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

Golden-Esque's page

Goblin Squad Member. Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber. Pathfinder Society Member. 764 posts (4,087 including aliases). 38 reviews. 1 list. No wishlists. 2 Pathfinder Society characters. 3 aliases.


1 to 50 of 664 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Matrix Dragon wrote:

D: D:

Luckily for me I think I have a good method of balancing out dragon player characters in my games. I use houserules for replacing about half of a player's magical items with a feat-like subsystem. I'll simply take away a good number of a dragon character's abilities (with some sort of explanation of course) and require him to buy them back at the cost of a number of his picks from the subsystem. I might also give them a wisdom penalty since they're young by dragon standards ;)

The alternative that you could do is to allow your players to grab more racial traits themselves. Giving them each an extra +2 to two different ability scores as well as a bonus feat would bring every core race up to about 25 - 26 rp.

Of course, +2 to two different ability scores and a bonus feat are MUCH better than what dragons receive as racial traits, but that's my subjective opinion.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I was asked to post my perspective in this thread after writing my GM Guide to Polymorph Spells article for Know Direction today.

In the case mentioned by the OP (a case that comes up frequently and deserves an FAQ, in my opinion), the shapeshifter would NOT gain the giant octopus / giant lake octopus's extra reach. Here's why.

While polymorph spells do state that you gain any natural attacks that the forum possesses, anything that the spell doesn't specifically state that you receive either from the polymorph subschool rules or the special abilities list of the spell is not given the caster. For example, the grab special ability is listed in the melee attack section of every creature that possesses it, but despite that all polymorph spells specifically call out whether or not a caster gains grab when assuming a forum with that special ability. If the rule was, "You gain the natural attack exactly as its printed in the stat block," then the spell wouldn't have bothered to call out that you gain the grab special ability.

Likewise, a giant octopus's extra reach with its tentacles actually isn't described under its melee attack. It is described under the creature's reach entry. A thorough read of the polymorph subschool and every polymorph spell in the game reveals that not a single instance of the word "reach" is uttered. As a result, you only gain whatever reach would be afforded to you for your new size when you use a polymorph effect to transform into a creature. Because as I say in my blog article: A polymorph spell only gives you what it says it gives you.

"Extra Reach" is not part of the natural attack, nor is it an ability specifically defined by the polymorph spell. Therefore, you don't get it.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
KutuluKultist wrote:

I suppose a common cat could be a decent mauler.

After a quick check, both Raccoon and Wallaby get a Battle From base strength of 14, while among flying familiars the Hawk seems to come out on top with two attacks and a Battle Form base strength of 10.

It becomes stronger if you combine the mauler familiar with Fighter (Eldritch Guardian) and Ranger. Take two levels of Fighter to get the ability to share combat feats, then progress as ranger. Grab natural attack combat feats using your ranger combat style and grab Eldritch Heritage (Arcana) to gain a familiar of your level –2, which syncs perfectly with the two levels of fighter you possess, for a total familiar level equal to your level. You can also pick up goodies like Eldritch Claws that are likewise shared with your familiar, and Hunter's Bond (companions) would allow you to share half of your favored enemy bonus with your familiar (as well as your other allies).

Alternatively, you could do two levels of Fighter (Eldritch Guardian) and then progress as a hunter. The best teamwork feats are also combat feats, so by 5th level you would have two animals (your animal companion and your familiar) that shared all of your teamwork feats with you, your animal companion from the hunter tactics class feature and your familiar from your levels in Eldritch Guardian.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Swashbuckler's Finesse (or Champion's Finesse) + Weapon Focus: katana + Slashing Grace will also make the katana finessable, but only if you wield the weapon in one hand.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Owen K. C. Stephens wrote:

Okay folks, I'm curious!

If you have bought this book since late 2012 (when Ultimate Equipment came out), what spurred you to buy this?

If you own this and UE, and still use Adventurer's Armory, what's in it that you're still using?

Equipment Tricks.

Awesome idea. Innovative design (when it was new, that is). We've seen a few expansions since the Adventurer's Armory came out, but more expansions would be welcome.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Here's a weird question that I think the answer to is, "Yes."

Is a specific rogue talent / alchemist discovery / investigator talent / etc considered a class feature?

Specifically, if I pick the Poison Use slayer talent, do I meet the prerequisite of "Poison Use class feature" of feats like Addler Strike?

Along those same lines, Is an archetype feature also a class feature?

For instance, if I gain the Slayer Talent ability from my Sanctified Slayer inquisitor archetype, do I qualify for the Extra Slayer Talent feat, which requires the slayer talent class feature?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Bind Additional Spirts is a seperate class feature from Bind Spirits. As such, occultists are an exception to the rule; they can bind multiple spirits whereas all other spirit binders can deal a pact with no more than a single spirit at a time.

Keep an eye out for our Kickstarter next month! We are doing a big compilation project called Pact Magic Unbound: Grimoire of Lost Souls. It's a compilation of Vols 1 and 2, plus a large chunk of new content, such as new spirits, feats, and Advanced Class Guide archetypes. The book also includes expansive rules editing and alot of our previous assumptions (that the reader is already familiar with Pact Magic via the Tome of Magic) has been abandoned. We're in the process of playtesting the material now.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Arcanic Drake wrote:

Sorry... But this is a self bump to see if I can revive my thread. If it dies again I will leave it be.

Anyway, thank you to those who previously posted on my thread. You guys were very helpful and I am starting the basis for the adventure. I still believe more impute would be helpful though and would like to hear more thoughts on the matter.

