Darksol the Painbringer's page

RAW, I agree with the others in that you cannot provide an expensive component for a spell-like ability due that the spell-like ability cannot utilize them to begin with, meaning that by rights and technicalities, spell-like abilities cannot have material components.

The general consensus for "expensive material components" would be thousands of gold; then again, expensive in general varies from level to level. Taking the example the book cites in terms of "expensive material components" (the Wish spell), which costs over 1,000 gold for sure, taking a 100 gold gem in comparison is a minor fraction of the cost, and would most likely not warrant the spell component being under the listed definition.

With that said, let's review:

Summoned Shadow Creature with Magic Jar spell-like ability (normally has a 100 gold piece material component to cast, but is not included as spell-like abilities have no verbal, somatic, or material components, and no focuses).

Summoned Creatures cannot cast spells such as Teleportation, Dimension Door, Plane Shift, etc. or spells that have costly material components (e.g. the Wish spell, costing ~1,000+ gold pieces).

You would technically not have to bother with the component, because the SLA wouldn't have it, and it isn't really a costly component in the first place.

I hope this helps!

Fun list indeed. Let's add some moar. (And yes, I know I spelled the word more wrong. Why? Because I can, and this is exactly what I'm talking about.)

Chaotic Ambitionist: A character that does whatever they want and give the most ridiculous reasons for their actions.

e.g.

Player [as a Catfolk Character]: I chase my tail as a full-round action.
GM: You're in the middle of combat with a guy who's just about to decapitate your fellow party member. Why on earth would you do that?
Player: Because I can.

Evil Dieroller: A character (or most likely a GM) that constantly receives rolls of Natural 20's and Natural 1's [or the highest and lowest numerical outcomes possible], leaving the results of the game in their favor.

Lawful Rulesnazi: A character or GM who uses nothing but the book to dictate rules. If it's not in the book, we don't use it.

Double Good: A character who has an unusual obsession with the concept of good [Goodception?], and does nothing but devote every second of his life to it.

Modifier and Bonus are interchangable, the major difference between the two is modifier includes both positive and negative numbers, while the other does not.

I am under the interpretation that a character with dumped intelligence would have penalties apply to their base skill points received from the class, but everything else applies afterward. With the example Paladin, 2 - 2 = 1 (minimum), plus the 1 for Human and 1 for Favored Class would still result in 3 Skill Points per level.

@ Gorrath: Different classes have different focuses for a reason; that's what diversifies their gameplay. Why would, for example, an 18 Intelligence and Strength character play a measly Fighter when he would be significantly more effective playing a Magus? Sure, the character being a Magus would be a very powerful melee, but also a very vulnerable one, since they are front-line casters.

As for characters who don't need AC, HP, or Saving Throws, the answer is Primary Casters, really. If the caster is good enough, he shouldn't leave his enemies even a chance to hit him, deal damage to him, or debilitate him, whether through using human(oid) shiel-I mean, party members as lines of defense, or careful planning (and picking) of spells.

I believe the penalties accrued from dumping stats is plenty as is. A character who's Intelligence of 7 isn't going to be too bright, they won't be able to think much outside of character examples like AM BARBARIAN. "AM BARBARIAN, AM SMASH ALL!" is about all you would get from a character with such measly intelligence. You also have your 7 Strength characters, whose best physical capabilities is bench-pressing a blade of grass, and the slightest gust of wind flinging them halfway across the world, your 7 Constitution characters who die by paper cuts, and your 7 Dexterity characters whose form and mobility is akin to that of a stone statue. There are also 7 Wisdom characters who can't tell their left from their right, and 7 Charisma characters who are constantly scorned and viewed as The Ugly Sin of the World, and the dump stats (in my opinion) adequately reflect such concepts.

Not all characters and classes are "Focus one stat, screw the rest," for stat building, and I don't see a single class that has such a goal for the character to be effective. Even so, there is still the right for the players (and GM) to just outright say "You can have 0 Skill Points per level if your intelligence amounts to it," or even go as far to say that you receive negative Skill Points per level that you apply to skills (but look what good that is going to do, since people can just "dump" those skill points on equally useless garbage).

On a side note, I agree in that this should be renamed to something like "Dump Stats and their effects," since Int and Languages doesn't seem to be the main issue here.

I know it has been a while since I have posted/updated on behalf of the guide (and in general), and that is because I have been without internet access for a long time. It is unfortunate that due to this turn of events that I have not been able to get any work done on the guide. (How I currently have access right now is a mystery, but the connection is slow and unstable, so I can only post stuff like this.)

I now have copy-pasted the current write-up of the guide so far, and I will continue to work on it offline, and when I can finally obtain internet access (as well as some more free time than what I have currently), I will attempt to make regular (and real-time) updates to the guide. Until then, I ask for more patience (and more constructive criticism for those who are still viewing it). In the meantime, I will attempt to respond to those who are offering criticism and/or debating what I have currently posted in the guide (in which they are doing so peacefully).

@ Martiln: RAW, an Unarmed Strike can only be performed with their hands full by a Monk, whose Improved Unarmed Strike list has extra caveats versus an Unarmed Strike by a different class. In addition, Unarmed Strike is listed as a Light Weapon in the hand, with no weapon description detailing that the Unarmed Strike attack can be used with other parts of the body than just the hands.

Realistically, I would agree that kicks and headbutts and shoulders and other parts of the body would suffice for Unarmed Strikes with any class (not just Monks). But if the RAW doesn't support it, then neither should the guide.

@ ub3r_n3rd: I look back and I notice that your term of approach would be the better one. I do try to rate feats based off of their overall usefulness for the class/character as a whole (i.e. Grapple, Dirty Trick, and/or Sunder Maneuvers are more helpful and debilitating than other Maneuvers, which are not so much or they are, but only work on a limited kind of enemy), though as you say, listing a feat Blue for a Roughrider or Mobile Fighter archetype, whereas that feat would be Orange/Red for a Fighter of any other archetype does tend to be misleading for people constructing and planning character builds.

I will look over all of the posted feats and re-examine their color code, making adjustments accordingly. Hopefully this will resolve some (if not all) confusion with this part of the guide, and will help me push forward in my current progression of the guide.

@ Solusek: I will ask that you read 1. of the Forward within guide again, as that will answer why those aren't listed. If it's not an Official Hardcover Pathfinder Rulebook (i.e. Core, APG, UM, etc.), then it will not be explained upon, and my reason for this is because not all players will have access to the miscellaneous Paizo books (like the Seeker of Secrets or Adventurer's Armory soft-cover books) whether through money, tracking down sources, or because it interferes with their style of play. It is also because of this reason that I have feats and traits and races separated the way they are, for players who are going Core-only, or have limited access to all of the current Hardcover Rulebooks.

