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

Devilkiller's page

1,596 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


1 to 50 of 1,596 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

My PCs like Eldritch Heritage (Arcane) to gain a familiar. You might encounter some table variation regarding whether you can qualify for Improved Familiar that way though if your PC also happens to have arcane caster levels either potential reading of the RAW is probably in your favor (nice for Bards or Sorcerers).

In one game where we all have cohorts I had my cohort take Eldritch Heritage (Destined) so he can give my PC a big 1 round boost of insight bonuses when the situation seems critical. There are some other interesting options for Eldritch Heritage, and of course there are also other uses for Skill Focus. For instance, one of my PCs took Skill Focus (Intimidate), which ends up being around as good as Intimidating Prowess at most levels but also allows me to get two other bonus Skill Focus feats. I chose Perception at 8th level and might take Stealth at 16th level depending on how things progress in that campaign.

I was really just addressing LoneKnave's comment that Death Roll doesn't actually add Trip to your Bite or Grapple. As I'd said, it is technically true that the Death Roll attack is not a Trip. Therefore you won't get any bonuses from Trip feats or be able to benefit from stuff like triggering AoOs with Greater Trip (though an ally's Vicious Stomp would work). Conversely, I don't think that Trip specific defense like having many legs would necessarily count against Death Roll. If not that would be quite helpful for getting lots of 4 legged stuff crocodiles like to eat prone.

As long as the Crocodile Domain's Death Roll counts as maintaining the grapple it actually seems like a pretty great ability due to the +1/2 your Druid level on the grapple check which was just mentioned again. If you succeed on that check you effectively get a +4 on subsequent ones due to the enemy being prone. These are pretty big boosts.

Ironically you'd probably be better off using this domain while wildshaped into something else like a hippo behemoth. Being a "crocodile just for style" wouldn't hurt too bad though as King Hippo might seem excessive in terms of Bite damage (12d8 buffed I seem to recall?)

Thunder & Fang looks like a nice feat package since it doesn't require Improved Shield Bash to get started. You'd need to add ISB before taking Shield Slam though. T&F says you wield the earth breaker as a one-handed weapon, so you won't get two-handed bonuses from Str or Power Attack. The average damage boost in comparison to a warhammer is +1 compared to the +2 you could get by taking Weapon Specialization with the warhammer.

While some aspects of interrupting enemy movement are unclear just the ability to knock charging foes off path seems pretty cool since I think most DMs would agree that is enough to disrupt the charge (which has very specific movement rules)

I'm glad to see that folks agree the Beast Shape spells only give you Ex attacks from the list each spell specifically grants (else what would be the point of those lists?)

For a Druid I'd probably prefer having an animal companion (maybe even a crocodile with Death Roll) to having a familiar, but there are a lot of familiar archetypes around now, some of which might be pretty useful. Getting a valet familiar to help you with teamwork feats might be nice, for instance.

That said, I think the Death Roll ability might be pretty nice in and of itself. If you're focused on grappling then having the ability to knock an opponent prone during your grapple routine is really nice.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I thought Maxwell's last name was Edison...

Anyhow, as far as I know the Bull Rush from Shield Slam uses the result of your attack roll as the number you compare to your opponent's CMD to determine the results of the Bull Rush. In other words, you wouldn't get any bonuses from stuff like Improved Bull Rush though things like Weapon Focus (Heavy Shield) and an enchanted shield would help.

If your opponent still has movement remaining it could use that movement to come towards you again. I'm not 100% sure regarding whether that would count as a new action in terms of triggering an AoO (which is usually limited to one per action). Even if it doesn't you'll probably end up being able to push people away before they get a full attack. You'd also be able to stuff charges and therefore avoid being pounced.

I'm running a PC with Shield Slam in one current campaign, and one of my favorite aspects of the feat so far has been the fact that enemies pushed into a solid obstacle fall prone. This is a great debuff which can create a lot of tactical advantages. I think your Druid might be better positioned to exploit this aspect of the feat than my Viking since you might be able to create walls, trees, etc to bounce foes off of.

If you decide to pursue the knocking folks prone aspect of Shield Slam then the combination of Vicious Stomp + Enforcer would be extremely useful. If you throw on Hurtful too you can really pile a lot of damage onto a prone foe quickly.