There's a preview of Microsized Adventures in my company's Facebook group. I'm going to do another preview every week or so until its ready to be published (probably the first week of February atm).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Gun Dragon wrote:
Are you gonna make some cool Kitsune Summoner stuff soon?

Is there a demand for me to make more kitsune stuff?

(As an aside, I'm not touching the summoner until I see Unchained. I have some eidolon ideas floating around in my head, but I don't want whatever I write for the class to be obsolete if the summoner is getting a total rehaul.)


2 people marked this as a favorite.

For what my opinion's worth, I like the non-goblin, more regal look of the hobgoblins. Sort of implies that goblins are, in fact, a mutation of hobgoblin. "Plus-size goblin" isn't exactly an interesting design for a race.


15 people marked this as a favorite.

Maybe instead of lamenting that your players don't leave themselves room to grow and develop because of the encounters and experiences they face, you should think about where the PCs would like to take their characters and design a story that will help the PCs realize their character concepts? Just a thought, but when someone complains of rigidity, its typically a two-way street. If you're a GM who is playing an AP, then you're also a hypocrite because in using an AP, you basically have your entire adventure mapped out in advance.

Personally, I'm a planner. I want my character to be cool and effective. However, the best laid plans of mice and men are often lead astray, and I usually end up revising my build based on my experiences in-game (Oh man, my GM is really pushing this "leader" thing. Maybe having Leadership would be a cool idea!) or mechanically (I keep getting wrecked by Fortitude saves. Maybe I should take a level in a class with a good Fortitude bonus). But having a build idea already in place helps me have a starting ground from where I am and where I want to be going.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Mark Seifter wrote:
David Neilson wrote:
Be weird if you got the ability to be a summoned creature.

Don't knock it til you tried it!

Also, just noticed that this one has both Anthony and Linda as freelancers. Boston Lodge unite?

Its also got Anthony and me as freelancers. Private Sanctuary Podcast, unite!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Liz Courts wrote:
Azreal The Darkened Shadow wrote:
Is it legal to use the traits found in this book in Pathfinder society?
No.

I'm pretty flattered that people keeping asking me that.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
deuxhero wrote:
Alexander Augunas wrote:
I'd probably thwack you with my copy of the Giant Hunter's Handbook.
Aren't the player's companions floppy?

Players can be surprisingly hard to replace, and in my experience bludgeoning them with my Core Rulebook brings the unpleasantness of police investigations, so I prefer to stick with thwacks rather than clobberings.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
The black raven wrote:

By RAW, it seems possible to use several Effortless Laces on the same weapon. Or did I miss something ?

Also, I do not get what the benefit of the Cry Challenge feat is. Way I read it, it only allows you to get attacked :-/

Again, I'm not the developer or a representative of Paizo, Inc and my word has no say at anyone's table but my own, but if you tried to tie multiple effortless laces onto a single weapon at my table, I'd probably thwack you with my copy of the Giant Hunter's Handbook.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ken Pawlik wrote:

Broken Earth by Sneak Attack Press

Zeitgeist Book 1: The Investigation Begins by EN Publishing
GM Miscellanies: Dungeon Dressing, Urban Dressing, Wilderness Dressing, and Village Backdrops by Raging Swan Press
Age of Electrotech by Radiance House

I'm hoping the completed Liber Influxus Communis, Akashic Mysteries, and Strange Magic will make my best of list for 2015.

Thanks for the direct shout-out (Age of Electrotech) and the indirect shout-out (Liber Influxus Communis)!

I also think I'm in the GM Miscellanies, Village Backdrops product but I don't remember. D:


4 people marked this as a favorite.

And finally, because its New Years Day, I figured that I'll share the product name that Dario and I finally settled on for the new Pact Magic product here.

Pact Magic Unbound: Grimoire of Lost Souls


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Nyaa wrote:
Gambit wrote:
That said, I'm not sure a name change would be a horrible idea, if only so the class and system can maintain its own identity, otherwise I can see potential confusion on the horizon.
I completely agree with you that Paizo should change their Occultist name to something not currently used in Pathfinder, but it is (was?) better to post that suggestion on the Occult Adventures playtest forum.

I think it WAS "suggested" on the playtest forums (and humorously I saw a small minority of people who said that our pact magic was more interesting than the medium's spirit binding; thanks, guys!) but at the same time I respect the need to have a class called "occultist" in a book called OCCULT Adventures.

As anyone who purchases my Everyman Gaming products (or who has purchased Age of Electrotech) knows, I personally don't let other 3PP determine for me what I should and should not do, so I respect Paizo's need to cater to its fanbase. It just so happens that their fanbase happens to be just about everyone in our community.

I think Dario and I settled on the alternate name for the occultist. Early on in the book, there's going to be a blurb about how the word "occultist" is a very common name and means a lot of things, so if you feel the need to "specify" one occultist from another, you can call the class the "spirit bound" or the "spirit bound occultist." But everywhere else in the book, the class's name will be "occultist" and will be referred to as such.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
pendothrax wrote:

I cannot wait for the kickstarter. a superpretty hardcover would be really tempting for me. I really appreciated the archetype for alchemists in volume 2, are you planning for any more pathfinder class archetypes or feats for pact magic?

There will be archetypes for every Advanced Class Guide class in the new book. And because it's New Year's Day, here's a list of all of the new archetypes that are currently in the book, in alphabetical order.