If I am mistaken, in that those two subjects are actually listed within a Pathfinder Rulebook (like the examples I've listed), then if you can cite the book name and the corresponding page number so I can reference it, then I will display them within the guide under the respective sections.

So let's say I am a Medium creature using a two-handed weapon, and I have an Elemental Earth Belt equipped, granting me a +4 Constitution bonus. I can use its power, Elemental Body III (as the spell) 1/day.

Since I am using a manufactured weapon, and am turning into an Elemental, would I be able to use a manufactured weapon in such a state, or because of my bodily composition I am unable to use such weaponry?

Secondly, since the effect from the belt calls for a Large elemental, and I am using a medium weapon, does this mean I can use it one-handed (at a -2), or would the weapon grow with me and I would get that enhanced damage dice (while still using it in two hands)?

Darksol the Painbringer wrote:

IIRC, Good Hope and Inspire Courage will not stack, assuming both are Morale bonuses.

Not true, Inspire Courage gives a competence bonus to attacks and damage so it stacks with Good Hope. Only the bonus to saves is a morale bonus.

Then the fault is mine. Apologies.

@ Magikot: A bard is a caster. Not a full caster since they have other (equally useful) class features, but a caster no less. If I wanted to play a melee casting class, I'd roll a Magus. They are much more effective at doing what the Arcane Duelist can do; the only reason why I suggest Arcane Duelist is that it makes the Bard a bit more combat savvy, granting armor proficiencies so they can be in the front lines and not get auto-hit, Bladethirst bonuses for allies (which becomes obsolete once you get +10 weapons, and Inspire Courage is better anyway), an Arcane Bond that allows you to cast ANY spell from your list at any given time 1/day, as well as a couple useful Bonus Feats (Combat Casting for free! Sign me up!), and all it costs is knowledge garbage.

It's no offense to the Bard; they are still fun characters, especially when bubbling a smoke pipe in hand while laughing at all the enemies that are uncontrollably crying when the big bad frontliners go and beat them senseless. That's definitely a character I'd enjoy playing for sure, but the issue is that they must focus one or the other, and the Bard's casting capabilities (and Bardic Performance features) are one of a kind, whereas being a frontliner ignores such powerful and useful capabilities, and the party (as well as the character, especially if poorly played) suffers as a whole because of it.

Darksol, the numbers you're using are without buffs. If a bard with Haste, Good Hope, Inspire Courage, and Arcane Strike comes up against a fighter unbuffed, you'd start the rethink how "viable" the Arcane Duelist is.

The reason bards seem less impressive is because they're outshone by the party fighters - because the fighters have been buffed by the bard.

Technically, I included a buff you would have access to at 1st level, Arcane Strike, and while it's nice to have at early levels, you're going to want to switch to a Quicken Metamagic Rod. Haste won't be until you reach 3rd level spells, which will take a while (by that point you're going to have access to Quicken Rods, which makes Arcane Strike useless), and while adding a 2nd Highest BAB attack is nice and the +1 to Hit, AC, and Reflex Saves is also good, it becomes a party thing before you can actually use it. IIRC, Good Hope and Inspire Courage will not stack, assuming both are Morale bonuses. If they do, Inspire is limited by days, Good Hope by casts, which may instead be used instead to lockdown other enemies while the frontliners are plugging away at the Big Bad.

Well, there does become an issue to be had; the Bard is too MAD to be competent with any given frontliner. You need good striking power (Strength), good casting capability with your crowd control and buffs, plus UMD is nice (Charisma), and you're going to need some AC and Reflex Saves to avoid dying really quick for being a buff bot (Dexterity).

Unless you have access to Scimitar proficiency (which you don't as a Bard) plus Dervish Dance, you don't have an excuse to dump Strength and be a double-primary stat character, which is much more viable [but not optimal]. Even so, that is just as feat intensive as any given TWFer, which I find would be better spent on Extended Arcana (getting access to extra spells at given levels, and can be selected multiple times with stacking effects is a heck of a lot more worthwhile than some melee antics, which can be solved more easily with a second frontliner added to the party). Also considering the factor that it isn't in the Hardcovers (which some if not most players don't have access to) does discourage its availability, and even in PFS gameplay, you're going to need a legitimate reason for your character in-game to take the feat outside of "Well, I want to not rely on Strength anymore!"

Charisma is your most important stat. It determines your casting DCs, extra spells per day (not spells learned; Expanded Arcana feats help with that), Party Face Skill Bonuses [Intimidate, UMD, Diplomacy, Bluff, etc.], and other useful goodies.

Dexterity is great because you get a higher Initiative (allowing you to start buffing and casting sooner), you get more AC (which applies to Touch AC, a very common AC creatures attempt to hit you with), better Reflex Saves (let's face it, you can't buff when you're dead by a Fireball), as well as Acrobatics and/or Escape Artist checks, because you can bet the enemy is going to lock down the buff bot making the frontliners big and nasty.

@ Bearlock: The reason I nabbed a Gauntlet was because for my PVP gameplay I used a Heavy Darkwood Shield and a Quicken Metamagic Rod in the same hand as the Gauntlet. Since the ability says I can fulfill somatic components with the bond equipped, I can use Metamagic Rods and Shields while also using my Gauntlet at the same time. (Even so, some would argue that I could just go to a Light Shield and just put the Quicken Metamagic Rod in the same hand as the Light Shield.)

And there's an issue with the Arcane Strike feat. It would be better if it were as a Free Action; if as a Swift, I cannot perform the Quicken Metamagic Feat (or use a Quicken Metamagic Rod) and apply Arcane Strike at the same time. That Swift I can use to deal +5 Damage on a given attack can instead be used to apply another debuff or crowd control spell, essentially throwing another creature out of the fight, or making the Big Bad not so tough for the frontliners to cleave anew. Of course, I can argue that you won't always have access to the Quicken Metamagic, especially starting off, or that you may not always want to use the Quicken Metamagic, freeing that Swift for Arcane Strike. Simultaneously, Bards are still pretty fragile, meaning they may instead want to invest in a bunch of Quicken Metamagic Rods.

I hate to say it, but Bards are nothing but Buff Bots. I don't even know why they have anything offensive when it's complete garbage for them to attempt to deal damage.

"I'm going to use my wimpy longsword to deal 1D8 + 1 point of damage. Oh wait, Swift Action for +2 damage instead (Arcane Strike lololol)." That doesn't work after 1st level.

All I can say is, Arcane Duelist is great in that you get an Arcane Bond (get a Gauntlet, because you'll probably want a Wand or Metamagic Rod in that hand) and can even cast with that hand occupied, you get Combat Casting as a bonus feat, as well as the ability to use Medium and Heavy Armors without issue. The other stuff you get with it can be very awesome, though Bladethirst is cool, it gets redundant by the endgame (since Inspire Courage is probably better anyway), and Mass Bladethirst isn't accessible until you reach the point where everyone has +10 weapons (who actually uses weapons; not you, of course).

