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

Cyrad's page

RPG Superstar 2014 Star Voter. Pathfinder Society Member. 573 posts (740 including aliases). 5 reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 1 Pathfinder Society character. 1 alias.


1 to 50 of 573 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

One of my players has a habit of jumping and mounting onto any Huge or larger creature he's fighting. I ruled that doing so is considered grappling except the target creature only gains the entangled condition. If the creature has four legs or is larger than Huge, then the target only suffers the entangled condition with respect to the grappler.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Basically, anything you want. It's the one thing I like most about the summoner -- it's a class that encourages you to make a story about your main class feature.

Maybe your eidolon is an imaginary friend that turned out to be real.

Maybe your imagination gave birth to the eidolon -- it's a physical representation of your fears and darkest desires.

Maybe the eidolon is your greatest invention that you end up spending a lifetime figuring out how you created it in a night of bitter drunkeness.

Maybe your eidolon is an ancestor from a distance past.

Maybe your eidolon is yourself from the future.

Maybe your eidolon is the spirit of a loved one tied to an item you own.

Maybe your eidolon is the spirit of a haunted deck of cards that lets you materialize the cards into monsters.

Maybe your eidolon is actually your wife! A magical genie you had to marry because you drew The Marriage from the harrow deck of many things.

Maybe you are the eidolon. Your corporeal body is merely a puppet you control.

thaX wrote:

As far as Vancian Casting goes...

Let me quantify my overall problem and what I would propose to go to.


The Wizard would still have the spellbook, preperation and choices, just not the amnisia.

I already explained three times that the wizard isn't "forgetting" his spells when he uses them.

That aside, I agree that having to use multiple slots on the same spell is kind of annoying. However, your suggestion removes the greatest (and one of the only) advantages spontaenous casters have over prepared casters. As Kirth pointed out, the wizard is already the best spellcaster in the game by a large margin. Compared to the sorcerer, the wizard has more spell slots, the ability to learn more spells, better class features, better class skills, a better casting modifier, and school powers are usually better than most bloodlines.

I would love to see more options with the bonded item. I would love to have my spellbook as my bonded item, enchant it as a bag of holding, and have an extra dimensional space on page 42.

I would also like rogues and monks to get full BAB progression. I have the belief that 3/4 BAB should be left to gish classes like the cleric, magus, and inquisitor. Paizo overvalued the strengths of the rogue and monk when determining when determining their BAB -- being able to cast spells is a large boon. Making the monk a full BAB also simplifies the math on the monk's attacks.

Steel_Wind wrote:

I care about one thing and one thing only as a "must have" rule development in Pathfinder 2E:

Current 3.5 mechanic for "Full attack" and OP attacks leads to static play. Most melee characters rush to the middle and by 6th level, there is VERY little movement at the table. This leads to boring mid and high-level play.

I want to see changes in the combat system that greatly reduce, if not eliminate this aspect of combat. I want more movement, more maneuvers and less static combat on the battlemat.

I think full attacks should be simplified a bit more, in general. New players I encounter still find it unintuitive. To solve the mobility problem, I'd love to see classes like the rogue and monk gain full attack mobility options, like getting a pseudo-pounce or the ability to get multiple 5-foot steps. This would not only make combat more dynamic, but also give a niche in classes largely considered underwhelming.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Has this thread been derailed so much that it degraded into a petty WBL argument?

Kirth Gersen wrote:

I'm not going to talk about specifics; most of what I'd want to see has been covered. But more than any of that, I'd like PF2 to feature a total change in the development mind set.

Instead of coming up with fluff and then grudgingly assigning crunch to it haphazardly, I'd like to see a system in which the mechanical stuff all works like a swiss watch, and then the cool flavor laid over it so that you can't see the gears beneath.

That means no more trap options or Timmy Cards. It means no more spending a feat on stuff that's worse than the stuff you get without a feat. It means no more of this "balance is for evil people with agendas" stuff. It means no more Martials Can't Have Nice Things. It means no more heavy reliance on Rule Zero to fix everything.

Contrary to the usual canard, this will NOT turn PF into 4e. It would simply make it a game that's simultaneously playable as a game AND as a storytime, because the rules would directly lead to the type of game people play, instead of working at odds to it.

