|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
One way to rein in a character who goes off on his own is to set up fights that are meant to challenge the whole party for whoever happens to be around. So, the main party has a slightly difficult fight (since they are one party member down) and the solo PC has virtually no chance. After the solo player's PC gets killed often enough (or, if he is smart, gets tired of running away from every fight), maybe he will get the hint.
Elrawien Lantherion wrote:
Are the Core 20 the only ones that can offer the 3 PRCs?
Chronicles of the Righteous gives obediences and boons for numerous minor good deities, albeit a single set not broken down into Evangelist/Exalted/Sentinel. From earlier posts in this thread their appear to be some generic obediences and boons published elsewhere for certain groupings of minor deities. So there are definitely deities with obediences and usable boons outside of the core 20.
Vic Wertz wrote:
We have to be very very careful when we think about doing anything that increases the value proposition of our products at paizo.com in ways that the retailers who carry our products cannot match. It makes them angry at us.
Don't your subscriptions do that?
No armor proficiency? Every source I have seen so far says that they get light armor proficiency and can use that Cha to AC trick while wearing light armor. Are those sources wrong?
I think you have a player problem rather than a paladin alignment/character problem here. If the party had been talking with the wyvern with the intention of keeping it distracted until the paladin could arrive and kill it, nobody except perhaps the DM would be upset about it. But because the player of this paladin is paying no attention to what the rest of the party is doing, he is not playing well with the rest of the party -- and that is creating tensions that will lead to problems in the campaign. The fact that his character is a paladin who should be the conscience of the group rather than its troublemaker only adds to the difficulties.
It is also a first level spell with a "Will negates" save. That limits the power of the spell right there.
I would have to disagree about opening up the medic eidolon evolutions for all eidolons. As the player of a Pathfinder summoner, I can tell you that those evolutions would be a no brainer for my eidolon to take even without taking this archetype. I would either disallow a standard eidolon from taking these feats or at a minimum impose a feat cost for selecting them.
For the twin eidolon ability, I could see this archetype's version as having the eidolon assume the summoner's form instead of vice versa. While in the summoner's form, the eidolon can cast any of the summoner's spells or use any of his spell-like or supernatural abilities, expending the summoner's resources (spell slots, uses per day, material components, and so forth) to do so.
I would also give some thought to improving the mental ability scores of the medic eidolon at the expense of its physical scores (maybe by having the strength/dexterity improvement by level apply to wisdom and/or charisma instead). I would also consider toning down its offensive combat abilities -- perhaps start by making it a fey like a First Worlder's eidolon and then limit maximum attacks in some way.
I like this archetype a lot -- but the fact that I would find it a no brainer to play if we were starting a new campaign tells me that it might have some balance issues.
Also, if you want to give your GM a history lesson, version 3.0 of D&D had exclusive class skills that could be taken only by members of classes that had those skills as class skills. D&D 3.5 eliminated them, and Pathfinder certainly did not bring them back.
Knowing something about the party composition and designing your character appropriately is not metagaming. The party members are already aware of their strengths and weaknesses and would in most cases look more favorably on somebody who complements them rather than duplicates what the existing party members are doing. The new player character is not a random individual but somebody who wants to join the party and whom the party wants to recruit.
As a DM, I would probably inform a new player of what the existing players are playing but not try to influence what the new player should play. As a new player, I would actively seek to fill in gaps in the party's talents so that it would make sense that they would want my character to join their presumably already tight knit group.
I just wanted to confirm something about threatening opportunity attacks:
Let's say you have a character who is wielding a 2-handed polearm with reach and who also has the Improved Unarmed Strike feat. Am I correct in assuming that, in the absence of special feats or class features, his options at the end of his turn are to either keep both hands on the polearm and thus threaten foes who are 10' away but not those who are adjacent, or remove one hand from the polearm so that he threatens adjacent foes but not those who are 10' away? Or would the free action to change grip on the polearm so as to threaten both ways be allowed as part of an opportunity attack? Or, since unarmed strikes do not have to be made with the hands, would he be allowed to kick adjacent foes?
I have a rather easygoing GM who could probably be persuaded to go either way on this question, but I would prefer to start with the rules legal "correct" approach.
The advantage of the wild caller and the standard summoner is that these options focus on the eidolon. Have you ever wanted to play a monster in Pathfinder? These options let you do that, but you have to accept a summoner as the eidolon's "pet".
I rather like the Wild Caller archetype. Combine it with the favored class bonus of the half-elf race (the required race for this archetype) and you have the most evolution points possible for an eidolon, at the cost of having Summon Nature's Ally instead of Summon Monster and losing access to some nice evolutions.
