I was toying around with giving the players a total of 25 (maybe 30) points to spend on a race and stats. If a player wanted a lower cost race they would have more to spend on stats, and vice versa.
That sounds like a fantastic idea! So basically it would mean (for a 30-pt buy for race + abilities) that a kobold character would in fact get 25 pts to buy his abilities, whereas an Aasimar would only get 15 pts.
@Thanis: I'll probably do that. One or two non-core races for a group of five doesn't sound too bad.
Anyway, thanks for everybody' contribution so far.
What happens if they all want to play an ARG race? How do you choose which one gets to play one?
Then, going by that post, they would all have lower ability scores. Though 10 points seems harsh. I prefer the idea of bribing with traits.
It is kind of awkward when the PCs are a mutant freak-show of obscure, rare races, and, while Race Points are nowhere NEAR balanced and the way you spend them is just as important as how many you have, the core races do TEND to be slightly weaker (or perhaps just less interesting) than the advanced ones. Or perhaps it's more a matter of the advanced races being tailored to more specific roles while the core ones are more multipurpose. As such, there is usually an uncommon race that fits what you want better. The race may not be more powerful in general, but it is in a specific role.
Either way, I like the idea of giving the core races a little something extra to help encourage players to use them, while still allowing advanced ones. Something small, like extra traits and/or a few extra points for point-buy.
For the campaign I'm preparing for, the guy who is GMing this one was worried about the same thing. So he gave us this:
-Custom race builder races get a -5 ability point buy (so a 20 instead of 25)
-Custom and non-core characters get 3 traits
-Core races get 6 traits and 1 extra starting/maximum Hero Point.
Of course we'd all been drooling over the race builder so most of us made custom races anyway (we were in the middle of a campaign when the ARP came out). Still, it seems like a good way to help encourage more core races. You could also limit the number non-core races if you want. Maybe give non-core races a -1 or -2 to point-buy rather than a full -5.
One other thing to consider would be characters who don't use certain items. Like a monk. No armor or shield, and maybe no weapon (though I'm sure they'd love the enchantment bonus on attack/damage to work anyway). Obviously, a monk wouldn't be spending money on those things, and so would have more to spend elsewhere. Or a spellcaster who can't have armor or a shield and may not use a weapon at all.
On the other hand, a Paladin is going to need a weapon, armor, a shield, strength, charisma, and will probably want the saving throws even if they don't really need them.
Wow. didn't realize that was the ninja ability. Yikes. But a ninja's CHA...even at 20 I doubt it would be a 30 or anything. A +8 at most. So then ninja would have a ki pool of 18 plus feats. Keep in mind that these are used for other abilities as well. Using the invisibility costs 3 ki pool points, so it could be used no more than 6 times a day. Sure it's for 20 rounds a pop, but those can't be broken up or anything.
Wait...oh, I see. You changed the vanishing trick and invisible blade. Yikes. Sorry, but I would definitely change them back. Your way is SUPER powerful. I didn't notice it before. The original costs a ki point and isn't divided up like yours is. Being able to divide the rounds up as you see fit is extremely powerful.
Of course, your rogue doesn't have ki. I can see 2 options for this. One make a rogue talent that that gives the rogue a ki pool, change all the talents that originally used a ki pool back, and make that talent a requirement for those. Otherwise, change everything back except the ki pool part, and make it usable for a number of times per day equal to 1/4 your level (minimum 1). Keep in mind that a ninja is unlikely to spend their entire ki pool on invisibility. It's not fair that the rogue would be able to use it as much as a ninja who did without suffering any penalty from using up their abilities.
If you add the ki pool, use the wording from the ninja (keep the requirements). If you go with a set number of times per day, go with your idea of making it improve vanishing trick/invisible blade instead of being a new ability. Keep it 1/4 level times per day though. The limited use is what makes up for the extreme power of the invisibility.
For Ranged Sneak Attack:
My though was that just having 1 ally threaten was too easy. The rogues doesn't need to position himself into flanking and is out of danger, making it quite a bit easier than even normal sneak attacks.
Conversely, requiring 2 allies to flank the target was too much. It required an extra person and specific positioning.