I don't even see why it should be called "Arcane Duelist" when the class concept is hardly even viable to begin with.

This update went by a lot quicker than I thought it was going to be, though I will say the next one will take the longest of them all.

Anyway, here's quick update notes.

As with the previous update, if I missed any Special Materials, Armors, Weapons, their special properties, as well as any specific armors and weapons, please let me know, as all of the stuff I snatched is from Ultimate Equipment for simplicity purposes.

Is it possible to use a large Scizore as a two handed weapon? From the description, it doesn't sound possible, but I don't know if there's any rule actually against it.

Quote:

The scizore is a hardened tube that fits your forearm, ending in a semicircular blade used for devastating bladed punch attacks.

Benefit: The scizore grants a +1 shield bonus to AC, but if you attack with the blade, you lose the AC bonus that round and take a –1 penalty on attack rolls with the scizore. While wearing a scizore, you cannot use that hand for anything else. A scizore provides a +10 bonus to your CMD against being disarmed of your scizore. Donning a scizore is a full-round action.

RAW, you can, as there is no RAW that specifically says you can't. Obviously, you would have to use up both of your hands to use it to attack, but having a huge hook attached to your forearm would be pretty cool flavorwise. Would make for an epic Pirate-like character, that's for sure.

RAI, many would rule that since it's a weapon you must attach to your forearm, you won't have much flexibility of using it in your hands, meaning sizing it up to Large (or one size larger than your current) would require that you be of equal size, or that you have both of your hands combined for use with the Scizore (meaning you can't let go of it like you can any other two-handed weapon).

Of course, this would have much table variation. Balance-wise and flavor-wise, I don't see an issue, but YMMV. It's definitely worth a talk with your GM.

I don't know how you could go about putting the broken condition on a Golem because living steel gives metal weapons a condition not damage and an Iron golem has DR 15/Adamantine so unless you can put a fixed amount of damage to that condition I would think that it would not work.

Aren't there some other metal golems, like a Bronze Golem or something?

@ Diego: Ah, good point. I don't see how the mechanics could not apply (since the damage properties and such can still apply to it, a broken condition for a weapon in a realistic scenario doesn't work much different for a broken limb), though I will concede to the factor that the rules do not encompass natural limbs being affected by a broken condition (which is a little silly, but them's the rules).

Golem and the like are creatures, not weapons, so they are immune to the effect of living steel.

RAW, the Living Steel material works on all metal weapons. This does not exclude the concept of natural weapons, or even unarmed strikes. If the weapon is metallic, then the Living Steel material applies.

The only immunity regarding metallic weapons is that the material used has to be made of Adamantine, so unless we're facing an Adamantine Golem, the RAW says otherwise.

Though, the question still remains on the Saving Throw modifiers; since the weapon is natural (and part of the creature), would the creature's modifiers apply, or would they not apply, since it goes based off the weapon and not the creature?

Bump.

Really? Does nobody know the answer to this?

Okay, so we know that the Living Steel material can make a target Metal Manufactured Weapon break on a DC 20 Fortitude Save. However, some Natural Weapons (i.e. Iron/Steel Golems who use Slam attacks and the like) are also comprised of metal.

My question is, would the Living Steel property apply to such creatures' and their natural weapons? If so, would said creatures use the rules for weapons for their natural weapons, or would they use their own fortitude saves since the weapon is a part of their body and not a different entity?

Some clarification would be appreciated!

I don't see why not. RAW, it doesn't say that the scroll must be accessible with a move action or less for the ability to function. The requisite to retrieve scrolls as a Free Action is that the character must move 10 feet or more in a given turn before retrieving the scroll as an action.

The ability isn't all that great. It's a lesser version of drawing a weapon as part of a move action, except it applies to Scrolls. There are special Scroll Cases to purchase that allow you to retrieve Scrolls as a Swift action, as far as I remember. Even so, retrieving a Scroll as a Move Action and completing the Scroll as a Standard Action, that Swift Action can instead be used for a Quicken Metamagic Spell. I know our party Wizard used them before, and chances are you can probably find it in Ultimate Equipment, APG, or the Core itself. If they're not there, then it must be a houserule thing and I apologize for the mis-information.

RAW, there is no rule about scrolls being ruined by a mere body of water. There are rules for them to catch fire, since fire can singe the paper (which has part of the spell) and make them unusable. It would kind of make sense for him to do the same for paper and water, though I find that the paper would be better protected against water than fire (paper is easily combustible, whereas wet paper can dry easily enough, even after being drenched/soaked into water). The writing of the runes and the spells themselves should not wash away by some water, since the incantations and such contain arcane power, and logically it would take more than some standard water to wash them away.

It would make more sense for him to roll and see if the scrolls are still usable after putting any fire out on them, since burning some of the parchment the scrolls that are stored in is more destructive, especially if it comes in a spell-like or supernatural form than it would for him to have to roll and see if mundane water ruined his arcane parchment.

Regardless, this does teach the Wizard a lesson about keeping his important scrolls in Scroll Cases, keeping them safe from the trials of adventuring, and the weathering from the elements. Plus, it's also good on the action economy, since taking a Scroll out normally is a Move Action, though he may carry special Scroll Cases which allow him to take them out as a Free Action.

This could be a really interesting book for Paizo to write up; maybe call it 'Ultimate Adventurer,' and have a points system for a given Class just like they would a given Race. It would make for a really cool alternate rules system, that's for sure.

But...

The largest issue I can see right off the bat that boils down to determining what class features define what makes the class (many people argue that Rage is what makes the Barbarian the Barbarian, whereas other people would say the Rage Powers is what makes a Barbarian a Barbarian), and how to rate something that can be of an incredible power if not seen initially.

It also makes things difficult to balance out both as a party, as a particular set of campaigns/missions, and/or as a game system that Pathfinder currently is altogether, and having such a system can make a given character severely powerful when they otherwise wouldn't be in a normal system.

One thing I can say is that your suggestion should have 4 Categories; Divine, Martial, Arcane, and General, and that the way I see it, the current classes would have a set spell list regarding their proper spell types, and I would rate them the same as you would BAB progression, and General would include having things becoming class skills, starting cash amount, etc. For example, having Paladin/Ranger spell types would result in paying X points, having Summoner/Bard/Magus spells result in paying Y points, and having Sorcerer/Wizard/Witch/Cleric/Oracle spells result in paying Z points, etc.

As for your 'Can't have both Arcane and Divine,' a simple clause of "Once a character applies points to either Arcane or Divine, they cannot apply points to the opposite category." And then follow off with an example that I listed above, and say that said character now cannot apply points to (whatever) category as their spell type and spell progression is set.