You really hit the nail on the head. This mentality and ivory tower design was inherited from 3.5e. I'm tired of lazily made feats that serve no purpose other than pad out books and serve as flavor. A good feat can be both mechanically beneficial and have awesome flavor (see Deadly Dealer). I'm glad Pathfinder has traits to provide the fluff to not muddy up feats.

And I agree we're not asking Pathfinder to be "4th Editioned." 4th Edition divorced his mechanics from its fluff rather than marry the fluff to the mechanics. When narrative was tied to mechanics, it was done rather lazily.

There's few rules on time travel mainly because it gives headaches to both GMs and players alike. Also, to model time travel mechanically would require some very game breaking stuff. After all, the three major time alteration spells -- haste, slow, and time stop -- are among the best in the game.

Also, there's many ways time travel can work in fiction. I've seen iterations where each moment of time is essentially its own plane. I've seen a setting where dinosaurs rule the past abandoned by creatures living in the present. The Strange by Monte Cook is basically D&D Doctor Who using Numenera's rule set. I've seen some settings imply that the First World and the Shadow Plane are actually the past and future of the Material Plane, which is why they look similar. There's tons of ways to do time travel. It's better a GM decides how time travel works than have Paizo give a concrete explanation. I suppose they could make a campaign setting book that proposes many possible systems.

Also, they already made a book on the planes. They do touch a bit on the time plane.

Numenera breaks down distance into three categories: immediate (10ft/3m), short (11-50ft/3-15m), and long (51-100/15-30m). Any distance greater is measured precisely. If you take an action, you can move up to an immediate distance. If you don't take an action, you can move up to a short distance. I think you can also move a long distance, but take penalties for it.

My system works similarly. Distance is measured in reach, close (25ft), short (50ft), and long (100ft). How far you can move depends on your actions.

You can easily do the same with Pathfinder since spells are already measured in Touch, Close, Medium, and Long range.
1) Any effect's range gets generalized to the appropriate range.
2) 15-30 foot cones target all creatures in an area between you and a primary target as well as all creatures near the primary target.
3) An effect radius of 20 targets all creatures in a Close range. Lower than that targets a creature and all creatures adjacent to them.
4) Creatures with a movement speed 20 or higher can move to a location within Close range as a move action. Taking the run action allows you to move to a location within Medium range.

I'd just use a system like Numenera's.

Rynjin wrote:
Cyrad wrote:
Rynjin wrote:
Cyrad wrote:

In fact, part of the reason we have Pathfinder is because Wizards nixed vancian spellcasting entirely. Wizards shot themselves in the foot. Why would Paizo ever do the same?
"4E did it and also failed, therefore doing anything similar to any little thing 4E did will cause my thing to fail too! That's how it works, right? Every individual thing a game did was responsible equally for it going under!"
Thanks for twisting my words into something completely different so you can make a smug rebuttal!

I don't see how I twisted your words at all. I don't see any other way to read that.

You've conflated "4E failed" and "4E removed Vancian casting" into
4E failed because it removed Vancian casting" and then go onto say PF should never move on from it because 4E tried it and failed.

I never said 4th Edition failed. I said Wizards of the Coast shot themselves in a foot. They splintered their game's community and created a strong competitor because they removed Vancian spellcasting and other iconic systems that people liked. I said this statement in the context that vancian/prepared casting shouldn't be removed for the sake of a minority of people that don't prefer it.

Kthulhu wrote:
My point is, why bother to have both prepared and spontaneous casters if you essentially give prepared casters the ability to cast spontaneously?

Yeah, this really annoys me. Though, I do think it works for a spellcaster like the magus as it allows them to still have damage spells without having to waste all their spell slots.

Rynjin wrote:
Cyrad wrote:

In fact, part of the reason we have Pathfinder is because Wizards nixed vancian spellcasting entirely. Wizards shot themselves in the foot. Why would Paizo ever do the same?
"4E did it and also failed, therefore doing anything similar to any little thing 4E did will cause my thing to fail too! That's how it works, right? Every individual thing a game did was responsible equally for it going under!"

Thanks for twisting my words into something completely different so you can make a smug rebuttal!

TriOmegaZero wrote:

Dislike of prepared casting has nothing to do with logic Cyrad. It's emotional, and you can't reason with emotions.

That being said, it's perfectly fine to not like it. Tastes and preferences don't need reasons.