So my thought was having the target be threatened by 2 people. They don't have to flank or anything, so less positioning issues, but it does require 2 helpers. However, not that I specifically did not say they had to be the rogue's allies. As long as they are hostile to the target, they work. Generally that would just be the rogue's allies, but in a 3-way fight it would make it easier.
I would still probably throw Evasion and Uncanny Dodge in there as class features (at levels where you don't get anything else). They are pretty basic staples of the rogue in general, like sneak attack.
Speaking of; your idea of changing the attack bonus to make sneak attack function as if the rogue had a full BAB has some merit. Still might be a bit much (what it the point of having a lower BAB if you're almost always getting a bonus to make it full?). Maybe half that value? Not quite a full BAB, but a small bonus (like +1 at levels 1, 9, and 17). Like Cheapy said, I wouldn't restrict the weapons. Most rogues will certainly USE light or finesse weapons, but no reason you can get extra damage for surprising someone with an axe to the spleen.
For conditions for ranged sneak attack, how about denied Dex, or threatened by at least 2 other creatures. Better than just denied Dex, but not as abuse-prone as simply being threatened. Doesn't require as much cooperation from teammates as having two of them flank the target would either (that was my first thought).
Your Master Talents are probably a good idea, though I think Hidden Master is probably too powerful. Probably way to powerful. 60 rounds of improved invisibility that cannot be seen-through or negated in any way. That's more than enough to cover an average--or even unusually large number of battles per day with complete invisibility. Untargetable. Ever.
Usable 3x rogue level per day and undetectable in any way are actually probably both overpowered, even alone.
Maybe specifically see invisibility and blindsense do not work on the Hidden Master and a small bonus to rounds per day (maybe 2/3 level instead of 1/2). That way it's a bit more often and the really low level invisibility foil don't work on it.
You're rogue class is looking pretty good. It does, of course negate the point of archetypes, but it feels like it could work. And you've obviously done a lot of work on it. Keep it up.
Cheapy wrote:
The rogue class doesn't push you towards high-crit range weapons at all, that's just the popular perception, influenced heavily by WoW.
I blame the Rapier for it. Being the only one-handed martial weapon to use weapon finesse it sort of the go-to (before dervish dance at least). And it has a high crit range.
Yeah, as nice as critical hitting spells on a 15-20 is, the magus has a lot of other things going for it. You can still cast a spell in addition to your full round attack, and channel it through your weapon. Not to mention the arcane pool abilities.
Though I do feel that taking away the crit ability does justify beefing up other aspects of mage knight.
As far as the 2 suggestions I made, personally, I'm leaning towards Armor Ward. I do love having good saves. Who doesn't?
"Elamdri wrote:
(Which, if I had to say anything about Magus, it's that I hate that it has made Eldritch Knight obsolete.)
Even stole the mascot character. Of course, prestige classes in general have been largely phased out.
After thinking about it, yeah, that Arcane Armor probably IS too powerful.
First let me restate: the point of the whole archetype is to offer a non-Dex-based, armored magus who does not (necessarily) use a scimitar. The point it to create some diversity among the magus class without forcing a player to use a highly unoptimized character.
It's not to make a magus-tank. The Dex-based Dervish Dancing magus can already do that anyway.
As such, I have had TWO ideas, and I would really appreciate some feedback on them. Both go with the idea that (unlike my original post) the mage knight starts with Light and Medium Armor proficiencies, and gains Heavy Armor at level 7.
Armor Ward
At 5th level, a mage knight's armor seethes with arcane magics, which protect him from harm. As long as he is wearing medium or heavy armor and has at least one point remaining in his arcane pool, the mage knight gets a +1 bonus to all saving throws. At 8th level, and every 3 levels after, the bonus increases by +1, to a maximum of +6 at 20th level.
This ability replaces the bonus feat gained at level 5
(Sort of a weaker Divine Grace)
or
Spell Battle
At 5th level, a mage knight becomes more proficient at using a melee weapon while casting spells. So long as he uses a 1-handed weapon, he may grip it in both hands and use it 2-handed. He can, in essence use his weapon for the somatic component of spells (he must still be able to move it). He can use his weapon 2-handed while casting spells, using spellstrike, and using spell combat.