Martial would include Base Attack progression and Weapon Proficiency types. There will be a minimum limit, where a given character is always proficient with set weapons and has set Base Attack progression, but a character can spend points to adjust Base Attack progression, and/or grant Weapon Proficiency types, or Armor Proficiency Types, etc.

Then you have the General area, which would include Saves, Class Skill lists, starting cash, etc. And a character can spend points to have X/X/Y saves, have Bluff and Diplomacy and some Knowledge Skills and Spellcraft as Class Skills, and select a starting money amount, etc.

One thing I can say is that you will need to make the points for Full Casting and Full BAB equate to being Mutually Exclusive, and have a Fantasy level for the set amount of points each character can get to determine their raw power. Obviously, the highest Fantasy level is what you would base the Full BAB/Casting limitations on, because a game superior to that level of starting points is going to be broken beyond compare to begin with.

Other than that, this can be a really promising alternate rules if done properly. That's my 2 copper pieces on the matter. Though I wonder what I should spend with my other 10...maybe go Full BAB? :)

I have applied another quick update to the guide. The Items section is taking forever, but at least I am making progress.

Again, feel free to positively critique and give some constructive criticism. If I forgot a weapon or armor or other item within any of the hardcovers, please let me know so I can add it to the proper section. I hope you enjoy the update!

Well, the thing with your fix that I like is that the benefit would apply to all characters using it on an equal level, though that is the original beauty of the feat to begin with; characters using big weapons in one deadly swing would be nigh-equally as effective as a character swinging multiple times with a smaller weapon.

Plus, calling it precision damage would lead to confusion of stackability; take for example, a Rogue with 6D6 Sneak Attack damage, also considered precision damage. Would these two sources of precision damage stack, or since they are the same bonus and damage type, they would not?

I find that the original mechanic isn't an issue, it's how it was fleshed out that poses the problem.

Are you talking a Standard Attack or just any Standard Action that involves an Attack. Which is what I allow.

The RAW feat (as well as my adjusted version) lists the Attack Action, a specific Standard Action. If the Two Weapon Warrior can use both weapons on a single attack for an Attack Action, then it would be allowed.

If the special ability does not allow this, then they can only use a single weapon.

Vital Strike is a Fine Feat. But this is perfect for buffing it.

I especially like that, if I am reading it right, it works with the Two-Weapon Warrior's Ability to TWF as a Standard Action.

It works for making a single Attack Action. If the Two-Weapon Warrior's feature allows them to make an attack with both weapons with a single Attack Action, that target is going to die quickly...

look at panther style feats.

one of the tricks here isnt so much to avoid AoOs with movement but to actually PROVOKE them, get busy using a high dex and combat reflexes with dodge and mobility you'll be hard to hit but with panther style as long as they are provoked slap! you get to attack!

you might want to take 1- 2 levels of monk to maximize the feats.

this might mean not getting to that level 15 F/A right away but with the panther style it's less of an issue. 2nd level of monk also gives access to evasion in light armor.
Mithral agile breast plate TWF with shield mastery, high dex blah blah blah could really work out well here.

Claw in one hand and a clawed (spiked) shield. that'd be my route.

If he takes any levels of Monk, he will not be able to make a Full Attack as a Standard Action when he reaches max level (as well as a Whirlwind attack, if he so decides, but I highly doubt he would go that route).

He does get Armor Training as Mobile Fighter, so he can use Heavy Armor without movement issue, and combining Mithral Armor, with current Armor Training, and the Armor Expert Combat Trait (reduces all Armor Check penalties incurred by armor by 1), you will be running around with a 0 Armor Check Penalty Full Plate Mail, have a 30 foot base movement (actually, 40 feet when you reach your next level), and with a stunning +5 Maximum Dexterity Bonus (or a +8 AC with +6 Maximum Dexterity Bonus if he uses a 'Full Plate variant' armor, I forget what it's called, it's an Eastern armor though). Combine that with Expeditious Retreat (or other Enhancement Bonus to movement) and Haste, and you can easily run close to 80 feet per move action. Take a Quick Runner's Shirt, and look at that, you're running ~160 feet, and making an attack against any creature you run into. Looking at Panther Style, you can choose to purposefully fail Acrobatics checks and then use their provocations to make some provocations of your own, with Combat Reflexes, you're looking at approximately 5 or more Attacks of Opportunity (assuming a +4 Physical Stats belt with a 14 base Dexterity), combined with 3 (or more) regular attacks, amounting to 8 attacks per round, 6 of which are at your Highest Base Attack.

And that's awesome, Darksol. It brings it much closer in line with a normal full attack, without obsoleting it. That's exactly how it should be. Though, for a five feat investment, it should probably be even closer.

I personally think it's close enough. For a character who is making a Full Attack w/ Haste, they get 5 attacks. My adjusted Vital Strike is going to basically amount to a 4/5 Full Attack with much more consistent damage/hits per round, or if they somehow miss their highest attack, would result in a 0 hit, which is going to be very scarce, or because of a very bad roll (1's and 2's, anybody?), which is going to happen here and there.

Full Attacks have a variance of getting 2 to 4 hits, with even 5 being a very generous roll, and/or dependency of target having significantly lower AC.

In addition, taking a character with Furious Focus as two-hander and comparing the two, this now 6-feat investment allows Furious Focus to apply to a net amount of 4 attacks versus with the adjusted Vital Strike, compared to the single attack of a Full Attack character.

Seranov wrote:

And that character would have done more damage if he'd used a full attack.

Extra damage dice are mostly meaningless - it's the bonus damage that does all the real work.

How would he have done more damage with full attack? He was doing the SAME NUMBER of attacks, but all were made at full BAB. Plus he still had 3 more attacks of opportunity.

Which would you rather have?

Melee guisarme +10/+10 (2d8+10/1d8+10)

OR

Melee guisarme +10/+5 (1d8+10/1d8+10)

The first one is using Vital Strike, the second is full attack.

How is the first one even viable? Vital Strike only allows a single attack in a given turn, and you can't use it outside your turn. You don't even include other attacks with it. So, excluding Attacks of Opportunity (which, if math was done correctly, would have actually been added to both sides instead of just the one if we are comparing a Full Attack V.S. Vital Strike, both receiving a single Attack of Opportunity), it would go like so, assuming all attacks hit:

+10/+10 (2D8+10/1D8+10)

V.S.

+10/+5/+10 (1D8+10/1D8+10/1D8+10)

Net totals would be as follows:

3D8+20

V.S.

3D8+30

The difference is 10 damage, which is pretty much adding an additional multiple of your generic static bonuses. In a given round, adding up, you're losing out on 10 damage per round, which would equate to 30 damage in a standard 3-round combat.

My bad-ass Arcane Trickster died last night by "corking" an Acid Pit spell with a Force Cage. Weird story.

