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

Darksol the Painbringer's page

4,297 posts (4,301 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 1 alias.


RSS

1 to 50 of 4,297 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Optimization makes static bonuses the better thing to specialize in. Even if Damage Dice might be cooler and more thematic, Guts' character build wouldn't have the tools needed to really kick it off. You don't have size increasing abilities to make it shine, both virtual and actual. That's spellcaster territory; more specifically, Druids and Monks.

Large-sized Bastard Sword is the same thing as a Full Blade in 3.X. Unfortunately, -2 size penalty and needing to spend a feat to even use it at all is an issue to make effective, even with Bonus Feats. Greatsword would be a safer choice, but again, static bonuses are best, which means critical-focused weapons are better. This means 18-20/X2 multipliers with decent damage dice. The only weapon that does this is the Nodachi, which is just a giant ass sword with a big hilt; but, if your GM is willing to gestalt, I'm sure he wouldn't mind a simple weapon reflavoring.

Speaking of gestalt, while I'm not 100% sure of the rules, I suggest you pick up a different class besides Fighter. Sure, their situation improved, but honestly, Slayers are better, and do fit Guts' character better. You'll still get access to bonus feats, and in fact, can be used to better supplement Guts' other combat utilities (his grenades, Repeating Hand Crossbow, Arm Cannon, etc). There's also the matter that Guts is a cunning and devious combatant, especially when he's desperate, and has been known to use distractions to catch an enemy flat-footed (which in turn makes them open to a devastating Sneak Attack).

Race would be Human. You could go Dual Talent for the attribute increases, as you'll have plenty of skill ranks per level (4 + at the minimum), but the bonus feat isn't anything to scoff at. However, you should have plenty of feats, both bonus and otherwise, to make him able to function with most (if not all) of his weapons. The arm cannon is a gray area, and really functions as a McGuffin, because it's basically a Siege weapon shrunken down into a single mechanical forearm. I'd talk to your GM about how he would run it as, and plan accordingly. If it's a Firearm, you have it covered. If it's a Siege Weapon, well...that's more complicated.

Favored Class Bonus should go into the Human Barbarian Racial FCB.

Anywho, Basic Feat Progression:

1. Power Attack [duh]
2. Precise Shot [For the Repeating Crossbow]
3. Raging Vitality
4. Exotic Weapon Proficiency (Repeating Hand Crossbow)
5. Improved Initiative
6. Crossbow Mastery
7. Accomplished Sneak Attacker
8. Exotic Weapon Proficiency (Firearms) or Weapon Focus (Nodachi*)
9. Extra Rage Power (Lesser Beast Totem)
10. Point Blank Master
11-20. ANY

Rage Power Progression (basically cookie cutter):

2. Superstitious
4. Reckless Abandon
6. Witch Hunter
8. Spell Sunder
9. Lesser Beast Totem
10. Beast Totem
12. Greater Beast Totem
14. Guarded Stance
16. Rolling Dodge
18. Reflexive Dodge
20. Auspicious Mark?

Attributes:

Strength 20 (18 + 2)
Dexterity 12
Constitution 16 (14 + 2)
Intelligence 10
Wisdom 10
Charisma 7

Skills (6 X 20 = 120 Skill Points)

Survival MAX
Perception MAX
Intimidate MAX
Acrobatics MAX
Stealth MAX
Climb + Swim MAX (Let's just hope he never does so again in full armor)

That should about do it. Good luck, my friend.


Remember that in the case of a Fireball, you pick a center and avoid the area. There's nothing wrong with a character flavoring the environment to his advantage (such as stepping to a covered area at just the right moment), or by simply saying that you have a knack of withstanding the indirect effects of the Fireball.

It's also fair to call it blind luck; after all, to avoid the Spread would require an absolute miracle on your part. Quite frankly, Wizards shouldn't be the only ones who have the ability to bend the laws (and thereby the rules) of reality (or the game) to suit their needs.


Paradozen wrote:

Something worth note for lightning-based casters is that they are best in melee-heavy parties. Unlike fire, many lighting spells have more controlled (but smaller) areas. Lightning Bolt is a line you can shoot between frontliners, aggressive thundercloud can fly above the melee affecting large creatures, call lighting is a vertical bolt that hits 1 square, etc. They take longer to take out crowds, but are less likely to grill friends.

I would start fights with aggressive thundercloud and greater, possibly tacking dazing onto the former at high levels. That way you can use move actions to do damage, as well as standard action spells and maybe a quicken or two. Also, most blaster classes have the spell, so it works with whichever theme of caster you might pick.

Finally, don't put all your eggs in one basket. Druids get spontaneous nature's ally when lighting immunity pops up, sorcerers can take some non-blast spells and spontaneously cast them, but I would make sure to pick up some recreational cold spells and buffs on a wizard/witch. Or be a kineticist with another blast type.

Line effects aren't particularly worthwhile, and serve only to get one or two enemies at a time. Aggressive Thundercloud is an all-or-nothing spell. Although with optimized save DCs, it's great, but doesn't scale particularly well, and only serves as a stepping stone to higher level spells (with higher save DCs).

In addition, if you're worried about friendly fire, there are several ways to address it. For starters, proper spell placement (and ally positioning). There's also Communal Resist Energy to cut back on collateral damage, and there is the Selective Spell metamagic (which only adds +1 to the spell level) if you're wanting to eliminate friendly fire entirely. For Area-of-Effect Blasters, this Metamagic feat is very convenient to have, and if optimized, only serves as a minor inconvenience to your blasting.

Druid Summoning is a garbage means of optimization, (even if it's one of the best things a Druid can do for their allies,) and if you're wanting to specialize in summoning creatures, Druids aren't the way to go; Summon Monster is infinitely better, because it has the larger array and versatility of creatures, and has better tools to synergize with. In addition, this is about making a Blaster, not a Summoner; Druids suck at blasting. Flame Strike at 4th level is perhaps the only "good" blast spell they get, if only because they get it before everyone else, but its area is small, its damage is weak, and can be easily resisted and reduced to as little as 1/4 damage on a standard successful saving throw. Call Lightning damages and scales worth a crap, and requires Standard Actions each round just to use the spell, and any improved versions don't get any better. There are better uses of 3rd level spells and Standard Actions, and Call Lightning isn't it.

Sorcerers are constant spontaneous spellcasters, and don't spontaneously spellcast the way you suggest, though certain bloodlines (AKA Orc Bloodline) offer some very powerful goodies for blasting. Unfortunately, it's hard to obtain them without some sort of extreme commitment. Wizards get bonus feats, have the best spell progression (and spell list), are the most MAD, and have the power to be relevant in most every combat with the proper school selection (AKA Admixture), and not have to memorize a bunch of different spells because people are stupid. They're also under the Batman paradigm, where they are only as effective as the player's preparedness and foresight, which may or may not be good.

You want a good spellcasting blaster? Arcanist. All the way. More specifically, the Blood Arcanist. They get the good spell list, an acceptable progression, the ability to enhance their spellcasts, and have the best of both classes; they can get the important Bloodline goodies from the Sorcerer, as well as the versatility of the Admixture school from the Wizard. They have the spontaneity of the Sorcerer (in which spells they memorize can be cast over and over) with the preparedness of the Wizard (in which they can memorize a set amount of spells for each spell level). They can also buff their spell power to a level that no Wizard or Sorcerer can even match, and even without them, is still as strong as any Sorcerer or Wizard of the same nature.


RaizielDragon wrote:

I'm interested in making a blaster focused on electrical damage and am torn between a traditional blaster caster and an air kineticist focused on the electrical side of the air element.

I was wondering what everyones thoughts were on which is the better blaster. My preference leans towards a kineticist because I don't like the idea of potentially running out of spells, but a caster seems easier in that you don't have to worry about collecting various infusions to get the various shapes you want; just select the right shaped spells and you're good.

This is a joke, right?

Kineticists are great because they are Constitution-based and Dexterity-based (for their attack rolls, if any), so they can build some AC and have quite a few hit points before they go down. Unfortunately, they're still only 3/4 BAB, despite rolling for Touch AC, and their range isn't really all that great without investment or specialization in certain mannerisms.

Quite frankly, their defensive benefits are the only things going for them. They lack quadratic versatility and scaling, and they aren't capable of Area of Effect damage; at least, nowhere near as powerful or devastating as a spellcaster. Plus, they are also equally as effective as any Kineticist, and have more self-buffs they can apply themselves to become absolutely brutal and devastating.

Also, if you're wanting the strongest thing, Full 9-level Spellcasters are the most powerful thing in the game. Ask anyone. Nothing short of GM FIAT or the player's knowledgable limits can stop them.

In addition, spell slots are only an issue if you either A. can't prepare them properly, or B. your spell of choice (AKA your go-to blast spell) isn't strong enough in comparison to how much you would value your spell slots; in which case, that's a resource optimization issue that can be easily fixed with proper building.

I'm in the middle of finishing a Master Blaster Caster guide (or at least, bringing it to a 1.0 stage), and when I'm finished, I'll PM you a link so you can browse through it.