The Baobhan Sith (I always thought it was Sidhe before following the link) really was a painful encounter. Anything which hits the entire party with a SoL effect like that can easily cause a TPK. Of course some folks like TPKs. I guess those of us who don’t can use hero points, but I’d rather see more SoL effects nerfed anyhow. Offering a new save every round or starting after a number of rounds would iron out a lot of the problems IMO. In our games we’ve recently started offering new saves on the Fear spell to reduce the condition to shaken. That way you run for a few rounds and come back debuffed instead of just cowering and dying.

I thought Mythic would probably be pretty stupid, but the one Mythic game I’m involved in hasn’t been marked by excessive PC power levels so far. Then again, we’re only 2nd mythic tier at 8th level, so maybe time will tell. My impression so far has been that Mythic gives more of a boost to martial PCs though perhaps that’s just because our party doesn’t have any full casters. I doubt we’ll fight Cthulhu though the fact we have a couple of Viking themed PCs in the game does mean we tend to spend some time at sea.

I suggest using the Troop Subtype. It is kind of like a swarm for larger creatures.

I thought we already had this thread. Depending on which mount you're using a larger animal might more than make up for the lost damage. The big cat animal companion is very good at dealing damage, for instance.

The saved feat is somewhat relative since humans get an extra feat to begin with and Focused Study can turn that into 3 extra feats. Granted, they're all Skill Focus, but Skill Focus (Ride) is nice for Mounted Combat, and I'm somewhat obsessed with Eldritch Heritage.

For further reading on what you gain while using wildshape check this link: Beast Shape

Druids can be decent grapplers without taking any grapple related feats and great grapplers if they make some feat investments. A lot of grapple builds suffer from a bit of lag where they don't really get their damage output revved up until the second round of grappling when they maintain the grapple. Using Grab as part of an AoO can be nice for this. I guess that delivering Frigid Touch via Bite and grabbing the foe could work too.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Dragons can be really tough for their CR, especially if you weren't expecting them. I wouldn't say that they "aren't fun for their CR" though since players often really enjoy dragon fights, especially if the DM doesn't make it impossible to find and claim the dragon's treasure hoard afterwards.

Unless I'm missing something you can't gain the Death Roll ability of a Crocodile by wildshaping into one. If you don't like the version of Death Roll in Crocodile Domain your best bet might be to take some Barbarian levels and get the Raging Grappler rage power, which allows you to knock an opponent prone when you maintain a grapple while raging. My Feral Gnasher uses that power a lot.

You might be thinking of the Underground Chemist, which can retrieve and alchemical item as if drawing a weapon and can do sneak attack damage on one splash weapon attack per round. Concentrated Splash would indeed be a nice feat for such a Rogue, but generally speaking their damage per attack after the first attack will probably be a lot less than that of an Alchemist throwing Bombs. They're also much more susceptible to energy resistance.

"It's not a bug. It's a feature." Seriously though, I think that bomb focused Alchemists are doing just fine without a "boost damage by 50%" feat.

The Death Roll ability being discussed here is part of the Crocodile Domain. It has different wording than the ability possessed by the Crocodile monster. The domain ability never says that includes a Trip. I don't believe that Beast Shape grants the Death Roll ability, so Druids interested in Death Rolling might be stuck with the domain version.

I wouldn't call it a trap as long as the Death Roll would count as maintaining the grapple. Sure, pinning might be better in most ways, but you could Death Roll somebody and then Pin them too. Assuming you have some allies to take advantage of all those AC penalties this seems like a pretty nice combination.

I used to play with a DM who liked "average" damage. I put that in quotes because while he had a PhD and was an accomplished linguist his ability to calculate the average result of a die roll was highly suspect. Anyhow, some of the players felt like average damage was boring, so the DM made a compromise where you roll damage once and then multiply that by the number of hits. This can be sort of bad since it can lead to big swings in damage on a full attack, but the players seemed happier that way.