Totally agreed. If people don't like prepared casting, that's fine. But I roll my eyes every time I see someone say "THEY SHOULD GET RID OF VANCIAN OR PREPARED SPELLCASTING." That would be like if I said they should stop making crunchy peanut butter because I like it smooth. It's ridiculous. A little variety is a beautiful thing.

In fact, part of the reason we have Pathfinder is because Wizards nixed vancian spellcasting entirely. Wizards shot themselves in the foot. Why would Paizo ever do the same? Especially when there's plenty of high quality alternate spell systems available from 3rd party providers?

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Every time I look at this thread, I see more people complaining about prepared casting, usually over misconceptions on how the flavor works. You're not "forgetting" the spell after you use it. Instead, all preparations have been expended. A wizard cannot cast the spell again for the same reason you can't fire a muzzle-loaded gun after you just made a shot. It doesn't matter how many bullets you have. Unless you have another gun with the same type of bullet ready to fire, you still have to put more gunpowder in and prime the gun if you want to fire another shot.

As for Perception, I think it should be an innate statistic that all creatures have, like Initiative. This would also help fix many problems related to it, like Stealth and the trap system.

It's a really weak feat. Your average unarmed strike damage increases by 0.5 and you add +1 situational damage. If the feat was a little underpowered, that's fine, but this has a feat tax. Also, cestus already deal 1d4 damage. Even then, there's no reason for a cestus wielder to take this as the entire point of the cestus is to enable a character to do unarmed strikes without having to waste a feat on Improved Unarmed Strike.

I use "Training Montage" for a homebrew RPG of mine where a character can gain proficiencies by hiring a trainer and learning how to use a weapon for a week or so.

Hm, alright! From your feedback, a resource pool sounds appropriate for my class. Now to figure out what it scales off of. Constitution makes sense, but that doesn't sound right for a martial class since they value that stat anyway. Since my class gives a flavor option for their power source, perhaps I can make the flavor option determine the statistic the resource pool scales off of.

I do like the idea of replenishing points. I liked the idea of passive abilities that required having at least one point.

I must admit that Mythic Power is my favorite implementation of a resource pool. It's an ability that you use X per day, but your other abilities use it as a resource pool. It's not the mechanics I like, but rather the language. You're not spending "mythic points," you're spending "uses of mythic power."

Adjule wrote:
I also really like the discoveries, rogue talents, rage powers, etc features, and wish more classes got something similar. Like fighters.

I totally agree. It's one of the reasons I love the magus class. What's also nice is that often these classes have tiered talents (or talents based on level in the case of the magus). Not only can the class get more powerful talents to match the power level of full casters, but also it incentivizes single-classing. There's a big problem with martials like the fighter and gunslinger where after a certain level, there's little reason to stay with the class. They get their best abilities at around level 5. The rest of class levels simply add minor bonuses to it.

The gunslinger, in particular, baffles me because Pathfinder encourages specializing in a single weapon. So getting gun training in a second weapon is no big deal. It makes archetypes like Pistolero and Musket Master no-brainers because you'll use only one firearm for at least 8 levels anyway. Worse is that it hurts character concepts. I have a player who pictured his character being an arms master that carries an arsenal on his person and shuffles between weapons to suit the needs of a situation. However, he's stuck mostly just using his pistol because the Dexterity bonus only applies to it and not his musket.

I feel my point was missed here. The race feels very schizophrenic and unfocused. Komodo have many powerful traits with each one representing only a very small aspect of their physiology and culture. Worse is that the choices feel a bit off at the intent and come off as munchkiny.

They get a bonus to conjuration because it seemed like the one that best fit the shaman idea. Simple as that.

But only a very small minority of komodos were/are shamans. To give all komodos this bonus implies all komodos are innately magical. Worse is that only spellcasting komodos benefit from this. Well, okay, you gave them spell-like abilities, but that doesn't make much sense to me. Races get spell-like abilities when they have innately magical heritages. Gnomes and kitsune get SLA because they descend from fey creatures. Note that elves commune with nature and are as close to fey as one can get without actually being a fey and even they don't get any spell-like abilities in the core rules.

I think the shamanism might be better modeled through an alternate trait, a favored class bonus, or perhaps a Spellcraft or Knowledge (arcana) bonus

They have a swim speed because their tail efficiently propels them through the water. They are amphibious because they can breathe underwater. They are technically amphibians, but of a variety which closely resembles reptiles. Much like the ones that went extinct when reptiles first showed up. They are hatched in the water, and though they grow out of the water, they retain the ability to breathe underwater.

