonably play the character and qualify for the prestige class. This leads me to think a level of fighter is pretty much a must-have, but again--I don't want to do fighter 1/wizard 6 because that's 7 full levels before I get to start up with the prestige class.
So, what I need is PFS-legal suggestions or ideas for traits, spells, equipment, or anything else that will either allow me to cheat an effective additional wizard-level onto my swift dimension door ability with only five actual levels or ways that I can avoid the fighter level without having to have four terrible feats somehow squeezed into 6 levels.
I also have a wayang boon and was considering using it for this character.
I'm a huge fan of teleportation. The last time I played a duskblade (before Pathfinder arrived), I got approval from my GM to add a bunch of teleportation spells to the duskblade spell list. Currently I'm playing a magus going for the dimensional feat tree. Given that I want teleportation to be a major part of what my character does, and the magus can't do it until 10th level, I began to look at additional spell options to try to add to my character, and found that many of Paizo's options seem available only to strange class choices and mostly seem underpowered (especially when compared with the travel domain and teleportation specialization wizard options), almost all of the third party options out there seem either over or underpowered, and that most of the old 3.5 spells seem pretty overpowered. So, with GM approval, I'm authoring some of my own, taking into consideration all of the preexisting options I found.
Here are some reference spells:
D&D 3.5 Spells (Not OGL)
I know I want a 2nd level spell and a 3rd level spell, and I want one of them to be usable offensively in conjunction with spellstrike, so the following are what I came up with. I wanted very basic spells as my starting point, but I'm open to more interesting ideas in addition if people have any. I'm looking for power level feedback mostly (since existing spells are all over the place and hard to gauge)!
You teleport the target (and all objects it's wearing or carrying) a distance of 25 feet plus 5 feet per two caster levels to an unoccupied space you can see.
You teleport yourself from your current location to any other unoccupied spot you can see within range. After using this spell, you can't take any other actions until your next turn. You can bring along objects as long as their weight doesn't exceed your maximum load, but not additional creatures. This spell counts as dimension door for the purposes of qualifying for or benefitting from the Dimensional Agility feat and feats with Dimensional Agility as a prerequisite.
You teleport yourself to standing position from lying prone. You must begin and end in the same space.
Hey there! My GM and I recently began work on an arcane ranger archetype because it fits the character concept of a fellow player who's brand new to the game and who started off taking levels of ranger, but has decided she wants to go a more arcane route. Neither my GM nor I is the most experienced ranger player, but we're both reasonably experienced players, and this is our first stab at an arcane ranger. The basic concept is to remove the really druidy feeling aspects of the ranger and replace them with more wizardly feeling parts instead. Please be honest about this and open with feedback! I can take critique and constructive criticism, but I'm not even going to acknowledge scathing remarks or posts to the tune of "this is a stupid concept and you shouldn't even bother with it." Our mind is at least made up that we are going to put forth this archetype as an option to the player. We just want help making sure it's not too over or underpowered. Thanks!
Transcendent Wayfarer Ranger Archetype
A transcendent wayfarer’s class skills are Climb (Str), Craft (Int), Intimidate (Cha), Knowledge (arcana) (Int), Knowledge (dungeoneering) (Int), Knowledge (geography) (Int), Knowledge (nature) (Int), Perception (Wis), Profession (Wis), Ride (Dex), Spellcraft (Int), Stealth (Dex), Survival (Wis), Swim (Str), and Use Magic Device (Cha).
This replaces the standard ranger class skills.
Weapon and Armour Proficiency
A transcendent wayfarer is proficient with all simple and martial weapons and with light armour, medium armour, and shields (except tower shields). She can cast transcendent wayfarer spells while wearing light armour without incurring the normal arcane spell failure chance. Like any other arcane spellcaster, a transcendent wayfarer wearing medium armour, heavy armour, or a shield incurs a chance of arcane spell failure if the spell in question has a somatic component. A multiclass transcendent wayfarer still incurs the normal arcane spell failure chance for arcane spells received from other classes.
This replaces the standard ranger weapon and armour proficiency.
Detect Magic (Sp)
A transcendent wayfarer can cast detect magic as a spell-like ability at-will with a caster level equal to her ranger level.
This ability replaces wild empathy.
Transcendent Wayfarer Combat Style
A transcendent wayfarer gains access to the following combat style. She may still only choose one combat style to pursue.