This ability replaces the bonus feat gained at level 5
(bit of extra power on weapon strikes)
Do either of these look like good options?
EDIT: For my previous post, I realized the example fighter would actually have 26 AC because of armor training. Just pointing that out.
That's a fair point about the fighter. But to be fair, sticking all your spells in AC boosters is a little harsh for a class who's main abilities involve casting touch spells through their weapons as part of a full-round action.
My main concern is, taking your example, a dex-based magus would have 18 Dex and a scimitar. They get Leather Armor (2 AC), probably +1, so +3 armor.So, Armor(+3), shield (+4), 18 dex (+4), cat's grace (+2), so that's a solid 23. Also, a magus in a breastplate would only have 24 AC (max dex on the breastplate).
Only a 1 point AC difference for wearing heavier armor, having a lower movement speed, having a higher armor check, having lower reflex saves, and having to invest in more ability scores (dex-based needs no str, while armor still needs some dex).
Also, the figheter in your example should probably have full-plate, so that puts him up to a 25 AC (+3 armor -1 dex). Sure the magus out damages, but the fighter kills in feats (and the ability to actually hit--magus is -2 using spell combat, fighter gets weapon training).
Interesting. I like the "1 point left in his Arcane Pool thing." I'd like to avoid an aura, though. They're too easy to forget in battle (for allies at least). Maybe something like this:
Arcane Armor
At 5th level, a mage knight learns to empower his armor with his magic, granting himself extra protection from harm of all kinds. A mage knigh who is wearing medium or heavy armor and has at least one point remaining in his arcane pool gains a +1 bonus to AC and saves. At 9th level, and every 4 levels after that, the bonus increases by +1, up to a maximum of +4 at level 17.
This ability replaces the bonus feat gained at 5th level.
Too much? Not enough? Just right?
Edit: That's in addition to moving heavy armor prof. back to level 7.
Even with heavy armor, a Mage Knight would only have slightly better AC than a Dex-based magus for a small time, especially considering they can't afford full-plate at level 1.
I understand what you mean, though. I had, at one point, set it up so they started with light and medium armor and gained heavy at level 7 (when they'd normally gain medium). That might be doable (though I feel it still kind of pushes the magus towards higher Dex--even if you want to be armored). But if I went back to that, I would probably want to give something small to the Mage Knight to make up for it. Weakening Spellstrike IS a fairly hefty penalty.
Maybe take away the 5th level Bonus Feat and give something that's actually pretty nice in return? Not sure what though.
I'm going to be starting a new campaign soon (as a player rather than a GM). I'm really eager to play a Magus, but I'm really disappointed at how the Dex-based Dervish Dance magus seems to be the uncontested optimum build for one. It's a waste of those (overly late) armor proficiencies and made me sad when I realized the build I was working on was a dime-a-dozen.
Fortunately, the GM for the campaign is pretty loose on customization. So I've more-or-less got the go ahead to make my own armor-based magus archetype. Of course, it's all subject to approval, but I wanted to get some community ideas on balance and what is fair.
Here is what I have so far:
Mage Knight:
MAGE KNIGHT
Weapon and Armor Proficiency
A mage knight is proficient with all simple and martial weapons. A mage knight is also proficient with all armor (light, medium, and heavy). He can cast magus spells while wearing armor without incurring the normal arcane spell failure chance. Like any other arcane spellcaster, a mage knight using a shield incurs a chance of arcane spell failure if the spell in question has a somatic component. A multiclass mage knight still incurs the normal arcane spell failure chance for arcane spells received from other classes.
Spellstrike
At 2nd level, a mage knight gains the spellstrike ability as normal. However, when a mage knight delivers a spell through his weapon, the spell only threatens a critical on a natural 20 (as normal), rather than using the weapon's threat range. This means that the weapon delivering the spell may score a critical hit, while the spell itself does not.
This modifies the spellstrike ability.
Armor Training
At 7th level, a mage knight gains armor training, as the fighter ability. At 14th level, he gains armor training 2.
This ability replaces knowledge pool and greater spell combat.
Fighter Training
Starting at 10th level, a mage knight counts his magus level –3 as his fighter level for the purpose of qualifying for feats (if he has levels in fighter, these levels stack).