Alchemical Meister
Bloodsworn Binder
Eldritch Jailer
Esoteric Dilettante
Mad Cultist
Occult Bruiser
Occult Exploiter
Occult Investigator
Occult Shaman
Occult Scourer
Pactsworn Assassin
Pactsworn Hunter
Pactsworn Warpriest
Seal-Bound Sorcerer
Shadow Templar
Soul Screamer
Thaumaturge

I say "currently" because I just took inventory on the artwork that we need (which is the reason that we're running the Kickstarter in February in the first place) and Chapter 1 is VERY loaded with potential pieces. I might ultimately end up writing some more class options in order to reduce the amount of artwork that we need in that chapter, but we'll see. As is, that last covers every Advanced Class Guide class at least once (there's at least one ACG class that has two archetypes) and it also includes a decent number of new archetypes for the Occultist class.

Also, the following archetypes were renamed from their previous iterations in order to make them match the source material's theme better.

Warshade (Fighter) ---> Warbinder
We made the warshade a bit more generic; instead of getting his own, personal list of fighter-exclusive powers all of the old "seals of darkness" were transformed into binder secrets. In its place, the warshade can pick binder secrets instead of bonus feats. Ultimately, it makes the archetype more flexible and more fun, but it didn't really warrant the name "warshade" anymore, so we decided to make a callback to Secrets of Pact Magic and rename it the "warbinder." But yeah, if you were playing a warshade, you're getting a buff in the long run. Sometimes fighters DO get nice things!

Untouchable (Rogue) ---> Fringe Binder
We changed this one for two reasons: 1) Having a rogue archetype called "the untouchable" made it difficult to imagine being a rogue binder as a good thing in a setting where pact magic was everywhere and accepted. We're trying not to make too many setting choices for you on how pact magic is viewed, we're simply trying to give you the history. 2) We cleaned up the archetype so ninjas actually qualify for it, and given Eastern theology (especially Japanese), having an archetype called the "untouchable" doesn't really mesh that well with oriental ideology. (On another note, we also cleaned up the pactsworn knight so samurai can take that archetype.)

Spirit Drudge (Witch) ---> Weird Witch
This change happened because EVERYONE asked me what the heck a drudge was. And when I told someone that it was basically a henchman / servant, they'd go, "Why do I want to play that?!" So yeah, thematic reasons only. I think weird witch conveys the theme much better than spirit drudge does. Plus I love figurative language. ;-)


2 people marked this as a favorite.

If I was your player, a person playing a REDEEMER paladin, I would be pretty annoyed if my GM asserted that my gods-given powers (the ability to help guide the wicked towards redemption) was essentially worthless. Because that's what you're telling your player if, after nearly a LIFETIME of work, I found out that I could *only* partially redeem the dragon.

I've personally never liked the notion that alignment is a genetic factor, not a societal one. Putting aside real world debates, if alignment was as strongly based on nature as you believe, then why would devils exist? It would be pointless to try and tempt Good people into Evil, because it would be entirely in their nature to be Good, and thus the devil would fail every time. But as every good "fallen hero" story will tell you, that is NEVER the case. Alignment is a consequence of your actions, a statistic that defines YOU based on what YOU do; it isn't this rigid cosmic mandate that tells you exactly how you act at all times.

If I was GMing for your player, I would have the wyrmling be VERY open towards acting in a Lawful Good manner if raised in the right way. Children basically mimic the alignment of their parents until they're adolescents anyway. Wait until the dragon is a Juivenelle before making it introspectively examine its life, forcing it into an existential crisis. A draconic identity crisis is a MUCH more compelling story than, "Oh, this thing is naturally Evil no matter what you do."


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Quick update: Dario and I just sent the Alpha version of what will be our Kickstarter Product to our playtesters. They should finish up around the end of January, and so far we're relatively on-course to begin our Kickstarter around them as well. We won't start until we're satisfied with our playtesting so we have something to show off when we're trying to convince our fans (and people who aren't our fans yet) to invest in us.

Also, Dario and I finally decided on the name for the final product: Pact Magic Unbound: Grimoire of Lost Souls.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
bugleyman wrote:
Sean K Reynolds wrote:

It wasn't my square, or my ruling. It's how Jason thought it should work, in the text that he wrote for the Core Rulebook. When this question came up in the FAQ queue, I pointed out the problem to Jason (heck, it was a diagram on the marker board on my office wall for months), he acknowledged it wasn't clear over two years ago, but nothing got done about it until now.

Please stop attributing to me every ruling or answer you (generic "you") don't like. (Which, mind you, is one of the reasons why I stopped being the point man for FAQs for about five months. And during that interregnum, there were only a handful of new FAQs posted, because nobody else made FAQs a priority like I did. And then I was ordered to be the point man for FAQs again, despite me not wanting to, and despite being told "you get into too many arguments on the boards.")

I stand corrected, and I apologize for misrepresenting your position. I will be more careful in the future.

In my opinion, a large part of the problem is that there are "positions" at all. There is are fine lines between "debate," "discussion," and "arguing," and all arguing ever does on the Paizo boards or any other is get a community's privileges taken away. It happened not too long ago with the infamous "Paizo Needs to Clean Up Its House," thread and now we have strong evidence that similar behavior in regards to Pre-Seifter FAQs likely caused FAQ Friday to dry up altogether until recently.

