|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Slashing Grace also lets you treat the weapon you use as piercing, so the difference between Rapier with Fencing Grace and Cutlass with Slashing Grace is the Rapier has a +2 against disarm while the Cutlass can get through DR/slashing. Both can beat DR/piercing.
This is incorrect. To quote:
Slashing Grace wrote:
...you can treat it as a one-handed piercing melee weapon for all feats and class abilities that require such a weapon...
Emphasis mine. So...it only counts as piercing for Feats and Class Abilities. Nothing else.
Deadmanwalking, I think the idea is for the character to not be dependent upon specific gear, so that if you gave them, so that "if they had level appropriate gear could fight against most threats reasonably well," even without any specific magic item.
That's not precisely what was said or how people were answering it. So...yeah, clarifying the intent was what I was requesting, really.
Master Summoner, or Synthesist with a 4 level dip in Oath of Vengeance Paladin are also valid options, if you like.
Now, the same hypothetical with no items not in the corebook instead of none at all...that's a lot more viable to determine what you seem to want to determine.
N. Jolly wrote:
Are you reading it on a different device or something? I ask because in my doc, there's a line break there which is why I didn't include a space. I threw one in because I could fit it though.
I'm just following the link. So...I really dunno.
N. Jolly wrote:
And for the Inquis, the problem is that their weapon selection almost forces a ranged character, which is where I thought their combat styles were limited.
As Lemmy notes, they get their deity's Favored Weapon, too. This makes them as limited in melee options as a Cleric, but better at range.
N. Jolly wrote:
Let me know if you can think of a better 'problem' with the class though.
Like Magi, they can burn through resources really quick if you aren't careful. Bane is wonderful, but very limited and you get fewer Judgments a day than there are fights for much of your career. Spells help with this, but unlike Magus, take up turns you could be fighting.
Obviously, you'd need to sum that up in a slightly shorter format...
In a PF style fantasy world the most powerful people on the battlefield are armor lacking magic users. This means all the logic that rapiers were the result of armor wearers no longer controlling the battlefield would have applied earlier in the evolution of weaponry in a fantasy world, resulting in rapiers developing in tandem with greatswords instead of sequentially.
This is an excellent explanation, actually. :)
It's not universally true, but it's common enough for weapons to be made for the situation.
The thing people seem to be forgetting here is that level is based purely on accomplishment, not birth or status.
Historically, most peasant revolts failed rather definitively unless they had a competent and charismatic leader of some sort, as they fell apart completely due to lack of coordination. In the world of Pathfinder that leader simply needs to be high level to boot...and even that only eventually, with leading a revolt being a great way to rise in level.
Student of Philosophy effectively allows Int on both Bluff (for everything but feinting) and (in combination with Empiricist) all Diplomacy. Take that.
For your other Trait, as Some Other Guy notes an initiative or Save booster is always solid. While Armor Expert can be handy and Fate's Favored is good if you ever get Luck bonuses. Inspired is a solid choice, too.
Very nice. I approve this immensely.
Though I'd put an extra line between Dex and Con, to make them match the rest. It looks slightly off otherwise.
I also see two minor issues on specific classes:
1. You should note that Hunter animal companions are by far the most badass animal companions. That's an important part of why you might want to play a Hunter.
2. What do you mean that Inquisitor lacks options in combat? I've never found that to be the case.
N. Jolly wrote:
Edit: Before this I never really read over the Hunter, now that I am I'm not sure why it exist.
It's surprisingly solid in several subtle ways.
The ability to use the Ranger list as a 6th level caster is great, for example. Lead Blades and Resist Energy as a level 1 character is very nice to have.
Skirmisher Tricks being available to their companion is also awesome, and the Teamwork Feat synergy is brutal. Pack Flanking allows Outflank, Paired Opportunists, and Broken Wing Gambit to all stack. By 9th level you can have all that automatically with the only price being the purchase of Combat Expertise.
Heck, as early as level 3, we're talking Pack Flanking, Power Attack, Outflank, and the Skirmisher Trick Aiding Attack from your animal Companion you can manage something like +10 to hit for 2d6+9 damage as long as you and your companion are adjacent.