A swim speed implies the creature's body is fully adapt at swimming. It takes much more than a strong tail to swim effectively. This strikes me as more suitable as a Swim bonus than a swim speed, especially considering they live out of water for most of their lives.

But you know what would be kind of cool? What if you added an alternate trait where young komodos have a swim speed instead of a climb speed? And when they grow up, they get the climb speed and the swim speed changes to a Swim bonus as a normal komodo. I've never seen a race that had different traits depending on its age.

They have a climb speed because trees are freaking everywhere, including wetlands. Lots of reptiles (and amphibians) are natural climbers, and being humanoid with opposable thumbs doesn't hurt. Where they spend most of their time doesn't matter, it's biological. City dwellers wouldn't lose their climbing claws any more than a caged bird loses its wings.

Well, a species of bird that lived through many generations without flying would probably not be good at flying anymore. Instead, consider this: What if they modeled their cities like a forest? What if they used trees for their dwellings or made dwellings that resembled trees (tall and cylindrical)? This would justify their climb speed and make visiting a komodo city very interesting for a party since the only way to get from building to building is climbing at uncomfortable heights.

I know that tribal komodos lived in hollowed out trees, but it looked like this isn't the case with city komodos since that would require VERY large trees.

I went with intelligence over wisdom as a subversion of tired tribal society tropes. Rather than making them one with the land, noble savages, etc. I figured, I'd take a different route. They are survivors in a harsh world. Wisdom is nice, but cunning is better for actually staying alive. They are tribal in structure, but are not defined solely by being a generic tribal society. It is a society that is shaped by the unending struggle against nature and the dangers of the wilds. It is this struggle which has kept them from advancing, but also forced them be tough and clever.

This still doesn't make much sense to me. Learning how to best nature through generations strikes me as a Wisdom thing.

No bonuses to survival because I can only give them so many things, and as I see it, survival is less about living among a tribe, and more about surviving on your own. Some of them will obviously put it to good use, but its not something all of them will need, any more than your typical human villagers. If I was throwing everything and the kitchen sink at them, I would have given it to them, but there's a limit, and it just didn't make the cut.

But the entire point of komodo's background involves a survivalist race that evolved into a modern society that thrives on harsh environments. This is one massive aspect of the race and it's not being modeled! Survival skill is much more than just surviving by yourself. All of the applications of the skill benefit more than yourself, even the one for surviving severe weather.

Perception on the other hand is critical. They live in an environment where staying alert is often a matter of life and death. They must learn from an early age to constantly remain aware of their surroundings and avoid getting caught off guard, because they are never truly safe. They suffer the penalty to wisdom (poor senses would fit here) and what they get is a class skill, not a flat bonus. It represents being trained and experienced, not being gifted with acute senses.

Okay, now this makes sense to me. I suppose ultimately, it's still a +2 bonus considering they take a penalty to Wisdom.

I admit I skimmed over the fluff, but I don't really understand why a race of lizard people have all these abilities. Why do they get a caster level bonus on the best spell school? Why is the caster level trait better than that of native outsiders, creatures innately magical? Why do they get the amphibious trait and a swim speed when the only aquatic feature they have is a strong tail? Why do they have a climb speed when most of them live in cities, underground, or in wetlands? Why do they have an Intelligence bonus and a penalty to Wisdom when they have a culture with tribal influences -- shouldn't that be the opposite? Why is survival and tribal culture a major theme of this race and yet they don't receive any Survival bonuses? Why do they get a Perception class skill when, being reptiles, they probably don't have very good hearing and sight?

When I look at a race's crunch, I should be able to say "Yeah, that makes sense." Here, it just raises questions. It seems like you're trying to accomplish too much with this race. The race feels very unfocused at best and munchkiny at worst. Pick a theme for your race and stick with it!

Strength build? Power Attack.

Why the Disruptive arcana? Have you considered the Quickened Magic and Maximized Magic arcana?

Exactly what do you want to center around?

What are your opinions on ability resource pools? I don't mean spells, but rather things like arcane pool points and ki points. It seems like many of the new advanced class guide classes will get them. Do you find them annoying book keeping? Have you thought of any interesting systems?

