Fistbeard McBeardfist's page

56 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS

1 to 50 of 56 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

Mchawi wrote:
MageHunter wrote:
Think of it as an optimization exercise and challenge...

Yes, this was slightly a joke but more of a challenge. I read somewhere that you could get super high diplomacy and base land speed and run around taunting people and force them into following you getting them off your party.

You just have to think outside the box, don't think of it as a stupid and worthless exercise, think of it as an experiment on making a character that's fun to play, even if he isn't as strong as the other party members.

You're either moving the goalpost, or truly shit at posting requests.


Jürgen, I've seen your work elsewhere, AND I've GMed Kingmaker AND I can do high school level math myself, and I absolutely promise you that you can build a better system from scratch with less effort than it will take you to fix what Paizo made.


First of, going with CRB only, Fighter is a terrible lifestyle choice, melee Fighter even more so. Your opportunities to actually make full attacks against enemies within 5' are likely to be limited (to put it mildly). But, going with your decision:

Dodge is pointless filler.
Combat Casting?
Disruptive and Spell Breaker are not going to do anything if your enemy can 5' step. Consider the Step Up line, in addition or instead.
Bleeding Critical doesn't do enough to matter. Trash it or replace with Blinding Critical.


Bob Bob Bob wrote:


2. Command word at-will True Strike? Yes, that's possible.

3. Command word is always a standard action unless it says otherwise.

To expand on this, command word is always going to be a standard action unless you base the magic item on quickened True Strike. 5th level spell, CL 9, a reasonable-sound 81K.


Nothing but Mauler's Endurance. Look into temp HP instead.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

First of all, what IS the intersection of "has skill ranks", "is immune to fatigue and boredom", "under perfect control" and "can be made cheaply"? Because I can't think of any creatures just off the top of my head.

Also, Fabricate exists and nobody buys anything crafted with craft skills past level 4.


It's a 3.5-ism, but it's obviously still being used by Paizo.


"By character level X, you're allowed to cast no higher than Y level spells". Less intrusive, solves the same problem.


There is nothing special about the feats in the Bestiary. That said, there is a very stupid ruling, maybe in the CRB FAQ, about the Fly skill and how much you need to be able to fly in order to use it as a prerequisite.


Ryan Freire wrote:
Abyssal, for mad summoning shenanigans

....at character level *17*. Cool story, bro.

To answer the actual question, there are a lot of useless Eldritch Heritages that become interesting with Improved EH, when your career is almost over. Fey is pretty badass - no save, no level limit, "just wham bam f*~+ you ma'am" action denial. It's a touch (sp), so your familiar can even deliver it for you.


That's not what Exceptional Pull does. Yes, the feat really is worse than a 1,000 gp enchantment.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

You can pretend to be a Fighter, in which you would clock in at about an 8th level character, 9th level if you have level 15 bling. Or you could max UMD to auto-succeed levels, buy a pile of wands and scrolls, and pretend to be a really bad wizard. Or, you could take leadership, an animal companion and a name-bound Outsider. Any way you slice it, your actual character brings nothing to the table. You're either a joke, a sack of gold, or the dead weight that brings your cohorts.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

VMC Wizard, True Name discovery, boom useful character. But, like leadership, it's kind of cheating.


Lobolusk wrote:
can he choose to ignore the grapple and Still Attack?before he is pinned?

Yes, he can. Can't swing a two-handed weapon though.


"Striking for damage with punches, kicks, and head butts is much like attacking with a melee weapon, except for the following:"

"Armed" Unarmed Attacks: Sometimes a character's or creature's unarmed attack counts as an armed attack. A monk, a character with the Improved Unarmed Strike feat, a spellcaster delivering a touch attack spell, and a creature with natural physical weapons all count as being armed (see natural attacks)." Note how IUS and natural weapons are different cases.

From the combat chapter. Next, the "natural attacks" universal rule: "Some creatures do not have natural attacks. These creatures can make unarmed strikes just like humans do".