Anyway, our party needs a front-liner and I'm thinking about the concept above. I need some ideas on how to make him awesome. I have access to all material and I have Level 14 Starting cash. Let's do this.

Mobile Fighter is a great archetype for being able to move and attack at the same time. However, the feature itself cannot function effectively on its own, so you will need lots of movement speed bonuses, lots of Acrobatics (that's right, you'll want to spend points into this), Mithral Armor (reduce that Armor Check Penalty down to 0 as best as you can, getting that Max Dex Bonus up there doesn't hurt either), and spend a couple feats on the feature itself. Dodge and Mobility combined with Acrobatics makes you be able to avoid attacks while moving, but still able to get that sweet, sweet full attack option.

I would also recommend Boots of Haste, so as to make your class feature much more viable (since unfortunately, its lesser, level 11 version requires you to sacrifice your highest base attack; Haste pretty much gets it back), or if you have a party caster which can give you Haste whenever, then Feather Step Slippers is great for combating Rough/Difficult Terrain, and is very cheap too. If you can combine them, then I would fully recommend it.

An issue that would be represented with using natural claws is not only the damage dice itself being fairly low, but also possibly requiring you to be MAD with both Dexterity and Strength (since these weapons can be finnessable, IIRC,) so unless you're getting Claw weapons to amplify your natural attacks, you might also want to focus on your size bonuses, raising that dice damage up there.

Just a few things off the top of my head, hope it helps!

And that character would have done more damage if he'd used a full attack.

Extra damage dice are mostly meaningless - it's the bonus damage that does all the real work.

The ultimate issue is that Vital Strike suffers from not only random number generation (i.e. Damage Dice results), but also the lack of cumulative bonuses that others would normally get from Full Attacks. Vital Strike is great if your only chance to hit is with one hit (which greatly outweighs any Full Attack, though if you can only hit with one single attack, then there is a problem).

My fix is an attempt to close the gap, though I also don't want to make it so that Vital Strike doesn't just outright make Full Attacks useless. With my fix, Vital Strike is now much more useful in that it allows a character more consistent, powerful damage with single attacks, but it is also still weaker than a character who would otherwise make a Full Attack option with Haste.

Darksol the Painbringer wrote:

Devastating Strike

Same as before, however, multiply damage bonus by 50% if using as a two-handed weapon (or a one-handed weapon in two hands), and divide damage bonus by 50% if using as a light/off-hand weapon. Bonus scales based on additional multiples of weapon damage dice.

I know what you're intending here, but you should reword the percentages for clarity's sake. As written...

Two-handed weapon:
DamageBonus * 50% = DamageBonus * 0.5 = DamageBonus / 2

Light weapon:
DamageBonus / 50% = Damage Bonus / 0.5 = DamageBonus * 2

I suggest using the phrase "increase/decrease the damage bonus by 50%" instead of "multiply".

.

Otherwise, this looks pretty nifty, and I like it. I'd love to hear how it works in actual play, though.

I suppose it would need re-wording. The normal feat allows you to apply a +2 damage bonus to your total damage dealt when using the Vital Strike feat. What I want the feat to do is stay as is in terms of general mechanics, but to instead apply wielding bonuses/penalties to it like they would for Power Attack; so if I am using a light or off-hand weapon with the Vital Strike feat, it only grants a +1 damage bonus, and if I'm using a two-handed weapon with it, it grants a +3 damage bonus.

The RAW also says the damage scales with an additional 'multiple' when you achieve the Improved and Greater Vital Strike versions. So using the unadjusted version, having an Improved Vital Strike feat upgrades the bonus received from Devastating Strike to +4 normally. With my adjusted version, the damage would increase to +2 for Light/Off-hand, or +6 for Two-handed.

So, as many people point out, the Vital Strike feat, its upgrades, as well as its correlatory feats, are nigh-useless to PCs using them, and one thing that many people state is that the feat chain itself is done quite poorly. I too am in that department, and I am of the belief that the feat chain would be more worthwhile if it were constructed better.

Here is my proposition of how the feat chain should go for both Vital Strike and its sidekick, Devastating Strike:

Vital Strike
When you make an Attack Action at your highest Base Attack Bonus, you may multiply your weapon damage dice by two. When the character reaches Base Attack Bonus +11 and Base Attack Bonus +16, they add an additional multiple to the weapon damage dice.

Improved Vital Strike

The character may now multiply their strength bonus to damage equal to the damage dice multiple when using Vital Strike.

Greater Vital Strike

The character may now multiply all other damage bonuses equal to the damage dice multiple when using Vital Strike.

Devastating Strike

Same as before, however, multiply damage bonus by 50% if using as a two-handed weapon (or a one-handed weapon in two hands), and divide damage bonus by 50% if using as a light/off-hand weapon. Bonus scales based on additional multiples of weapon damage dice.

Improved Devastating Strike

Reduce critical confirmation bonus by half, but apply an equal amount of bonus to the attack roll itself. Bonus scales based on additional multiples of weapon damage dice.

Any thoughts as to whether this makes the feat chain too good?

now here is a question then if they are a standard act to work why would it not work the turn after you turn them "on".

It's mutually exclusive. You're spending (in essence) a Full Round Action to move 15 feet without combat problems. You spend the Standard to Activate, and the No-Action to use the 5-foot step (the proxy for the effect to take place). All you're left with is a Move Action, and the best you can do with that is play with yourself (both senses intended). You cannot use a Movement Action within the same round as a 5-foot step, and you can't delay the onset of the item's duration.

In addition, the effect only lasts for a single round (the round in which you activate it); after that, one of the three charges per day is gone. It's a really garbage item.

RAW, this is the Boots equivalent of the Gloves of Storing, in that it provides less help than it does provide as a waste of space/a slot. Of course, the Gloves of Storing can be quite debatable.

I'll FAQ this, since the flavor of using the sword for deflecting melee attacks is pretty sweet (one that all Fighter tanks should try to employ, since they don't get anything like DR, and AC doesn't become relevant unless you specialize in it), I don't think that is the intent of the weapon. For all we know, it could just be able to be used to deflect projectile weapons, not deflect melee attacks.

And besides the point, being able to use it in two hands while considering having both hands free would be a pretty broken combination, since I could, in essence, hold the weapon, and then cast a spell, while at the same time be open for Deflect Arrows and Crane Style simultaneously.

RAW, I'd say you would be correct, since you can use it as if it were Unarmed. Another question is would the damage dice scale as if being used as an Unarmed Strike?

Anyways...FAQ'd, and I hope the Devs can clear this up, because this can either be the most broken weapon in the game, or it can be a pretty good must-have Monk tool. Either way, it's still solid.