I'm personally torn between giving this full BAB class of mine a resource pool or not. The class has talents with abilities the player can choose from. Some of the abilities I want the class to have are clearly something that should come at some cost or limitation. I'd hate to add extra book keeping to the class with a resource pool or per-day limitation. I considered something where each of the abilities costs a swift action made in response to another action or the abilities have to be triggered in place of an attack -- some kind of significant action economy cost.

There's several ways you can do it.

Give him the demon subtype: demon without the summoning ability

Make him a refluffed tiefling.

Give him the sorcerer Abyssal Bloodline.

If I did something, I would make casting taint you with raw elemental energy. Slowly, you gain elemental traits, like an outsider. It makes you a bit stronger, but the taint starts to devour your mind and body. Eventually, you'll become a pure elemental that's barely sentient.

I'd imagine that if there were other arbiters of death, they'd deal with a subset of souls rather than all of them like Pharasma does. Then another arbiter might exist under them, followed by another and another, subdividing the massive torrent of souls until hey get categorized down to their ultimate fate in the afterlife.

These are changes I would make

1) Introduce a trait that grants proficiency in a single exotic weapon. Thematically, this makes sense because most exotic weapons exist for flavor or background for the character. Mechanically, this works because traits are valuable, but not as valuable as a feat.

2) Introduce a trait that grants proficiency in X amount of martial weapons.

3) Exotic Weapon Proficiency applies to X amount of exotic weapons.

4) Martial Weapon Proficiency applies to an entire weapon group.

5) Feats that apply to a single weapon now apply to a weapon group.

6) Weapon Focus and Greater Weapon Focus work differently. You still choose only one weapon, but you receive the +1 bonus when wielding any weapon from the same group as that weapon. If the weapon belongs to multiple groups, you have to choose one of them. In addition to the attack roll bonus, your selected weapon also receives another benefit depending on its weapon group.

For example, let's say I choose Weapon Focus (longsword) and choose heavy blades. I get a +1 when wielding heavy blades. If I wield a longsword, I also get +1 damage if I wield it with two hands, which is a boon specific to focusing in a heavy blade.

7) Monks gain a static list of weapons as well as all monk simple weapons and monk martial weapons.

I like your idea of making class weapon proficiencies based on weapon groups, though that could create some problems and unintentionally bar character concepts. I kind of wish spell lists worked this way. I hate how they have to make a new spell list for each new class and each spell has to have its description modified to allow for them. I'd rather there be an "arcane spell list" and a "divine spell list" and each class draws from a subset of one or each list with a few class-unique spells.

Pathfinder is an offense-oriented game, so this is a major improvement and can be stacked with Power Attack. I personally would not allow this in my game.

I usually houserule that Weapon Finesse, Combat Expertise, Power Attack, and Deadly Aim are free bonus feats to any character that meet the prerequisites.

Rapanuii wrote:
paper cartridges are like 6gp each, so how does one afford to play this class in PFS when you're shooting away money every attack?

That's why you carry a bow as well and save your ammo for priority targets. Your wallet will suffer if you waste bullets on every single goblin that comes your way. You should have all the feats necessary to be a decent bow fighter. If you get 7th level gunslinger, you can use the Deadshot deed, which allows you to essentially full attack when you're actually making one firearm attack.

And no, there's no way to get free action reloads without a paper cartridge. The best alternative solution is to use a firearm that has an increased capacity.

Fighter is probably not a bad choice after 5th level as they get plenty of feats, weapon training, armors, and shields.

I try to think of more rules, but everything I think of are general Pathfinder rule tweaks.

More clarity on improvised weapon rules and a way to masterwork/enchant them like normal weapons.

More concrete thrown weapon rules and how they interact with enchantments and ranged/melee options.

Mounted rules that are elegant and actually make sense.

Grapple rules that don't require a flow chart to understand.

I must admit in my first PFS game, I threw myself off because I was too used to a houserule about shooting into melee. In my personal games, I ruled that shooting into melee gives the target an AC bonus rather than an attack roll penalty for the assailant. I found this approach much simpler because players already have a ton of situational bonuses to calculate and GMs can take this into consideration when determining cover bonuses.

kinevon wrote:
** spoiler omitted **

Game Answers:
Yes, it was Thornkeep: Accursed Halls. We did get a lot of XP and gold for that. It was great for me because I was able to level up fast, but a few players got discouraged because we weren't finding much loot. Also, two players (including the sorceress) played RP characters not expecting Thornkeep to be a Gygaxian-style adventure.