It falls behind Druid at higher levels, as do almost all 6-level casters behind their 9-level brethren, but it's very solid in its own way.
Play a Gunslinger.
Take, as your Traits, Student of Philosophy and Barroom Talespinner (the latter from the Skull and Shackles Trait list).
Don't bother with Charisma (in fact, you can dump it if you like), just raise your Int to 12-14. Take Diplomacy as one of your skills, and maybe Bluff as another.
There, you're now as charming as you really need to be.
I'd definitely put Skald in Warrior. It's only got 4+Int skills, after all (and without a class focus on Int). You could argue Bardic Knowledge and Versatile Performance make them Specialists but I don't know if that's quite enough.
Magus and Warpriest are definitely Warrior classes as well.
Hunter, I might throw in Warrior too. They have 6+Int skills but are even less good with them than Rangers (and way less than Slayers). If Ranger's in Warrrior, Hunter definitely should be. If Ranger's in Specialist it's a harder decision.
If you're locked out of early entry it might be worthwhile, but otherwise... not really, even if you had the SLA, because the SLA only saves them one level instead of the Wizard's four (here's looking at you, Eldritch Blade).
This is true. Like I said, it's not worth skipping early entry. But with a racial SLA or in a game forbidding it...
Admittedly the Blade Adept could make for a decent gestalt gish, but for an EK it just takes too long and doesn't offer enough.
Arcane Accuracy alone is very nice.
No, it's your Arcanist caster level. Whenever a class feature talks about a caster level, assume it's referring to its own.
Huh? Eldritch Blade does almost precisely this.
True. That's true of everyone, though.
As mentioned, that has some thematic coolness to it, actually (the Alex Verus novels are indeed an excellent example of this...and the Scryer keeps Forewarned, which is the thematic one, it only loses Diviner's Fortune).
And yeah, you don't get early entry, sans race anyway, but it's solid as non early entry builds go. Which is admittedly mostly at high levels, but still potentially fun. It's very good if your GM isn't allowing early entry.
I'm not seeing it. What does the archetype have over a standard diviner -> EK build? It is a spell level behind and gains... The black blade, which is of dubious benefit anyway. I guess it is probably better in low WBL games?
The ability to burn Feats on Magus Arcana (via Extra Arcane Exploit). Several of those are quite worth it. The Black Blade's a pretty cool thing to get as well.
Not worth giving up early entry, but if you have a racial SLA or other method of early entry, or early entry is disallowed, it's solid.
Giving up Brawling for Medium Armor is trading +2 each to hit and damage for a max +2 AC (I guess +3 at some GP amounts). That's worse than Combat Expertise, and a bad trade.
And it's not like I'm suggesting not putting your level up points into Str or something. Starting with 18 and going up from there is very reasonable.
Good Drow are absolutely possible. Hell, there's a canonical CN Drow in Second Darkness. Plus, Shensen, one of the characters in the NPC Guide, was born a Drow. She got reincarnated by a Druid, but that doesn't change alignment, and she's CG.
So...yeah, this can happen. It hasn't happened in Golarion much as of yet, but it can.
If you want to, go for it. It works best as a Dex-based Barbarian (for stat synergy) or a Bloodrager (since you need decent Charisma to make it work anyway).
It's not preisely optimal, but rage cycling makes it a very valid build.
And lemeres, you need Empathy at level 1 to make it work since otherwise you can't get Rage's bonuses. At all.
Fruian Thistlefoot wrote:
Im not a fan of skill monkey as a party member.
As a primary role? Me either. But Bard's a pretty solid arm that also covers that better than any other Class except maybe Investigator (which is generally a melee hammer with a side of anvil and thus probably not appropriate to this party).
And as for the fourth member doing it, no one character can cover all the necessary skills (certainly nobody who's a primary spell caster). So...having two people covering different segments of them is very useful.
In before Magda to recommend the Evangelist Cleric, basically a bard and cleric wrapped into one delicious package. Why choose one or the other when you can play both?
Skills. Nobody else in the party seems to have them, after all.
But yeah, if you don't care about skills, Evangelist is great, and the right way to do Cleric in this situation.