As a sidenote, the idea of a game where only one player has a phone or tablet seems very strange to me now. In the games at my house I'm the only person who isn't almost constantly looking at one. 3 of the players have a Pathfinder rules app on their phones, and they reference it a lot, and the DM uses her tablet to help run the game. That group is steadfastly against average damage or online dice rolling though. Heck, one guy has a box of minuscule d6s he bought for doing sneak attacks with a TWF Rogue in an AP game which finished at 15th level.

My apologies for copying an old post of mine from elsewhere, but it was easier than rewriting basically the same stuff...

Splitting the HD doesn't affect BAB, so it is mostly HP and feats you're short on. Here are some ideas to help get the most out of your brood:
- Haste: Summoners get Haste early at 4th level. A normal eidolon can only get one extra attack from Haste. A brood can get 2-4 extra attacks.
- False Life: An extra 10-15hp might help an eidolon stay in play, and multiple eidolons can hold more temporary hp than a single eidolon
- Combat Maneuvers: An eidolon which focuses on Grapple and Constrict often won't be able to use more than one natural weapon per round, so why not move those excess natural weapons to another eidolon?
- Wand Jockey: The Skilled evolution and a circlet of persuasion should allow even a low level eidolon to use wands pretty consistently. Pick up an Improved Familiar via the Eldritch feats too and you'll be buffing up and rejuvenating with the quickness.
- Surge: If an eidolon is a little short on evolution points you can still buff it up with an evolution surge, possibly delivered via wand by another eidolon
- Mount: A medium quadraped eidolon without much else going on could make a pretty decent mount for a PC with good Ride skills. Low HP shouldn't be as critical when you can cancel most attacks with a Ride check. If you carry a menacing weapon then you and your eidolons will get a +4 to hit when they flank (potentially +6 with the Outflank feat). You might have to use a dog/pony/mount spell as a mount at early levels though.

It seems that I should once again tell the story of the PC who wanted to get his Escape Artist skill really high, cast Reduce Person, enter a political opponent's body through a rather inappropriate orifice, and then dismiss the spell on the assumption that this would cause the victim to explode. The player in question moved away a few years ago, but another longtime player recently had his goblin Witch use a Grease spell and a skyrocket firework to dispatch a human prisoner in a somewhat similar manner. That was ostensibly an interrogation tactic, but I don't think the Witch planned to extinguish the fuse regardless of what the prisoner told her.

The skyrocket incident inspired another goblin to create a new Goblin Game called Baby Bombs where we'd strap babies to skyrockets and then shoot them at each other. He's the only PC in the party with Evasion, so that game would be extra fun for him. Since human and gnome babies are kind of hard to come by maybe there could be an alternate version of the game using puppies. Man, that's sick...I kind of enjoy playing Evil goblins, but it kind of bothers me sometimes too...

Luckily the Concentrated Splash feat specifically says, "This feat cannot be used with an alchemist's bombs."

I guess the feat would probably work OK for an Alchemist throwing a non-Bomb splash weapon such as a flask of acid, but those can't be thrown quickly.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Tendriculos doesn’t seem as bad as it was in 3.5, where it was my go to example of a monster too nasty for its CR.

I find it mildly disturbing that this thread seems almost like a list of monsters my Viking has fought. The Sceaduinar was definitely the worst, and he was in the same fight with a Witchfire, who isn't much fun herself. That was in the same cave where we ended up fighting a Shadow Demon. A Seugathi in another dungeon might have become a TPK if another PC hadn't rolled high on a bunch of Will saves. Earlier in the campaign it had taken that same party member days to recover from Str damage inflicted by Shadows.

Perhaps the most terrifying monsters I’ve run as a DM have been Sea Serpents with the Advanced template. Sure, they can be largely neutralized by Freedom of Movement, but most PCs don’t have the Ring, and by the time you cast the spell it might be too late. With Grab, Constrict, and Swallow Whole all on one monster the Sea Serpent is a super charged damage machine. Fiendish Dire Tigers can also be pretty nasty, especially as summoned monsters. Big air elementals using their Whirlwind ability against folks who can't fly can also create havoc, but

I guess that not being able to fly leaves you vulnerable to a bunch of things though. I'm a little ashamed to say that one party I'm in had a ton of trouble with an Erinyes around level 8. Sure, you should be able to Fly by level 8, and usually we can, but the devil's at will Fear ability made the PC who casts Fly run away.