Arcane Combat Style:
If the ranger selects arcane style, she can choose from the following list whenever she gains a combat style feat:
Arcane Armour Training, Arcane Strike, Spell Focus, Spell Penetration, and Spell Specialization**.
Arcane Bond (Ex or Sp)
At 4th level, a transcendent wayfarer gains an arcane bond, as a wizard equal to her ranger level minus 3.
This ability replaces hunter’s bond.
At 4th level, a transcendent wayfarer gains the ability to cast a small number of spells exactly like a standard ranger does, except her spells are arcane and drawn from the transcendent wayfarer spell list and she uses Intelligence instead of Wisdom when determining the highest level of spells she can cast, her spell save DCs, and any effects of her spells normally determined by her Wisdom. She must also choose to specialize in one school of magic, adding all ranger and sorcerer/wizard spells of 4th level or lower from that school of magic (that are not already on her class list) to her class spell list at the same spell level a standard ranger or wizard would receive them (whichever is higher). This choice must be made at 4th level, and once made it cannot be changed.
Each day, instead of meditating, a transcendent wayfarer must spend 1 hour communing with her familiar or studying her bonded item (depending on which she chose) in order to prepare spells for the day, though she may still prepare any spell on her class spell list, provided that she can cast spells of that level.
Transcendent Wayfarer Spell List
1: abundant ammunition***, air bubble***, alarm, ant haul*, anticipate peril**, bowstaff***, cloak of shade*, dancing lantern*, deadeye’s lore***, delay poison, detect aberration*, detect animals or plants, detect poison, detect snares and pits, diagnose disease**, endure elements, feather fall, feather step*, glide*, gravity bow*, hide from animals, horn of pursuit**, hunter’s howl*, jump, keen senses*, know the enemy**, lead blades*, liberating command***, longshot***, longstrider, negate aroma*, obscuring mist, pass without trace, read magic, residual tracking*, resist energy, returning weapon***, sun metal***, tireless pursuit*
2: accelerate poison*, acute senses**, allfood*, ant haul (communal)***, arrow eruption*, badger’s ferocity**, bear’s endurance, bloodhound*, brow gasher***, bull’s strength, campfire wall*, cat’s grace, chameleon stride*, create treasure map*, cure light wounds, eagle eye*, effortless armour***, endure elements (communal)***, forest friend***, fox’s cunning, glitterdust, guiding star*, hide campsite*, hunter’s eye*, locate weakness***, protection from energy, protective spirit*, reloading hands***, ricochet shot***, slipstream*, snare, stone call*, versatile weapon*, wind wall
3: blessing of the mole**, burrow**, burst of speed***, clairaudience/clairvoyance, cloak of winds, cure moderate wounds, darkvision, delay poison (communal)***, dispel magic, feather step (mass)*, fickle winds**, instant enemy*, life bubble*, named bullet***, neutralize poison, protection from energy (communal)***, remove disease, resist energy (communal)***, tireless pursuers*, venomous bolt*, water breathing, water walk
4: blessing of the salamander*, bow spirit*, commune with nature, cure serious wounds, darkvision (communal)***, darkvision (greater)**, dispel magic (greater), find quarry***, freedom of movement, named bullet (greater)***, nondetection, stoneskin, terrain bond***, tree stride, water walk (communal)***
* Advanced Player's Guide
Is there a PFS ruling on how to calculate your animal companion's CR for the spell resistance gained from the ARG's Celestial Servant feat?
I just assume that the spell resistance never progresses beyond 5, since it's 5+CR and PCs and their pets don't really have CRs.
Redcap's Corner is proud to present the Unseelie Court, a weekend-long Pathfinder Society event from October 12th to 14th. We'll be running all the convention specials, a few tables of the Cyphermage Dilemma, a few sanctioned modules, and a variety of recent season three and four scenarios, with GM appearances by five venture-officers! The event is $10 to enter, regardless of how many tables you play, and we're running a single slot Friday night, as well as three slots each day Saturday and Sunday.
Should be fun! You can register, pay, and sign up for tables all through our Warhorn site, which can be found here: http://www.warhorn.net/unseelie-court-2012/
I played part 1 of Rats of Round Mountain the other day. I plan on playing part 2 with the same character before playing any other scenarios with that character. The chronicle sheet quite clearly states that the special reward is only available so long as my next chronicle sheet is part 2. Does that really mean that if I had taken a holiday boon as part of part 1, or if I GMed a different scenario for credit on this character between parts 1 and 2, that I wouldn't be eligible for whatever additional benefit is available for playing them back to back? I understood the point to be that the benefit was for having your character remain in the field between scenarios, and as far as I know GMing or taking a holiday doesn't have any bearing on that.