So please, even if you don't like a designer / developer or his stance on something, don't spread your negativity about how awful it is. Fine some solid, empirical proof and present it if you want to, but don't go attacking the people who spend their off-time working to try and make your gaming experience even greater.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

On the subject of rogues, I actually did a fairly large two-part article on rogues on Guidance a few months back, which you can see here (part 1) and here (part 2). For those of you who don't feel like reading 6+ pages of analysis (and I don't blame you if you don't feel like doing so), the summary of my articles is that the rogue has really good burst damage, but few ways of actually making sure that her blows connect to deliver that burst damage. Even in a post-slayer world, the only class that can come close to matching the rogue's burst damage is the ninja, which the later can do a bit better thanks to the ki pool.

Ultimately, I think the rogue's REAL problem shines when people talk about, "Well, you could do that better as X," because the truth of the matter is that all of the rogue's best class features (including talents) are available to other characters. Many archetypes, classes, and prestige classes get sneak attack. At least two other base classes get uncanny dodge, improved uncanny dodge, evasion, and trap sense and in many cases those other classes can use these abilities to better effect. The rogue doesn't have much of anything that she can call uniquely hers, especially when her intended design seems to be "the most martially inclined of the skill-focused characters."

From what the designers have said about the unchained rogue, I have high hopes for the class. The "sneak attack modifying" abilities will definitely go a long way towards making the rogue a stronger class and help to solidify its niche compared to, say, the bard or investigator.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Alex G St-Amand wrote:
Blaming Cosmo for people reactions to FF XV's Cid before the game is even out.

Thanks for deciding that the tears of hundreds of Gamergate supporters were a more delicious delicacy than my own tears, Cosmo!


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Once per round, when fighting defensively with at least one hand free, you can designate a single opponent you can see. You receive a +2 dodge bonus to AC against that opponent for 1 round. If you are using the total defense action instead, you can deflect one melee attack that would normally hit you. An attack so deflected deals no damage and has no other effect (instead treat it as a miss). You do not expend an action when using this feat, but you must be aware of the attack and not flat-footed.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Throne wrote:
Protoman wrote:
Whoa that effortless lace sounds incredible. I hope it'll be PFS legal as that would open up a bunch of finesse-build options.
It does.... a lot. By itself, Slashing Grace doesn't let you apply dex to hit with weapons that don't already get it. Combined with this (at a really decent price, to boot?) Don't need to dip Swashbuckler anymore to get full use from finesse, sure, but it also opens up a lot of options for twf... depending on the exact wording, of course.

Without giving away any spoilers on the book, I will say that one of the reasons I worded the Effortless Lace as I did was to make dual-scimitar builds something that could actually be accomplished without a massive –4 penalty on attack rolls. We'll see soon enough how the fine gentlemen with the Pathfinder Society choose to handle the Effortless Lace, I'm sure, but I designed it the way I did to expand upon the number of finesse builds that people could play effectively. In that way, its sort of like a blinkback belt or belt of hurling, but for finesse weapons.

Again, not a Paizo-official response. If you quote my post and try to use it as +1 flaming finesse weapon bane ammo, I can't promise that an angry rune giant won't show at your doorstep in the wee hours of the morning, looking for vengeance.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm actually writing a 3PP product on this topic for January 2015 called Microsized Adventures. ;-)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

A fairly major update to the Kitsune Compendiun us now live!

In addition to the shiny, new cover, there are fixes to the ronin archetype and Spell Bluff feat as well as some wordage changes in the "5 Things Everyone Knows About Kitsune." Some of the interior formatting has also changed, but most notable is the image and background changes. Everything has been merged and optimized to (hopefully) improve loading speeds. I notice the difference on my Mac, but I don't have any PC references to go by.

Regardless, thanks for supporting this product and making it Everyman Gaming's #1 best seller. A lot of love went into this product, and it makes me overjoyed that so many people have picked it up.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
John Lynch 106 wrote:
How is Pact Magic and the Occultist different to the upcoming Occult Adventures from Paizo? They appear to conceptually be sharing the same space (even going so far as to have the same name). Mechanically will they be extremely different?

The Pact Magic occultist is nothing like the Occult Adventures occultist, save for having the same name. The Pact Magic occultist binds spirits to her soul in order to gain supernatural abilities. The Occult Adventures occultist invokes an array of esoteric, otherworldly items in order to gain magical powers. (Specifically, psychic spells). Our occultist has absolutely nothing to do with implements or spell schools. About the only design space they share is that both characters draw magic circles. But where Occult Adventures occultists draw circles to protect themselves (and others) from outsiders, Pact Magic occultists draw magic circles to summon otherworldly entities into this world.

In terms of mechanics, the Pact Magic Occultist is more similar to the Occult Adventures Medium, as both characters invoke spirits for mystic powers. However, there are key differences between them. First, the PMO is all about individuals. Each spirit is a unique entity with its own supernatural powers were the OAM has 54 spirits that are designed to be generic, "this can be anyone" spirits. Second, the PMO has scaling spirit levels where the OAM's spirits are all available at 1st level. Finally, the PMO isn't a spellcaster (and is balanced around that) while the OAM is a 4-level psychic spellcaster.

For one final point, the concept of binding spirits to one's self for power is one class in Occult Adventures. Maybe a few archetypes here or there, too. The Pact Magic book will be about 300 pages long (longer with stretch goals) and not only has class mechanics to go with it, but magic items, spells, special abilities, a background generator, and more. The scope of the Medium at launch will pale in comparison to the Occultist simply because we have so many more years of development and so many more pages devoted to making the idea awesome.