The sorceress was a kitsune. The player joked he could just use the same character sheet with a different name and ID # until he realized that he lost the race boon when she died. The shadow did, indeed, crit her, but we all almost died. If we did not have a pre-gen cleric that spontaneously sat in the session at the start of the game, the adventure would have ended right there. I wasn't bothered that much by the encounter's difficult except that it inexplicably never left the room. That really threw me off. The only reason we confronted the shadow instead of run was because we thought it would chase us throughout the dungeon.

Cyrad checks his character's session record.
Oh wow! You are the GM of that game! It was a tough, but very memorable first game for me, as was the second game (though my character preferred the wights over what he had to deal with in that one).

I'd love to find more events in the area. Most of them are a bit out of my reach, but maybe I can manage it when I have more downtime during the summer. I leveled up after my second game and took a level in warpriest. I'm itching to play more now that my character is a real Pharasmin priest.

A voice of reason.

My last session had a guy who claimed he was Batman and psychotic gnome monk that was punching innocent women as they were dying. A crazy person is nothing without a straight man to be their foil.

I hate to necro a thread, but I want to give a shout out to everyone for helping me out. I went to the con, played two games, and had a blast! Thanks a lot!

Though, the two games were rather insane. Despite it being an adventure for 1st level characters, my first game had a wight and a shadow. The shadow one-hit killed our sorceress, causing her to turn into a shadow as well. The rest of us managed to slay both shadows and survive the session.

I had fun, but I felt really bad for the guy who had the sorceress. He originally was going to use a stronger character, but decided to pick her because he thought she'd be more fun to play with a PFS newbie. He spent a boon on that character, too. At least it made for a good story for my character. Being a Pharasmin priest, he presided over her funeral.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Allow the Deadly Dealer feat. The only reason that's banned is because it dips a toe into item creation. I think that's really lame and denies potential Varisian character concepts.

Allow archetypes that grant firearms.

As I mentioned before, you're still making a physical action. I can understand Intelligence modifier being added to an attack roll in the case of some kind of mental or magical ability guiding your strike. However, to replace Strength/Dexterity entirely with Intelligence implies the attack is purely guided by mental prowess. Yes, Pathfinder abstracts many things, but the entire point of ability scores is to abstract how your mental and physical prowess affects your actions in the game. Replacing a physical statistic with a mental statistic without making the action a mental action contradicts the fluff, abstraction, and mechanics.

Master of the Dark Triad wrote:
Cheburn wrote:
williamoak wrote:

There are TONS of ways to fluff int to hit. My favorite, is sizing up the opponent, calculating trajectories, then putting your weapon at the right place so that the opponent hurts themselves.

However, from a mechanical perspective, it can be problematic.

We'll do a test. I'll take 10 fairly strong guys and have them try to hit a moving target that doesn't want to be hit. You take 10 super intelligent but really weak guys and have them do the same thing. We'll see how it goes.

You can size up your opponent and calculate trajectories all you want. If you can't get there faster than he can move out of the way, you won't hit.

And even in terms of sizing up his movements and "calculating their moves," honestly, knowing what someone is going to do in a fight before they do it comes down to awareness and intuition, both of which are heavily in the "Wisdom" area.

Hey, I play this cool game called Pathfinder. It's a fantasy game! Isn't that cool?

I get to use my imagination and stuff. It isn't always realistic, but it's a game. I have fun with it, and so do many others!

Isn't that great? :D

But if it's not believable, then it ruins immersion.

Gun mechanics aside, gunslinger is a very simple class that's easy to min/max. I think Musket Master sounds like your cup of tea. While Pistolero can do more burst damage with Up Close and Deadly, Musket Master will likely do more reliable damage. Besides, experience taught me and my gunslinger friends that grit points are often best saved for misfires. In addition, muskets have superior range and Musket Master grants you free Rapid Reload. Add distance to your gun, and you'll almost always be targeting touch AC.