I have a ninth-level witch with Improved Familiar and a quasit by his side. I understand the risks of having my spellbook wander into battle, but I chose the quasit for its resilience (my spellbook has fast healing 2!) and I know when to use him and when to hold him back. Unfortunately, the quasit basically does nothing, and I have a feat invested into him. Solution? Time to turn my piles of gold into "equip my quasit."
Anyone have any suggestions for items that would make the little devil (I mean demon) a little more useful? He doesn't currently have UMD, but if he needs it I can get him up to a +9 next time I level up. Right now, he just has an Amulet of Mighty Fists that bestows vicious on him.
Is there an up-to-date web resource that collects the crunch from the various paperback Pathfinder products?
I know about archivesofnethys.com, but it seems like that site hasn't been updated since November or so, and it seems like the owner of that site decided to dilute its purpose by adding in all the hardback content too, which just isn't necessary since it's available so many other places, and arguably isn't even really desirable since it clutters the resource quite a bit.
Has anyone else stepped up to bat since Archives of Nethys stopped updating? Amongst other things, there's an item a friend recently saw in a newish paperback book that was something to the tune of Shackles of Truthfulness, and neither of us can find it now. It was an item similar to Manacles of Cooperation but more focused on forcing the wearer to tell the truth. And I'm also on the hunt for an item or feat that will give my 9th-level witch access to greater invisibility.
I have a ninth-level witch who could benefit greatly from the addition of greater invisibility to his repertoire. I have my ninth-level feat slot open, so a feat would work, and I also have about 23,000 gp so an item would work too. Right now I'm leaning toward a Staff of Stealth from the APG, but I wondered if people had other suggestions before I commit to that. Thanks!
So, I went to Paizocon 2010, and had a really fun time playing a variety of different games over the course of the event. However, only one of those events was part of the Pathfinder Society (Echoes of the Everwar, Part IV). The character with which I played that event was 7th level, and after I got back from Paizocon, all the games I played were with lower-level characters.
Well, tonight I'm playing in a higher level mod and I decided to dust off the old character for the first time in over a year. Unfortunately, somebody at Paizocon reported the character as having played in Silent Tide too. I don't know if other people can see the sessions for each other's characters but here's a link to the page, just in case:
It's super weird. It's listed as not having a GM, but it's showing up as part of my character nonetheless, and I received 2 prestige for (not) participating too!
I know I've reported this issue at least once in the past, certainly to Josh Frost, but maybe also to one of his successors, and I don't remember if they just never got back to me or if they told me there was nothing they could do about it, but what do I do?
I'm more than happy to ignore it and just accept that my chronicle sheets will always show me (correctly) having 1 less XP and 2 less prestige than my online records, except that this little oversight is going to prevent my character from ever getting credit for playing Silent Tide in the future. Actually, that might not be an issue because I believe one of my other characters played Silent Tide before the replay rules were changed, but still it's annoying that my online records are wrong and what if one of my other characters HADN'T played that particular mod?
What do I do? Anyone else ever have a similar problem?
Hey there. I'm making a new PFS character for the first time in a long while, and I decided to go with an undead lord cleric, as it seemed like a lot of fun. I have a really good non-evil premise for the character.
Anyway, I did some thread searching and I saw that a few other people had asked about corpse companions and how they worked. To me, the ability reads pretty clearly and I have no doubt that I can animate any fallen creature with discernible anatomy in-game as long as the result doesn't end up with HD exceeding my own.
What I'm curious about is: can I begin with a 1HD skeleton the very first game I play with this character? As in, can we assume that as an undead lord he has come across some sort of corpse in the past and animated it? Or do I have to wait until something dies in the first adventure and stall the game for 8 in-game hours?
I would hope I could begin play with a companion, but I need an official ruling before I begin playing the character.
Is there an official ruling on whether or not Spell Combat is a full-attack action? I'm building a magus as my new character for an existing 9th-level home game, and the GM and I are having a disagreement about the way this ability is worded. I'll happily defer to him if there's no official ruling, but I believe he'd happily defer to me if there is an official ruling that says I'm right. It's not a huge deal either way, but I figured I'd ask.