This ability changes the fighter training class feature
True Knight
At 20th level, a mage knight gains DR 5/magic while wearing medium or heavy armor. As a free action, he can spend points from his arcane pool to improve this damage reduction. For 1 point, the DR can be changed to one of the alignments (chaos, evil, good, or law). This must correspond with his alignment. For 2 points he can change the DR to adamantine. For 1 point he can increase the DR to 10/magic. A mage knight may both increase the DR and change its type by paying the cost for both. These modifications last for one minute.
This ability replaces true magus
The basic gist of Mage Knight is that they get all the armor proficiencies right off the bat, instead of waiting. In addition, they get Armor Training 1&2 (at levels 7 and 14) in exchange for Knowledge Pool and Greater Spell Combat. Their Fighter training is also a bit better (Level -3 rather than 1/2 Level). The Level 20 change is just to have something a bit different flavor-wise.
The main drawback of the Mage Knight is that Spellstrike no longer allows spells to threaten critical hits using the weapon's range (so no more +10d6 damage on a 15-20). There are two reasons for this: First its to give a fairly hefty drawback to make up for the bonuses the class gains. Second is more flavor (no more ZOMG SKIMITARZ PLZ!!!!!!11!!1). Have you EVER seen a Magus without a scimitar?
Anyway, I could really use some help balancing this archetype. And I'm still not sure it's good enough, actually. It has some nice gains for only 1 drawback, but all the same, the Dex-based Magus will still have comparable AC (especially with Celestial Armor), Much better Reflex saves (Will and Fort will be even), better movement speed (until level 14 at least), and still have better ability scores (they can completely ignore Str, while a Mage Knight can still use some Dex for AC and Saves). Also, light armor is much cheaper than full-plate (especially is you want it Mithral). The only real drawback for Dex-based is the 2 feats you need to spend on Weapon Finesse and Dervish Dance.
Thoughts? Is it balanced as-is? Should I maybe give it something extra? If so, what?
I've been advocating this kind of option for months, JediSSJ.
I can see what Amrinas is getting at, though: However I can also read the section on 'role' for the monk, and I think that is what should be aimed at. That's why I would like to see a monk that can make accurate strikes that bypass DR but inflict less damage than other combat classes. This way he can use his other major attack, the stunning fist, with some effect. He becomes useful, because while he is not dealing mega-damage he is able to contribute consistently. This way he can strike at enemy vulnerabilities, which is where he falls down in his role right now.
Gotcha. To be fair, a 25 page debate is a bit too daunting a task to wade through too much of.
I'm actually more of a Magus player than a Monk. But I know the Bladebound Magus gets that kind of bonus (on a free intelligent weapon with other powers) for the cost of a small decrease in Arcane Pool size (1/3 level + Int instead of 1/2 level + Int). However, the Magus' blade gets it's own Arcane Pool and certain other abilities on top of the free natural Enchantment bonus progression.
Compared to that, I can't call giving a monk's ki strike a growing enchantment bonus overpowering at all. And to be honest, I'm not even a huge fan of the monk. I'd love to take away the monk's bonus to AC (the set +#, not the Wis) as I really don't like the idea of the monk tank. But, the monk certainly needs improved offense in general (especially if you take something away from it).
I did like the mentioned idea of a monk spending ki points to make flurry of blows a standard action. I kind of like that idea.
In general, I think that adding an enchantment bonus to ki strike and allowing Flurry to be made a standard action via Ki points would make the monk's offense much more competitive.
I'm curious, is anyone here familiar with the Magus' Bladebound archetype? Starting at level 3, it gets an intelligent weapon that starts as a +1 and grows to a +5 by level 20.
I can't help but think that making Ki Strike work like that, rather than overcoming certain DR, would make the unarmed monk more powerful, without taking away from other monk styles.
For example:
As long as he has at least 1 point in his ki pool, he can make a ki strike. A ki strike adds an enchantment bonus to the monk's unarmed attacks as listed below. This causes the monk's unarmed attacks to be magic attacks, as if using an enchanted weapon.
This would sort of replace the whole overcoming DR thing. In addition, the AoMF could then be worth it's price as an item to add special weapon properties on top of the monk's ki strike. Also, you'd have to take more than a dip to get this bonus.