Also, as you've noted before, "Will they be different?" isn't the right question. "Are they different" is the question you should ask, because Pact Magic Unbound is about two years older than Occult Adventures. (Three by the time its released in July.) And I think our fans will agree that Occult Adventures is many things, but it isn't pact magic.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
White Unggoy wrote:

So I've been a big fan of stuff from Everyman Gaming that I've purchased, and this sounds appealing, but as someone who owns SGG/RGG's Dragon Rider and Dracomancer classes, as well as RP's In the Company of Dragons, I'd like either the man himself or someone who picks it up to sell me on what this has to offer; I see a lot of parallels between those products and this.

I'll still probably buy this, but make me feel better about my purchase. :-)

Yes, there are parallels between this product and the products you mentioned. Particularly In the Company of Dragons and Genius Guide to the Dragon Rider. I picked up both of those products not only to check to make sure that I wasn't inadvertently stepping on Stephen or Steve's toes, but also to make sure that I covered all my bases in terms of which options I offered to GMs and players.

This is the side bar that is on the Table of Contents page of the Dragon Companion Handbook. I hope it answers your questions.

Dragon Companion Handbook wrote:


Using This Product
The idea of using dragons as PC options is not a revolutionary one. Many source books published over the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game’s history that give PCs ways to interact with dragons; some of these options predate the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game itself. With all of the excellent supplements that are available, one might ask one’s self, “Why should I consider this one?”

Kept simply, the Dragon Companion Handbook is designed to give players access to dragons. Not otherworldly creatures that look similar to dragons. Not dragons with plenty of leashes and restrictions attached. Dragons. In some cases, this design goal has left the options in the Dragon Companion Handbook unable to fulfill some of the niches carved out by other Pathfinder compatible products; that’s perfectly alright. The Dragon Companion Handbook wasn’t designed to make the products of other companies obsolete. It was designed to fulfill a niche of its own: providing dragons to players with minimal strings attached. Below are several popular products that are compatible with the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game as well as a brief synopsis of their respective niches. It is our hope that you choose the best Pathfinder RPG compatible supplement to fulfill whatever job you are looking to fill in your campaign setting and beyond.

Genius Guide to the Dragonrider, Rogue Genius Games: This product is designed to give players the ability to play as dragon riders from the very beginning of their careers as adventurers. It gives players a dragon steed from 1st level and mechanics to balance the power of the dragon for a 1st level character. Unlike the Genius Guide to the Dragonrider, Dragon Companion Handbook focuses more on the dragon as opposed to its rider, and while options exist for any character capable of taking an animal companion or special mount to gain a dragon companion, the earliest one can do so using the Dragon Companion Handbook is 4th level. Players looking to be dragonriders primarily are advised to use Rogue Genius Games’ product while those looking to add dragons to existing classes will be better served by the Dragon Companion Handbook.

In the Company of Dragons, Rite Publishing: This product is designed to create a new player race and accompanying base classes and archetypes to allow players to play dragon characters. While very similar to the premise of the Dragon Companion Handbook, In the Company of Dragons introduces a new subrace of dragons specifically designed to act as a player race while the Dragon Companion Handbook draws its inspiration from the true dragon septs that have already been introduced to the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game. As a result, the races found in the Dragon Companion Handbook are roughly 10 race points stronger than the race that is presented in Rite Publishing’s In the Company of Dragons, and are therefore less suited to acting as player races. As a matter of fact, the Dragon Companion Handbook assumes that you are using the Leadership Handbook (also by Everyman Gaming, LLC) to recruit these dragons as cohorts rather than play them as PCs. The racial options provided by Rite Publishing are better served as PCs while those described in the Dragon Companion Handbook make better cohorts.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Barachiel Shina wrote:

Woah Effortless Lace does what!? Wow

I got a buddy with a Barbarian/Fighter that dual wields two Mercurial Greatswords that'll be happy at that.

The Effortless Lace can only be applied to one-handed piercing and slashing weapons.

You could, however, wrap the lace around a katana and use it with Weapon Finesse without needing Slashing Grace. Or you could wrap the lace around a rapier to use said rapier with Piranha Attack.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Its weird to see something I wrote in a Paizo product.

I ... kind of like it.

Cackles madly.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
MMCJawa wrote:
I believe the point behind changing the Barbarian is to simplify the math it uses, not nerf/power up the class.

I *think* that Jason mentioned that a few of the "so specific its weak" rage powers are getting simplified as well. For example, he mentioned that raging swimmer will change to simply grant a swim speed while raging instead of its current, relatively complicated form.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mark Seifter wrote:
Alexander Augunas wrote:
If you could choose what sort of "guy" you develop into at Paizo, such as Jason being the "Razmir Guy" or Wes being the "Devil Guy," what would you pick?
I think the designers, other than Jason who was there since the time before time, don't get to be a "guy". Hypothetically, I could mug Sutter for fey or something.

That's not true! Stephen is ... um ... the ... pig-kicking guy?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Thanks for breaking World of Warcraft on its newest expansion's release date, Cosmo.

Said no one ever.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lou Diamond wrote:

Mark I don't like the randomness of how the Magus gains his black blade.

I have an idea on how to change this. I would push back to 4th the level when the the magus gets his first stat bump and the Magus would choose
his weapon and what it is made out of. The Magus would perform a magic ritual binding himself to his weapon sacrificing his first stat bump to give his weapon sentience. The Black Weapon would continue to gain intelligence as per the black blade chart. I would also change the ego
rules to mirror the standard intelligent magic item rule. I also would allow weapons enchantments to be placed on the weapon. So in all respects the black blade would be a custom intelligent magic weapon instead of a hybrid magic weapon/ class feature. Can I get your comments on this?