The way I read Spell Combat, it functions like two-weapon fighting, which DOES use a full-attack action. It then goes on to clarify exactly what being "like two-weapon fighting" means, during which it notes that you need to use a full-round action. I read that as being explanatory, and not as superseding the original statement that it functions like two-weapon fighting. A full-attack action IS a full-round action, so it doesn't seem to me to be problematic that it uses only the full-round terminology. The full-attack action seems inherent to the ability since the ability works "like two-weapon fighting."
My GM, on the other hand, believes the fact that it doesn't explicitly state that it's a full-attack action means it isn't, and that the "works much like two-weapon fighting" terminology is meant only to draw comparison mechanically, not to set a rules foundation. He believes the text that follows that statement is the rules, and that the two-weapon fighting reference is just a helpful way to remember how the ability works. Again, I believe the opposite: that the two-weapon fighting reference sets the foundation and that the following text clarifies that foundation.
Any verdict? That actually matters because if it's not a full-attack action, I'll get no bonus attack from haste, won't be able to use Dimensional Dervish in conjunction, etc., etc.
Two questions pertaining to my new magus:
1) I'm assuming the answer to this is "no," but if I have the maneuver mastery arcana for disarming and choose to disarm for each attack as part of my full attack, do I get iterative attacks based on the increased BAB? Again, I assume this is "no" based on the way it reads, but I figured I'd ask the internet for a second opinion.
2) Secondly, I'm using a cape of the mountebank to qualify for the dimensional feats from Ultimate Combat. There's no problem there, right? I understand that things that are "like" or "as" dimension door would seem not to qualify you for the feats, but the cape is quite explicit that you're actually just using it to cast dimension door, rather than generate a similar effect. I feel like qualifying for feats via equipment is sort of a gray area, but I haven't met a person yet who feels like belts and headbands of +2/+4/+6 stat can't help you meet the minimum requirements of feats like Weapon Finesse, Power Attack, or Two-Weapon Fighting. If stat-boost items can do it, then the cape can do it too. Plus, it seems to be the only way to make those feats usable at a relevant level.
What do people think?
I'm trying to put together some zombies to update the 3.5 summon undead spells, and in using the Pathfinder template, I couldn't help but notice that the phrasing is different with regard to the natural armour the zombies receive. In 3.5 the template increased the creature's existing natural armour, and in Pathfinder it reads as though it flat-out replaces the creature's natural armour. This is a pretty substantial nerf, and I wondered how intentional people believe it was. This isn't just a misreading of the 3.5 version either, because the statblocks in the old MM all support the increased natural armour. I feel like these zombies are all going to be terrible, despite CR, if I go by the letter of the law with Pathfinder on this one. Thoughts anyone?
I don't want to go into too much detail, but I'm playing a summoner in a game. In-game, however, he doesn't think of himself as a summoner, he thinks of himself as a fighter descended from dragons. His eidolon is a dragon (and his closest confidant), and he has never, ever used one of his summon monster spell-like abilities, because they just don't fit the flavour of the character. Well, there's another player in the group who's playing a dread necromancer (the 3.5 class) and we (by "we," i mean, she, the GM, and I, collectively) recently decided to go ahead and update her summon undead spells to include CR-appropriate Pathfinder undead, since a lot of them are really cool. And while I was contributing to helping her with her summoning lists, it occurred to me that my summon monster ability could absolutely be in-character if we just re-flavoured it so it was a little more dragon-y. The GM consented, and now I'm off to work on authoring my own custom summons list. For low CRs, this is what I've been able to find in Pathfinder books:
CR 1: Pseudodragon (Bestiary)
The problem? Well, summon monster I tends toward CR 1/3 or 1/2 creatures, with summon monster II tending toward CR 1, III tending toward CR 2, and each spell level above that focusing on the next two CRs above the previous spell level (3 and 4 for IV, 5 and 6 for V, etc.). And there just aren't any dragons below CR 1, with only one dragon at CR 1.
So, what I'm asking is this: does anybody know of any templates (preferably Paizo-published, but third party is cool too) that might be appropriate for lowering the CR on some dragons to help me build summon dragon I and summon dragon II up a little? Or does anybody have any other ideas or stats that they think might be appropriate? I was thinking about stealing the celestial hawk stats and just dragonizing them a little bit if I could do so without affecting power level, etc. Any help would be appreciated, though! Thanks, guys!