I see what you're trying to do there: ultimate customization. But I think it looks almost TOO customizable. The way you're going, your likely to come up with a custom class maker (like the Race Maker in ARG). The problem is that your rogue doesn't feel quite as...roguish. Master Strike is your only possible 20th level ability, as sneak attack is the only consistent class feature.
Let's look piece by piece...
-Good Will Save
I'm ok with this one. Rogues are a bit crafty and part of that could involve throwing off mind altering effects.
-Sneak Attack
Not so sure on this one. With the attack bonus and set damage a rogue's sneak attack is going to be out damaging and out hitting(or at least hitting on par with) a paladin's smite evil with unlimited uses and a less strict restriction (flanking vs evil only). Also it multiplies on a Crit. Seems a bit OP to me. If you want to add the bonus to attack rolls as well as damage you should probably lower the damage significantly. To be honest though, I would throw out the bonus on attack rolls. You are already flanking and/or catching the target flat-footed. That sort of IS the sneak attack's bonus to attack rolls. Adding more bonuses to attack rolls doesn't really make much sense and is very powerful. Having all that bonus damage on Criticals is pretty insane on its own. Not only is it powerful, it makes your rogue pretty much ENTIRELY critical focused in combat...a real shame after all the work you did making them customizable in every other respect.
If you are wanting to improve Sneak Attack in some way, perhaps a more balanced method would be to give a rogue Power Attack-like bonus damage on top of normal sneak attack damage. THAT bonus is multiplied on a Crit, unlike the bonus d6s. Even that, though is a bit much. Perhaps have the rogue's sneak attack only improve every 4 levels, like power attack (1st, 4th, 8th, 12th, etc). For example, at 12th level, the sneak attack damage would be +4d6+8. That averages about 18 extra damage, but the +8 would multiply on a critical hit. It would, on average, do slightly less than the normal sneak attack (though less of the damage is up to chance) but have bonus damage on a critical. Just my thought on a possible alternative.
-Ranged sneak attacks now within weapon's first range increment, not simply 30 ft.
Not really a fan of this in general. The whole idea was that you had to be particularly close so you could spot and target a weak spot more accurately.
Sneak attacking by sniping with a Compound Longbow at 110 feet or a Heavy Crossbow at 120 feet? Maybe throw in the Distance enchantment? Seems a bit much. How can you find a weakness at those kind of ranges? Let alone accurately hit it. If you're not close enough to SEE the gap in someone's armor, how can you target it?
-Trapfinding & Trap Sense improved and now only one of several possible bonuses (see Rogue Trade).
I like the combo, but I would rather see it be a set class feature in addition to the Rogue Trades, rather than one of them. Maybe have it picked up at 2nd or 3rd level automatically.
-A Rogue Talent every level!
Yeah...no. That's way too much. I like that you expanded the list of talents, but one every level is a bit much. I would say, take a few of the ones every rogue needs or makes sense to have (Evasion, Uncanny Dodge, Improved Uncanny Dodge, Assess Situation, and Improvised Trick[restrict to talents that are usable at will] would be my suggestions). Have those abilities be gained naturally (preferably at odd levels), while gaining a rogue talent every even level like normal. You'll be giving a few extra class abilities this way, but not a crazy amount.
Rogue Trades
I like the idea of this.
I only have two suggestions. The first was stated earlier: Tomb Raider/Treasure Hunter should be gained normally rather than be an optional choice. The second is that I would avoid having any Trades that give a bonus to Stealth. This is more of a diversity issue...let's face it; pretty much every rogue is going to choose the option that gives a bonus to stealth, regardless of character or story consideration.
Master Strike
A list of possible level 20 abilities to choose from might be your best bet. Fits with the whole rogue talent thing. I agree that something other than Master Strike would be good, though. Or maybe an ability that lets Rogues add INT to AC and DEX instead of STR on finesse weapons. (way overpowered anywhere but level 20)
All in all, that would leave a rogue with:
-Good Reflex and Will saves instead of just good Reflex.
-Tomb Raider/Treasure Hunter instead of Trapfinding & Trap Sense (maybe use the old names and just change how they work?)
-Slightly lower Sneak Attack damage, but part of it is multiplied on a critical hit.