Teamwork feats with your eidolons would work, except for the annoying problem that your entire brood shares a single pool of feats, which is small enough that you wouldn't want to reduce it further by dipping into other classes such as bard.
You are probably better off taking the standard summoner class and forming a tag team with a single eidolon. That single eidolon would have almost enough feats to keep up with the summoner for teamwork feats, or more than enough if the summoner takes Extra Evolution at every opportunity.
If you want to dip into bard, you may want to take a look at the Lyrical Summoner prestige class in d20pfsrd's "Into the Breach: Summoners". That prestige class is designed for a bard/summoner multiclass.
It is about as useful as Contagion.
Neither spell is likely to kill a foe in combat, but they both cause major problems for the character afterwards. It is most effective as a hit and run tactic used by a villain -- less so for heroes who generally want to win an encounter and then move on.
Dave Justus wrote:
Fractions are therefore NEVER used in any mathematical operation that occurs after you get the fraction.
This is what I was disagreeing with. With favored class bonuses, you get the fraction right from the beginning.
So let's say that you have a favored class bonus of 1/3 and you have taken it 3 times. I think everyone agrees that the total bonus is 1/3 + 1/3 + 1/3 = 1.
But if you never use fractions in any operation after you get the fraction, then each of those +1/3 bonuses would have to be rounded down to zero, and your total bonus would be 0 + 0 + 0 = 0. That is clearly wrong.
The priority list for spell-like abilities as given in the Core Rulebook FAQ is the most reasonable guidance we have. It starts with sorcerer/wizard and continues with "cleric, druid, bard, paladin, and ranger, in that order". On that basis, Wall of Fire would be a 4th level spell for the Oracle.
Dave Justus wrote:
Not true. Those fractional favored class bonuses would never work if you rounded them down to zero at each level where you received them before adding them up.
By the current official FAQ, yes that would be legal -- at least until the dev team revisits that FAQ answer as James Jacobs suggested they might in the Inner Sea Gods product discussion thread.
You can certainly use a bow while sitting on the back of a horse (in other words, riding), so the only issue for sitting at a lower level would seem to be whether the bow itself is touching the ground and thus more awkward to handle.
By the way -- it will be several levels before that favored class bonus actually pays off. It doesn't give you the ability to summon your eidolon in one round -- it reduces the time required to summon your eidolon by one round each level it is taken until you can summon it in one round at 9th level.
If you are interested in summoning your eidolon quickly, that can be taken care of at 4th level with a 2nd level spell (Summon Eidolon) -- and you would not really be able to dispense with that spell until 5 levels later.
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
Also, with the summoner is the life link ability. The summoner may want a larger pool of hit points to transfer to the eidolon.
Although I must admit that in my experience the Life Link ability has very seldom proven useful. At low levels, there are very few enemies that can reduce an eidolon with 1+ hit points all the way to -Con hit points in one hit, so you very seldom get to use Life Link in a way that keeps the eidolon up and fighting.
Okay, then the lists can clarify one point. I assume that they are all core or base classes? By implication, that would exclude prestige classes at least -- for the sake of sanity if not balance. I think a lot of people's heads would explode if they had to deal with multiple layers of "+1 level of existing class".
Grim Tales (based on d20 Modern) had another approach to limiting magic that only let you gain casters levels at odd levels starting at 3rd level. It also had a system of strain damage from casting spells as well as notes about how this change affected the rarity of magic items and the danger presented by magical monsters.
This approach could be approximated in Pathfinder by requiring the first level or two a character takes to be in a non-spellcasting class and forbidding characters to take a class level that would increase their caster level beyond half their character level.
Ah -- so the validity of the complaints about potentially abusive choices of aligned class would be campaign dependent unless the examples already include something that is potentially problematic. The open question would be what are the aligned classes for a deity who is not one of the top 20. So -- it looks like it will be at least two weeks before I can see for myself. I was going to refrain from buying the PDF for this one, but it looks as though I won't have the patience to wait those extra few days until my FLGS gets its physical copy.
This seems wrong to me but evangelist doesn't specify that the aligned class has to be a non prestige class heck evangelist can increase levels in exalted or sentinel!
That's interesting -- a couple of pages back Lord Gadigan made mention of an Evangelist choosing "one of five deity associated classes" -- and the mention of "aligned class" as opposed to simply "class" suggests that there is some limitation of the class that can be chosen. So what is the real story here?
I had my summoner ask his eidolon where she came from more than once, and each time she would give a different answer. Sometimes she hints that she knew his patron goddess in a past life, sometimes she hints that she is an avatar of the goddess, and sometimes she denies existing at all before the first time he summoned her. My summoner eventually gave up on this question.
I was counting the animal's hit dice as character levels, since they do seem to count as such for most purposes. Where is the ruling that character level does not include racial hit dice?