Darksol the Painbringer wrote:

Finding Magic Items? Probably, if only for simplicity, though you'd think that for specific magic items that are actually powerful, the DCs wouldn't be a joke. I'd find if the BBEG got done completing his ultimate Death Ray Staff with his insane 30 Intelligence, having a DC 13 Will Save or Die would make his item seem like a complete joke. That's no Death Ray Staff, that's just a Laser Pointer shining in the eyes of somebody that just might be Seizure-sensitive.

Staves us the caster's stats for determining DCs. That's what makes them special. Magi can do the same thing with wands (with the right arcana), while in 3.5 there was a feat that did that (as lot of 3.5 feats became magi arcana).

As an actual Staff Magic Item? Yes. As a special Quarterstaff with a charge/day-like power? Not really.

My point is that the magic item DCs for PCs are complete garbage. Most all creatures are going to have some sort of high-end saving throw, and if the creature is a caster or has the right spells, they can just say "I cast X, that spell won't do crap to me anymore."

I mean come on, a Slaying Arrow with a mere DC 20 (or 23) Fortitude Save is significantly weak compared to facing creatures that have amazing saving throws to begin with, matching with a crazy stat modifier, combined with other special features/spells, and you're looking at a +16 Saving Throw right off the top.

@ MLP: The +4 V.S. DC 11 thing, as I said, only included Base Saves and Racial Traits, no stat modifier or conditional modifiers; When we throw in that extra +2 Race bonus V.S. Charm, have a 12 Wisdom (+1), as well as another buff or two against enchantment effects, raking in at least a 2 or higher to succeed. The casting modifier is an extremely important part of the spell casting's power, something that the spell itself does not apply, but the caster.

And the worst part is, even if that PC made that same item, the RAW would still say that the item has the listed DC, which makes no sense with the rules of spells being cast when they can cast the spell with a superior effect than what is listed. Outside of Spell Preparation and Variable Party Make-up reasons (which don't exactly address the issue), why would a PC get a magic item with an obsolete DC when the spell cast by the person who made the item actually gets better results than something that he actually cast?

I mean, I see it as the caster casting two spells in two different instances, except with the same exact variables. Why should the concept of an item inherently interfere with the net result of the casting?

The idea is that found magic items have DCs based on the lowest possible stat required to cast the spell.

There is some factory somewhere with level 1 Wizards with 11 Intelligence churning out Sleep Arrows, I guess.

But yeah, that's why you'll notice all level 1 spells in items have DCs of 11, level 2 spells have DCs of 13, level 3 -> 14, level 4 -> 16, etc.

Finding Magic Items? Probably, if only for simplicity, though you'd think that for specific magic items that are actually powerful, the DCs wouldn't be a joke. I'd find if the BBEG got done completing his ultimate Death Ray Staff with his insane 30 Intelligence, having a DC 13 Will Save or Die would make his item seem like a complete joke. That's no Death Ray Staff, that's just a Laser Pointer shining in the eyes of somebody that just might be Seizure-sensitive.

Now, if the BBEG was able to apply his insane 30 Intelligence to the DC of his Death Ray Staff, that joke of a DC 13 Will Save will turn into a monstrous, life-threatening DC 23 Will Save, meaning the Death Ray Staff will actually be a Death Ray Staff, not a Laser Pointer of the Fairies.

LOL @ the Factory; probably a bunch of Level 1 Keebler Forest Elf Wizards making Sleep Arrows and baking them with chocolate chip cookies.

I don't know if it's just me finding that the DCs from Magic Items (and Magic Properties) are just a complete joke for any of them to be effective, or if it's because I'm exaggerating the capabilities of monsters/creatures, but for me a DC 11 Charm Spell against something like a Half Elf Wizard with a +4 Will Save base minimum (not including Traits, stats, or other good things) have to roll a 2 just to not be controlled by some Keebler Elf who made the item, and the factor of it scaling up to a maximum of maybe DC 23 against a creature's strongest save (Fortitude) makes the DCs of Magic Items seem a joke. Why even have the Magic Item with that property if it doesn't do anything almost 100% of time (if not already 100% of the time)?

(1): Mechanical simplicity. Each item the replicates a spell is assumed to function at the minimum level and caster stat needed to cast said spell. That is where the Sleep Arrow DC comes from.

(2): Spell slots should be more valuable than magical items, otherwise items outshine players.

Who the heck would burn through wands of charm person? 50 castings? Only on humanoids. Yeesh.

They would burn through them if they cannot effectively utilize Charm Person with the opposed Charisma checks. I did forget that even if the target succeeds the opposed Charisma, they don't break out of the spell effect, they just sit there and pick their nose, so I should apologize for my terminology.

What I should say is that they will burn through it with little to no gain if their Charisma is garbage. And heck, I probably didn't think that one through either, since chances are, their Charisma isn't garbage, whereas the target they're using it on (an enemy party fighter with a Charisma dump-stat for optimization of melee capability) is.

Either way, I still think that the DC for an item crafted (even by a PC at the least) should have the DC adjusted based on the crafter's 'casting' modifier.

I don't see how that's an issue. If the caster can create a Wand of Charm Person with that high of DC for only 750 gold pieces, then they are actually a competent caster. The DC of 17+ is actually pretty good (depending upon the level, of course) for the lower levels. Even so, a spell like that requires an opposed Charisma check for each 'command,' that the target normally wouldn't do, and if the user has garbage Charisma, then they won't be able to maintain the spell that well, so they'll burn through that Wand after a few encounters, meaning another 750 gold has to be coughed up.

Now, before people sit here and say that this is a complaint thread and doesn't belong in this forum, I will say that I pose this as a question of why the rule is what it is compared to the rules of magical effects from other sources

Let's take for example, a Sleep Arrow. These arrows cost 132 gold a piece. They are a +1 Arrow that comes with a Sleep property. Now, the RAW for this arrow says that creatures hit by it must make a DC 11 Will Save or fall asleep (as the spell). This DC seems extremely low for this magic item to be all that much better than any other +1 Arrows.

Now we take, for example, a Wizard with an 18 Intelligence casting the Sleep spell. The DC for creatures affected to save against the spell would be equal to 10, plus the spell level (1), plus the caster's modifier (4), equating to a DC 15 Will Save. Compared to the Arrow, this DC is significantly stronger than the Sleep Arrow mentioned.

Let's say that same Wizard who has the Sleep spell, was the same Wizard who created the Sleep Arrow I brought up. Why would I ever want a Sleep Arrow with such a very low DC compared to a Sleep Spell cast by that Wizard?

Being abstract of the whole "That Wizard won't always be there," or "Because he doesn't want to waste his first level spell slots for the spell," arguments, the point and crux that I am asking with this question is why are the DCs for the items listed generated differently than that of the spells used to comprise the effect of the item (and the caster that created the item)? Why should an item he created have a less effective DC compared to that cast from himself, when the magic he used to create the item (and the spell) is exactly the same?