An animal companion which gains the ability to speak could activate such an amulet via command word. I'm not sure if animal companions who can't speak could use it though. I suppose they might be able to howl and try the UMD skill, but that's not a skill most animal companions are very good at (though dinosaurs have enough Charisma to be decent and the idea of a T-Rex who uses wands with his tiny arms seems amusing to me)

It is technically true that Death Roll doesn't Trip. You won't get to add bonuses from various Trip feats you probably won't have to your CMB check. Death Roll also wouldn't trigger AoOs from Greater Trip (which is one of those feats you probably won't have). Death Roll will result in your opponent being Prone though, and that could be pretty nice since it gives the enemy a -4 to AC, attacks, and attempts to escape or reverse your grapple.

I think the only thing which could make this version of Death Roll really suck would be if the DM ruled that the opponent is released from the grapple when you perform a Death Roll. I don't think that's the intent, but since the wording of the Druid's Death Roll is significantly different than that of the regular Crocodile's Death Roll some DMs might read the ability in the way which least favors the PC.

The monster ability reads like:
Death Roll (Ex)
When grappling a foe of its size or smaller, a crocodile can perform a death roll upon making a successful grapple check. As it clings to its foe, it tucks in its legs and rolls rapidly, twisting and wrenching its victim. The crocodile inflicts its bite damage and knocks the creature prone. If successful, the crocodile maintains its grapple.

Anything like this is entering into house rules territory, so some folks will dislike/disdain it.

That said, one good reason to make up your own rules is that otherwise awakened animals are pigeonholed into just a few viable classes. It is odd that you mentioned a Raven specifically since I wanted an awakened Raven as a Skald to fit with the RP for our mythic "Viking game". Unfortunately the highest Charisma an awakened Raven could possibly have would be 10 (since Awaken gives animals +1d3 Charisma)

I guess many people might say something like, "A 10 is a viable Charisma for a Skald if you use level increases and magic items to augment it. Stop your endless whining and play the game by the rules you worthless complainer and shameless munchkin." However, the DM for the game in question let me roll ability scores for the Raven as for a normal PC and then adjust them with some racial modifiers. I believe we used Str-6 Dex+4 Wis+2.

If you want an animal with high Charisma and the DM isn't flexible I guess you could try dinosaurs since they tend to start out with higher Cha than other animals.

Wow, those familiar archetypes look really cool. I probably never would have guessed that they're listed as a specific type of magic armor though. No wonder I couldn't find them!

@Sissyl - I haven't gone through the effort of finding and studying the build in question, but there's a "Shaping Focus" feat which increases your effective Druid level for wildshape by +4 (up to your character level). I had a lot of fun in the past playing a Druid with a level of Monk, but with that feat available I might consider such a PC with more levels of Monk (but probably no summoning)

1 person marked this as a favorite.

It is tough for me get on board with the idea that "slings are amazing" when they require two hands to operate and do less damage than javelins. I'd be more willing to accept a statements like:
- slings are good enough for low levels
- slings are better than javelins if your enemies are really far away
- slings are better than atatls if you don't know about atatls or you're fighting skeletal archers

I mean, slings aren't useless, but they fail to amaze me. Most ranged weapons which aren't bows are pretty depressing when compared to bows though.

There's a magus arcane which lets you use a wand instead of a spell with Spell Combat. This all sounds like a pretty bad idea since creatures attacked with a Shadow Weapon get a Will save to reduce the damage to 1 point. You might be better off just getting a "Bladed Belt", which can be changed into any slashing or piercing melee weapon:

"On command, the belt’s wearer can transform the belt into a single masterwork slashing and/or piercing melee weapon of her choice. As long as she is holding the weapon, she can also revert it back to belt form with a command. Furthermore, the belt can be enchanted like a piercing and slashing melee weapon, using the cost of the belt as the cost of the masterwork item."

It only costs 2,000gp. Later on maybe you could craft intelligence into the item, allowing it to change shapes on its own and perhaps use a few other powers. Alternately maybe the DM would house rule a custom feat which works kind of like Quick Draw but instead allows you to change your weapon's shape as a swift or free action.

