|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
I noticed that...
Never said I don't like role playing or item descriptions, but when my character takes effort to find out what his magical item is and the DM responds "no, sorry it's just too magical for you to know," then that is aggravating.
Have you ever thought if the possibility your players don't express their disappointment with you because you treat anyone who complains as a petulant child? Might stifle discourse a little...
To you it's fun. For you players you think it's fun because they don't roll their eyes even though they become determined to use whatever resource they could bring to bear just to end your little mystery.
Like I said, saying to your group "you find a +1 sword" might be boring or immersion breaking. But when casting Identify doesn't identify the magical properties it gets old, fast.
My bad. Misunderstood what you were saying.
And in the first instance you are removing one of the balancing factors of the game. In the second you are regulating the alchemist to a NPC class as you could be any other class and then just buy the alchemist class abilities at the store.
Chris Lambertz wrote:
Removed some posts. Bigoted/racist comments and personal attacks are not OK here. Take a moment to revisit the messageboard rules. We're keeping an eye on this thread, as it seems there's a lot here set to induce grar, so if these comments can't be kept out of the discussion, the thread will be locked.
Ha! I got to read it before you deleted it this time. Too slow today, Chris.
I honestly don't know if you are joking or not but if you are, you are hilarious. I tip my hat to you, sir.
Thanks Calybos1 and Daenar. I think it will work pretty well. I'm looking at +15 attack dealing 4d6+14 damage. Now I'm wondering if I have enough bombs but with Extra Bombs only giving you two extra bombs I'm not sure it's worth a feat. I guess without Fast Bombs I can go for 13 rounds a day and keep my move action for positioning. With my falchion and Alchemical Weapon ability I have a decent backup.
I wonder if Immolation Bomb would be helpful. Fire off one or two immolation bombs and then draw my sword...
Also, can't believe I didn't mention it earlier, I have my mutagen that could boost my Dex if needed. That would give me another +2 to attack and +3 to AC (with the natural armor bonus)
I believe threeshades was replying to thejeff.
Wasn't thinking of a ranged build per se, just a bomb throwing build (although I like that belt of hurling idea). I like Grenadier for the Directed Blast ability. With Strafe Bombs and regular Bombs that gives me cones, lines, and bursts. I could take Breath Weapon Bomb (I think that's the name) but it doesn't combine with Explosive Bomb like Directed Blast and Strafe Bomb.
I have Force Bombs for anything fire doesn't hurt. Was thinking about Frost Bombs for staggered.
Not sure I could get approval to change his stats (I know it seems arbitrary when I'm changing everything else but my DM can be kind if a stickler).
I do like Beastmorph but I'm really trying to focus on bombs.
Sorry, not trying to slap down all your suggestions. I try not to overshadow the other players who don't spend as much time on this as I do. I guess I could just spend less time on it but where's the fun in that!
Stats are Str 14, Dex 10, Con 14, Int 20, Wis 10, Cha 8. Locked in gear is Adamantine Folding Plate, +3 Keen Falchion, and Cloak of Resistance (+5). Character was a scholarly type in an isolated city, joined the army when war broke out, was "retired" and then called in for one last mission. I do plan on switch hitting some (I only have 13 bombs!). Half-Orc, might should have mentioned that. My group are casual gamers so I don't need an uber build, just looking to have fun. One character is the aforementioned fighter/rogue. The other player missed last session so I don't know what he will have (but most likely a TWF ranger). We also have a NPC gunslinger with us but I'm not too concerned with stepping on her toes!
Trying to keep the two characters similiar. I simply changing his focus from his falchion to his bombs. First version was Fighter (Unbreakable)/ Alchemist (Chirurgeon).
Oh, right. I forgot you are not supposed to role play in Pathfinder.
Yeah he actually was a pretty brutal Melee alchemist! He was originally built with vital strike and devastating strike. I'm changing him (with DM permission of course!) because after our first game I found out our fighter/rogue character also had a vital strike build. I build a lot of characters so changing mine was the easiest route. Since we've already played one session so I want to keep it as close as possible to the original character.
I can understand describing something as a +1 sword can be immersion breaking but speaking as a player it is incredibly annoying to not know your weapon's properties. When I first started playing my DM was like that. Even after getting someone to cast Identify, he would just give some mystical description so every attack was "I rolled X to hit and X dmg plus whatever my sword does." Gets old quick.
Yeah Risner i think youre far off in this case. I agree with you abouy how it should be run, and also think theres often an anally awkward RAW-hysteria in these parts, but reading it as "any morale bonus" isnt awkward, its the most obvious way. That doesnt make it correct necessarily but its not in any way twisting words or an "awkward" reading. Give someo who doesnt know the game an exerpt of the Rage ability and this weapon enhancement and ask how big bonus someone with a +4 courageous weapon raging gets to strength and youll probably get the answer "six".
Give someone who never played the game a Barbarian and a Courageous weapon and I doubt they ever realize their ability increases are "morale" bonuses.