Let's say I'm some Big Dumb Fighter wearing the heaviest armor you can possibly imagine, and my climb sucks, and I don't carry things like grappling hooks around. I fall into a pit, and I'd need to make a 20 on my dice roll just to climb upward.

Now, as part of my repertoire of weaponry, I carry javelins and some rope. The idea is to tie a length of rope to a javelin, and throw the javelin toward the ledge of the pit, and use the rope to climb upward, similar to that of a grappling hook.

Of course, the range for the javelins is limited; it has a 30 foot range, and a 40 foot pit, so I would normally suffer the -2 to throw, but I carry amentum with my javelins, which basically extends the range to 50 feet (but then becomes treated as a Martial weapon), meaning the range penalty is negated.

The question that I pose is as the title, and if it can be done, how would it be run in a strict-rules basis?

You can get an Enlarge rod, doubling the range of a given spell, or a Silent rod, allowing you to cast spells, even in a Silenced area, both of which are 3K.

If you saved up 2K, you could get an Empower rod, allowing you to multiply dice results by 1.5.

There are plenty of cheap rods you can obtain with some neat effects; you can pretty much find all of them here.

**Edit** Oh...you mean Wands, not Rods. Silly me...

There are quite a few powerful choices for Wand selections. Wand of Mirror Images would be very nasty to have (with a CL 12, of course). A Wand of Heroism would also be a very helpful buff, assuming your group doesn't run a bunch of Morale bonuses.

A Wand of Darkness and/or Invisibility would be (a) very helpful Tactical Wand(s) to utilize.

Wand of Silence would be your ultimate Caster Lockdown weapon (although it works both ways, unfortunately).

Wand of Spiritual Weapon would be pretty cool to have, sending a weapon after a target in each combat.

Wand of Barkskin would be a very nice buff for those who don't have Amulets of Natural Armor.

Wand of Scorching Ray would be very powerful when fired against a Big Bad if you can get a CL 12.

Wand of Cacophonous Call is a nasty debuff, nauseating a target only makes them have a single Move Action in a given round, plus multiple other penalties, but I would only recommend using it on a martial type, since it is a Will Save.

Wand of Acid Arrow would be very nice to have Damage over Time against a creature, and is an uncommon damage type for creatures to have resistance against.

A Wand of Bestow Grace would be a significant self-buffing wand for you (and any other Charisma-based characters), increasing all of your saves equal to your Charisma modifier.

Wand of Surmount Affliction is great for temporarily removing conditions affecting your party members in the heat of battle.

The list for amazing wands are near endless; it'd take me a while to list them all, since you can technically make a wand out of any spell (assuming it meets the spell level limit).

Ah, Penetrating Strike is actually worthwhile to spend feats on as well. Ignoring DR is like adding damage to your attacks against certain creatures for which it applies, so it's definitely a fair enough feat to choose.

Nimble Moves and Acrobatic Steps are garbage feats; he can very easily accomplish that with a cheap magic item (or two), and the net gain from those feats would show that other selections are better choices.

Diehard is okay; it's nice to avoid laying there dead. Endurance being a pre-req can easily be a turn-off, but if he is going to wear Mithral Heavy Armor, Endurance will actually be worthwhile (being able to sleep in Mithral Heavy Armor and all).

Disruptive and Spellbreaker are useless as well. By mid level, his capability of interrupting their spellcasting goes out the window, since by that point casters have a +20 minimum to their Concentration check, and the DC bumped by those two feats would only be a +4 at best.

The Step Up line of feats could have been worthwhile to use if he achieved them early to where it can be helpful. Getting them for as late as he otherwise would (due to his superior feat selections) severely reduces the feat chain's value, because by the endgame, you're facing things that don't need to resort to "Oh, I 5-foot step" tactics; you're facing things that have Fly-By Attack, Ride-By Attack, Pounce, you name it, and chances are it has it.

Druid is a fairly solid choice, since it has much flexibility.

If one dislikes playing a Cleric (I wonder why...?), take a look at the Sorcerer counterpart to the Cleric, the Oracle. It can function very well in melee, have healing, spell casting capability, as well as have some skills or two.

Bard is another great one, and would probably synergize the best with the Barbarian. The Wizard can get some help from you too, although the Barbarian, if spec'd (and geared) right, would receive crazy bonuses.

Azaelas Fayth wrote:

R.A.W. you can Cast with it unlocked.

If you actually want a reasonable representation of a Locked Gauntlet: The Motions needed for casting can't be done in a true Locking Gauntlet. Unless you could reasonably do them in a Full Forearm Cast or with a Prostethic Hand you can't in a Locking Gauntlet

How do you know you can't cast in a full forearm cast?

I highly doubt you can move your hands when they are immobilized by the cast. Unless the cast breaks or is removed, that hand isn't wiggling anytime soon, and is honestly how I see a Locked Gauntlet operating.

locked gauntlets should also allow you to cast if they aren't locked into a weapon...

I don't think so. Locked Gauntlets are shaped to have your hand around a weapon's hilt, and that's it. There is no wiggle-room for your fingers and hands to perform the proper gestures needed to complete spells, meaning unless you carry a Still Wand in the Locked Gauntlet hand (or apply the Still Metamagic feat), you aren't going to get any spells off anytime soon.

RAW, the GM has no grounds to argue against you. There is no RAW that says you cannot cast spells with those gauntlets, and the Spiked Gauntlets aren't that much different from regular gauntlets.

This is honestly not much different from a Paladin applying spikes to a light shield (and I recommend you pose this as an argument to your GM). Going by his logic, a Paladin using a spiked shield (or even an Anti-Paladin) cannot use Lay on Hands (or Touch of Corruption) because the spikes are obstructing his ability to use the class feature. The same can be said with spells, should the Paladin use a Cure (, or the Anti-Paladin using an Inflict). That sounds silly, doesn't it?

On a mechanics standpoint, the Gauntlets don't function any different from the example above (aside from the light shield being usable as protection and a weapon simultaneously, of course), and if the GM still won't allow it, then it's a houserule issue.

@ Finlanderboy: RAW, you can; the Gauntlets don't actually take up a hand, since they pretty much are the hand. Objects being in the hand that the Gauntlet is attached to have nothing to do with the properties of the weapon itself. If your other hand is full with some other object (like a Spellbook or some shield or whatever), then I would rule that you cannot cast spells or utilize the Wand for spells.

@ Azaelas: From what I can recall, almost everything threatens except Improvised Weapons (unless trained in them with feats and such) and regular Unarmed Strikes. Other than that, everything should threaten, but of course as you said, penalties do apply.

I am not sure as to what I could add that would complement your build and/or playstyle. If you gave us a little insight as to what item type you're looking for (or perhaps that is the advice you are asking).