Design-wise trading something not tied to a class for something tied to a class isn't a great idea. A magus arcana is MUCH more powerful than a +1 bonus to an ability score and it becomes impossible to justify why only magus have this option available to them.

My brother plays a bladebound magus in one of the games we play in. We started at Level 2. My GM assumed that my brother's sword (a bastard sword) was always a black blade; it just simply chose to not provide my brother with its magical benefits until he was strong enough to prove to him that he was worth the black blade's effort (3rd level). Intelligent magic weapons are fun like that.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Hey Logan, hope you had a good time on vacation as you won't be reading this until you return.

So, here's the scoop: I haven't played the mesmerist myself; working on getting a few more XP on my PFS swashbuckler at the moment. That said, my last PFS scenario was played with a mesmerist at the table, so I thought I'd list some of my observations in the hopes that its helpful to you to know how this class is perceived by someone else at the table. If this isn't helpful, hey! Free carte blanche to skip me. Here it goes.

We played at Level 2; apparently there was a Con in the area that I missed last week and this guy leveled up his mesmerist fast. We played Shadow's Last Stand part 1. Overall, it was a pretty scary scenario for the mesmerist because there wasn't a lot that he could use his mind-affecting powers on.

1) The mesmerist tricks weren't tested much/ I don't remember all of the tricks that our mesmerist player took, but the only one that actually saw any use was the one that made a cloud of obscuring mist appear around one of our party members. What ended up happening rather frequently is that our player would pick a party member to implant a trick on, but the triggering condition would never happen to that player. He had obscuring mist implanted for a combat or two before he got to trigger it because enemies would constantly attack from behind when the trick was on the lead fighter. What seemed frustrating to me was that the mesmerist couldn't switch out a trick and place it on someone else without losing his previous use. Another player at the table described it as playing "Whack-a-Mole" with his class features.

2) The mesmerist's spells were very offensive. I don't know if this is a hallmark of the class or not, but the mesmerist couldn't compare with, say, the bard in terms of utility with his spellcasting. All of his spells were offensive ones like charm person; things that you cast on other players. This might be a build bungle with our player, but it seems like a bit of a problem with a class that is constantly compared to the bard. Maybe adding few more enchantment buffs would help this class out a bit? That said, this is a bad scenario for a Level 2 mesmerist; we fought a lot of stuff like constructs and undead that are immune to mind-affecting spells and he wasn't high enough level for the ability that allows the mesmerist to pierces immunity to mind-affecting effects.

3) Hypnotic Stare was really cool. I might have been the only person who thought so, but I thought the flavor behind the hypnotic stare class feature was great. At our level, it was only a small penalty to Will saves, but the idea that the character's presence alone causes those penalties was really cool.

4) The mesmerist was pretty terrible without his tricks and spells. Typically, Medium base attack classes have something that make them at least passable in combat, such as an inquisitor's judgment, a bard's morale bonus on attack rolls, or whatever class feature you're designing for the rogue so she can hit higher AC foes more readily. What was weird about the mesmerist is that he didn't have anything like that. He was a Medium base attack bonus class with nothing to actually make him decent at using that Medium base attack bonus. The only other class that I can think of that has a Medium base attack bonus that it can't really use is the summoner, but the summoner as an eidolon to make up for it.

Suggestions:
Without having seen what many others in this thread have said, here are some thoughts I had after seeing this class in action.

— This class doesn't have a signature class feature. Bards have performances. Rogues have sneak attack. Inquisitors have judgment. Personally, I think that hypnotic stare should be the focus of this class, as the crazy swirly eyes are the most iconic part of being a hypnotist. I would also update the stare so it had a limited number of targets at once (I would use 3 + Cha, similar to the bellflower tiller's bellflower crop class feature) and have the stare grant a benefit to selected allies and penalty to enemies.

— Tricks are far too limited. They have limited range, limited uses, and limited conditions in which they are useful. No other class in the game that possesses a talent mechanic uses those talents as the class's centerpiece, and I think the mesmerist is showing us why that is. Rage powers supplement rage, Ninja tricks / rogue talents supplement skills, sneak attack, ki pool, or grant bonus feats, wild talents supplement the elemental blast, and so on.

After making hypnotic stare the centerpiece, I would change mesmerist tricks so they are activated as an immediate action when a trigger occurs. If the mesmerist is aware and isn't flat-footed, he can use a trick to affect one of the targets of his hypnotic stare at a range of up to 60 feet. For example, if the party fighter is one of the mesmerist's hypnotic stare targets, if the mesmerist sees a group of enemies attack said fighter, he can use the mirror image mesmerist trick on him as an immediate action at a range of up to 60 feet.

In this manner, the mesmerist keeps its "Whack-a-Mole" gameplay, but it isn't as punishing as it currently is.

3) Bolster the HD Mechanic. I never got to see this in action, but the idea of a class that can use color spray, sleep, and similar spells more effectively is cool. This should play a larger role in the mesmerist class, but that's just my opinion. Maybe something like canny defense, but with Charisma and affecting the HD maximum of his mind-affecting spells?

Hope this feedback helps!


2 people marked this as a favorite.

There's a considerable part of me that's wishing for rules for the ghost rider cavalier to gain a possessed motorcycle mount instead of a steed. (Compatible with the Technology Guide, of course!)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Are you asking for feats to take normally, or for feats to swap into with martial flexibility?