Stop arguing that unarmed strikes, as a general rule, outside specific explicit exceptions, are natural weapons. You are not arguing in good faith.


Every single statblock with unarmed strikes ever published makes it unambiguously clear that unarmed strikes don't qualify for 1½*Str for being singular primary natural attacks.


Touch spells don't trigger on combat maneuvers. Even grapples. It's aggressively nonsensical, and I hope it gets changed soon.


That sounds swell, both days are a good fit for my schedule. I think I'd play a native Ustalavian social climber, class to be determined.


Death Contingencies have been in D&D for over 30 years, so, barring anything that specifically forbids them, they are legit.


Have you tried looking it up? Have you, in fact, done anything at all before coming here and asking?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

"You cannot use a style before combat begins". This leads to two possible interpretations. One is that there are conditions that force you to end the style, the other is that there are no such conditions.

If no conditions exist, then the only time you are not in a style is the period of time between when you learn the style, and the very first time a dire rat squeeks at you menacingly; from then on, you eat, shower, study and sleep in your Tiger Stance.

If conditions do exist, what are they? They are not explicitly listed in the introduction to style feats, so they must be inferred. "You cannot use a style before combat begins" refers to the state of "before combat begins", which logically rules out any time that you are in combat. I've also shown above, ad absurdum, that having previously been in combat (but currently reading a book) does not preclude you from this limitation. "Before combat begins" is thus synonymous with "when not in combat", and the limit against "using" applies to activation but also to no-action maintenance.


GM discretion on number of free actions. I don't allow any further grapple checks once you've successfully grappled an enemy this turn, and it goes both ways.


When did Master Tinker become legal?!? Anyways, Campaign Clarifications clarifies that it's an exclusive gun buyers club, not crafting.


They have level prerequisites exactly because you're not supposed to have them before a certain level.


Lorewalker wrote:
Fistbeard McBeardfist wrote:
Lorewalker wrote:
Viondar wrote:

Ah, yes, that's true :)

Two levels of fighter (eldritch guardian) would then net us an improved familiar with impressive strength, that can wear armor and wield weapons, right?

Unfortunately, eldritch guardian does not pass on weapon or armor proficiency. You'd have to take the relevant feats. Though some improved familiars naturally have proficiency and hands that can wield weapons.

But, yes, that can work.
Is there a FAQ on that? Because the feat chapter of the CRB, last I checked, gives armor proficiencies as bonus feats to Fighters. Meaning that they have them as feats AND as class abilities, because bad editing.

The weapon proficiencies were never called bonus feats and there is a FAQ for armor proficiencies. Basically, the feat descriptions for armor that says something like "Special: <class list> automatically have <type> Armor Proficiency as a bonus feat. They need not select it." are supposedly incorrect.

FAQ

Right, thank you. It's probably not even Paizo's fault, a lot of the CRB text can't be edited for legal reasons, with very stupid results sometimes.


Lorewalker wrote:
Viondar wrote:

Ah, yes, that's true :)

Two levels of fighter (eldritch guardian) would then net us an improved familiar with impressive strength, that can wear armor and wield weapons, right?

Unfortunately, eldritch guardian does not pass on weapon or armor proficiency. You'd have to take the relevant feats. Though some improved familiars naturally have proficiency and hands that can wield weapons.

But, yes, that can work.

Is there a FAQ on that? Because the feat chapter of the CRB, last I checked, gives armor proficiencies as bonus feats to Fighters. Meaning that they have them as feats AND as class abilities, because bad editing.


No. The ability says he gets the first level bloodline ability, not "everything a first level sorcerer would gain from his bloodline".