For the record, there are two versions of the build, one for Single-Target (your typical Kineticist build would behave this way), and one for Area-of-Effect (great for destroying armies upon armies of mooks, and still fairly effective for stronger enemies).

In short, the results of the optimization guide is that the first build can very easily kill a Tarrasque, a creature with ~550 hit points on average, with a single round of spellcasts. The second one can very easily annihilate any CR-equivalent foe on the same time table, to any creature within the areas designated by your spellcasts.


Boomerang Nebula wrote:
The Guy With A Face wrote:
Quote:
Correct, that is textbook evil with a pleasing facade of goodness. That is how evil hides within an otherwise good community. A less palatable way of describing the same thing is: I will kill whoever I like and I will make sure it is legitimate by calling them my enemy first.

You just called every paladin of Torag evil who we know are lawful good.

Part of the Code Followed By Torag Worshipping Paladins wrote:
Against my people’s enemies, I will show no mercy. I will not allow their surrender, except when strategy warrants. I will defeat them, yet even in the direst struggle, I will act in a way that brings honor to Torag.

If they're following their code properly, its 100% acceptable to kill every enemy without offering surrender unless it serves a strategic purpose. Nothing in there requires redemption or mercy.

Similarly, you've called every Mystery Cultist of Ragathiel evil despite having a required alignment of LG, NG or technically CG (which wouldn't make much sense). Their daily obedience is to

Quote:
Slay a proven wrongdoer in Ragathiel’s name. It is not enough for the sacrifice to have an evil heart or evil intentions; the sacrifice must have committed evil or unlawful deeds. Gain a +4 sacred bonus on saving throws against spells and effects cast by evil creatures.

Once again, no mercy, no redemption.

I'm not saying you're having wrongbadfun, but if I were at your table I would go insane due to your extreme alignment views.

i don't have extreme views, my views on morality are in line with the general community. Modern soldiers are not allowed to kill enemy combatants who surrender to them. Killing someone who is no threat to you is a cowardly, inhumane and evil act. This is recognised in the modern rules of warfare. No paladin would do that.

Whoever wrote the Paladin code has extreme views, accepting...

Paladins will do those things if their code requires it. Ever heard of "Take No Prisoners"? Yeah, that's a thing in today's society, even for certain Paladins of Pathfinder (i.e. Torag Paladins). Quite frankly, in certain situations, procluding an enemy to live longer, except that increased longevity is via obvious suffering, torturing, etc. is significantly more unethical (and probably more evil). In those instances, it's actually more of a Good act to put them out of their misery than it is to keep them alive.

Don't confuse psychopathy with fanatacism. Remember that they are divine champions of a deity, and they follow the teachings and code set by their deity. The code of their deity says "Show no mercy, and take no prisoners unless tactically beneficial." That's not Good (which Torag isn't), but not Evil either (which, again, Torag isn't). Not all Paladin deities have to actually fall between both Lawful and Good for Paladins to select (and worship) them, nor is it a necessity for Paladins to maintain their alignment.

But at the end of the day, it's ultimately the GM who determines what the Paladin's code means for the player, and how it should be represented. If you, as a GM, feel that a Paladin being a murderhobo toward most everything he fights would be against Torag's code of "Show no mercy," then by all means communicate that to your Paladin player before he commits himself to the deity.

Otherwise, you're gonna have a bad time.


Entryhazard wrote:
Darksol the Painbringer wrote:
I appreciate the answers (and I notice that the FAQs as of late are fairly lengthy and complex; I actually had to re-read a few sentences to see if I understood the meaning correctly), though this does raise an unusual precedent from the Psychic Bloodline corollary; that is, Archetypes count as their own, unique favored class. This means that technically, if your Favored Class is the vanilla Fighter, and not Mobile Fighter, as an example, and you took levels in Mobile Fighter, you would not be eligible for a Favored Class Bonus, because your Favored Class is the vanilla Fighter, and not the Mobile Fighter. (Also, before people spout the "FAQs only do what they say," this is an example that is explicitly paraphrased within the Psychic Bloodline FAQ, so...)

An archetipe is still that class, what changes are the specific characteristics.

A psychic sorcerer is still a sorcerer, but is not an arcane caster. So it still qualifies for anything that calls out sorcerers.

Darksol the Painbringer wrote:
Another interesting thing of note, is that according to the Psychic Bloodline FAQ, if you have a Psychic Bloodline Sorcerer, he would not be eligible for the likes of the Expanded Arcana feat, several Racial Favored Class Bonuses, slews of Magic Items, etc. Basically, anything that requires or improves Arcane spellcasting, does not apply to Psychic Bloodline Sorcerers in any manner, since they are treated as having Psychic spellcasting, and have all of the rules and restrictions from that apply instead of the Arcane spellcasting.

Yes, they can't take anything that explicitly requires arcane spellcasting, but can take stuff that requires psychic casting

On a side note, Expanded Arcana still works as it only requires spontaneous casting

I've said it before and I'll say it again; while I appreciate the extra brevity and thoroughness of the FAQ, it really makes me scratch my head sometimes, because even after reading and re-reading it, I'm seeing things that I don't notice before, and I end up coming out with a different interpretation every time I read and re-read it.

Also, misleading feat title is misleading. Should've been called "Expanded Spell Knowledge."


Devilkiller wrote:
Back to the actual subject of the thread, I have no idea what the OP is talking about. Is there some special rule which makes it harder to ID a Lawful or Chaotic outsider with Knowledge (Planes) than it is to ID a Good or Evil one?

I clarify what I meant in my following post. (Read: Get ready for a wall-of-text rant.)

Let me give you some examples. A Demon is Chaotic Evil. A Devil is Lawful Evil. It's quite clear that they are Evil, because they are usually performing things like killing innocents, preparing schemes to stop the forces of Good, etc.

But, it's unclear if they are, for example, Chaotic or Lawful. I mean sure, in this specific instance, Demons don't much care for contracts or legal bindings or words of honor or commitment. Devils, on the other hand, treat such legal bindings or agreements with more brevity and authority. That is, if a contract or agreement stated that the Devil would grant so-and-so an Unholy Boon, they would be obligated to do so (but that doesn't stop them from making said Boon a toxic and unhealthy "buff" for so-and-so).

And the worst part is, you wouldn't be able to tell whether that is actually the case unless you either A. Know the Beastiaries like the back of your hand and Metagame the absolute hell out of Pathfinder (in which case, I applaud your system mastery and knowledge), B. Bear witness to several, character-defining actions to determine whether they fall on the Lawful, Neutral, or Chaotic axis, C. Succeed at a Knowledge check so the GM can tell you, in-game, that said creature is on the Lawful, Neutral, or Chaotic axis, or D. Have a Detect Lawful/Chaotic spell going at all times to determine if they are Lawful or Chaotic. If you're using both and they don't ping, then they are Neutral (or using an Undetectable Alignment spell).

There's also the matter of appearances, abilities, etc. Evil and Good are much more clearly contrast in appearance, and have abilities that sync much more closely to said appearance. Law and Chaos' appearances are not so well known, and making the assumption that because you don't know so much about them, that they are Lawful or Chaotic, isn't much to go on because that can easily be the result of lack of system mastery, a failed Knowledge check, Undetectable Alignment is cast, or simply because you can't use spells like Detect Lawful/Chaotic. As such, this makes any resources (and therefore action economy) spent as an attempt to counter their defenses risky and perhaps useless investments that could have been better spent doing something besides that.

Not to mention, because of the opposite levels of awareness between the two axis, the preparedness for said foes are significantly reduced as well. Truth be told, this is what makes +5 Weapons so good; not only because of the bonuses to attack and damage, but being able to just ignore the required preparedness needed to properly deal with purely Lawful or purely Chaotic enemies. (I mean, Align Weapon, Protection from X, etc. are spells that most nobody prepares for Chaotic or Lawful enemies unless they know that they'll be fighting them, and since they're very unpredictable and people don't have the knowledge to fight them, they become overly-situational spells that will only see the light of day once per few sessions.)

Another in-game example of this is to look at Martial character builds. How many players run around with Holy Weapons? Most every one of them do, because Evil is commonly prepared for, the most predictable to come across, and expected to fight against. Unholy, not so much, but it does see use in Evil campaigns as much as any other, typical campaign. But how many people run around with Axiomatic or Anarchic weapons? They're practically non-existent; and like the Bane weapon property, are best served as temporary attachments to your weapon through things like Divine Bond, Arcane Pool, etc. because the odds of knowing that you're fighting such enemies is about the equivalent of winning the lottery without getting some outside knowledge, through a check, detection ability, metagaming, etc.

