Oh! But since oxen (let's be gender neutral in the spirit of Paizo publications) aren't really raised on pasture (except on TV commercials and pictures on milk cartons) we can kill both the ox AND the zillions of little whats-its that die to the corn thresher to make the heaps of silage or whatever we use to feed the things. It's win-win!
Here's a few examples:
1) barbarians getting access to pounce in the APG
Not all power creep is necessarily bad. #5 is a straight up buff to a class that needs straight up buffing. #4 is cool because maybe fighters will occasionally take EWP (not falcata) more often. But I don't think 1 or 2 were at all necessary and 3 is so bad it gives me a headache.
Barry Armstrong wrote:
Not fixing obviously broken rules is just lazy. You can tweak fortune now but a good fix would "future proof" cackle against abuse of any new hexes Paizo or some 3rd party dreams up in a new book.
Adamantine Dragon wrote:
Yeah, I guess I'd add the clause "whenever a witch stops cackling, all of her hexes affected by cackle expire" or similar. The max extension thing would work too, of, course; it just seems like more book keeping if a cackling witch starts different hexes on different rounds. No worse than round/level spells though I guess. Shrug.
Cackle is just a (mechanically) poorly thought out ability. Don't get in fights about it. Just house rule it. Append the following text onto it and it works just fine:
"Cackle is considered a Sonic Effect. To cackle, a witch must laugh out loud at the same volume she would normally speak the verbal components of her spells. A witch can cackle only once per round and may continue to cackle for a maximum number of consecutive rounds equal to her class level plus her intelligence modifier. A witch who reaches this limit regains the use of cackle after she ceases cackling for at least one full round."
I'd love to see a Pathfinder 1.x/2.0. What do I want from it? Well I think PF is already pretty good as is. I'd love to see is that the new edition address, clarify, or rewrite the more problematic sections of the rules. These can usually be identified because they have skillions of forum threads devoted to them. Just a list of things that could be done better in a new edition (in no particular order):
1. class balance (think monk/rogue here)
This is what I want see and I'd gladly rebuy all the hardcovers to get it.
Have you considered using a two handed reach/trip weapon like a halberd? The damage scales very competitively with the oversized flail, you avoid the -2 to hit (which also applies to your trip CMB), and best of all, when enlarged, you can move and attack someone without having them 5' and full attack you on their turn.
I am going to have the players head off to find ingredients for a cure. (I know there is not a real cure for the black death but its a game so its okay.) I want the players to be afraid that they might get infected but I don't want to make it impossible for them to pass the save.
Various antibiotics are effective. Have then go on a quest to the local pharmacy to retrieve some Cipro.
Azaelas Fayth wrote:
Thanks! PF has kind of sparked a fascination with black powder weapons. I particularly like the idea of being a double hackbut wielding 'slinger with monkey style (no penalties to being prone) and 2 level rogue dip to get the Stand Up talent. Basically, if he didn't have time to set up the carriage, he'd roll around on the ground firing off his giant gun and kip-up when necessary to reposition. Fire again the next round and knock himself prone. Comedic gold!
But, yeah, to the OP's question the only non-magical way to get reload on as musket down to a free action is to get three levels of Musket Master.
Azaelas Fayth wrote:
Do you have a reference for any of this? The only time I've ever heard of anything in the real world called a "double hackbut" is the one museum piece that shows up when you Google them term (and happens to be single barreled). Otherwise "hackbut" seems to be used synonymously with "arquebus" or to specifically denote a long barreled gun with hook on the bottom of the barrel to help stabilize it or mitigate recoil when bracing it on solid surface.
It's not perfectly clear that the double hackbut is a double barrel weapon as its descriptive text (unlike that of all other double barrel weapons) mentions nothing of the sort. The capacity of 2 listed in the table is probably a misprint but I know of no official errata. The "double" in the name was probably meant to refer to the extra long barrel but it looks like a confused editor tried to fix the stat table to make it look double barreled. As for the 2d12 damage all I can say is "who knows".
master arminas wrote:
That's a good point. I agree with ciretose that it would be a shame if the optimal core monk build ended up wielding a sword. I guess this would also take bit of fun out of a monkosaur's bite flurry but in that case it's more about damage die staking anyway.
Well this is certainly how I'd rule it my own game (and it would be very silly to allow it to work) I'm not sure RAW prevent it.
And, yeah! My half-orc monk/wolf shaman is definitely going to have vicious stomp! After his flurry of Feral Combat Trained bite/trips renders someone prone, he'all kick them in the kneecap for good measure!
Think of the big picture here... This ruling is all about monk/druids with Feral Combat training who wild shape into dinosaurs to use Strong Jaw + Flurry of Bites. So cool!
OK, difficulty level 2:
A druid with the Greater Trip feat wild shapes into a wolf gaining the Trip special ability. He attacks a human with his bite, hits, and succeeds on his free trip granted by wolf form. Greater Trip triggers giving him an attack of opportunity, which by RAW resolves before the target is prone. Our wolf druid uses his bite attack for the AOO, hits again, and because the target isn't prone yet, makes another free trip maneuver, and so on and so forth until he fails an attack, maneuver, or exhausts his AOOs. Does this work?
I'm a human ranger. I take Favored Enemy: Animals. I cast Instant Enemy on the party's half orc barbarian. Then I buff him with Animal Growth. Legal?
I'm still a human ranger. I take Favored Enemy: Undead. I cast Instant Enemy on myself. Now I get healed by negative energy. Legal? Or would it only be my negative energy that heals myself because only "I" can treat "me" as my favored enemy type? Can I decide to treat myself as undead in lieu of making a saving throw against Dominate Person? That should be legal, right?
