Animals or natural attacks are great for a front loaded build.
I'd suggest a Human Druid (Packlord) 3.
This allows you to have 3 horses, at animal companion lvls 4, 4 and 2.
It might be a bit stronger in a few levels by going aasimar with celestial servant.
But all in all, you get a lot of combat potential from the start, and in the long run, you are still a full caster.
Nothing suggest that you can progress the animal companion beyond was is written. The class ability caps a lvl 20, so that is the max, as far as RAW goes.
Since the chart has a linear progression, it is quite easy to do so as a house rule. As a house rule however, it is entirely up to the gm and gaming group, to consider the balance and flavor implications of doing so.
I think your example is great at showing how the a single event - or several events - does not change your alignment. Although real world psychology isn't as black and white as the alignment system.
That said, I don't like the suggested will save. IMO, this takes away the players choice as to how their characters react to the game world. In comparison, warning them that said behaviour is on the path toward shifting to neutral and eventually evil, gives the player the choice, how to play their characters and whether or not they are going to walk the road away from being good.
I wouldn't change their alignment based on a single action.
Just state that this sort of behaviour is evil in your book (and the current game). Continuing such actions will make it very difficult to uphold a good alignment.
This way they get to react to your inputs, and be active in how their characters is going to develop alignment-wise.
But what happens if you cast it after shaping and then shape back into human form? Does it merge or change shape or what?
It works like normal barding does, when you resume your original form.
Whatever that is, I am not entirely sure. However I would assume no merging or shapechanging takes effect on a non polymorphed armor, when the spell ends.
I have to add something:
Going by RAW, transformative gives you a weapon that can become any two-handed weapon. This might not be as cool flavorwise as you intend.
It is easily limited to those weapon, of course. But if you are making changes to RAW, it wouldn't be problematic to allow a version that changes between shortspear, spear, and long spear, and nothing else.
Prior to wildshape: It is worn like normal armor, so it would merge with your form.
After wildshape: While it doesn't state it, I'd expect the spell to fit your form, so it should work like barding. You need to either be submerged in water, or have someone help you don it (Probably. I would not assume a bear form is capable of clothing itself).
The first part of the core rule book tells us how to create a character.
Nowhere does a rule allow us to choose templates for our characters (Apart from rule 0).
As such it doesn't really need more clarification. The rules aren't built around specifically disallowing non-availiable options.
RAW: It affects all channel energy abilities.
The wording doesn't follow the norm, as you yourself mention.
In case you need to choose one class, though, I think it is safe to say that you need to choose which one, when you become a HV.
Rules As Written:
Mechanically speaking, the highest amount of thrown shields I reached with a build is 16,800 in a round.
In theorycrafting? It is fun due to the absurd proportions, and blatant disregard for consistancy with the rules as a whole.
It is powerful, yes.
But it isn't that problematic in my opinion, due to a couple of limitations:
1) The hex can only be used once in a day, whether or not the save works.
1 and 3/4 is important concerning the GM's ability to deal with it. Since you can wake the creature, you have an opportunity to avoid instant-CdG death.
Compared to a hold person/monster, you as a GM has several opportunities to avoid the slumber hex.
The caster level of the item, is simply the highest caster level needed for one of the abilities.
Changing caster levels of the abilities, require increasing (and paying) the cost of these abilities.
Boots of speed as an example.
You could however raise the cl of the item (and thus the dispel resistance) by adding another ability. Using light as a command word once per day, for example, could be caster level 20 for 5.400 gp.
Yes and no.
Your example has the correct chances to hit. And that is correctly a 27 % reduction in the chance to hit. While you can use that to determine the decrease in DPR (following the normal limitations of DPR calculation), it cannot be interpreted as a miss chance.
To get a miss chance, you need to look at the miss percentages, which show a different picture.
With a to hit bonus of +9:
Numerically speaking, this is an 20 % increase in miss chance for each +4 AC. And relatively speaking, the increase in chance to miss is more significant the lower AC you have (80% increase from AC 15 to 19, and 44 % increase from AC 19 to AC 23).
I am not saying this is a more correct approach to compare AC to DR. Yet both calculations are too narrow to provide a clean comparison.
The Morphling wrote:
PFS benefits greatly from having gray-area rules questions clarified. Table variation is not a good thing, it is an unavoidable evil to be limited where possible.
The hobby as a whole benefit from table variance. It helps us focus on cooperatively creating and managing a game based around telling stories. Table variance is a part of changing the game we play to fit our combined ideas of what is fun.
PFS might be special, and while I understand that people like clear ruling here, it isn't really important for the ruleset to be working in general.
I am not sure about metamagicking it. I am not sure whether someone trapped in the spirit jar get any actions.I would be inclined to say no, but it is one of those parts of Magic Jar that isn't very clear.
So if it makes magic jar have infinite duration, why does its description speak of duration running out?
The Jars themselves has a permanent magic jar, not you.This mean that anyone inside the jars, can be permanently trapped, or saved in case their bodies is dead. Unlike a normal crystal for magic jar, that release you, when the spell runs out.