A good build might look like this:
Human Gunslinger
STR: 10 DEX: 20 CON: 12 INT: 7 WIS: 14 CHA: 10 (includes racial bonus)

Dangerously Curious //So you can use wands)
Never Stop Shooting //Can keep shooting even when dying)

B1 Rapid Reload (musket) //From Musket Master
B1 Point Blank Shot //From human race
L1 Deadly Aim
L3 Rapid Shot //You can now reload as a free action at this level
B4 Precise Shot
L5 Blind Fight //for ricochet shot deed
L7 Ricochet Shot Deed
L8 Improved Critical (musket)
L9 Cluster Shot

DAMAGE PROGRESSION (does not include magical item bonuses)
L1 1 x 1d12+3 //base + deadly aim + point blank shot
L2 1 x 1d12+3
L3 2 x 1d12+3 //can attack twice per round via Rapid Shot
L4 2 x 1d12+5 //Deadly Aim's bonus increases by +2
L5 2 x 1d12+8 //musket training adds your Dex mod to damage
L6 3 x 1d12+8 //your BAB now adds an extra attack
L7 3 x 1d12+8
L8 3 x 1d12+11 //Deadly Aim's bonus increases by +2, your Dex should now be at least 22, now crits on a 19-20
L9 3 x 1d12+12 //musket training adds an extra +1

Put one rank in Craft (alchemy) and buy as many paper cartridges as possible. Using cartridges, at first and second level, your reloads will be a move action. At third level, they become free actions.

As a last bit of information, muskets have a x4 critical modifier. Anything you crit will surely die and it's easy for you to confirm critical hits.

I made a PFS gunslinger and helped a friend make two gunslingers.

A gunslinger's biggest concern is getting free action reloads. By default, a one-handed firearm takes a standard action to reload while two-handed firearms take a full-round action. To get free action reloads, you need Rapid Reload`with your weapon of choice and paper alchemical cartridges. If you want free action reloads with a musket, you need the Musket Master archetype

Here's a list of random advice off the top of my head:

1) Pistol and muskets are the best standard firearms. Blunderbuss can be fun for flavor. It's usually best to choose one weapon and stick with it.

2) Pistolero and Musket Master are the best archetypes. The others might be fun in edge cases, but I don't recommend them for you.

3) The Musket Master is the only way to get free action reloads with a two-handed firearms. Otherwise, you need the Deadshot deed to full attack your musket.

4) Always save your grit points to quick clear misfires. Misfires are the bane of your existence. My PFS gunslinger was out for an entire combat because he got three misfires in a row.

5) Ammunition for guns are very costly because you need a dose of black powder and a bullet to fire a shot. The Gunsmithing feat thankfully reduces this to 11 silver pieces per shot or 6 gold per alchemical cartridge.

6) Buy lots of bullets and black powder. When you're able to attack more than once per round, use alchemical paper cartridges instead. Make sure you put a rank in Craft (alchemy) so you can buy alchemical cartridges at a discount.

7) You need a gunsmithing kit and powder horns as starting equipment.

8) Buy a bow and use it when the enemy is out of range or they're not worth wasting bullets on.

9) Remember you can restore your battered gun using the Gunsmithing feat. Doing this will turn it into a masterwork weapon.

10) Get Rapid Reload at first level and Rapid Shot as soon as possible. Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, Deadly Aim are good feats.

11) I recommend humans due their bonus feat. Rapid Reload and Point Blank Shot are solid first level feats.

12) Start with an 18 Dexterity and at least 14 Wisdom. Constitution should be 12 or higher. Don't dump Strength.

13) There's not really any convenient way to two-weapon fight with pistols because you need a free hand to reload. It's not impossible, but you either need a third hand by dipping into alchemist or take Gun Twirling feat, which has hefty feat tax for your already feat-starved build.

Kirin Strike and Focused Aim can add Intelligence to damage. A universalist's hand of the apprentice ability lets you throw a sword at someone and use Intelligence on the attack roll.

This isn't 4th Edition where you can basically add any ability modifier to your attack and damage rolls. It needs to make sense both in the game world and the game mechanics. It doesn't make sense in-game because you're still physically wielding the weapon. It doesn't make sense mechanically because Intelligence is already a strong statistic, and mages/gish classes already have a large advantage over full martials in combat.

When I think of runes, I always think of Tibia's (MMORPG) magic system. In Tibia, casting instantaneously is not preferred since many spells have high mana costs and mana regenerates very slowly without expensive potions. So, a mage has to prepare runes, which are basically like multi-charged scrolls, ahead of time.