Uh, he's doing an AP. Not PFS. So...this advice is pretty much not true.
I mean, everyone should always build for survivability, but aside from that...
Cleric or Bard are solid. The party needs some healing and maybe buffing. Oracle or Druid would also be good, as would Inquisitor to a lesser degree. Witch would be very different, but also potentially work well.
Personally, I'd also go with something with a fair number of skills, since you're low on those at the moment. That'd probably leave cleric by the wayside, but the rest listed still work at least in theory.
In terms of build, offensive caster or archer are probably the right choices, since your party lacks both.
As bookrat notes...not necessarily. It's definitely something you should check with the player in question about before including, though. And also, frankly, the group as a whole.
I've had my PC personally do worse things than that in an Evil game, and I was probably the second nicest party member (after the one LN one), with some of the others being much worse. I've run a game where the PCs were serial killers (and not the cuddly kind ala Dexter) with all the horror that implied. I've had PCs personally kidnapped and tortured by main villains. I've seen all kinds of things worse than this done in all sorts of games.
All of that was perfectly acceptable because I've known the people I've been gaming with for years, and checked to make sure that sort of thing was okay beforehand. Nobody complained and those games are remembered fondly. So...this sort of darkness certainly can work.
The corollary, to reiterate, is that it's rather definitively required for you to know your players and check about this kind of thing before you introduce anything resembling it, or it can be seriously traumatic and unpleasant. If they aren't cool with it...don't do it.
But if they're cool with doing this? No inherent reason not to if it's fun for everyone.
I built this a while ago.
That build obviously isn't intended for PC use, but it gives a general overview.
To differentiate yourself from the other Slayer consider a splash of Barbarian. A Slayer 3/Barbarian 2 works a lot differently from a straight slayer, even if you never take more than the two levels of Barbarian (which also give you Uncanny Dodge, which is pretty awesome and very thematic for Conan, more so than the Rage to be honest).
And I'd go something like what you did for stats, though I'd minimize the number of odd stats, since increasing them is tricky. Something like this would definitely work:
Str 18 (+2 race, +1 Level)
And a +1 to one of those last 3, whichever you want to boost at 8th.
That'll hurt your will Save, but Rage helps, and you can afford to grab Iron Will if you like. A greatsword (or other two-handed weapon) build isn't exactly Feat intensive.
Maybe go Dual Talented for Dex 16. In that case your Feat loadout could be Power Attack, Furious Focus (from Two-Handed Ranger style), Iron Will, and Deadly Aim. You could also grab Quick Draw next level with Combat Trick if you like (and don't have another Slayer Talent you want). Extra Rage at 7th would also be a good call if going this route.
You're forgetting Lingering Performance. Which makes it viable at 18-24 rounds (depending on Charisma) from level 1 onward.
All you really need is Lingering Performance, though Fate's Favored makes it miles better. those two are all you require.
Nox Caedes wrote:
Question: Do mediums have to be possessed by a spirit that shares their alignment? I kind of like the idea of a good medium being haunted and controlled by evil spirits or an evil medium being haunted or controlled by their previous victims haunting them...
They do not. Indeed, the alignment of spirits is almost immaterial. It has some effect in terms of what they influence you to do, but it's not a straightjacket or anything, and nothing inherently prevents a Medium/Paladin from channeling CE spirits exclusively.
So yeah, that works...though mechanically the Spirits a Medium channels never actually take control unless the Medium's player decides they do.
Milo v3 wrote:
I shouldn't have to read specific book series to understand why x class has an ability. It should just be fitting for the class, and I don't really see how it is. I can't really see any reason why a occultists that aren't abjuration and conjuration based would ever really use the circles.
It's not a specific book series, those were just some examples (from a book series and a comic book respectively...though both characters have also had TV shows, now that I think about it). It's a fictional archetype common in urban fantasy, and certainly not unknown outside it. I'm honestly a bit surprised you're unfamiliar with it.
You might as well be asking why Barbarians get Uncanny Dodge and/or Trap Sense. It doesn't synchronize with their other class abilities much at all...but thematically, it represents a feral instinct for danger, which is very thematically tied in and appropriate for the Class.