Silly question, I realize, but I have an ability that refers to hellcats going up on a wiki and I'd like to cite the page number for the most recent stats. I won't be able to own Bestiary 2 until its street date, but I'm sure I'm going to forget to go back and edit this if I just don't do it now while I'm thinking about it. Can any subscribers help me out? Thanks!
I need some stats for a hook sword for a new campaign, but I have no experience with balancing mundane weapons (much better at classes, races, etc.). If you're unfamiliar with the weapon, check out the wikipedia entry here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hook_sword
Things to consider:
I don't know! Any thoughts on putting together balanced stats for one of these would be great.
A month or two back I noticed that the PFS mod I played in at PaizoCon2010 had not yet been reported, and I emailed Josh Frost to ask him what the story was with that. He admitted that he had yet to report the PaizoCon mods, but was getting to it soon.
Tonight I checked again, and not only was I correctly reported as having played Echoes of the Everwar IV, but the same character seems to have been credited with having played Silent Tide at PaizoCon... only I didn't play Silent Tide at PaizoCon. This is awkward. Was this a slip-up that affected lots of people or was I just accidentally added to the reporting sheet for an additional game? Can the record of my having played Silent Tide be corrected, or should I go ahead and fill out a chronicle sheet (PS. Thanks for crediting me with two prestige, but isn't only one prestige available for Silent Tide? PPS. Just kidding about filling out a chronicle sheet, but seriously what should I do? This makes it look like my character should be a level higher than he is)?
Just keeping the system honest!
I own a store in Philadelphia that has been running Pathfinder Society for the last year or so. In that year, we've run over 100 mods, so we're averaging around two per week. We schedule PFS once per week, but sometimes we have impromptu sessions, run more than one table simultaneously, or just play two mods back to back.
A few months ago, when PPP was updated to allow credit for replaying mods, it couldn't have come at a better time for us. We were just getting to the point where seating people was proving difficult. You never know who's going to show up to play, and you have to make sure that mods are read thoroughly and prepared before people start showing up, but when you prepare mods X and Z and people show up who've played both already, there isn't much you can do but turn them away unless you have access to some sort of replay options. And this is exactly what we were beginning to encounter each week.
Additionally, when you're playing two sessions per week and only two new mods are coming out per month, it doesn't take long before you run out, and quite frankly we have some customers that show up pretty much every time we play PFS. Without allowing for the option of replay, we're going to be turning these customers away en masse, and frankly it's probably going to ruin Pathfinder Society at our store.
I realize that 1 player credit and 1 GM credit makes a lot of sense at conventions where many different mods are being run, and I realize it makes a lot of sense for home games where there's a steadier crowd showing up each week, but for stores who have less predictable crowds and fewer resources (not to mention smaller turnouts than conventions), losing the option of replay is literally a death sentence for the program. As for the option of replaying without receiving credit, my question is to what end? The only reason at all I can think to disallow replay is to stop players who have already played from ruining the plot hooks for everyone else. But receiving credit isn't what makes that a risk, it's replaying the mod at all that gives you the opportunity to spoil the ending. Replaying without receiving credit just feels like a punishment, since there doesn't seem to be any reason to deny credit but still allow replay. And frankly, the ability for a GM to deny credit to someone who spoils the plot actually better incentivizes people to stay in line. I would think people for whom nothing is at stake would be more likely to ruin the fun (not that I've ever known plot-spoiling to be a problem, at least at my store).
The PPP section of the GtPFS has always emphasized that it's never right to turn a player away and that the bottom line is fun, but disallowing replay is going to force us to turn people away and allowing replay without granting credit is going to ruin people's fun (because it feels like a senseless punishment, and nobody likes playing without gaining XP) and effectively turn them away. Either option seems really, really bad for PFS at stores.
This is not to mention that there simply aren't enough mods in existence to maintain more than about one and a half characters without replay. If your 8th-level character were to die and be unrevivable, you'd likely hit a point where you just couldn't level up your new character until a new low-level mod came out, which means more turning away players. And hell, every player should have a low-level character on-hand at all times just in case not enough high-level character-holders show up any given night, but without replay options you just can't have more than two characters. There aren't enough mods.