Just to be clear, the acrobatic check to jump and an acrobatic check to avoid an attack of opportunity are two different checks. The only way the jump check would avoid an AoO is if the player jumped completely over the opponent's threatened area. So jumping over a medium creature would mean jumping from more than five feet in front of it, clearing the top of the creature by five feet, and then landing more than five feet behind it. Otherwise you are making an acrobatic check to jump, to which the ring would apply, and an acrobatic check to tumble, to which the ring would not apply.
It's kind of a re-work of an already existing character that is Str based and I'm trying to change his focus without changing the character as much as possible. He is also locked into an Adamantine Folding Plate so his Dex doesn't affect his AC really.Weapon Master Fighters do not choose a weapon group. Their weapon training simply applies to their chosen weapon.
So I was making a Mad-Bomber style Alchemist when I noticed something. Point Blank Shot and Precise Shot don't have a Dex requirement. So I was thinking, since bombs are touch attacks, how viable would a low Dex character (I'm talking a Dex of 10, so really a middling Dex, not a low Dex) be?
I was thinking of four levels of Fighter (Weapon Master) for extra feats and Weapon Training (Bombs). That combined with weapon focus, weapon specialization, and Gloves of Dueling would give you +4 att/+5 dmg at the cost of 2d6 bomb dmg and 2 discoveries.
Eight levels of Alchemist (Grenadier), with Explosive Bombs and Strafe Bombs (plus Force Bombs for anything that doesn't burn).
This would give a BAB of +10, a +4 from Fighter (mentioned above), +1 from Throw Anything and another +1 from PBS when applicable. Is a +15/+16 good enough for a touch attack at level twelve?
Would Fast Bombs be worth a feat if I didn't have Rapid Shot or Two-Weapon Fighting? I would still have two attacks from BAB. I was thinking without Fast Bombs I wouldn't have to worry as much about running out of bombs but I do like the idea of firing two 40 ft lines of fire!
Any ideas or suggestions greatly appreciated, even if just to tell me I'm crazy!
Just to be perfectly clear, the Bomb ability says you can create and throw a bomb as a standard action that provokes an attack of opportunity.
I understand that to mean you can create and throw a bomb as a standard action that provokes an attack of opportunity.
Darksol the Painbringer wrote:
But, again, for the lance only. Or more specifically, using a two-handed weapon in one hand by means of an ability that does not say "as a one-handed weapon" which to my knowledge only applies to the lance while mounted.
Diego Rossi wrote:
Except I don't believe it is written anywhere that you can cast a spell and attack with it as a standard action that provokes AN attack of opportunity. The Bomb ability is explicitly called out as provoking AN attack of opportunity.
So republicans are racist and democrats are nazis? You'd think they would get along better.
How does that work, exactly?
"I believe that the govenrment has a responsibility to protect the welfare of its citizens. Except the blacks and the Jews!"
Doesn't quite make sense to me.
Size bonus does not figure into base attack bonus. That's based off your class/level and determines the number of attacks you can get (extra attack at +6, etc) and certain feat requirements (Weapon Focus requires +1 BAB).
N N 959 wrote:
The ability is "if you do more damage than the floor's hardness" so if it has hardness 10, then you have to deal 11 points of damage regardless. If it is a normal weapon, then you deal one point of damage and trigger the ability. If your weapon is adamantine then you deal 11 points of damage and trigger the ability.
I think Bombs are their supercharged items. More damage, higher DCs, variable energy damage, debuffs, etc... Plus they can use many of the normal items better than other people. Allowing them to build stronger base items would essentially give them unlimited resources or allow other classes to buy their enhanced items.
Orfamay Quest wrote:
But everybody knows science has a liberal bias...
I think free actions used to limited to during your turn but according to this it's whenever you take an action. So unless AoOs are a "not-an-action" it should work.
I think it falls under " not all republicans are racist but all racists are probably republican" line of thinking. It was mentioned but if you want a "right" most people would find repugnant then it is easier to advocate for all "rights."
In a word, yes.
The lance FAQ is open ended because new abilities and rules are frequently added to the game. Again, to my knowledge, only the lance and only while mounted falls under the two handed weapon wielded in one hand as a two handed weapon. However they might add a new weapon or archtype or feat that allows other weapons to be wielded in that way. So, to accommodate an ever expanding game system, they address it in broad terms even though it currently only applies to the one situation.
The FAQs address two different things; wielding a two-handed weapon in one hand as a two handed weapon and wielding a two handed weapon in one hand as a one handed weapon. To my knowledge, the only two handed weapon that you can use in one hand as a two handed weapon is the lance and only when mounted.
Doug's Workshop wrote:
Except it's not applied differently. The poor would be limited to the same amount as the rich.
With the Klar I would say you have a choice. You can make a masterwork "shield" version for the lower ACP, and then enchant it as a shield or weapon or both as it is masterwork. You could make a masterwork "weapon" version for a +1 to attack and again enchant it as either a shield, or weapon, or both. Or make both parts masterwork for both benefits. Although really there would never be the need to make the "weapon" masterwork as you lose the benefit as soon as you enchant it. May not be RAW per se but it makes sense to me.