My original point is that Lawful/Chaotic subjects should be just as easily determined as Good/Evil subjects, and as such, should be just as easily prepared against. The fact that they aren't changes the paradigm of power significantly between the four alignments (i.e. for optimizing and powergaming purposes, Good/Evil alignments suck unless you absolutely need them for something, such as being a Paladin). If you're simply a Lawful/Chaotic character, the likelihood for enemies to be using Axiomatic/Anarchic weapons, or Anti-Lawful/Anti-Chaotic spells against you, unless they too, are Chaotic/Lawful, respectively, are extremely reduced (and if you're True Neutral, you're basically immune to anything that requires specific Alignments, or you suffer the least effects, both benefits and penalties, of every Alignment-based effect).


I appreciate the answers (and I notice that the FAQs as of late are fairly lengthy and complex; I actually had to re-read a few sentences to see if I understood the meaning correctly), though this does raise an unusual precedent from the Psychic Bloodline corollary; that is, Archetypes count as their own, unique favored class. This means that technically, if your Favored Class is the vanilla Fighter, and not Mobile Fighter, as an example, and you took levels in Mobile Fighter, you would not be eligible for a Favored Class Bonus, because your Favored Class is the vanilla Fighter, and not the Mobile Fighter. (Also, before people spout the "FAQs only do what they say," this is an example that is explicitly paraphrased within the Psychic Bloodline FAQ, so...)

Another interesting thing of note, is that according to the Psychic Bloodline FAQ, if you have a Psychic Bloodline Sorcerer, he would not be eligible for the likes of the Expanded Arcana feat, several Racial Favored Class Bonuses, slews of Magic Items, etc. Basically, anything that requires or improves Arcane spellcasting, does not apply to Psychic Bloodline Sorcerers in any manner, since they are treated as having Psychic spellcasting, and have all of the rules and restrictions from that apply instead of the Arcane spellcasting.


The Guy With A Face wrote:
Arbane the Terrible wrote:

Town full of clueless people infected by something harmless-seeming...

.... Isn't that how Arthas ended up becoming the Lich King in Warcraft III?

I think there's a massive difference between the two situations. For one, the PC's solution was, after diplomacy failed, to scare the crowd into dropping their death-flowers. That's quite different from, "This entire city must be purged."

EDIT: Unless, of course, you're talking about Hearthglen. Then the difference becomes the absence of the massive undead army and the mind-breaking fun of watching people turn into undead before your eyes without being able to do anything.

To be honest, Arthas provides a very good example of what happens when you play Lawful Stupid.

He wanted to destroy a Greater Evil so badly that he used an Evil object (that was probably even more Evil than his Greater Evil enemy) to do so, even though in the long run, he would become one of the Greatest Evils to ever exist in the universe by claiming and using said object.

And in that same exact moment, he decided to kill those who were (or going to become) plagued into mindless Undead, instead of finding a means to reverse those effects before resorting to the ultimatum of "They must be cleansed by fire and by sword," like a typical Pathfinder Paladin would probably do.

But, back to the OP's situation...

The first thing that should be discussed in a game where PCs are required to keep a specific alignment are what the GM's expectations for the PC with said alignment (or even with said deity, if they have an influence on how the character is supposed to act), and give examples on things that would break that alignment, whether eventually, or immediately. If the GM feels that threatening a child is an extremely Evil act, then that should have been discussed with the OP, because we (and several others) don't think so, and have used rules to back up our claim.

(Which also calls into question as to whether that's a healthy train of thought; threatening a child, that is. Luckily, this is only a fantasy-world discussion, so...)


Mechanical Pear wrote:

Punishing Kick as the last hit? That way, they come at you, you hit them three times, and push them 5 ft. back, out of melee range (possibly), that way, they have to repeat the process next turn, or just go ranged.

Maybe Pushing Assault would be an easier way to do that, as a barbarian, though.

Pushing Assault requires using Power Attack to function, which means you'd need to attack or something before they act. In addition, losing PA damage can really bite. By ~8th level, where you'll be getting +9 damage from PA with a two-handed weapon, that's 27 damage you're missing out on, and that will only go up with levels (and certain feats/rage powers).

It's more prudent to, for example, ready an attack (and declare Power Attack) for when the enemy moves into your melee range after your other attacks of opportunity resolve, and then proceed to 5-foot out afterward, forcing their charge or movement to not do anything.

It's a basic, concise Readied Action that falls within the realm of possibility for a GM to allow.

This gives you:

-3 Attacks, 2 of which are at full BAB, 1 of which at BAB - 5, and is very nice.

-Full benefits of Power Attack with all of your attacks (as you must apply Power Attack at the time of readying your attack)

-The ability to invalidate an enemy's Charge action, or make them require more movement, which can potentially negate any sort of attack they would make.

Unfortunately, you won't be able to Full Attack in the following round, but you can repeat this process again and again until they're dead. Makes for a very solid tactic.


Blake's Tiger wrote:

Place ranks in Knowledge: Planes?

EDIT: Oh, wait, the player and not the character? You shouldn't know, at least not until one of your characters interacts with it, uses an appropriate divination ability, or uses its ranks in Knowledge: Planes.

I'm not saying that the player himself needs to know. In fact, I'm saying the opposite; the character should know before the player does, and it usually ends up being the opposite because the tools you need to use to actually determine such things, even for a player, are obsolete or don't even work half the time.

The line between Lawful and Chaotic seem so blurred (and at the same time, so glossed over and insignificant) that it's just never dealt with.

That being said, I would still agree that even for the Player, it's more difficult to determine what is Lawful/Chaotic before knowing what is Good/Evil without the player looking into the Beastiary entry and seeing the "This is Lawful/Chaotic" tag on the creature's type.

It shouldn't require what is effectively cheating to know how to actually deal with a Lawful/Chaotic outsider.


5 people marked this as FAQ candidate.

According to the Ultimate Combat section on the PRD, Alchemists get access to several Communal spells as Extracts. The one I am most interested in, is Resist Energy (Communal).

Now, normal Communal spells require that you touch the intended targets and distribute the duration as evenly as possible at the time of casting. Unfortunately, Extracts are basically spells in Potion form, and use both sets of rules (potions and spells), which complicates things.

So, since an Extract isn't exactly a spell (and not an actual potion either), and potions normally don't allow you to distribute their spell effects across creatures, what happens with Communal Extracts?

I've looked at all of the Potion descriptions, the Extract entry, and I don't see anything that gives any sort of answer, and I'd rather not leave something as valuable and game-changing as this to table variation. (And I suppose this is because Communal spells didn't become released until Ultimate Combat was published, but a minor point.)

If you would likewise appreciate an answer to this, please hit the FAQ button on this post to signal an official response in relation to the bolded section of this post.


As the title.

What sparked this, is I know there are a lot of planar beings that are only purely Chaotic, or purely Lawful, and don't have any sort of Good or Evil ties to them. But without the Beastiary slapping a "This is Lawful/Chaotic" tag on the outsider in question, the only way a player can determine whether something is Lawful or Chaotic is by using things like Detect (Alignment goes here) abilities, or a very lucky Knowledge check, which may or may not even work due to things like Undetectable Alignment and the such.

A lot of such creatures can be determined by their behavior, or even their appearance. But these guys? You'd have to basically get a spreadsheet or schedule to determine whether they are Lawful or Chaotic, and even that's iffy because you wouldn't even know what to look for.

Am I missing something? Are purely Lawful/Chaotic beings that much more difficult to determine, and more powerful than those who are more easily detected and dealt with?


My interpretation:

Multi-Weapon Fighting wrote:

This multi-armed creature is skilled at making attacks with multiple weapons.

Prerequisites: Dex 13, three or more hands.

Benefit: Penalties for fighting with multiple weapons are reduced by –2 with the primary hand and by –6 with off hands.

Normal: A creature without this feat takes a –6 penalty on attacks made with its primary hand and a –10 penalty on attacks made with all of its off hands. (It has one primary hand, and all the others are off hands.) See Two-Weapon Fighting in the Pathfinder RPG Core Rulebook.

Special: This feat replaces the Two-Weapon Fighting feat for creatures with more than two arms.

Based on the feat text, MWF replaces TWF if you possess more than two arms. Since that leaves a lot of gaps in the rules, it's safe to say that if you're going for feats that require TWF, MWF replaces it as a pre-requisite, though, in the case of ITWF and GTWF, you're only ever gaining one extra attack with those feats.

It's also safe to assume that the baseline for MWF is identical to TWF except where it's mentioned or obviously intended for the same line of rationale above. This includes things like Light Weapons for reducing penalties, activity restrictions, etc.

So, back to our dual Two-Bladed Sword character, which uses Double Weapons. They have this to say:

Double Weapons wrote:
You can use a double weapon to fight as if fighting with two weapons, but if you do, you incur all the normal attack penalties associated with fighting with two weapons, just as if you were using a one-handed weapon and a light weapon. You can choose to wield one end of a double weapon two-handed, but it cannot be used as a double weapon when wielded in this way—only one end of the weapon can be used in any given round.

So, we have two attack methods demonstrated here. The first is that you can attack with one end of the Two-Bladed Sword with two hands, or you can use two hands to attack with both ends equally, as a Light and One-Handed Weapon. Because you have four arms, you can do either of these twice. However, the damage bonuses of MWF (where there is one Primary, and three Off-Hand) will only allow one of your One-Handed Weapons to grant full Strength. This can be circumvented with Double Slice, which will allow you to deal full Strength with a single Off-Hand of your choice.