The caster of magic jar - to use the spirit jars - is affected by the duration of the spell. In that time he can keep possessing bodies or swapping between them. Returning to an empty soul jar allow him multiple possession-ready bodies while the spell is in effect, since he can leave them, without releasing the owner.
The way you make a permanent magic jar, is by creating this magic item... You don't cast a permanent magic jar on them, you make it permanent through crafting.*
This is the item you were looking for in the other thread, actually. So your body dies, or the spell runs out of range of your body? Well, simply take a rest in the soul jars, and wait for your minions to let you out, or give you a new temporary body.
Alternatively they can be used to grant magic jarred bodies to your party members:
nate lange wrote:
I have to agree with Rhatahema that the Elf/Orc Blood is the trigger for half-races to gain the parent choices.
As a distinct racial trait it is not covered by Racial Heritage, anymore than you don't get low light vision, darvision, or whatever the race gets.
I can understand you argument based on the FAQs. Often the FAQ replies simply state the ruling on a given question. In these cases they don't sum up the subrules that lead to it (in this case the benefit of ***-blood for half-races).
I honestly don't think this is FAQ worthy.
The rules aren't even unclear.
People can always interprete it in another way if they want to. Both the rules text, and SKR's comment clearly states that it does not allow additional attacks. Yet people keep questioning it.
Let's just play the game please. I'd even let you make extra attacks with your vestigal limbs at my table, if it means that we can stop asking for FAQ replies for every aspect of the game, and let developers have time to design new stuff.
I've used skinsend as a solution to the problem.
If the spell ends you return to your skin, free to flee or continue. If the skin is destroyed, you better flee to your actual body before the spell ends.
It is debateable, whether or not your skin counts as your body in regard to these spells, however. Some might disagree.
I wouldn't care much for hard rules on it. As a subject of GM and player interpretation, I think we can get the cool describtion without.
If however, I was to make rules for it, it would be something like this:
This doesn't include a "You just barely parry the incoming blow with your sword". That category can't really be included based on the mechanics, yet it is quite important flavourwise.
Taku Ooka Nin wrote:
Erm, coup de grace is an automatic crit, not a crit with maxed damage dice. So that 3d12 is an average of 19 damage. With a -2 str modifier (as in the OP) the damage would fall to 13, resultating in a DC 23 fortitude save, which is difficult at lower levels, but not much more than that.
It is fairly difficult to give a catch-all solution, when the only thing to go with is a total of 100 HD worth of undeads, some of which are high HD.
Generelly though, flying tends to render undeads useless (apart from zombie dragons), since they haven't got a flying speed, and possibly not any ranged weapons (and even so, those are going to be weak).
You are reading it wrong ;-)
The armor deals 1d8+6.
Matthew Downie wrote:
I think he is proposing Mythic Haste, which grant an extra move action.
Technically, I can see a character gaining up to 6 move action in one round:
Default: 1 move + 1 standard action.
Total: 3 move action + 3 standard action that can be used as move actions.
RAW there is a bit of problems:
1) Weaponwand doesn't exactly "enhance or improve" manufactured weapons. It creates an effect that is seperate from the weapon itself. As such it might be in violation of the rules for the monk's unarmed strike:
2) The spell requires you to wield the weapon: " For the spell’s duration, a character who wields the transmuted weapon is also considered to be wielding the wand as well."
These aside, it could be cool, and not overtly problematic, as the monk could easily be wielding a wand and kicking instead. So I would probably allow it.
Misunderstood Monk wrote:
I had a player use a pair of immovable rods a couple of very creative and actually pretty ingenious ways but it required him to activate them multiple times. RAW I know it would not be allowed but it was pretty harmless and pretty cool so I let him do it. So I was wondering what sort of handwaving other GMs may provide for other such circumstances.
Without knowing the details, I think this seems fine. Using the rods creatively is great, as long is it doesn't result in any instant-win solution that are repeated all the time.
As such it doesn't really become a question of allowing more move actions, but rather making slight changes to how the rod is activated.
If availiable, firearms is your best bet.
Using both shots of double-barreled musket deals 8d10 on a CDG, averaging 45 damage and a pretty difficult fortitude save.
Even if firearms are unavailiable, you might be allowed to use a Fire Lance, which is basically gunpowder in a tube propelling a javeling. However ignoring your bad strength, and quadrupling on crits, it could be nice with deadly aim or other damage boosters.
Me too, yet I have rarely seen it... :)
I am currently playing a dedicated blaster-sorcerer at lvl 11. Dealing 105 damage with an intensified, maximized acidball have several times ended APL-equivalent encounters before they started. Additionally a few times a day, they get an extra through familiar spell.
Many character don't need to think about Spell Perfection if the game doesn't take them there.
Since it depends on saves, dealing 172-344 to single creature might be challenged by a fighter. Dealing that damage to several creatures is very efficient.