-Rogue Trades added as level 1 abilities
-A couple extra naturally gained class abilities on top of the normal Evasion and (Improved)Uncanny Dodge (I still recommend Assess Situation and Improvised Trick)
-A Rogue Talent every other level, but with a lot more to choose from
Anyway, you have some interesting ideas there, and you obviously put a lot of effort into that Talents list. Good work. I hope you find my suggestions useful.
A creature with this special quality ignores damage from most weapons and natural attacks.
I do not believe starvation and thirst to be a weapon.
SRD wrote:
The numerical part of a creature's damage reduction (or DR) is the amount of damage the creature ignores from normal attacks.
Or a normal attack.
My thoughts exactly. Your rager can't be knocked out by non-lethal attacks very easily, but DR wouldn't apply to damage from starvation or forced marching etc.
Can a creature/character with natural or magical flight be knocked prone?
Not when they're flying. You can mess with a creature in the ways detailed in the Fly skill, which might make them fall, but you can't make a flying creature prone. Or a swimming or burrowing or climbing creature, for that matter.
Praise be your search fu!
I think I'll go with the idea that a failed save makes the dragon fall 10 feet (in addition to any he may fall for taking damage). Seems reasonable. More so than plummet instantly or being simply unaffected.
I'm planning to play a Magus in my next campaign (after finishing the one I am GMing now), and was very excited about it. But then, after crunching some numbers and building several different magi I realized something: ZOMG DERVISH DANCE ROFLMAO PWN!!!
Basically, there is ONE best build and basically every magus looks the exact same, unless intentionally avoiding the cliche or just being bad at optimizing (or going with something totally different like the Staff Magus). And the Strength-based armored magus has no love at all. This made me very sad (especially considering the short time where I thought I was being clever in my optimization).
Fortunately, the guy who will GM our next campaign is pretty open to customization. So that got me started on making up my own Magus archetypes. I ended up making 3. Mage Knight is an archetype for wearing armor and casting spells. Spell-Sword focuses on the Magus ability to enhance his weapon. Magi Meister is an odd one I thought up in the process-a Magus who focuses on non-touch spells.
Anyway, I would really like to get some feedback on what people think of these three archetypes and how balanced they look.
MAGE KNIGHT" wrote:
Mage Knight
Weapon and Armor Proficiency
A mage knight is proficient with all simple and martial weapons. A mage knight is also proficient with light and medium armor. He can cast magus spells while wearing light or medium armor without incurring the normal arcane spell failure chance. Like any other arcane spellcaster, a mage knight wearing heavy armor or a shield incurs a chance of arcane spell failure if the spell in question has a somatic component. A multiclass mage knight still incurs the normal arcane spell failure chance for arcane spells received from other classes.
Spellstrike
At 2nd level, a mage knight gains the spellstrike ability as normal. However, when a mage knight delivers a spell through his weapon, the spell only threatens a critical on a natural 20 (as normal), rather than using the weapon's threat range. This means that the weapon delivering the spell may score a critical hit, while the spell itself does not.
This modifies the spellstrike ability.
Mage Armor
At 8th level a mage knight adds Mage Armor to his spellbook as a 1st level magus spell. When a mage knight casts mage armor on himself the AC bonus it grants uniquely stacks with the armor bonus granted by the mage knight's armor (much like stacking dodge bonuses). This only works for the mage knight himself. Cast on anyone else the spell has its normal effect. If the mage knight loses or removes his armor, the spell immediately ends.
This ability replaces the bonus feat gained at 5th level
Armor Training
At 7th level, a mage knight gains armor training, as the fighter ability. At 14th level, he gains armor training 2.
This ability replaces knowledge pool and greater spell combat.
Heavy Armor
At 7th level, a mage knight gains proficiency with heavy armor. A mage knight can cast magus spells while wearing heavy armor without incurring the normal arcane spell failure chance. Like any other arcane spellcaster, a mage knight using a shield incurs a chance of arcane spell failure if the spell in question has a somatic component.
This replaces the normal medium armor and heavy armor abilities.