In addition, because you'll count as having two One-Handed Weapons for your MWF, this means you'll have a -4 penalty to all of your attacks (unless you apply an Effortless Lace or similar effect to one of the two One-Handed ends).

So, to sum up:

MWF counts as TWF for all intents and purposes, such as qualifying for other feats, action type and restriction applications, etc.

-4 to all your attacks.

Feats like Double Slice, ITWF, GTWF, etc. only apply to one Off-Hand, though it is one of your choosing at the time of performing MWF.


Those feat chains are fairly extensive, and don't really do a whole lot for what they're taken for. They're best with a Reach weapon, which you aren't using, or making some other means to generate Attacks of Opportunity. At the rate of your feat selection, you wouldn't see them in use for PFS anyway.

Hammer the Gap is better for TWF builds, that much is true, but by the endgame you're running with 3 or 4 attacks, which would give you as much as an extra 6 damage per round.

Really, the only other alternatives are feats like Dodge, Toughness, Lightning Reflexes, Strong Comeback (which amplifies your Improved Iron Will), or one of the Weapon Styles that are basically all crappy.

Too bad you can't VMC in PFS, otherwise taking the Barbarian VMC as a Fighter would be a great use of your excess feats.


Ranishe wrote:

Actually, in regards to Darksol's doc...

Fighters gain a bonus combat feat every even level. Rogues gain a rogue talent. Barbarians a rage power. Why is it that these classes each get a "choose a thing" feature on every even level, but the fighter is the one who only gets them from the common pool of combat feats, especially when other classes (ranger, magus, slayer) dip further into this pool with their own features? Should the fighter have their own section of "fighter talents"?

I don't think so, because if feats were of comparable effectiveness to things like rage power (scaling with level) then there wouldn't be a power discrepancy. The main advantage of the fighter's bonus feats would then be the versatility they offer above a normal class, or the ability to leverage general feats while still filling out a combat style. The fighter's uniqueness can then be made up with their other features to give them something beyond "has more of the same" possibly including features that synergise with feats.

Which is precisely what I was trying to accomplish when I created Combat Arts. These are abilities that allow the Fighter to perform unique and interesting actions in combat that not many (if any) other classes or characters can perform. That's what makes Paladins, Barbarians, Inquisitors, Bards, etc. unique to the playing field, by having their own tailor-made abilities and choices. The Rogue ones suck, and the Fighter didn't have anything tailor-made besides some silly Fighter-only feats that should be Class Features.

I also expanded their ability of selecting bonus feats to not only be an optional thing (if they truly want a feat), but to be able to circumvent some pre-requisites, as well as advance their access to others (i.e. those that require a high BAB).

The Fighter-only feats in the game that weren't Weapon Focus/Specialization, Shield Focus/Specialization, etc. should have simply been class features for the Fighter. Getting rid of staple feats like that should be done so that you aren't transmuting Feats into free numbers. (Although they aren't bad options, Feats should be better spent on something interesting and unique, enabling the character to do some out-of-the-box activities, not something as bland as a +1 to hit or +2 damage with a single type of weapon).


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm presuming you went Human, which is a solid choice, since that's the only way, as far as I can tell, that you'd have 7 feats at level 5.

In my opinion, from the prospects of my Two-handed Fighter guide:

Dodge isn't that great of a feat. This could have been better spent on something like Improved Iron Will, Toughness, or even Additional Traits would be amazing. One feat for a +1 to AC isn't really worth the cost, especially when it's (as far as I can tell) not building into anything. Spending feats for something like that is better spent on what you've already projected, which gives about the same AC at first, but becomes stronger as you level. I don't know if you acquired that feat with one of your Fighter bonus feats, but if you did, I'd switch it out (unless you really need it for something) as soon as you can for one of the other suggestions I made.

The Greatsword is a decent early-game weapon with a decent multiplier, but to be honest, Nodachi is the kind of weapon you're looking for. It is only slightly less base damage than the Greatsword, but with it dealing D10 damage, it scales better with size increases than the Greatsword does (meaning it will eventually outmatch its damage), and plus it has a coveted 18-20/X2 multiplier. There's also the factor that it can deal both Slashing and Piercing damage, has the Brace weapon property, and is still a Martial Weapon.

Vital Strike is a trap option that requires you to abuse size bonuses to your damage dice to truly make it effective. In other words, unless you're a Colossal-sized+ Creature with effects like Lead Blades, Strong Jaw, et. al. applied onto you, it's not going to have much merit later on. All of these things, a Fighter cannot perform or achieve. Vital Strike is best used on Natural Weapons with high base damage dice (since it's easier to pump their damage dice over other types of attacks), and if you're only ever going to get a single attack anyway. To be honest, Vital Strike is truly only good for any martial if you're running Mythic rules, which we all know PFS doesn't allow.

It's okay to take the base Vital Strike feat, since your iteratives may not be good enough right away to make proper use of your full attacks, but I'd work into retraining it into something else later down the road, when your BAB gets higher. This same subject also applies to Furious Focus.

The best thing is to focus on your Full Attack routine. Picking up the Greater Weapon Focus and Greater Weapon Specialization feats will make your higher BAB iteratives essentially a guarantee, and your lower BAB iteratives have a feasible chance to deal absolutely insane damage. Always find ways to get into a position to Full Attack, even if it means relying on your party members for some things. Picking up Gloves of Dueling will make your damage and to-hit skyrocket, and certain Advanced Training abilities will improve due to these gloves, namely your Defensive Weapon Training ability. Boots of Speed (or a friendly caster giving you Haste) will make you more likely to hit, and gives you an extra attack at your highest BAB, something which Vital Strike wouldn't allow. It can also make you run/fly really fast to your target.

Here's my projected feat path for you instead, * = Bonus Feat:

1. Power Attack* Weapon Focus (Greatsword), Improved Initiative*
2. Furious Focus*
3. Iron Will
4. Weapon Specialization (Greatsword)*
5. Improved Iron Will
6. Vital Strike* (to be retrained as Improved Critical [Greatsword] at 8th level)
7. Defensive Weapon Training (AWT), Armor Specialization (AAT)*
8. Greater Weapon Focus (Greatsword)*
9. Additional Traits (Armor Expert/Reactionary/Defender of the Society, Indomitable Faith/Birth Mark), Flight Mastery (AWT)*
10. Warrior Spirit (AWT)*
11. Hammer the Gap
12. Greater Weapon Specialization (Greatsword)*

For the Additional Traits, you can pick Armor Expert for the reduced ACP (to make up for the Advanced Armor Training choice at 7th level), or Reactionary (because +2 Initiative is crazygood), and Indomitable Faith for the +1 to all Will Saves, or Birth Mark for the +2 to Will Saves versus the stuff you'd be really concerned about for Will Saves (Charm/Compulsion effects). Any of those can be changed out for the Fighter-exclusive Defender of the Society trait, which gives you a +1 bonus to AC while wearing any sort of Medium or Heavy Armor, but I'd prefer the other choices instead, since you'll already have decent AC.

If this wasn't Society play, I would've advised against the Warrior Spirit choice, since by the endgame, you'll be running around with a +10 Greatsword, making the Warrior Spirit obsolete; however, that will be perfect for Society play which ends at 12th level, allowing you access to that sweet, sweet +5 weapon, as well as any nifty properties you may want.


To be honest, I don't see how you can just "lead them away." They are smart, they aren't some mindless, animal-like Undead that you can just lure away with a piece of fresh meat (AKA Zombies). Although Ghouls and Zombies share a similar food palette, Ghouls aren't stupid. They might know that they're being baited, and not go for it.

This is very similar to a case of having outrageous high AC, but otherwise not being a threat. In the case of stupid enemies, they'll hit the first thing they see, even if it's highly inoptimal. In the case of smart enemies, they might go after him for a couple rounds, but will eventually realize they're vainly fighting the wrong target, and switch.

Except, in the case of baiting them outside the city (or into a trap you guys create), the Ghouls may or may not see through it, in which case you're either wasting man power (and time) for a gambit that may or may not pay off as well as simply going to exterminate them.

If your Cleric has the Command Undead feat, you might be able to simply make them leave the city, or to fight against their brethren, though to be honest, if you try to make them leave, they may simply come back. Killing them, while time-consuming, is also the most safe option for your city, because simply leading them away, or commanding them to leave, is only a temporary benefit, one that can make your ownership of the city backfire.


BigNorseWolf wrote:
It was, again. Not glossed over. Accept the fact that people can disagree with you without being lazy, incompetent, or biased and deal with what's being said rather than just insulting people.

I am dealing with what's being said.

You said:

BigNorseWolf wrote:
As the difference between the two is only 300 fake units of currency (faker even than real units of currency) I would just pay the extra gold.