You could get some Boots of Striding and Springing for 5,500, giving you a +10 Movement Speed, and +5 to Jump Checks.

You could get a Dusty Rose Prism Ioun Stone, granting a +1 Insight bonus to AC for 5,000 (or a cracked one for +1 Competence bonus on Initiative checks, costing only 500 gold).

If you don't have a ranged or off-hand weapon, you could probably get a +1 Bow (or other suitable weapon, and get a +1 property on it if you save 1,000 gold).

You could get 2 Pearls of Power II if you also save up 1,000, granting you two extra 2nd level Spell Slots.

You might also want to get another rod, like a Still or Silent Rod, incase you're grappled or an enemy caster puts Silence on you.

Don't forget some weapon (and armor) special properties do not count toward your total Base Price, and instead cost a set amount of gold (for an Impervious property, it costs a mere 3,000, and is great when you fight enemies that damage your weapon, and plus you don't have to worry about it turning to dust that much).

That's all I can think of off the top of my head. There are most likely more that you may want, but unless I have more information (and divert more time to investigate), this is all I have to offer. I hope it serves you well.

I'd like to add a ditto to the vital strike proposition.

This would work, but is also very feat-intensive. You're asking the character to give up at minimum 3 feats (actually, make it 5, for Devastating Strike and its Improved version), which can be better spent with helping that + to hit or other areas they are weak in *cough* Will and Reflex Saves *cough*. After all, if you're dealing that nasty 4D8 per swing, that gives the Bad Guys all the more reason to charm you and use you against your own party, and you're no good when you're incinerated by a giant Fireball.

In addition, the 4D8 can do as much as 32, which is painful, but as low as 4, which is quite weak.

The reason why you shouldn't put all of your emphasis on your damage dice is because the variant results you get from it can lead you to your death.

With the changes so far, it seems solid, though there are a couple changes you can implement.

As far as Step Up, I wouldn't even use that as a feat (unless you plan to obtain all 3 at some point, but that feat alone doesn't provide too much), so I'd recommend you select another feat. Blind-Fight would be a pretty good feat, since by that level you will probably be facing ghosts or other encounters that have melee miss chance. Improved Initiative would also be a great one, netting you a +6 Initiative, which is fairly good for a Fighter.

Don't forget you also get 2 Traits to select upon character creation (unless your group is not doing Traits), meaning you can also get another +2 to Initiative (Reactionary) as well as a +1 to Will Saves (Indomitable Faith).

For some of the blanks, you could get Lightning Reflexes (and possibly the Improved Version), as well as Lunge, Skill Focus (Perception), etc.

Well, I am not exactly sure. I wouldn't say using a Medium two-hander in a single hand confers the same penalty as would, for example, using a Large one-hander in two hands. I look at it this way:

Let's take a two-handed Reach Martial weapon sized for a medium creature that deals 1D10. I decide to make it sized for a Small creature, so now it only deals 1D8 damage and I incur a -2 penalty, but I can still use its Reach, and I can use my other hand for either another similar spear, or for a shield as protection.

Now, let's take a Bastard Sword sized for a medium creature, it deals 1D10. We can use the weapon as a one-handed Exotic, or a two-handed Martial. Adjusting it to large would add an extra hand, meaning you can wield it as a two-handed Exotic weapon, or a three-handed (or more) Martial. The damage adjusts to 2D8, but I still incur that -2 penalty, since the inappropriate size weapon works both ways.

The issue with applying the same mechanic for weapons of the same size (but different wielding type) is that the rules for inappropriate size would not apply, meaning we can't assume the same -2 (or -4 also listed) would apply as well.

I would honestly find the best RAI for such would be to rule it as if the player were non-proficient with the weapon in such a manner (a -4 penalty), and that for the player to adjust it, they'd need a 'proficiency' feat for it. I'd also state that the player must have a Weapon Focus feat for it, and a certain Base Attack Bonus (or character level, whichever is more fitting to simulate the character's experience with using such weaponry, such as Character Level or Base Attack +6) for them to select the feat, so as not to just hand players free "I can use this weapon however I want" feats.

But I am digressing. Other than the Titan Mauler I don't know any feat that would reduce these kinds of penalties outside of feats that work for certain weapon combinations.

Darksol the Painbringer wrote:

...It'd be a cool flavor thing, and probably fun to roll all those dice, but in the end, you're not going to be better than that puny Medium-sized guy who's beating you out with his "+30 Damage/Swing" compared to your "+12 Damage/Swing", even if you roll really good (or maximum damage,...

Which I consider a pretty big flaw in game design, by the way. Getting hit by a freaking GARGANTUAN bastard sword should MESS. YOU. UP. Like, get-out-the-dental-records-and-DNA-testing-kits-to-identify-you kind of mess you up. If we assume that a weapon doubles in weight, as given in the CRB (pg 143), that gives us a 48 lb sharpened piece of magically enchanted steel (effectively) making a solid enough impact to cause slashing damage. That's game over, man. If a medium fighter with medium weapons can out do that then that's the game designers' bad. But that's just my own opinion. If I REALLY had game design figured out so well, I'd be writing for Paizo.

I do agree from a realistic physical perspective; huge sword cleaving building in half = tin can humanoid becomes small blood droplet. The issue is that the scale for damage dice is significantly limited and difficult to breach, whereas static bonuses not so much. And since the static bonuses have a higher limit than the damage dice, and also do not vary from roll to roll, the choice is clear.

Unfortunately, the numbers don't always fall in line with the concepts of real life (or even an adequate semblance of real life). Of course, this game is supposed to be a fantasy world, where puny humans are actually capable of defeating huge giants.

While it's solid damage, it also makes you vulnerable to hit, and very unlikely for you to hit as well; even with your high strength, your power attack penalties and your size increases reduce what bonus you get from enchantments and class features, meaning you're going to be hitting significantly less.

In addition, if you want to prevent getting hit (commonly with Dazing Assault), you're going to have to take even bigger penalties to hit, and when you face that guy with huge AC and CMD, you'll take the whole entire building you're in down sooner than you would hit and kill that guy; and that's assuming he just stands there picking his nose.

Darksol the Painbringer wrote:

@ Hawktitan: The issue with not charging is then Cornugon Smash does not activate. It only works with the Charge option.

Here is the wording found at d20pfsrd

Quote:

Cornugon Smash (Combat)

Your terrible attacks strike fear into your enemies.

Prerequisites: Power Attack, Intimidate 6 ranks.

Benefit: When you damage an opponent with a Power Attack, you may make an immediate Intimidate check as a free action to attempt to demoralize your opponent.

Seems to work just fine outside of a charge.

Odd; I remember one of his feats that he needed for his build to work require that he perform the charge action. Perhaps I was just misreading things (once again).