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Marginally Competent Schrödinger's Fighter, level 10.
No archetype.
Armor Training II (full speed in heavy armor)
Weapon Training +2 (+4)
Bonus Combat Feats
F1: Combat Stamina
F2:
F4: Barroom Brawler
F6: Advanced Weapon Training
F8:
F10:
Advanced Weapon Training: Warrior Spirit
Advanced Weapon Training: Abundant Tactics (Barroom Brawler)
Gloves of Dueling 15k

That's the barebones. He can use Warrior Spirit 5/day as a standard action, or Barroom brawler as a move or swift (swift somewhere between 2 and 5 times per day, depending on pacing). Either grants him a bonus combat feat for 1 minute, and he can take AWT, which leads into Item Mastery as well, giving him access to Dimension Door, Flight and a wide range of 3rd level or lower spells. He can also use his feat to gain 10 ranks in any one skill.

It's actually pretty nifty all around, and not that resource intensive. The early version comes online at level 5; you only have one of Warrior Spirit and Abundant Tactics, and your WT bonus is only +1 because you can't afford Fighter Mittens yet.

However, it is one specific build, requiring access to specific things, and knowing that you need to combine these specific items (Inner Sea Intrigue is pretty damn obscure). It shows that you can build *a* good Fighter.

Note that level 10 is the earliest opportunity to have both Abundant Barroom Brawler and Warrior Spirit into AWT.


There' is no need for anyone to "prove" that 150% real effects are *not* basically Empowered. The party who wants a specific effect, in this case the pro-shadow crowd, have the burden of proof. That burden has not (and obviously, will not) be lifted.


Ellioti wrote:
Correct me, if I'm wrong, but doesn't the requirement of X skill ranks mean, you can't enter the Prestige class before X+1?

It means that your first level in the PrC can be your character level X+1. Whatever 4/Arcane Trcickster 1 as a 5th level character. Among other things, it's impossible for you to distribute your level 4 skill ranks before you've taken your level 4 class level.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
N N 959 wrote:
Fistbeard McBeardfist wrote:
N N 959 wrote:
Fistbeard McBeardfist wrote:
You CAN make a +x (shield)/+y (weapon) enchanted shield. That's what the CRB says, pretty explicitly.

Really? Can you show me where that is stated "explicitly"?

just quoting from d20pfsrd, because your question is stupid and I can't be arsed to get off the couch and retrieve my book: "A shield could be built that also acted as a magic weapon, but the cost of the enhancement bonus on attack rolls would need to be added into the cost of the shield and its enhancement bonus to AC." From the magic items chapter, magic armor section.

Indulge me. Please let me know in which actual rule book that paragraph can be found.

Thank you in advance.

cORE rULEBOOK, 6th printing, p. 462. Anything else you need me to do for you?


You don't have a progression for when the aether elemental eidolon gets her special abilities, but you could extrapolate it from the progression of the other elementals easily enough, as a houserule. Of course, the abilities would work as intended, not the bullshit no-save disarm interpretation that some people on this board are fond of. Also, when you look at the progression of the four classic elementals, you will se that they are completely nerfed into the ground.


N N 959 wrote:
Fistbeard McBeardfist wrote:
You CAN make a +x (shield)/+y (weapon) enchanted shield. That's what the CRB says, pretty explicitly.

Really? Can you show me where that is stated "explicitly"?

just quoting from d20pfsrd, because your question is stupid and I can't be arsed to get off the couch and retrieve my book: "A shield could be built that also acted as a magic weapon, but the cost of the enhancement bonus on attack rolls would need to be added into the cost of the shield and its enhancement bonus to AC." From the magic items chapter, magic armor section.


JosMartigan wrote:

Other than Wheel of Time, has anyone come up with a Wanderer class?

I am trying to figure out a class that emulates an itinerant person. A person who travels from place to place, is capable of living off the land between towns and has a varied set of abilities that allows them to make money quickly and easily in towns/cities.

That is a *profoundly* low level concept. I would suggest capping the class at level 6 and having "must be a good entrant to Horizon Walker and Spherewalker" as design goals.