Typically, you're going to want to use your core feats to build your basic fighting style and your martial flexibility for more situational affairs. For example, if you want to focus on thrown weapons, your best bet (as lemeres mentions) is to specialize in using wooden stakes. Quick Draw is going to be very important to your build, as it'll allow you to draw your stake(s) quick enough to make a full attack with them. Likewise, you'll probably want to invest in a blinkback belt, which will teleport any stake that you throw back into your belt for further use. This, of course, depends on how much you want to focus on thrown weapons.

Picking up Combat Expertise is a worthwhile investment. Not because Combat Expertise itself is good, but it allows you to use martial versatility to pick up just about any Improved combat maneuver feat that you want without needing to invest any additional feats into that combat maneuver. For example, you can take Combat Expertise and whenever you decide that you want to trip, you can use martial flexibility to gain Improved Trip temporarily. Next time, you could take Improved Disarm instead, or Improved Dirty Tricks.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tels wrote:
Squeakmaan wrote:
While the new cover is undoubtedly awesome, is it giving anybody else Pinocchio flashbacks? "I got no strings, to hold me back"
There are... no strings on me.

This must confirm what we've all been thinking: Wayne Reynolds and Joss Whedon are one and the same.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tels wrote:
Alexander Augunas wrote:
Liz Courts wrote:
I think you mean "punny," because that golem is anything but puny.

What do you mean? I never called anything puny!

*Uses Mesmerizing Stare (Su)*

Requires Eye Contact and one does not just 'find' Gninjas.

How do you know that I don't have eye contact? >:D


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Liz Courts wrote:
I think you mean "punny," because that golem is anything but puny.

What do you mean? I never called anything puny!

*Uses Mesmerizing Stare (Su)*


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Romaq wrote:
I would be happy to get this PDF, but a review from someone who is comfortable with the leadership material "by the CRB" and able to compare it to this document would really make my day. :)

I can totally compare this to the CRB for you.

Imagine the Leadership feat. Take the feat's Leadership score and make it a baseline statistic, like your Reflex save or AC. Every PC has this statistic, and NPCs have it too if you (the GM) want them to have it.

Now using this statistic, every PC gains the ability to attract cohorts and followers and posseses a Sphere of Influence. All of these things are based on your Leadership score. Additionally, your mass combat capability (as a commander) is also based on your Leadership score.

Finally, in order to set leaders apart and allow them to customize their skills, leaders get special benefits called perks. Perks are earned at 2nd level and every 2 levels thereafter. Most don't give many (if any) combat benefit. They make you better at downtime, at kingdom building, at managing contacts, and at fighting with an army. If you don't like cohorts and followers, there are even perks that let you buy out of leadership called Loner perks. My favorite loner perk is called One-Man Army, which gives you an ACR boost when acting as a commander of a Fine army (an army consisting only of yourself).

I hope this helps you determine if this is the right product for you. :-)


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Ever wished there was a way to grab a cohort without spending a precious feat slot on it? Maybe you'd like a handy list of things your followers could do that doesn't involve getting eaten by a dragon in droves. Maybe you'd like a way to track your reputation with multiple factions for a true sense of political intrigue, or maybe you're looking for some neat ways to progress your character's Leadership skills that didn't make you choose between a +1 bonus on kingdom rolls or Power Attack. Or maybe, just maybe, you'd like a means to connect all of the dispart campaign systems that exist for Pathfinder together under one statistic.

If any of this sounds like you, make sure to pick up Everyman Gaming, LLC's 4th Pathfinder Product, the Leadership Handbook, which is now available at Paizo.com!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jadeite wrote:
With Paizo creating an Occultist for Occult Adventures, should the Pact Magic Occultist be renamed?

I'm not planning on renaming it. There are a finite number of words for "magic" in the English language and I don't want to set a precedent where I rename the core class of this system every time Paizo comes out with a new class. Unless I break standard naming conventions and either A) make up a word or B) use a two-word name for the class, it will happen sooner or later.

The beauty of it is that in denotation, an "occultist" is simply someone who practices occultism. Occultism is "the practice of magic, astrology, or any system claiming use or knowledge of secret or supernatural powers or agencies." So by that definition, every spellcasting class ever published is an "occultist."

That said, I'll likely include a note somewhere that you can call the class a "ravaged occultist" if you want to or something. I'm not even sure how I'll be incorporating Occult Adventures into the world of Pact Magic yet.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Fascinating. A Medium BAB character with 4 levels of spellcasting. That doesn't have a spell list!

Triune Vessel seems complicated to me.

There are some strong similarities to Pact Magic Unbound in the Medium class, which is sort of ironic because Occult Adventure's Occultist is nothing like our Occultist. xD

Making the spirits based off of the Harrow cards is INGENIOUS. Bravo on that bit of flavor, Mark!

The Beating:

"For a Medium medium." Ha. Grammar is fun. For the bear spirit's Awesome Blow, you'll need to note that you ignore the feat's prerequisites, as the Awesome Blow feat requires that you be Large or larger. On the other hand, you could rewrite the ability to instead grant the brawler's awesome blow class feature, which is probably the better option. Especially considering that The Beating gives a medium a monk's unarmed damage class feature.

For The Beating's dogpile class feature, you might want to note whether or not that ability stacks with the menacing special weapon property, which effectively does the same thing. (Though dogpile is stronger.)

The Beating's dissolution class feature is looking a little strong. Other, similar abilities either require a saving throw or a special condition to occur, such as a ninja's pressure points trick requiring a successful sneak attack.