An intelligence of 3+ and three non-standard animal companion feats are required, thus I assumed a 5 HD animal companion that increased intelligence to 3 at 4th level and retrained its prior feats appropriately by 5th level.
At least a cohort taking the Leadership feat hits a point of diminishing returns, as the maximum level drops by at least 2 at each step. A familiar loses half hit points at each step.
But there seems to be no similar limiting mechanism for the animal companion of a 5 HD intelligent animal companion. You could rule that a newly recruited animal companion cannot have an intelligence of 3+ or non-standard feats, but that only delays the issue until you can retrain its feat and its ability score increase -- so time and money are the only limiting factors.
However, further advancement of the animal companion will cause those further down the chain to fall behind eventually. When the druid is 20th level, the animal companion has 16 hit dice, its animal companion has 13 hit dice, its companion has 11 hit dice, and so on until you reach a potentially infinite number of 6 HD companions. But how many of these companions would you actually want to take with you on an adventure?
Cardinal Chunder wrote:
But that sort of situation does not come up often enough to require everyone in the party to carry lit torches at all times -- especially given all of the alternate solutions available to a party of sufficient level and diversity of talents.
If the party has stopped for a break, why not? One casting is enough to hydrate the whole party in most cases.
I was actually looking at this from the point of view of an oracle whose spells known included Create Water and Light. For obvious reasons, I had her not bother carrying torches or a waterskin. Most of the rest of the party carries waterskins (since they would otherwise be out of luck if anything happened to the oracle) but nobody bothers with torches since there are so many full casters in the party that can cast the Light cntrip/orison.
I like this idea, as it makes it the player's decision whether to risk a fumble and does not punish high level warriors with multiple attacks (as they are more likely to simply accept a single miss rather than risk a fumble).
If a pound of weight in rations a day seems encumbering, I wonder how you deal with the weight of the water per day...!
Create Water is a zero-level cleric spell, castable at will if you have the spell prepared (as a cleric) or known (as an oracle). You only need to carry one empty container -- cast Create Water on it, drink or otherwise use whatever you need, and then dump the rest and repeat as needed.
We could extrapolate from the rules about armor and bracers of armor and rule that only one of the intelligence boosting items functions at all for all purposes -- normally the first item unless the second item grants a greater bonus.
Since the saving throw of a spell is basically the spell's attack roll being rolled by the target instead of the attacker, maybe something bad should happen to a spellcaster if any of his targets rolls a 20 on a saving throw? Under this house rule, a spellcaster who targets a dozen or more creatures with an area effect spell would have real cause to worry, just like the 20th level monk or two weapon fighting ranger who has a similarly high number of attacks.
If the spell does not involve saves, attack rolls, or attempts to overcome spell resistance, you could still include a "casting roll" that hurts the caster if he rolls a 1 and perhaps gives him some minor benefit on a natural 20.
If anything, it actually makes more sense to have a fumble system for spell casters than for weapon users -- magic is a mysterious and scary force to most people, since they are not sure that the caster is in full control of his powers. A fumble system for spell casters would reinforce that paranoia.
Rolling first prevents you from using the argument presented as a circumstance bonus or penalty to the Diplomacy roll. On the other hand, presenting the argument first helps the DM decide which skill is applicable -- Diplomacy with an honest appeal, Bluff with a lie that is obvious to the DM and players (but not perhaps to the NPC), or Intimidate if the player is threatening the NPC. At the very least you would want to establish what the player is trying to do before he makes any skill rolls.
Treating deadly wounds takes a full hour, so the time factor alone should stop that from working.
Unless the character with a carrying capacity of zero is stark naked and carrying no equipment, he is overloaded.
It is basically a matter of the way you want to run this lycanthopic antipaladin NPC. If you want him to have the benefits of lycanthropy but none of the drawbacks, you can make him a hereditary lycanthrope. If you want to rein him in a bit, make him cursed/diseased.
Don't you fall when you fail to hover? You don't have the options of staying where you are (since you failed to hover) or of deliberately moving (since you are paralyzed), so what else is left but falling?
So -- is there an estimated date for getting the contents of this book into the PRD? The date of the last post in this thread reminds me just how many months this book has been out.
So let me get this straight -- Alice actually thinks it is more difficult (in this case, impossible) to get out of the way of somebody who cannot see you and who is walking through your square without trying to run over you than it is to get out of the way of somebody who sees you and is actually trying to run over you?
Orfamay Quest wrote:
So the "bag of rats" returns once again!
Doomed Hero wrote:
I think lycanthropy is only a disease or curese if you were infected with it. If you inherited it, you get to change into an animal pretty much any time you want to and have no real downside to your condition.