This is how it is normally done, yes.
But applying it in this case, makes it very inconsistant with the trade good prices of mithral. So result is that people trading in mithral pays 500 gp for a pound, but if they sell it to a craftsman they only a third.
If we use the original weight, then there is a slight inconsistancy in that the crafter only earn half the material costs (similar to magic item creation).
The two that pops up in my mind:
The most recent cohort for my draconic sorcerer was a Tatzlwyrm (with ranger levels), the combination of pseudo-intelligence and a tendency to sneak up on people had potential for funny situations. A bit of a creepyness factor was added by the fact that my familiar was our mutual offspring...
Earlier, I played a ratfolk fighter with a ratfolk fighter companion. While it blatantly abused the cohort critfishing for my scythe, it became a bit cheesy. But RPG wise it was quite fun to play the two guys, who had virtually no identity seperate from eachother.
If the price per pound is an actual in-game reference, and not a mechanics, you example makes sense. But we might as well turn it around.
Buyer: "Hey, I'd like to buy a Mithral dagger. I know the prices, and I'll pay you 252 hp for it!"
Most people I know about would fall into the TN category.
On the law-chaos scale, people tend to fall between as well. While most generelly believe in upholding the law, but we are prone to break the law 'when it doesn't matter much' (like crossing the road when no traffic; Doing work for friends in exchange for a gift that formally should be taxed). Eventhough we mostly like the laws we have, many of us have a distrust of 'the system', and enjoy critizising it.
I think it is valid.
Burn!Burn!Burn! doesn't trigger by Fire Brand, that is clear.
However it does trigger by a torch.
Using Fire Brand on a torch doesn't change the fact that it is an eligable weapon, since it still deals it's 1 point of non-magical fire damage.
That said, I doesn't seem that strong. The torch is going to deal d2+d4+d6+1+str damage, 8+str on average. It is an improvised weapons, so you'll need Catch Off Guard to be able to hit anything. Doable at lvl 3, it might be useful, but I expect it to become subpar pretty quickly thereafter.
Well, I'll try to answer it here anyway :)The horse bite attack was a d4 in 3.5 (don't know about previous), and PF seems to have stuck with that.
IMO it seems reasonably, as the horse is typically a mount compared to the frontline fighting tiger - despite that the tiger can be mounted. And for what it is worth, while I don't want to be bitten by a horse, I'd choose it over the tiger bite any day.
On reaching from different squares, my guess is no. But I am not aware on official word on it. There was a recent thread regarding choosing squares of large creatures to attack.
As I read this, it just refers to the generel thing about summoned creatures being manifestations of an original creature. Thus the creature is the same, but it won't die permanently due to being only an aspect.
1) I'd say no. The Eidolon is normally treated as a summoned creature with exception, but that is because the Eidolon is normally a 'sort-of' summoned creature.2) It is an awesome spell, yes, but is going to require some investment to be availiable to you.
3) You could choose the anti-climatic solution solution instead, and place that gate below the boss...
Calling your Eidolon could be a very risky affair. If it dies, it really dies. While you can use a true ressurection to bring it back, if that isn't an option, it is lost for good. And in that case, the summoner has no way of getting a new one.
Regarding the magic circle, you could simply give the eidolon a manufactured weapon to remain useful. Even if it is based on natural attacks, an evolution surge could give the needed limps.
On the shield ally question: I don't think it is supposed to affect itself. It might be dismissed by the fact that "it is not within its own reach". Admittantly, it is not the best argument ever.
While I do get your point, I just have to point out that this isn't true in the game, since production time is a linear function of the price.
That said, mechanically the masterwork bonus is the same for any weapon. While we don't see many MW daggers since they are subpar most of the time, any character who is built around using daggers get the same benefit as someone using a MW sword. This makes a flat masterwork cost a working solution, as opposed to having several different categories of prices for the masterwork component of a weapon, that doesn't matter a part from the first levels any way.
I've done something like this with a couple of friends. Mind you, it was mostly to be able to take very short sessions while writing our master's theses.
We included a random leveling for the PCs, random GM for each 15-30 minutes, and a random genre/theme for the short session (such as: Horror, Hack'n'slash, Film Noir, Romance, Piratey, social realism, Sci-fi).
It made an entertaining game, but not much more than that...
If you want to abuse free actions Throwing Quickdraw Shields are the way to go.
Shieldy McThrower has maxed his str to 36, with muleback cords and a heavy load belt (ant haul), his carrying capacity reaches 100,800 lbs. This allows him to carry around 16,800 Throwing Quickdraw Light Wooden Shields, but let's go with 16,500 to free some for the rest of his gear.
These shields can be donned as free actions, (through quick draw) and be thrown as a free action (which is what those throwing shields can do), so you've got a character who makes 16,500 attacks in the first round of combat, expectedly enough to lay waste to every body within his run action to move around the battle field.
I am a bit confused. Are you going with no armor, or are you going with light armor, as initially stated?
What are your class an level?