With the rune knight, you can follow something similar and perhaps model the alchemist's extracts. The rune knight could perhaps spend a rune slot in order to embue his weapon and armor.

I don't really see the problem here. Be a half-orc or a human with a god that has a whip as a favored weapon. Take Weapon Finesse at first level and Whip Mastery at 3rd level. Use a scorpion whip until you have Whip Mastery. Then get an agile whip.

Casters don't need identify to identify magic items. They can do so with detect magic and a Spellcraft check. At 6th level, a caster should have at least a +13 Spellcraft (maybe lower if a sorcerer). They should be able to identify anything with a CL 8 or lower by taking 10.

If she worships Lamashtu, she's literally insane as Lamashtu is the goddess of monstrosity and madness. Since your character likely will not (or cannot) kill her out of mercy, I think the best course of action is to stick with her in order to thwart her acts of evil and patiently wait for an opportunity to bring her back from the madness.

Though honestly, if I GM'd this, I'd make her roll up a new character and use the anti-paladin as the campaign's new villain. This makes the campaign take a dramatic turn without having to railroad PCs into allying with evil.

You could be an oracle before going to harrower. I think the class fits like a glove and lets you pick up all the requirements for harrower.

I once homebrewed an oracle archetype where the oracle's curse is a haunted harrow deck they can use to throw cards at people and curse them. Its playtest was successful, but it could use a few tweaks.

Ultimate Campaign and Gamemastery Guide touch on that the biggest issue is making sure players don't abuse the system to get an effect cheaper. For example, a player can't make a cape with a constant Mage Armor effect so they can get a cheap bracers of armor +4 or a bow with True Strike to cheat having to increase its enhancement bonus. I've rarely had a problem with players customizing their magic items. The players still need your permission and most abuse cases will be very obvious.

I really like the idea of him being an illegal art dealer. I'm not so sure about Maedar. It's a good suggestion, but it doesn't seem as cool if he's a literally a male medusa.

But I like the idea of stoning people as punishment. He definitely should have a couple of wizards on staff with stone to flesh. Maybe he could also do some loan sharking, using his debtor's stoned loved ones as collateral. If they don't pay, he sells the statue to recoup the financial loss.

Ultimate Campaign has rules for owning buildings and businesses. It has its flaws, but it's a starting point.

Bruunwald wrote:
Scott Wilhelm wrote:

You could make something up: you're the DM. You could just say that stone giants, oreads, goliaths, or something else are immune to petrification.

This. I am not a fan of the notion that every single aspect of what the GM puts into play MUST be governed by a rule just to make the players or some other uber-nerd-lawyer happy.

You could easily just say this guy was born with an immunity to petrification (maybe he had a medusa ancestor), and that he has exploited this immunity to indulge himself with a harem of medusae. It says badass, and needs no further explanation. It's hardly game-breaking.

I would prefer such a simple solution over making him blind. Seriously, what is the purpose of a harem if you cannot gaze upon it like a king on a throne?

Bad enough that visitors cannot bask in the glory of such an exotic menagerie without making its master blind, as well.

You just pretty much summed up my NPC in a nutshell. I think I agree with you here. It might be best to just make him whatever I want, like a burly human with some kind of unusual heritage that granted him immunity.I think this fits the character better, despite the cool idea of a fallen angel mobster. Who knows, maybe the angel could be his business rival.

Now to think of exactly what the mobster's business is...

These are some good suggestions! Mobster fallen angel is kind of a neat idea. Is that even feasible? I thought aligned outsiders can't change their alignments.

I'm trying to make a mob boss NPC that's infamous for leisurely conducting business Jabba the Hutt-style while in the presence of his harem of medusae, exploiting his immunity to their gaze to gain an umbrella against his enemies. The medusae typically wear black veils in the presence of visitors to his audience chamber, but his henchmen give his visitors the courtesy of a blindfold to avoid any "accidents."

I originally envisioned him as a stone giant, but I cannot find any humanoid that's immune to gaze or petrification. Maybe you have some ideas for this character?

blackbloodtroll wrote:

Tieflings no longer need the Fiendish Heritage feat for anything.

why's that?

I'm playing a PFS character that's a gunslinger multiclassed into warpriest from the Advanced Class Guide playtest packet. It gives you spells, the ability to cast buffs on yourself as a swift action, weapon focus for free, and you still have a full BAB with your firearm.

1 to 50 of 573 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email 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.