Greater Spell Shield
At 8th level, whenever a mage knight wearing medium or heavy armor uses spell shield, he may spend 1 extra point from his arcane pool to cause the AC bonus from spell shield to last for a number of rounds equal to his Intelligence modifier rather than until the end of his next turn. If the mage knight removes or loses his armor the effect immediately ends.
This ability replaces the improved spell combat class feature
Fighter Training
Starting at 10th level, a mage knight counts his magus level –3 as his fighter level for the purpose of qualifying for feats (if he has levels in fighter, these levels stack).
This ability changes the fighter training class feature
True Knight
At 20th level, a mage knight gains DR 5/magic while wearing medium or heavy armor. As a free action, he can spend points from his arcane pool to improve this damage reduction. For 1 point, the DR can be changed to one of the alignments (chaos, evil, good, or law). This must correspond with his alignment. For 2 points he can change the DR to adamantine. For 1 point he can increase the DR to 10/magic. A mage knight may both increase the DR and change its type by paying the cost for both. These modifications last for one minute.
This ability replaces true magus
My Notes
Mage Knight is mostly about making an armor-wearing Magus competitive without taking away his spell-casting. The changes to Spellstrike are the main drawback. Spells go from criting on a 15-20 back to a 20. My thought is that this nerf offsets the improved armor proficiencies and any of the traded out abilities that might be a bit more powerful than the regular Magus ones (also, no more ZOMG SCIMITAR PLZ!!11!1one1!). RAW the Dex-based Magus has just so much of an advantage over the armored one (especially with Dervish Dance). Mage knight also looses the bonuses to concentration (for defensive casting), but mostly gains AC boosts in it's place. And frankly, I strongly believe armored characters should have higher Armor Class than dex ones.
SPELL-SWORD wrote:
Spell-Sword
Diminished Spellcasting
A spell-sword may cast one fewer spell of each level than normal. If this reduces the number to 0, he may cast spells of that level only if his Intelligence allows bonus spells of that level.
Arcane Enchanter
At 3rd level, when a spell-sword uses his arcane pool to enhance his weapon and uses other magus arcana to improve this ability (such as enduring blade or devoted blade) he spends one less point from his arcane pool in total than normal (minimum 1). If he spends more than 5 points in total, then he reduces the total by 2 instead.
Arcane Blade
At 6th level, a spell-sword may ignore level prerequisites for magus arcanae that improve his ability to use his arcane pool to enhance his weapon. This includes arcana that give increased enchantment options or improves the enchantment itself, such as enduring blade or bane blade.
Epic Arcana
At 16th level, when a spell-sword uses his arcane pool to enhance his weapon, he may spend 2 additional points from his arcane pool to bypass the normal restrictions on enchantment bonuses and modified bonus limits. This allows him to use his arcane pool to give his weapon an enchantment bonus higher than +5 and a modified bonus higher than +10. This does not allow a spell-sword to create or modify a weapon so that it has a permanent bonus exceeding the normal limits, and does not stack with bonuses granted from any other source (such as spells). This bypass only applies to enchantment bonuses and special properties applied using his arcane pool. Treat this ability as a magus arcana for the purpose of the arcane enchanter ability
This ability replaces Counterstrike
My Notes
The whole spending arcane points to enchant your weapon is what drew me to the magus in the first place. Being confined to the whole +5/+10 enchantment maxes is silly. That's the whole purpose! To add enchantment on to what your weapon already has! How does it makes sense that a Magus can't effectively use a weapon with an enchantment of greater than +5 total? Also, the prereqs for Bane Blade and Devoted Blade are so high it's kind of ridiculous. Why wait so long just to get options you still have to spend your bonuses on (though I know Bane is an exception)? IMO diminishing spells makes up for the extra abilities here pretty easy.
MAGI MEISTER wrote:
Magi Meister
Battle Caster
At second level, a magi meister becomes skilled at hurling spells at one opponent while engaging another in close combat. When a magi meister succeeds in casting defensively (while being threatened) he gains a bonus on the spell he casts, so long as it targets, or includes in it's area of effect, at least one hostile creature not threatening him. The spell may also include any creatures threatening him, but it must include at least one that is not. That creature must be hostile and capable of threatening him (not helpless) but simply not be within range.