Several of those are spells that discharge their effect and then end. Obviously not candidates for Permanency. Similarly, some of them are very similar to existing weapon enchantments, and not candidates for permanency (because the question: "how much gold does it cost to add ability X to my weapon?" has already been answered).

Do any of those spells fall outside these two criteria?

The overarching principle is that anything that makes the weapon better at being a weapon is priced on the (quadratic cumulative) weapon scale.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Spring attack does nothing for you.


Isonaroc wrote:
And, even if I did decide to let it go, I would rule that a pocket that was accessible enough to stick your hand into as a free action is as exposed as a belt pouch would be to a sunder or other adverse event.

Yeah, this.


You CAN make a +x (shield)/+y (weapon) enchanted shield. That's what the CRB says, pretty explicitly. It's just that most adventure writers prefer simple statblocks, and besides Bashing and Shield Master exist.

Also, Defending weapons are terrible.


TrinitysEnd wrote:
Cavall wrote:

Of course. You quoted it yourself but I'll bold.

A masterwork weapon is a finely crafted version of a normal weapon.

As you can see that's very specific. Your answer is quite clear by the rules.

Can you point me to where a "Normal Weapon" is defined in the rules? Because if I use a rock as a weapon, wouldn't that be normal for me?

Step back, take a deep breath, and re-read your own posts. You clearly already know that you are wrong.


Honestly, this discussion about sundered SCPs is about the same as the conversations about Trapfinding.


When you do the Warrior Spirit + Training -> AWT shuffle, did you remember to pick one less AWT so that it's actually legal?

Because I'm seeing a lot of juggling here, where the one AWT allowed to a lowish-level Fighter covers every single weakness.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

An Axe that is both a, you know, axe, but also an actual axe. Oh my, never seen *that* before. Since the actual game effects are "sweet f*&*-all", just let him have it for whatever change he's got in his pockets.


Your scaling attack/damage bonus should be called "XXX Training", not "Finesse".


I'm Hiding In Your Closet wrote:
Did I put this in the wrong subforum?

No. It's just that underpowered but otherwise functional character options do not get errata. Everybody knows it, and therefore nobody has a single mote of enthusiasm to spare for your petition.


A spontaneous caster needs two tables: One for spells known, one for spells/day.


For the Dune Drifter, he is obviously supposed to be able to use challenge with his guns, but some hack didn't check his work before turning it in.


Functional link


The Spellslinger?

Look, your document is not even at a level where people can give you input on balance. What you have looks like a half-finished wizard archetype. I can't even tell if this is supposed to be a prepared or spontaneous caster, and if it's really supposed to have no attribute associated with spellcasting, why it's called a "spellslinger", or anything else really.


master_marshmallow wrote:

You either need to run the archetype that let's you use two weapons as a standard action, or take Double Slice, Improved Vital Strike, and Weapon Trick.

Eeeexcept Two-Weapon Warrior gives up both WT and AT, disqualifying it from being even marginally competent. You see what I was saying about high optimization skill?

Also, Doublestrike is a level *9* ability. That is downright insulting.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
master_marshmallow wrote:

We get it, you don't like fighters. You don't like the optional rules designed for them.

You're allowed to not like it. We've had this thread a million times and I've proven your corner cases wrong repeatedly. YOUR problem with the fighter is not everyone else's.

Assuming that people do or don't use the systems doesn't prove anything, but they do exist and they are from official Paizo material. In the first page I was the one who said the real problem with fighters was the fact that its fixes came from supplemental materials, so if you're just frustrated...

A Fighter who

1) is built with great optimization skill,
2) with access to options from every book,
2b) including specifically WMH, and
3) has access to optional subsystems such as stamina,

4) is not (necessarily) problematically weak.

5) THEREFORE, Fighter is a fine class, no problems.

That's your argument. Most of us are disagreeing with you on 5), because premises 1-3 are shaky.

1 to 50 of 56 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>