From this claim, I presumed you were talking about the difference between a Masterwork Shield with reduced ACP, and a Masterwork Shield with increased to-hit. If that wasn't it, then I apologize. But if it is, then I pointed to the rule that said you can't pay for the extra 300 gold to get the +1 to hit for Armor and Shields, that you have to pay the extra 150 gold to reduce the ACP instead. Four times, yes, but not all of them were towards you (though you made the same argument that James Risner made), and that's because my stance hasn't changed, since no new evidence has come to light that I haven't refuted.

If you see that as an insult, then I apologize, because that's not the intent behind these statements. I'm always about making sure that I'm getting my point across clearly and concisely. Unfortunately, that even includes being a little blunt about it, because the Pathfinder rules are confusing, difficult to explain, and at points, quite contradictive to their intent.

At any rate, it is clear that the original question to this thread has been answered, and this debate we're currently having is irrelevant to the answer already provided. If someone else wants to make a thread about how Shields become Magic Weapons when they can't be created as (the general definition of) Masterwork Weapons, then we can continue the discussion there. Until then, it's just pointless, stress-inducing, back-and-forth pock shots, something that helps nobody, and as of right now, serves no purpose other than to cause trouble.


MrCharisma wrote:
UnArcaneElection wrote:
Later on, a maneuver Magus could use Quickened True Strike to break through high CMD in 1 round (as I posted above).

Actually a Magus kind of has a built in Quicken spell, b]Spell Combat[/b]. To be honest Quicken spell isn't super useful to a Magus since they already have that effect and it doesn't have a built in "+4 to level".

There are some amazing tricks you can do if you're casting 2 spells & full attacking in the same turn but you really need to build specifically for that kind of thing.

There's also the factor of Spell Storing weapons, which allow you to discharge spells stored into the weapon as a Free Action (according to the PRD), though it's only one use until it has to be restored, so it's really only good for contingent or emergency use spells like Vampiric Touch, so you aren't dying in the middle of combat, or say, debuffing with the likes of Dispel Magic. The best part is, it discharges on a successful hit, so you aren't having to waste spells for it.

So, with Spell Combat, Quickened Spells, and a set-up Spell Storing weapon, you could, in fact, get ~3 spells off within a single round.


The Ghoul's disease requires them to actually hit you in order to be affected by it. The Save DC for it is also fairly easy to make as a 7th level PC, assuming Cloaks of Resistance, having the good Fortitude Save progression, and not completely dumping your Constitution. Its AC, HP, and to-hit are absolutely weak. Though, if you come across guards that were wearing armor that were turned to Ghouls, they will have the increased AC from that armor.

There's also the factor that if certain powerful citizens were to succumb to the Ghoul Fever, they would instead rise as Ghasts, which are significantly more powerful and deadly to your party, since Paralysis is the Supernatural equivalent of Hold Person, a very common Save or Die spell. Their HP and to-hit aren't that much better, but their AC and Save DCs for both the Disease and the Paralysis go up significantly, which makes them a bigger threat if not taken down as soon as possible.

All I can say is, this is basically the beginning of World War G. (Get it? Because it's not Zombies, it's Ghouls and Ghasts?) Use range to your advantage, set up a Tactical Operations Center at the heart of the Ghoul Swarm, make sure it's secure so they don't end up sandwiching you guys, and be sure to be able to make as many attacks as possible; with the proper damage bonuses and buffs, a lot of your party members should be able to kill a Ghoul for each attack you make, and probably a Ghast for every Full Attack against them.

Bows, Crossbows, Alchemical Supplies (like Alchemist's Fire and Alchemist's Acid, great wave-clear for the Ghoul trash), Reach Weapons, all of these are going to be vital to reducing the amount of damage and set-backs you'll be taking.

**EDIT**

Also remember that Ghouls and Ghasts, unlike Zombies, are very smart; possibly smarter than a lot of your party members, as they have 13 (or more) Intelligence. They'll know how to use tactics, can probably understand what you're saying, etc. Plan for that accordingly by denying them any use of effective tactics.


Remember your character backstory; you really only care about 3 people. One is already dead. The other two are somewhere. Everyone and everything else is expendable. This includes deities, like Asmodeus, so if Asmodeus would betray your trust and your value of those 3 people, he would consider it, even if it means invoking the wrath of Hell itself.

But keep in mind that Asmodeus would be leagues upon leagues more powerful than this Epic Time Wizard; after all, he is still a deity, one fueled with the power of condemning willing souls to his estate of Hell. It might be more prudent to enlist Asmodeus' help to (essentially) damn this Epic Time Wizard to Hell, by either twisting his morals, values, etc. or by tricking him to eternal damnation through Asmodeus' grand scheme. This would get Asmodeus more on your good size, and perhaps

I'd loop Asmodeus in by simply playing a ruse to the Epic Time Wizard (even if he may or may not see it) to basically have "turned" on Asmodeus to fulfill his promise, while actually prepping yourself to convert the Epic Time Wizard into a valuable soul for Asmodeus' Hell. This will get the Time Wizard off your back (letting you do what you want or originally planned to do), enlist the "Revenge" you've been wanting ("180 Times, you've made me watch my parent die. Now, you'll watch infinitely more as the things you cherish die, corrupting you into the very thing that would cause their demise.")

You'll also still keep your morals in check and your loyalties to what you care for (family members, Asmodeus, useful minions, et. al.), and Asmodeus will gain something in return for your cooperation and collaboration to bring a powerful unit into Hell's army.

Although the GM did specify that the character can be killed towards the end, it'd be more within character to not simply "kill" him. This is where the enlisting and praying to Asmodeus comes in. I mean, Asmodeus isn't about killing or genocide (at least, all the time), so this would be something that he can help you with while not breaking your apparent oath or contract to the Time Wizard.


Ckorik wrote:

You guys are missing the gold here...

Klar's can have vorpal or keen edge.

Vorpal isn't really anything special unless you're fighting the Jabbawock, and isn't worth the price tag. Even if you have a 1 in 5 chance of decapitating an enemy, you would basically do the same thing with a X4 critical multiplier weapon, being a competent martial and everything, and the enemy wouldn't require a head to do so.

Also, Keen isn't particularly effective for it, since the critical multiplier for the Klar remains a 20/X2, even after the FAQ. So making it 19-20/X2, while still helpful, isn't particularly gamebreaking, and really only makes up for the fact that you can't bump its damage to 2D6 anymore via Bashing. It would be more prudent to apply it to a X4 weapon, like the Scythe, than it would the Klar, ironically enough.

The only real benefit to a Klar at this point is that you're saving more money in enhancements and flat modifiers, and that it's a shield you can both use defensively and offensively, quite well, without having to spend more than say, an Improved Shield Bash feat. That isn't to say it's bad; it's actually the best versatile Shield choice in the game, since it's a Light Shield defensively (letting you cast spells or otherwise maintain free hands via Sword and Board), and a one-handed weapon offensively (which means you can two-hand for 1.5x Strength).


BigNorseWolf wrote:
Darksol the Painbringer wrote:


You also glossed over the text

It was not glossed over.

masterwork weapon
masterwork armor
Masterwork tool

Three uses of masterwork that mean different things.

Quote:
that says the ACP reduction is applied instead of the +1 to-hit.

By this logic, I could enchant a masterwork set of thieves tools as masterwork weapons because they are masterwork. Shields may in fact be intended to work that way, I'm pretty sure a masterwork drinking cup is not. I think it would be odd if a masterwork shield was the cheapest masterwork weapon in the game.

As the difference between the two is only 300 fake units of currency (faker even than real units of currency) I would just pay the extra gold.

Except you can't. You're pulling the same mistake James Risner is by saying you can pay 300 gold to give the shield a +1 to hit. The rules specifically say that you can't do that.

This is the 4th time I've said this, and it hasn't changed on the PRD in the short time we've discussed this.

And yes, you did gloss over it, because you would realize that the "instead" clause only applies to Armor and Shields (as they are what is being called out), because you are paying for the ACP reduction to constitute being Masterwork [i]instead[/b] of the +1 to-hit that other Masterwork Weapons usually possess. This is specific to Armor and Shields in contrast to the general rules regarding Masterwork Weapons.

Masterwork items like cups, tools, etc. wouldn't apply, because they aren't a type of Armor or Shields that can be made Masterwork, which the "instead" clause applies to.


Serisan wrote:
Darksol the Painbringer wrote:
Metamagic feats are really only for Blasters;

*snip*

Counterpoint: Persistent Spell. Until you start getting No Save win spells, Persistent drastically increases the odds of a spell successfully impacting an encounter. My 13th level Psychic used Persistent Mental Block (after adjustment, 4th level, base spell is 2nd) to shut off a dragon. There were, of course, other things going on, but Persistent caused the dragon to have a roughly 1% chance of getting out of the effect. It was a CR 17 encounter.

What do you call a dragon that can't remember how to fly and can only full attack? Answer: dead.

I agree with the other posters that Quicken is a higher level metamagic. I would take it no earlier than 13, probably pushing towards 15. 7th level slots make it much more viable.