Chief Ripnugget would definitely be a great mini too though he's a little more costly and lacks the ability to remove the rider from the mount so they can split up. The good news is that it looks like you can pick him up quite a bit cheaper if you shop around for used minis. We often use clear dice boxes as stands for flying PCs. My girlfriend even recently began attaching multiple boxes together with their lids since they'll snap on in either direction. This allows us to have a rudimentary if somewhat precarious way of tracking elevation.

Regarding big monsters in dungeons without big corridors, that's obviously possible, but we really only need 5 foot wide corridors to move Large mounts around with Narrow Frame. I wouldn't expect a "typical" game (if there is such a thing) to include lots of dungeons with corridors so small that Medium PCs have to squeeze and Large monsters can't leave their lairs.

That's not to say that being smaller doesn't still have some advantages as far as concentrating attack power. So does the Cavalry Formation feat.

Where is the Mauler archetype from?

2 people marked this as a favorite.

If you decide to go with the gecko mount you might want to check out some old Mage Knight "Dark Rider" minis. Salamander #115 and #116 would work really well for the riding gecko, and there are various minis available which are properly shaped to ride on top of the mounts. I guess the only problem is that the lizard might be a little bigger than Medium. I don't have one handy right now to check.

Ah, that's probably longer than the OP would want to wait. Until then I guess a halfling could ride a goat or pig familiar or anybody could buy or craft some figurines of wondrous power.

Does the Magus have a way to gain access to the Summon Monster spells? There are a lot of potentially decent mounts on that list though there could be some table variation regarding whether you can ride them and what sort of penalties you'd take while doing so.

Perhaps we would have been best off simply asking how many flasks of oil the barbarian wanted to have poured on him and then inflicting 1d6 per flask for two rounds. He probably would have been willing to go with that since the player was absolutely giddy about the idea that his PC's tactic against swarms should be to set himself on fire.

The only group where flaming oil has come up frequently allows pretty much any combination of hitting creatures with flammable liquids and setting them on fire. If you hit somebody with oil a torch can set it on fire, and hitting somebody who is already on fire results in the new oil lighting up too (pretty much at Gauss suggested - I was just wondering how other folks handle it and if there's actually any RAW or official stuff about it). We're playing goblins in that group at the moment, so the idea of setting stuff on fire comes up just about every session even if there aren't any swarms (though there often are)

Somebody pointed out recently that if you're not proficient in wearing your armor you might take the ACP to other stuff like initiative rolls. I'm not 100% sure if that's the correct ruling, but if so then wearing full plate you're not proficient with might be a bad idea.

Having a great initiative can be important for "tanky" PCs anyhow, especially since at some point many DMs decide that the monsters are absolutely going to get a surprise round no matter what. Getting surprised (possibly regardless of your Perception check) and then losing initiative can be pretty dangerous.

The fact that slings are cheap doesn't really make them any better. It just makes them cheaper. In real life you can get a lot of cheap things which aren't very good. Low level professionals (aka college students) often make do with cheap beer, for instance, so perhaps low level PCs making do with cheap ranged weapons makes sense too.

It sounds like some folks out there really do use slings in Pathfinder as more than a joke, and I think they're at least better off than the many players who ignore ranged weapons completely.

I too felt that the Body Shield feat specifically calling out the chance for the cover to be hit by the attack implied that no such chance normally exists. I've seen the rules point out useless or redundant information before.

I feel that even if a "hitting the cover" rule was implemented via FAQ or as a house rule the attack should need to hit the cover's AC to count as a hit against the cover. I'm not the one who would be making such a ruling, but some questions did arise in a recent session where another player's PC took cover using the Ride skill and the DM seemed surprised.

We haven't really had a chance to discuss the issue in further detail yet, but I figured I should make sure I have the RAW straight before any such discussion. As things stand I'd say there's a reasonable chance that the DM in question will make a house rule allowing the attack to hit the cover, but at least I can make sure he's aware it is a house rule rather than an official one.

We once had a half-orc Barbarian without fire resistance who wanted us to pour oil over him and set him on fire so he could run into a swarm of mosquito-like monsters. I figured that would probably inflict more than 1d6 damage per round to the half-orc and wasn't sure what effect it should have on the swarm.