And that leads into my next complaint, which is that the retirement of mods is getting really out of hand and seems really premature to begin with. I've already explained that in only a year of running this, we have multiple players who have played just about every available mod (especially with so few lower-level mods available), and though I agree that some of the older mods are not very good and should be retired at some point in the future, I think it's crazy that retirements began before season 2 had even started. I realize writing adventures is time-consuming and the process can't really be sped up all that much, but seriously: it's hard enough as it is to run this program with the already highly-limited number of available adventures without those adventures disappearing before critical mass has been reached. And I don't have access to the mods from home to do any number-crunching, but I assure you (as somebody who's been running eight games a month for the last year) adventure critical mass has absolutely yet to be reached.
Please, please reconsider retiring any further mods (and if possible please unretire those retired... we don't have enough adventures to keep running PFS), and please, please reconsider disallowing replay. These two decisions, especially in tandem, are going to put an end to Pathfinder Society at my store (and I'd wager at many others like it), and not out of some sort of childish protest, but because they actually make successfully running the program functionally impossible!
Thanks for running a great program otherwise, though, and I hope this came across as optimistic pleading and not whiny complaining!
So, I'm putting together my magus right now, and first of all I'm really excited. The class seems like a lot of fun. I still maintain that full BAB would make for a better frame for the class, but I'm not going to mouth off too much about that until I've actually sat in the driver seat with my new character. I did, however, notice two big issues in character creation:
1) Am I missing something or is the class's only touch spell Shocking Grasp until 7th-level? I realize Ultimate Magic will introduce new spells, probably many of them touch spells, and I also realize that at low levels Shocking Grasp far and away out-damages any other touch spells, BUT it would be nice if the magus had something to spellstrike other than damage. Why no chill touch, etc.? I agree with a strict limitation on how many touch spells, but a single 1st-level spell until 7th-level? Honestly, even if Shocking Grasp is always the best choice that's more of an argument to allow more options than to deny them, since more options would only make the class less boring and not more powerful. I'd strongly encourage Vampiric Touch as a high-level option also. Even if they're only temporary replacements until we see the new spells from Ultimate Magic, it would help to have a few more options to use with spellstrike.
2) For a class relying on spellstrike to deal a reasonable amount of damage (unlike the fighter whose wealth of bonus feats fills that void) 1, 2, or 3 1st-level spells is never going to be enough, especially since Shocking Grasp only has one charge. The class either needs a boost to the number of spells per day it gets (especially low level spells per day), more touch spells that allow you to get multiple uses out of a single casting, or some sort of weak spell-like ability usable with spellstrike to keep the class competitive. Maybe it just needs an ability where you choose one 1st-level touch spell each day and get 2 or 3 extra castings of that single spell for that day? I don't know. Right now, it just isn't going to be able to get enough mileage out of its signature class ability.
I also had an idea that maybe the class should be able to use spellstrike with any touch abilities granted by magus arcanas and that maybe you could make some of the "sacrifice a spell to get the following spell effect" arcanas actually have damaging touch spell effects, so that you don't get stuck preparing Shocking Grasp in all your slots every day. Or, maybe at least give the magus the ability to spontaneously convert spells into something spellstrike-able at each level, like a druid's summon spells or cleric's cure spells. I like the class as a prepared caster, but not if it means I just have to prepare all damaging touch spells every day in case I get into a lot of combats.
Stoked about this playtest! Thanks Paizo!
If your name is Jessica Bickis, Mike Motyka, Andrew Coffman, Kurt Ro, or Aaron Billheimer, please get out of this thread now, so you don't ruin a plot point of our game for yourself. Anyone else, look on, and please help:
So, one of the PCs in my game has been abducted by a doppelganger who's now impersonating her character. He's a doppelganger hexblade 1/ur-priest 5. We use 3.5 material with Pathfinder rules, obviously. Now, the character he's impersonating is a goliath binder 6. The actual race is a little home-brew and updated to fit better with Pathfinder conventions, but it's based on goliath. The player is in on this and is using a fake character sheet that upon first glance will appear to be her actual character's sheet, but upon closer scrutiny doesn't really add up because it uses math from the doppelganger's stats, etc. She's intentionally slipping up every now and then, so that eventually the other players will catch her and have to fight the doppelganger.