The problem with save or die spells are that you really gotta use feats, class features, etc. to pump up your DC. Which is fine for a Save-or-Suck caster, since as you said, Persistent spell is all you need (Heighten is really nice too, as that increases the Save DC as well), but to be honest, it's very difficult to make universally strong, and can only function in niche situations.

The other problem is that their applications aren't universal. Let's take our Mental Block spell as an example; it's really powerful for its level, and only certain Psionics, or a Bard, can cast it, so not even a God Wizard can shut down encounters that way.

But, if you're running into creatures with strong saves versus Mind-Affecting Effects (or even Immunities to said effects), you just became useless in that fight, Persistent Spell and all. There's also a question as to whether the Persistent Spell effects apply to saving throws after the initial one, as Mental Block gives you a Saving Throw every round.

The way I see it, if you can reliably affect a Human Barbarian with Superstition (and the FCB into it as well), which is the epitomy of powerful Will Saves (as high as +28 for their Will Save against your spell) then yes, Save or Die spells are great and can trivialize most every encounter. However, I have yet to come across a DC that is higher than ~32, so the odds of beating that Will Save is highly unlikely; at least, without some outside help or debuffing (which would likewise be difficult to implement, at least in spell form).


BigNorseWolf wrote:
Darksol the Painbringer wrote:
No, it's not. Didn't you see the bolded part that says "You can't create a masterwork version of such an item that confers an enhancement bonus on attack rolls"?

Yes, and immediately noticed the contradiction with the idea that they can be enchanted as magical weapons in their own right, and that requires a masterwork version.

Which it already is.

You also glossed over the text that says the ACP reduction is applied instead of the +1 to-hit. That's because the rules specifically disallow armor and shields having a +1 to-hit. This means that for the intents and purposes of constituting a Masterwork Weapon, if an armor or shield that can be used as a weapon and has reduced ACP in such a manner instead of the +1 to-hit, it is still, in fact, a Masterwork Weapon.


That Paladin is going to be having some issues with the current party set-up. My guess is the only reason the Paladin is in this party is to stop the BBEG in question, though that would mean the Paladin is aware of the BBEG, and understands that the Evil party members are a necessity to stop said BBEG.

I anticipate that at the end of the campaign, with the BBEG defeated, the Paladin will probably immediately turn on the Rogue and the Druid.

That being said, you guys have 2 sets of Divine spellcasting (Paladin and Druid), one of which will probably go away after the BBEG is dead. Thankfully, it's not the full spellcaster. The other is a Wizard, which is basically playing a Demi-God Wizard through buffing, and minor control benefits, which has the best spell list in the game.

Personally, I'd vote the Oracle, because the Druid spell list is absolute garbage outside of getting Flame Strike early and gaining spells like Barkskin. You'll want strong healing, which the Wizard doesn't provide, the Druid sucks at, and the Paladin really only effectively heals himself.

Sorcerer is nice, but the role of the Arcane Spellcaster is more than adequately filled by the Gnome Wizard. The role of Divine Spellcaster isn't adequately filled by the Oread Druid or the Halfling Paladin.

Of course, this is based purely off of mechanics and optimization. If you don't care for anything like that, then disregard my statements and just play whatever you think is best.

**EDIT**

@ Create Mr. Pitt: Yo dawg, I herd you liek Paladins. So I made an Evil character. Seriously though, it probably is. And I just added gasoline to the pile of soaked wood that is Paladin Debates.


James Risner wrote:
Darksol the Painbringer wrote:
it's technically still a masterwork weapon, because the ACP reduction is applied instead of the +1 to-hit you normally get for masterwork weapons.

+1 100%

You are point at "you can't benefit from the +1 by paying 150 gp" rules.

Look at the "pay 300 gp" part:

Quote:
An enhancement bonus on a shield does not improve the effectiveness of a shield bash made with it, but the shield can be made into a magic weapon in its own right.
If you make the shield a weapon, by paying 300 gp and the 2,000 gp for a +1 enhancement bonus. It becomes a weapon in its own right.

You can't pay 300 gold to grant a +1 via masterwork, because the shield is already masterwork. I've said this three times now, and the PRD says this too.

The ability to make it a magic weapon is already allowed because the shield is, according to the rules, already a masterwork weapon by having the 150 gold spent to apply the ACP reduction.


James Risner wrote:
Which says "you can't spend 150 gp and get a cheap +1 to attack"

You can't spend 300 gp to get a +1 to attack either. And the PRD doesn't say what you just said. Plus, the rules never let you do either of those things anyway.

It says that "Instead, masterwork armor and shields have lessened armor check penalties." This means that, instead of these masterwork armor and shields being used as weapons getting a +1 to their to-hit as other masterwork weapons would, you get ACP reduction.

So by the rules, it's technically still a masterwork weapon, because the ACP reduction is applied instead of the +1 to-hit you normally get for masterwork weapons.


Metamagic feats are really only for Blasters; figure Intensify, Quicken, Empower, and Maximized are all you need. Sure, Dazing is great, but that's over half your feats, and if you're a truly effective Blaster, your intended target(s) are dead before this is required, and/or you have a bunch of contingency defenses in place.

That isn't to say that Metamagic rods are bad (A Greater Quicken Metamagic Rod is the most OP spellcasting item in the game), but you can only ever use one, and if you're going to use one, you'd really only need them for situations that call for it (Silent Rod, Still Rod, etc).

But you're right, as far as the feat is concerned, it's not particularly great. If you're playing a (non-optimized) Magus, you'd need to cast 5th level spells before you could make use of it with Shocking Grasp, and even that costs a very high-powered spell slot. An Optimized Magus could do this with Shocking Grasp as early as 3rd level, though 4th level would be better, since you could stack Intensify on top of it. And unfortunately, Magi cannot really use Metamagic Rods, since they need a hand free to cast spells, and a hand for their melee weapon, so unless they dipped 2 levels in Alchemist for a Vestigial Arm or a Tentacle (not a horrible investment, but not exactly a great one either).

For other spellcasters who don't optimize around a single spell (i.e. non-blasters), you'd need to wait even further, as your really good/staple spells are higher level than a Magi's 1st level Shocking Grasp.


No, it's not. Didn't you see the bolded part that says "You can't create a masterwork version of such an item that confers an enhancement bonus on attack rolls"?

The RAW from the PRD specifically states that you can't ever create armor or shields that grant +1 to hit, so you stating that you "need to pay 300 more to get the +1 to hit" is asking for someone to learn and cast a 10th level spell.

In both cases, the result is simple: You can't do it. It's impossible. To do so otherwise would be considered houseruling.


Charon's Little Helper wrote:
Darksol the Painbringer wrote:
So you can't say that you are learning the spell as a 3rd level spell, because that's the normal way you would learn the spell.

You're inventing a mechanic.

There is no such seperate mechanic where you learn a spell "as an X level spell". You just learn spells which are various levels and cast them at the level of the spell. For sorcerers Heroism is a 3rd level, and so they cast it as a 3rd level spell.

I didn't invent any mechanic, that mechanic has been there. I stated nothing new, that a Sorcerer normally learns and casts Heroism as a 3rd level spell. A Bard normally learns and casts Heroism as a 2nd level spell, even though all other classes cast Heroism as a 3rd level spell as well, so yes, there is such a thing as "an X level spell," and the above is proof of that.

What I'm saying is that the specific benefit of the Ring of Spell Knowledge granting you access to any single Arcane spell might trump the general rule of spells known due to its mechanics.


James Risner wrote:
Just like a normal shield, you'd need to add +150 gp for MW Klar for AC and another +300 gp for MW Klar for weapon.

You can't make a Masterwork Shield that improves your to-hit. From the PRD:

Masterwork Weapons wrote:
Even though some types of armor and shields can be used as weapons, you can't create a masterwork version of such an item that confers an enhancement bonus on attack rolls. Instead, masterwork armor and shields have lessened armor check penalties.

Nor can you pay extra to apply both benefits of Masterwork quality. You can only pay 150 gold to reduce the ACP of the shield.

This does point out, however, that if your shield provides a -1 ACP because of its Masterwork quality, it still constitutes being a Masterwork weapon (since the ACP reduction is applied in place of the increased to-hit), and therefore can be enhanced as such (that is, without the rules specifically saying so, of course).


Charon's Little Helper wrote:

You guys need to go back to the item description -

SRD wrote:

This ring comes in four types: ring of spell knowledge I, ring of spell knowledge II, ring of spell knowledge III, and ring of spell knowledge IV. All of them are useful only to spontaneous arcane spellcasters.

Through study, the wearer can gain the knowledge of a single spell in addition to those allotted by her class and level. A ring of spell knowledge I can hold 1st-level spells only, a ring of spell knowledge II 1st- or 2nd-level spells, a ring of spell knowledge III spells of 3rd level or lower, and a ring of spell knowledge IV up to 4th-level spells.

A ring of spell knowledge is only a storage space; the wearer must still encounter a written, active, or cast version of the spell and succeed at a DC 20 Spellcraft check to teach the spell to the ring. Thereafter, the arcane spellcaster may cast the spell as though she knew the spell and it appeared on her class’ spell list.