Why do Dexterity spirits have two spells per spell level each, but Strength spirits only have one?

Demon Lantern:

Is there any limit to the number of times per day that I can cast fool's lantern?

If wisp walker is a spell-like ability that is an illusion [glamer] effect, do my enemies get a Will save to disbelieve it?

Is there a limit to the number of times per day that I can use The Desert's salvation supreme ability? Removing negative levels at will seems really powerful, especially compared to the abilities of the Strength spirits.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The cloud and cyclone infusions specifically call out "blizzards" and "sandstorms" as a possible manifestation of the blast, but the infusion is air-only. Why can't water, earth, or even fire take this infusion? (After all incendiary cloud IS a fire spell.)

What is the action required to use the engulfing winds wild talent?

Heh. Jagged Flesh is Spike, from X-Men Evolution.

There are a couple of wild talents that state that they function like other wild talents, but they don't ever mention that those referenced abilities are wild talents. For example, self telekinesis functions like flame jet, but never mentions that flame jet is a wild talent.

Huh. Kinetic Healer is interesting. You heal a channel energy's worth of lethal damage, but either you or your target take a point of burn damage. (Which translates to 1 point of nonlethal damage per Hit Die.) Interesting.

So my final thought: huh. Well, this is very clearly the Jean Gray / Avatar / Jedi class. I really like it for that. The abilities themselves are interesting: this is a cool take on a spell-less caster class. That said, the wild talents section is a bit overwhelming, mostly because the formatting is all very similar. I like that they're not all mixed together, but I'm wondering how easy this class will be to play at a table.

All that said, the fact that this is a Constitution-based caster class is REALLY cool, especially considering that you're going to burn your own hit points away to use its abilities. Very nicely done, Mark!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Garrett Johnson 284 wrote:
(1) Is there any other sites where you will be posting updates for Pact Magic Unleashed? (Facebook, Radiance House website?)

I post spoilers about things I'm working on all the time on our Pact Magic Facebook Group. They actually knew about this project a about a month before I made this thread. The latest thing I posted there was the tidbit that I rewrote the aging spells (namely alter age and siphon age) to fit better with Golarion, which included the addition of four pact magic themed alchemical power components. They are:

— Atlan Voidstone (Implied to be what Damian Darkstar's ship is made out of.)
— Crystallized Pain (Getting a heavy expansion in this book in general.)
— Desert Spice (Also a wondrous item.)
— Solar Orchid (For Paizo fans everywhere. Augments aging spells to make them last longer.)

Quote:
(2) Will you also be utilizing any of the content from Villains of Pact Magic? Maybe updating the spirits and classes?

As always, the classes from Secrets of Pact Magic and Villains of Pact Magic serve to inspire my archetype design whenever possible. Spirit-wise, this book has a ridiculous number of spirits. There's one spirit for every constellation at every level, plus one entirely new "constellation" called starless spirits. In short, there's something like 126 spirits in the book baseline and that number includes updates to every spirit ever written in Secrets of Pact Magic and Villains of Pact Magic. Except for anima spirits and epic spirits.

Quote:
Let me know because my DM allowed me to use your Occultist class of our upcoming low-magic, future/space campaign that we will be podcasting.

Nice! The occultist is getting a pretty big update in the next book, so if your GM permits, you might have some updating to do when this book rolls around. As I've mentioned, I'm intending this book to be to Pact Magic Unbound as 3.5 Edition D&D was to 3.0 Edition; compatible, but overall cleaner and better streamlined.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
James Jacobs wrote:
Alexander Augunas wrote:
Page 1,000 of your thread has come and gone. Any regrets?
Just that some folks tend to use my answers for evil.

If there's one thing that will always hold true, its that people will always try to use genius for evil.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
PDT wrote:
No. An ability bonus, such as "Strength bonus", is considered to be the same source for the purpose of bonuses from the same source not stacking. However, you can still add, for instance “a deflection bonus equal to your Charisma modifier” and your Charisma modifier. For this purpose, however, the paladin's untyped "bonus equal to her Charisma bonus (if any) on all saving throws" from divine grace is considered to be the same as "Charisma bonus (if any)", and the same would be true for any other untyped "bonus equal to her [ability score] bonus" constructions.

So if I'm reading this right, "Charisma bonus (if any)" is considered a Charisma bonus on saving throws, and would therefore not stack with other Charisma bonuses on saving throws as per the "same source don't stack" rule. But if you had a Charisma bonus and, say, an insight bonus equal to your Charisma, those would stack because the insight bonus is measuring itself against your Charisma, and isn't actually a Charisma bonus. (In effect, the same difference because a natural armor bonus and an enhancement bonus to your natural armor).

How does this work with baseline ability score bonuses? For example, all characters add their Dexterity bonus on Reflex saves. If there was a theoretical ability that "added your Dexterity bonus (if any) on Reflex saves," would the two of them stack? The reason I ask is specifically for the interaction between Divine Grace and the lore mystery's sidestep secret, which I've quoted below:

"Sidestep Secret (Su): Your innate understanding of the universe has granted you preternatural reflexes and the uncanny ability to step out of danger at the very last second. Add your Charisma modifier (instead of your Dexterity modifier) to your Armor Class and all Reflex saving throws. Your armor’s maximum Dexterity bonus applies to your Charisma instead of your Dexterity."

In effect, is that baseline "all characters add their Dexterity bonus on Reflex saves" considered an ability bonus for the purpose of this FAQ?

1 to 50 of 664 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2015 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com 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.