The problem? Well, vestiges give weird powers, and the cleric spell list is nice and flexible, but it's still hard coming up with ability suites that mimic the granted powers of vestiges. So, what I'm asking, as a thought experiment for all you creative converters, is can you come up with spell packages using the cleric/ur-priest spell list (for an ur-priest 5) that mimic any of the vestiges available to a binder 8 (she's only a binder 6, but has the feat that lets her be two levels ahead for binding purposes). Obviously, nothing's going to be an exact match, but any help with this would be fantastic. I've done a few, but I'm not all that pleased with my work, and it's really hard to do too many of these. She's already played a few games with my work, and I don't want her to have to keep faking this for too many more games, but I'd like the facade to be as realistic as possible in the meantime, and we're playing again tonight!
At PaizoCon this weekend, Erik Mona confirmed during his talk at the Advanced Player's Guide Banquet that spring 2011 would bring with it a new book called Ultimate Magic that would contain exactly one new base class, the weapon-wielding arcanist known as the Magus, but would also contain tons of new spells and feats for spellcasters of all stripes, as well as an alternate magic system for use with Pathfinder. What sort of things are people expecting or hoping to come out of this product? What are the most important aspects of a book like this, do people think?
This spell is worded somewhat confusingly.
I get that normal light becomes darkness, and that dim light or dakness becomes supernatural darkness. What I'm not sure about is the sentence that reads "This functions like darkness, but even creatures with
I guess, what I'm asking is: does darkvision work in darkness created by this spell? I know it doesn't work in supernatural darkness, but I'm able to read the spell description two different ways with regard to regular darkness.
I know both of these events state "materials provided," but I'm pretty sure other events that stated the same also allowed for custom character creation. Are these events using only pre-generated characters, or are attendees allowed to have characters built in advance?
If these events are using pre-generated characters only, is there any chance we can get advance peeks at them? I hate going into a game not feeling like I know my character well enough to make reasonable decisions. This holds especially for the Coliseum, as I feel like 16th-level characters require some fore-knowledge.
If we're allowed to build our own characters, what are the guidelines for doing so?
Thanks in advance!
My business partner and I are coming all the way from Philadelphia for PaizoCon, and we're coming as a business trip so the tickets for the con were purchased with our store Paizo account. We missed the lottery sign-up by a few hours because we didn't know about it, so I emailed for help, mentioning both that I had missed the lottery sign-up by only a few hours (and wondered if that was resolvable) and that I still didn't understand how to sign two people up for anything with this system, given that both tickets existed as a part of our shared business account. The sign-up system just doesn't seem to take into consideration the possibility that someone holds more than one ticket.
Well, I never received a response about either issue, so I logged in today to find that sure enough it isn't possible to sign up two people for events with one account. I've been calling customer service all morning with no answer, and after finally leaving a message for customer service, I realized that I could transfer ownership of one of our tickets and one of our banquet tickets to my personal email account, which might make things easier. I did so, and was able to sign-up for the few events which are left, but I have two major issues:
First of all, everything I was interested in is full, which is a major bummer considering I just had no idea about the lottery in time and would have run into the same problems with signing up more than one person had I known. Am I really stuck?
Second of all, I transfered one of my banquet tickets to my personal account when I transfered my 3-day badge, but of course it wouldn't let me sign-up for the banquet on my events schedule. This is just a mistake, right? I'm not being denied entrance to the banquet, despite holding a ticket, am I? I was excited about a lot of aspects of this con, but the banquet was at the top of the list, and I'm going to be really angry if I can't get in, despite having bought a ticket.
Does anyone know if anything can be done about any of this? I'm really bummed out, because I was excited about this, but the process has been so strange and cumbersome, I'm not even sure I want to go anymore.
I've been play-testing a witch in Pathfinder Society, and I think most of the changes to the class are great, but I wanted to share my thoughts on the matter, based on testing the class both before and after the recent changes.
1) The loss of "touch range" in favour of 30-foot range for most hexes makes a huge difference. The class is really, truly playable now! This was the perfect fix.
2) Removing the provocation of attacks of opportunity from hexes is also a great idea.
3) Lowering the spell level on Baleful Polymorph is great. Having Baleful Polymorph and Bestow Curse, two totally iconic witch abilities, feel more special for the witch by virtue of giving them to them at lower spell levels really hammers home the flavour of the class.
4) Amending flight so that it's a regular hex was definitely the right move. Witches fly, right? The flavour of the ability is great too.