Arcane spells that do not appear on the wearer’s class list are treated as one level higher for all purposes (storage and casting).

It ALREADY appears on the sorcerer's spell list, so the sorcerer treats it as if they know it.

Now - they can save some $ by getting a bard to cast Heroism on a Ring of Spell Knowledge II, but they still cast it as a 3rd level spell.

It DOES NOT say "as though she knew the spell and it appeared on her class' spell list at the ring's level".

Heroism is always Heroism, and the level of the ring is only relevant in what it can hold, not for the spell level that it gives you.

Solid logic, but there's still one issue to tackle; you're not learning the spell through normal means, i.e. through leveling up or spending feats/FCB. So you can't say that you are learning the spell as a 3rd level spell, because that's the normal way you would learn the spell. Using the ring to provide you a spell known is not normal, nor can you assume that it follows the same rules and restrictions, which it clearly doesn't, as it can give you access to spells not normally on your class list.

You're trying to apply the rules from a Page of Spell Knowledge to the Ring of Spell Knowledge; similar, and probably a good idea, but not the same, nor do they share the same rules, or restrictions.


Pathfinder Design Team wrote:

Answered in FAQ.

FAQ wrote:

Klars: A traditional klar “counts as a light wooden shield with shield spikes”, and a metal klar “counts as a light steel shield with shield spikes”. What exactly does this mean? Particularly, a klar is a one-handed weapon that deals damage like a heavy spiked shield, and it deals slashing damage instead of piercing damage, so where do the differences end?

A klar counts as a light shield for the purpose of using it as a shield (for instance, it grants a +1 shield bonus to AC, has a –1 armor check penalty, and has a 5% arcane spell failure chance). For the purpose of using it as a weapon, it is a one-handed weapon that deals 1d6 slashing damage, but it is otherwise similar to using a spiked shield (for instance, the damage doesn’t stack with the bashing ability, you lose the shield bonus to AC when attacking with the klar unless you have Improved Shield Bash, and so on). As a side note, anywhere that lists klars as counting as shields with “armor spikes” is a typo that will be handled in the next errata.

Thank you SO much for providing an official answer to this. This was something that needed to be addressed for so long, I'm glad all the headache and arguing is going to be over with.

If only I could favorite this post more than once...


Breath of Life is a solid example.


I'll just leave this here...


Selvaxri wrote:

Ironically, i had this situation come up in a scenario at PaizoCon.

My Gnome Sorcerer w/ Ring-SKII found a wand with Heroism on it (and four charges). After expending the charges for the final fight, he asked if it was on sorcerer spell list and if so, what level.
I was told yes, and it was second level spell. So i imprinted it on the ring.
I even had the GM mark it on my chronicle, that i had done so.

Looking into it myself, it's only available to Sorcerers as a third level spell, thus not legal for my sorcerer's ring. If i had a level of Bard, then possibly- but no.

If it wasn't legal, then the GM wouldn't have given you the okay to apply it to your ring, and if he didn't, it would have been on the grounds that it would be a 3rd level spell, because you don't have the spell on your class list. But you do.

If anything, the VC or whoever is in charge would've had to vet it, and say if it was or was not legal. Based on the lack of change, I'd have to say that it was, in fact, legal.

**EDIT** The quote answered my own original question of what spell slot it uses. It's official now; if I can apply Heroism as a 2nd level spell to my ring, and cast it as a 2nd level spell in PFS, then there is an official precedent to go off of for applying the same spell of a lower level to the slot.

And to be honest, I don't see it being broken when ran this way. You're requiring niche specifics, still using up spell slots, as well as burning WBL and a much-valued Ring slot to do this. I'd let a PC do it, and I'd applaud his ingenuity. He'll just need to learn that the bad guys can do that as well.


Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
It's not an issue. If the Sorcerer is taking it from a Bard's casting, he's essentially using the spell from another class's list instead of his own, which bumps it up one level... from 2nd to 3rd in this case.

It doesn't matter if the spell is on another class' list. You're putting restrictions to the ring that are simply not stated in the description. I'll cite it again:

Ring of Spell Knowledge wrote:
Arcane spells that do not appear on the wearer's class list are treated as one level higher for all purposes (storage and casting).

So now, we're taking a spell. It's called Heroism.

Can a Sorcerer cast it? Yes, because on the Sorcerer/Wizard list, it is a 3rd level spell. This means that Heroism is on the Sorcerer's spell list. So, if I were to encounter Heroism, cast as a 3rd level spell from a Wizard as an example, I could then teach Heroism to the ring via Spellcraft, and it becomes one of my spells known (if I didn't already know it), and that it's a part of my class list, but that statement doesn't detract from the factor that it's already on my class' spell list.

So, because the spell is on my class list, the spell is not treated as one level higher for storage and casting. The only way the spell is treated as one level higher for storage and casting would be if the spell is not on my class list.

And both you and Diego are saying that it isn't on the Sorcerer's class list, even though the PRD would strongly disagree with you.

Seriously, how are you two arriving to the conclusion of Schrodinger's Spell, where it is both on, and not on, the Sorcerer's class list? Walk us through the steps, because quite frankly, stating that they are two different spell levels for different classes doesn't change anything according to how you adjust the spell levels for the wearer when the spell is not on their class list.


James Risner has it right. They're the same spell. If I perform a Spellcraft check to identify Heroism being cast, then I shouldn't get two different results. It's either Heroism, or not Heroism. It can't be both, or some inane, yet almost identical result.

**EDIT** Posted too soon. Whoops.


Caedwyr wrote:
Keep in mind that when using informal language (which shows up in a lot of rules text in pathfinder) arrow could just as easily refer to the shape such as → and not a physical weapon.

Arrows are explicitly defined in the rules as being ammunition used for Bows. They can also be used as an improvised melee weapon like most other objects in the game. The factor that you think it's informal language is hilarious, and quite frankly statisically impossible. The only time this has happened was in relation to the Courageous property, where "morale bonus" was meant literally, in relation to fear effects, versus its pre-defined game term, which would apply to anything that granted a Morale Bonus to a statistic.

But seriously, you must be grasping at straws if you think that they're shooting a written symbol made of acid at a person, especially since, for YEARS UPON YEARS of this spell existing, it has never once, EVER, been defined or construed as such.

@ swoosh: You're correct. It's not a weapon. It's ammunition. Which means in order to actually make said Acid Arrow speed at your target, you need a Bow to fire it from; most, however, are made of wood (or something similar), and the Acid Arrow would melt the string before you could even fire it. Otherwise, it's a melee improvised weapon, which means you're suffering -4 to hit unless you have the Catch Off-Guard feat.

Thankfully, we aren't saying that it makes an actual, physical weapon, or that it makes actual, physical ammunition for you to use a Bow with. We are instead, saying that it functions as and is treated as a weapon for specific purposes (or, to put a better term to it, a "Weapon-like Spell").

Stuff like this, Flame Blade, Spiritual Weapon, etc. are all "Weapon-like Spells," and therefore are subject to effects which enhance weapons, such as Inspire Courage, per this FAQ here.


Diego Rossi wrote:
Darksol the Painbringer wrote:
Diego Rossi wrote:
PRD wrote:

A ring of spell knowledge is only a storage space; the wearer must still encounter a written, active, or cast version of the spell and succeed at a DC 20 Spellcraft check to teach the spell to the ring. Thereafter, the arcane spellcaster may cast the spell as though she knew the spell and it appeared on her class' spell list.

Arcane spells that do not appear on the wearer's class list are treated as one level higher for all purposes (storage and casting).

Heroism - level 2 spell in the bard list don't appear in a sorcerer spell list, it has Heroism - level 3 sorcerer/wizard spell, so the bolded part would apply an the spell would be treated as a third level spell.

The level bump only applies if it's not on your spell list. Heroism is on the Sorcerer's spell list, just as a 3rd level spell. It doesn't matter if it's on his list as a 4th level spell, 5th level spell, or even a 10th level spell (which is impossible, but still); if it's on his list of spells he can learn as a Sorcerer, then the level bump for storage or casting requirement from not being on his spell list would not apply. Full stop.

The ultimate question stems from whether he would cast it at a spell level it's cast as (in the case of Heroism, Haste, etc.), or if it defaults to what his spell level is if he already has it on his spell list.

**EDIT**

@ Gilfalas: As Ferious Thune states, spells like Cure X Wounds do appear on the Bard and Witch spell list, so you could learn up to Cure Serious Wounds as a 4th level spell from the ring, but it's not particularly worth it. Which is why I was more curious about things like being able to cast Haste or Heroism as a 2nd level spell, and not having a level bump because the spells are still on your spell list.

A little cheap and munchkin-y, though being able to apply sweet buffs sooner, at the cost of ~6,000 gold, spell slots, and a valued Ring slot, should be a

...

Please tell me you're not serious. PLEASE tell me you're not seriously saying that the Heroism from a Bard and the Heroism from a Wizard are not the same thing.