I'm running a kingmaker campaign soon and I want to run a permanent DMPC. Currently the group is a Paladin, a Cleric, and a Master Summoner. I'm opposed to running a wizard because as the DM I don't want to be the main problem solver. I'm also not really excited about running a rogue or bard because i've played several of them in the past. Any Suggestion? All books and races are available.
Go for sorcerer. That way you can fill the arcane niche that wizard would have but you can make a point of selecting only the spells you want the party to have access to while avoiding those that might cause trouble with your storyline.
When multiclassing, BAB is calculated such that it doesn't penalize 3/4 and 1/2 BAB classes. A cleric/wizard's BAB would be calculated as cleric level x 3/4 + wizard level x 1/2, round down. Therefore, a cleric 1, wizard 1 has a BAB of +1 instead of 0. Saves get the same treatment with the added rule that you only get the +2 bonus from a good save class once. Therefore, a fighter 1, barbarian 2 has F/R/W of 3/1/1 instead of 5/0/0.
I like ciretose' analysis here. I'll chime in and add one more role that I think is crucial. I'll call it Contingency/Escape. In every game I've ever played there have been situations in which the party gets in over its head and realizes it has no chance to survive the encounter. This could be because of GM vindictiveness but usually occurs because of overconfidence, bad dice luck, random wandering monsters showing up when everyone's tapped out, or players jumping the rails/exploring the deep end of the sandbox.
Yeah, probably. It just rubs me he wrong way for some reason.
Personally I would house rule it that paper cartridges are 1.2 gp to create. Paper cartridges were a widely used, real world thing. Their whole purpose was to save you from measuring out gunpowder. They're not magic, there's no 'alchemy' involved. Just a paper envelope that might be treated with lard or tallow that contains a metal ball and just enough powder for the barrel and the priming pan. And of course they're mandatory in PF if you want iterative attacks so why not let them be cheap?
As for ravens and parrots using wands held in the beak this should work. Birds vocalize with an anatomical structure called a syrinx that sits at the bifurcation of their bronchi. They don't really need to move their beaks or tongues too much to make sound. If you ever watch a pet parrot you can catch him talking with his mouth full of food, while using his beak to climb, etc. Parrots are also good at standing on one foot while holding an object with the other. I don't see why they couldn't use wands.
Yeah, I totally agree. I'm just saying maybe there's a have cake and eat it too solution out there that would work with my table/party comp and SoulGambit's as well. I'm too lazy to think about it now though. :) Also agree about the AC point. In future models we should probably look at maybe "boss level", "standard CR", and "mook level" AC spreads.
I've been in this sort of situation too back in the 3.X days. I had a cleric archer and an AC-focused psion that were downright obnoxious buff-stackers. Those parties were fairly atypical in my experience but they do happen when you get a bunch of power gamers rolling characters together. I like that people are thinking about this sort of situation though. Makes fixing the class a little trickier than I had originally anticipated.
In our current, hypothetical realm of gratuitous buffing, wouldn't the fighter by flying, and hence trip-proof anyway?
I think the interesting thing that SoulGambit demonstrates is that if you pile on a metric crap-ton of buffs there comes a point where all the monk's extra attacks actually land and damage starts to add up. Now, granted, I've never been at a table where I had all these buffs flying around but it could happen. Probably any fix should take this "scaling" behavior into account. For instance, have flurry add something like one extra attack at the highest bonus but make sure all the attacks land often enough and hit hard enough to trail but not exceed the fighter's DPR.
I think right answer to all of these questions is "the same thing that happens to ability score increases everyone gets at every 4th level". I don't think there needs to be a whole complicated mechanic for it.
It's all back on page 4. Everyone's in the guidelines as far as I can tell. The only reason I think monks didn't get straight up full BAB from the get go was that they're supposed to be a 3/4 class for purposes of feat access. If you look at when flurry adds extra attacks, for instance, they kick in at the exact levels a 3/4 class would have enough BAB to pick up the equivalent TWF feats. I think the easiest solution is just to give monks full BAB for US and monk weapons so they don't lose out on +hit when moving.
It is what it is, and these are the cards on the table. And comments on the build, or if you like post a counter build making the switch to full BaB for the monk at 10th level and compare the the builds.
The build I posted earlier in this thread was full BAB. It was pretty much identical to MA's as far as I can tell. The differences in DPR and AC were a function of different point buy allocation and itemization.
Also, although I agree that it's cool to try spring disarms and such these tactics are less fun in party vs. monsters/enemy party situations that comprise the overwhelming majority of actual combats. If the unbuffed paladin is putting down a monster every three rounds while the monk is slowly trying to disable a monster with hit and run tactics over 6 or 7 rounds then one of the following occurs
Really, there's no reason why a monk shouldn't be putting out almost as much DPR as the non-smiting paladin if not just AS much. Remember, that paladin gets all sorts of amazing extras on top of his DPR too.
They should have full BAB. Flurry is essentially the TWF chain on top of full BAB as is. Why they drop to 3/4 with a move or charge (think flying kick) is beyond me.
Things that make you SAD-er are always going to be a significant power boost to someone and probably open to exploitation somehow. The other particularly awful thing about Agile is that when your build relies on it you have to put up with many levels of suck before you get access. And depending on how your GM is with loot, downtime, and item access you may have a long wait. Personally I'd like to put Agile in a sack with Dervish Dance and some rocks and chuck the whole thing in the river.
This is... really, really smart.
master arminas wrote:
I had a thought along those lines. What would happen if you gave a monk +1/2 Dex bonus to hit and +1/2 Wis bonus to damage (with appropriate weapons of course). This would be in addition to Star rather than instead. The max benefit would probably have to be capped by class level somehow too, to prevent dipping.