5) I think cackle could be broader. It should probably say "any targeted hex with a limited duration" rather than specifically citing Evil Eye, Misfortune, etc. That way it's cleaner to apply cackle to other hexes that might become available in future books. Cackle, by the way, is awesome.
6) The witch's familiar still feels incredibly fragile, and the witch has too much invested in his familiar for that to feel all right. Imbue With Spells is a cool ability, and getting bonus spells from the familiar is an awesome idea, but if a witch's familiar dies, he's starting almost completely over with having to research spells. Something should be done to make the familiar a little more durable or able to reincarnate itself or something. Having a familiar but having to keep it hidden away at all times seems like kind of a waste.
7) A class so focused on having a familiar seems like a good fit for Improved Familiar. That does, however, mean sacrificing the bonus spells granted by his familiar. A second sidebar with bonus spells from improved familiars for the witch who chooses to go that route would be awesome. Or maybe rules that allow you to polymorph your familiar into an improved familiar when you take the feat, so that you can keep the bonus spell list of your original familiar. Just a thought.
I had been really, really excited for this class prior to its first printing, and when it was originally revealed I was actually a little disappointed, but having read through it a little more thoroughly, played it a little, and having seen the changes, it's actually one of my favourite classes, and lives up every bit to my original expectations. I'm excited to see where this class might go.
I've been play-testing an oracle in Pathfinder Society, and I think most of the changes to the class are spot-on, but I wanted to share my thoughts on the matter, based on testing the class both before and after the recent changes.
1) The medium armour proficiency is a huge, huge help, and I really think it will help make the difference for this class. I still believe the class should get good Fort saves, like a cleric, but I think this was the more important change.
2) The free cure or inflict spells go a long, long way toward making the cleric spell list more manageable for a spontaneous caster. I still think the oracle could use an extra spell known or two, but I think this is a really positive, beneficial change. My complaint before was that spontaneous casting lent itself less well to the cleric spell list because its more reactive, and thus benefits more from preparation. Not having to choose cure spells really helps with that, though I'm not positive it's 100% enough.
3) I still really like the idea of a healing-focused mystery for the oracle, for the player who really wants to try test-driving the oracle in the cleric's party seat. Channel energy is huge for a healer, and no access to that severely limits the oracle's ability to play the role of a primary healer. The extra spells-per-day beyond that of a cleric go a long way too, though.
4) Now that the oracle has access to medium armour, the armour bonus revelations that most mysteries provide seem wildly inappropriate and almost never worth choosing. Certainly at low-levels they're virtually worthless. I'd strongly consider lowering the bonus to AC on each of these and changing them from armour bonus to something more obscure. Nobody's ever going to pick these and waste one of their precious revelations on something that can be purchased with no penalty for 200gp or less. I'd absolutely consider using a revelation to gain a scaling +2 deflection bonus or dodge bonus or whathaveyou, though. It could create a refreshing difference between each of the different versions of this ability to provide different bonuses based on the particular mystery too. For instance, wind could get dodge, bones could get natural armour, heavens could get deflection, etc.
5) The new mysteries are awesome, especially Lore.
6) I realize multi-classing is supposed to weaken overall power since it provides so much more versatility, but I have to jump on board and agree with people complaining that the curse too harshly penalizes multi-classing. I think the curse is a great role-playing device and I love that some of them help a little, hurt a little and others help a lot and hurt a lot, but I really, really think you should consider changing the benefits of the curse to be based on character level rather than oracle level. Honestly, I think the scaling revelations should work the same way. If Invisibility is level-appropriate for an oracle of wind at 3rd-level, I don't see why it's level inappropriate for a 1st-level sorcerer, 2nd-level oracle on his or her way to a mystic theurge. I'm less sold on this idea, because spell levels obviously work the same way, but the oracle doesn't get a lot of class features, so for some of the good ones to be completely level-inappropriate by the time a multi-classing oracle is able to pick them seems pretty rough to me. Either way, I believe the curse needs to function off of character level. My Pathfinder Society character is multi-classed and it hasn't been a huge deal so far, but at 6th-level I still can't see between 30 and 60 feet because of my two levels of paladin.
I'm still really into this class, though, and I believe the few changes that were made were great. I just thought I'd point out the other observations I'd made through playing. I think this class will be a serious fixture of many games, just as the favoured soul always was for my playgroup.