If so, then I can stack Haste from a Summoner and Haste from a Sorcerer all day long, because you're telling me they're not the same spell. Or other "same source" abuse, which is clearly not intended.


Barachiel Shina wrote:
No where in the acid arrow spell does it state it counts as shooting an actual ammunition arrow, though. It just has the appearance of an arrow made of acid.
Acid Arrow wrote:

...Effect one arrow of acid...

...An arrow of acid springs from your hand and speeds to its target...

...You were saying?

So, you aren't using a bow to fire it with, big deal. It doesn't change the factors that:

A. It's an arrow made of Acid.
B. It's fired from your hand to attack your target.
C. It's treated as a Ranged Touch Attack, and therefore follows all of the rules and restrictions of Ranged Attacks, Touch Attacks, and Spell Ranges.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Diego Rossi wrote:
PRD wrote:

A ring of spell knowledge is only a storage space; the wearer must still encounter a written, active, or cast version of the spell and succeed at a DC 20 Spellcraft check to teach the spell to the ring. Thereafter, the arcane spellcaster may cast the spell as though she knew the spell and it appeared on her class' spell list.

Arcane spells that do not appear on the wearer's class list are treated as one level higher for all purposes (storage and casting).

Heroism - level 2 spell in the bard list don't appear in a sorcerer spell list, it has Heroism - level 3 sorcerer/wizard spell, so the bolded part would apply an the spell would be treated as a third level spell.

The level bump only applies if it's not on your spell list. Heroism is on the Sorcerer's spell list, just as a 3rd level spell. It doesn't matter if it's on his list as a 4th level spell, 5th level spell, or even a 10th level spell (which is impossible, but still); if it's on his list of spells he can learn as a Sorcerer, then the level bump for storage or casting requirement from not being on his spell list would not apply. Full stop.

The ultimate question stems from whether he would cast it at a spell level it's cast as (in the case of Heroism, Haste, etc.), or if it defaults to what his spell level is if he already has it on his spell list.

**EDIT**

@ Gilfalas: As Ferious Thune states, spells like Cure X Wounds do appear on the Bard and Witch spell list, so you could learn up to Cure Serious Wounds as a 4th level spell from the ring, but it's not particularly worth it. Which is why I was more curious about things like being able to cast Haste or Heroism as a 2nd level spell, and not having a level bump because the spells are still on your spell list.

A little cheap and munchkin-y, though being able to apply sweet buffs sooner, at the cost of ~6,000 gold, spell slots, and a valued Ring slot, should be a fair trade...


This is a fairly basic question, but I do want to confirm this for one of my other characters, and to that end this will be using 'hypothetical' examples.

Let's take a Ring of Spell Knowledge III, and say we want to put Heroism into the Ring. A simple request. But let's consider how we put the Heroism into the Ring.

If, say, a Wizard casts it, and a Sorcerer wearing the Ring succeeds his Spellcraft check, then that gives the spell to the Sorcerer as one of his spells known. (There's always Pages of Spell Knowledge for this sort of thing, but a Page of Spell Knowledge may not be able to perform the next part I'm suggesting.)

Now, let's take that same Sorcerer, wearing a similar Ring (without the spell), and put him in a much similar situation, except it is a Bard who casts the spell.

For Bards, Heroism is a 2nd level spell, and a Ring of Spell Knowledge III would overcompensate for that. But let's say our Sorcerer has a Ring of Spell Knowledge II instead. Does that same Sorcerer gain the ability to cast Heroism as a 2nd level spell like the Bard, as a spell known, due to the effects of the Ring? Or, does it default to a 3rd level spell and is therefore not eligible for the Ring of Spell Knowledge II, because the spell level, even if it's on his class list, functions as if he were casting it from his spell list?


But you're targeting the material with the spell, and the spell affects the material fully, assuming the material in question is somehow incorporeal. It doesn't automatically make the material some sort of special "I can affect ghosts indefinitely now!" substance.

That line of reasoning would allow me to make Ectoplasmic Mithril Longswords that deal full damage to both Incorporeal and Corporeal creatures. You're giving the Ghost Touch property without actually applying the Ghost Touch property in that case, and quite frankly that's obviously not intended.

I understand the line of reasoning you were going for, and to be honest, the mechanics don't point that way, and even if they did, it leads to some very bonkers mechanics.


Quintain wrote:
QuidEst wrote:

Fabricate- turn materials into finished objects. Has no effect on creatures.

Ectoplasmic- spell has full effect on incorporeal/ethereal creatures, which is "none, creatures can't be transmuted by this".
So, by this you are stating that only spells that affect creatures can be modified by the ectoplasmic spell metamagic feat?

It would be more helpful if you actually quoted the rules text.

But for the record, they are correct; Ectoplasmic Spell doesn't let you Fabricate something incorporeal/ethereal. Here's why:

Fabricate wrote:

...Target up to 10 cu. ft./level; see text...

...You convert material of one sort into a product that is of the same material. Creatures or magic items cannot be created or transmuted by the fabricate spell. The quality of items made by this spell is commensurate with the quality of material used as the basis for the new fabrication. If you work with a mineral, the target is reduced to 1 cubic foot per level instead of 10 cubic feet.

You must make an appropriate Craft check to fabricate articles requiring a high degree of craftsmanship.

Casting requires 1 round per 10 cubic feet of material to be affected by the spell.

Ectoplasmic Spell wrote:
An ectoplasmic spell has full effect against incorporeal or ethereal creatures.

Basically, the Fabricate spell allows you to transform one set of material (which you must provide as a material component for the spell) and turn it into a product made out of said material. The Target, as outlined by the spell, is the material, which can be as much as 10 cubic feet per caster level.

Ectoplasmic Spell allows the effects of the spell to fully apply to incorporeal/ethereal creatures. You might have had a point, except you're not targeting a creature with the spell (and you can't, as it specifically says so), you're targeting materials, which you're then trying to apply to the creature, which won't work because the spell is already finished, and thus is the product.

You couldn't even use the spell to affect the ethereal/incorporeal plane(s), because the Metamagic only applies for creatures, not objects or other such.

It's a nice try, but seriously, if you want to use a wall or something similar to stop an Incorporeal, that's what Wall of Force is for.


The most objective way to look at this is to put your perspective in the player's, or to be more accurate, the PC's, shoes. The environment has a lot to do with whether resting is safe (relatively speaking), dangerous, or outright suicidal.

Trying to sleep in a BBEG's lair, beckons for either retaliation (by sending minions or going himself and launching an ambush), or missed opportunity if the BBEG feels he is being encroached and needs to survive, and decides to pick up all his belongings and hightail it out of there.

Sleeping out in a wilderness area, or some other area during travel does invite danger, but nowhere near as much as being in the lair of a BBEG; some things might lurk where you rest, some don't, it's really a matter of random chance.

Ironically enough, even sleeping in a tavern/inn may not be the smartest choice, especially if timing is crucial. Your target may be right under your nose, or even a threat you aren't aware of.

In any case, not setting up watches is a foolish mistake, one that many an adventurers who do make that mistake, don't live long enough to tell you how big of a mistake it is. I mean, consider that you're in an environment that anything and everything is out to get you, whether it's the wildlife, some brigand/cutpurse, or even a mad wizard because you looked at him funny.

As I've said before, if you aren't sure how resting/recuperation should be handled, change your perspective, put yourself in the shoes of the PCs, and think "Is this safe? Should we do this? What can happen if I follow through with this decision?"


Grendel from the PRD

So for starters, it requires MPII.

Secondly, I highly doubt it's intended for players to be able to use MP or similar abilities to shift into Mythic creatures unless they have access to Mythic Monstrous Physique.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kalindlara wrote:
Does phrasing like "if the target is an evil humanoid" only refer to humanoids with the evil subtype?

You won't see that sort of phrasing, because Evil Alignment and Evil Subtype are not the same, nor are they always the case. Relevant text from the PRD:

Evil Subtype wrote:
Any effect that depends on alignment affects a creature with this subtype as if the creature has an evil alignment, no matter what its alignment actually is. The creature also suffers effects according to its actual alignment.

So, if a creature has an Evil Subtype (typically Outsiders, perhaps some Elementals), they're always considered Evil for effects that depend upon alignment, and if they have a different alignment, they count as that other alignment as well. This means if you have, for example, a Chaotic Good Demon with the Evil Subtype, he can be subject to both Smite Good (because his alignment is Chaotic Good), and Smite Evil (because he has the Evil Subtype), either individually or simultaneously.

In the above instances, the Chaotic Good Demon would suffer the increased penalties of Smite Evil (i.e. the increased damage from the first successful attack), and the normal penalties of Smite Good (because it is not an Outsider with the Good subtype).

If you really want to know why you hardly see the "Evil becomes Good" trope, especially in a combat-heavy, min-maxing table, it's because it is mechanically inferior to simply staying Evil and not giving yourself a dual weakness.

1 to 50 of 4,297 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2016 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.