@Gauss - Are you saying that you'd add 1d6 additional damage from the oil? If so would you add that only in the round when the oil actually hits the creature or also on the subsequent round? (so that if a creature is hit by an alchemist's fire and a flask of oil in round 1 it takes 2d6 fire damage in round 2)

If you want to make folks flat footed there's a pretty good tie in with Order of the Cocktrice (via Dazzling Display) and Enforcer. Check out the Shatter Defenses feat, which should be pretty easy for you to acquire. Since the effect lasts until the end of your NEXT turn this could help set up a devastating double rapier flurry with an improved chance to hit (+2 from Order of the Cockatrice and the enemy is flat footed)

It may or may not be amusing to take some levels in a class which grants sneak attack at higher levels. I probably wouldn't bother unless you want to enhance your intimidation with Thug (Rogue) or really like the idea of getting "magic tea" with Alchemist (Vivisectionist). I guess the Vivisectionist could view himself as a "man of Science". I'd probably stick with Cavalier, but there are a lot of options out there.

I wonder if most folks would agree that hitting an enemy already on fire from alchemist's fire with a flask of oil (no fuse) should extend the duration of the flames. It seems reasonable to me.

Assuming folks think stuff like that is reasonable I wonder if they also think that a DM in PFS should have enough leeway to make a judgement call like that or if the absence of info on this particular tactic in the RAW means it isn't available in PFS. A gaming buddy of mine has been running a lot of PFS games lately, so the chances of me playing more PFS are going up a bit.

It sounds like by RAW there should be no chance of an attack hitting the mount because it was used as cover. I don't think that gaining a +4 AC as an immediate action is overpowered considering the limitations

Did the old 3.5 rule cause the attack to hit the cover automatically, or did the attack still need to hit the cover's AC? I'd think it should need to hit the target's AC (if such a house rule were implemented in Pathfinder)

With Narrow Frame a Large mount should rarely be squeezing. I didn't say you'd always be able to charge, but honestly you're not always able to charge even on a Medium mount or on foot. Still, the Large mount only adds 5 feet to the horizontal distance required to charge with a lance. With Narrow Frame you wouldn't be squeezing.

I think the inability to ride Large mounts in dungeons is mostly just a misconception based on the idea that a man riding a horse would be too tall to fit indoors. That depends on the ceiling height of course though in Pathfinder there are also Large mounts much lower at the shoulder than a warhorse (that and Holy Diver being why I mentioned "ride the tiger")

One question which has come up a few times is whether the liquid from a molotov cocktail which fails to ignite or flask of oil which was thrown without a fuse can be set on fire after it hits a creature or swarm. I'm not sure if there are any official rules on this, but allowing it makes the use of oil in combat a lot easier. One PC throws oil, another can set it on fire with a torch or flaming weapon. At the worst you should probably be able to light up the square where the oil landed to do 1d3 damage though once again the rules are silent on this.

I believe that the Aldori Dueling Sword is in fact the same as the Dueling Sword. I was just suggesting it as a way to get Dex to damage. I was previously unaware of the Fencing Grace feat, which seems to serve a similar purpose and be great news for Swashbucklers everywhere.

Anyhow, I'm glad that my other ideas might be of some use. As far as the Enforcer feat goes, you could simply use one of your iterative attacks to make an unarmed strike (best if you have Improved Unarmed Strike). If you're willing to spend feats you might look at the Hurtful feat too. Another option which might be a little further than you'd want to go would be taking a couple of levels as a Master of Many Styles and picking up Snake Fang so you can demoralize your enemy with an unarmed strike AoO when he misses you. I've got a concept PC called "El Flamingo" who wears a pink Zorro outfit and will probably use this if he ever gets played (with the AoO from Snake Fang being a "flamingo kick")

Dual wielding rapiers could be a little tough due to the -4 penalty for doing TWF with a one-handed weapon in your off hand. Considering the bonuses to hit you can get from other sources it might not be that bad though. If you do pick up Improved Unarmed Strike you could also just use that as your second weapon until you have the foe demoralized and therefore get a +2 to hit from Order of the Cockatrice. After that you could start stabbing with both hands and maybe go for Two Weapon Rend. I'd seriously consider getting the Cruel enchantment on at least one of your weapons to sicken any foes you've made shaken.