There are other similar examples in various places, too. Classes are, in play, simply a grab-bag of cool abilities you can use to reflect whatever concept you desire, but in design they're usually made to facilitate certain highly specific fictional archetypes, and are given the abilities necessary to do so.
For example, you can play a dagger wielding Paladin in leather armor with sky-high Dex and a lot of skills (probably dipping Ninja to do so) but that's not what the Class is designed for. It's designed to play a holy knight in shining armor...and thus has the Proficiencies to do that, even if a particular character never uses them. Similarly, you can absolutely play an Occultist who'd never use the Circles thing, but the archetypical one can and does, so the Class has the ability to do so.
And besides, I'll bet there'll be at least one archetype that trades them away, if you really don't like them, just use that.
I only counted 4, since Combat Style + Combat Trick are the only ones that aren't locked into a specific Feat.
I also count Weapon Focus (since all Fighters basically have to have it anyway), and maybe Weapon Finesse (since it's something you want on all finesse builds). Hence, 5-6.
Gun Training is really niche, so I probably wouldn't count it.
Well, per James Jacobs the Evil is at least in large part cultural, and IMO should not inherently prevent a Black Dragon from becoming Good...at least in theory.
The basic character definitely still works, though. Not everyone raised by a Good person is Good.
Chengar Qordath wrote:
True, though I would say that the martial/caster disparity is the single biggest balance issue currently in the game, if only because a lot of the game's other issues ultimately rest there.
That's probably fair, in general.
Though I do feel like the 6-level casters aren't generally too badly overpowered compared to the good martial classes like Barbarian, Slayer, or spell-less Paladin (well, barring Summoner...which is a 9 level caster that just won't admit what it is). It's the 9 level casters that really tend make with the absurdity.
Chengar Qordath wrote:
The rogue certainly wouldn't look as pathetic if there weren't so many ways to out-rogue the rogue using spells.
Yes it would. Or close enough to make no difference. You can tell by how pathetic it looks compared to Slayer.
Chengar Qordath wrote:
That comment was specifically about caster/martial disparity, not imbalance in general. The two are somewhat different (though definitely related).
Also, I suspect it was not intended entirely seriously (though it certainly does reflect one of James Jacobs' views with which I personally disagree).
the bruising intellect trait lets you intimidate off of int, if memory serves.
Indeed, but then they can't take Student of Philosophy and thus can't use Bluff or most stuff involving Diplomacy with Int.
Yep. Investigators are similarly blessed with the ability to enhance everything for free via Inspiration and a couple of Talents.
The Fighter gets 11 Bonus Feats vs a Slayer's 4, but that's the only real benefit.
Slayers get 5, maybe 6 actually...and they get them over the first 10-12 levels, so in a game capping at 15, the Fighter gets 8 to the Slayer's 5-6.
And Archer Fighter has some unique capabilities. I'd still argue Slayer is better, but it has areas it's superior at.
i trying to make a reay cool archer thats deals good damage and be able to do cool things in not just shooting endless streams of arrows im trying to make him have a high cool factor like hawkeye or deadshot but not suffer in damage is that possible?
If that's your primary goal, Fighter (Archer) probably is the way to go...though your out-of-combat capabilities are gonna kinda suck.
Dipping Slayer for skills might be worth it, but Studied Target almost certainly isn't.
Yeah...Slayer is, in many ways, Fighter Plus. I don't see a lot of point unless there's saome very specific Fighter Class Feature you simply must have.
An Alchemist dip is a lot more viable, though dipping in general is usually not the best move possible in Pathfinder...it can be a lot of fun, though.
i took slayer mostly for studied target i plan to take two lvls of slayer and rest fighter
Why not continue going Slayer for the rest? It's better in almost every way.
I need help finding a CR 3 monster to refluff, or make a homebrew CR3 monster; the shriek from Dragon Age Origins
That's exactly how it's written, though. It affects spells, spell-like abilities, using magic items, etc. It's meant to have far-reaching affects.
Right. But not very severe ones, as the low concentration check DC indicates. Again, the primary use is making all other Concentration checks notably harder.