If the dungeon has Large monsters in it then presumably you should be able to ride a Large mount in it. If you can't ride the tiger then how do the trolls fit? The Narrow Frame feat can be helpful for getting through tight spots.

It seems like James Jacobs wants energy damage to affect swarms, but maybe the Alchemist’s Guild make a back room deal with whoever prints the rulebooks and controls the PRD webpage to prevent JJ’s intent from reaching the RAW community. I’ve often wondered why so many low level Paizo adventures feature swarms. I’ve seen an increased rate of people taking Burning Hands as a spell known for APs and modules since folks expect swarms. We’ve even had starting PCs making tough decisions about whether it was worth spending extra gold on alchemist’s fire instead of just using oil. Some of us have gone so far as to put a rank in Craft (Alchemy) and make our own acid.

Unfortunately, carrying around lots of flammable and or corrosive liquids in glass bottles has a tendency to make the DM ask a lot of questions if the PC gets hit with a fire spell or perhaps falls into a pit.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I wonder why there seems to be much more variation in the usefulness of ranged weapons than melee weapons and why many folks seem to find it more acceptable. With melee weapons there are mostly small variations with damage die, crit range, and crit multiplier roughly balanced against each other and some other attributes like reach, trip, disarm, etc. With ranged weapons bows are great and everything else kind of sucks. You can overcome some of the drawbacks by investing feats, but even then bows have some unique advantages like Manyshot.

I found the PDF interesting enough that I'd like to see a "Deadliest Warrior" style test of the sling's capabilities. I wonder if this could be the dawn of a new age of "sling fanboys" who challenge katana fantatics to a theoretical weapon duel to determine what's the greatest weapon ever.

I'm not 100% sure whether or not destroying the undead would allow Speak with Dead or Raise Dead to work on the resulting corpse. Based on the rules for Resurrection it kind of appears that the answer might be no. Since Resurrection specifically mentions that it can bring back creatures which were undead but then destroyed I think there's an implication that Raise Dead can't do that.

In a previous high level campaign the bad guys would kill prominent NPCs, turn them into undead, and kidnap them so that the party would have to go on quests to liberate their bodies. They also Raised a few of their own fallen comrades, which prompted my dwarf to start decapitating major foes, taking the heads with him, and storing them in a barrel on the party's ship. During voyages he'd get the heads out and scold them for their evil deeds. They also ended up being used in several pranks.

I think this combo would probably work. I've thought of doing something similar with a valet familiar.

I think that they're talking about an AC with a Cha of 13+ taking the Eldritch Heritage feat. Of course you could take EH to get a familiar too. Of course there might be some implications by other players that you and your AC must share a bloodline.

Ok, I can agree that if the casters pick wacky somewhat ineffective stuff and never go to high levels then the martials might not need much of a boost to be on par with them.

The Ride skill includes this potentially divisive capability.

PRD wrote:
Cover: You can react instantly to drop down and hang alongside your mount, using it as cover. You can't attack or cast spells while using your mount as cover. If you fail your Ride check, you don't get the cover benefit. Using this option is an immediate action, but recovering from this position is a move action (no check required).

Since the Ride check is made as an immediate action I'm pretty confident that you can choose to make it when an enemy attacks you on their turn. I'd assume that the cover you gain is soft cover since it is being provided by another creature (your mount). This often leads to the question of whether an attack aimed at you which misses because of this soft cover should hit the mount instead or at least be resolved against the mount's AC. It seems to me that the RAW are silent on whether there's a chance for an attack which misses because of soft cover to hit the cover instead (barring some specific circumstances such as the Body Shield feat). Would folks agree that by RAW there's no chance of the mount getting hit by the attack instead of the rider?

Of course the enemy could direct any further attacks at the mount, and since using Mounted Combat to protect the mount is also an immediate action using one would usually preclude the other. In this manner at least there's some potential "cost" to using the Cover option beyond the Move action you have to spend to get back to normal (which itself can be a pretty big cost)

I'm primarily interested in making sure the RAW work the way I think though I'd also be interested in knowing how people feel about the Cover trick in general.

1 to 50 of 1,596 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2015 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.