The magi meister chooses one of the following bonuses to add to the spell: +1 to the DC to resist the spell, +1 on checks to overcome spell resistance, or +1 damage per level of the spell (the spell must deal damage normally).
At sixth level, and every four levels after that, the bonus increases by +1, up to a maximum of +5 at 18th level.
This ability replaces spellstrike
Deadly Caster
At 9th level, when a magi meister uses spell combat and makes his attack before casting a spell, if he reduces an enemy to 0 or fewer hit points with his attacks, he may apply any one metamagic feat he possesses to the spell he casts without increasing the spell slot it takes up. The metamagic is applied on the fly but does not increase casting time. Quicken spell cannot be used for this. This can be used on a spell that already has a metamagic feat applied to it, but the total effective spell level cannot exceed 9.
This ability replaces the magus arcana gained at 9th level
My Notes
A Magus who doesn't use shocking grasp or any other touch spell. Instead it focuses on engaging in melee while casting spells at other enemies. I thought it was a neat idea and ran with it.
Anyway, I would really appreciate any thoughts or ideas on the balance of these Archetypes. They look fairly well balanced to me, but I admit I'm biased. I'm really hoping to use the Mage Knight and Spell-Sword types together for my Magus, but I want to make sure others think they look fair enough. The Magi Meister was something I came up with that sounded pretty cool for a more traditional sword and sorcery.
You are not considered flat-footed while flying. If you are flying using wings and you take damage while flying, you must make a DC 10 Fly check to avoid losing 10 feet of altitude. This descent does not provoke an attack of opportunity and does not count against a creature’s movement.
I don't see anything for reflex saves and getting knocked prone... :S
The alchemist's force bomb states that someone hit by it must make a reflex save or be knocked prone. And as you said, there is nothing in the fly section about it.
LazarX wrote:
Some rules are made with given assumptions. Have the dragon make a fly check at an appropriate DC. If it fails the check,it plummets.
Seems reasonable. I was just hoping there was something official. But there may very well not be.
Yes. I'm not crazy. Well, I am crazy, but there's reasons why I would want this.
Is there any guidelines to making a race in the bestiary as a playable one? I really want to try making a bear with class levels that's matched with the party.
You'll be wanting the Advanced Race Guide book. It's fourth chapter is a "Race Maker" -- a series of rules for making up your own races. Work with your GM on it and it will be exactly what you're looking for.
What exactly happens when a flying creature is knocked prone?
In particular, I am dealing with an alchemist tossing force bombs at a flying dragon. Obviously the dragon must make his fly check to avoid falling 10 feet from taking damage. But if the dragon fails it's reflex save it gets knocked prone. I'm not sure what to do with that. Does it immediately fall to the ground? That seems odd. How can he get in a full round of falling between his turns? Or does he fall on his turn, with a possible fly check to avoid falling damage? If so, does that take up his entire turn, even if it doesn't actually take that long for him to fall?
A held charge is held essentially in the entire body, not in a body part. If you are holding a charge and succeed with a natural attack vs. regular AC, the spell discharges; you would do the natural attack damage as well as apply whatever the effects of the held spell, whether damage or other.
** spoiler omitted **
If you have multiple natural attacks while holding a charge, you might miss with the first two and then hit (discharging the spell) with the third.
Your spell does not discharge if someone hits you with a natural attack. I could see the logic of why this might work, but it would be a non-standard interpretation.
That sounds about right. Though I'm curious if there is any official ruling on discharging the spell when hit by an unarmed attack. As the rules specifically state that, if you touch anything or anyone while holding a charge, even unintentionally, the spell discharges.
So I guess the question is, does being touched by someone or something count as touching them? I'm inclined to say yes. If the rule meant that to "touch" something meant making a touch attack (or natural attack)then you couldn't "unintentionally" discharge the spell.
Of course this doesn't apply if you're hit with a weapon, as you can't normally cast a touch spell through a weapon (Magus FTW). But if you were hit with an unarmed attack/natural weapon or hit with a Combat Maneuver (outside of tripping weapons), I would be inclined to say the spell discharges automatically.
Nasty little surprise for that darn monk that keeps making saves against your spells.
Had the gnome(A) attempted to hurl his Produce Flame at the smaller human(D) would he have taken cover twice as there are two people in the way? As in -4 for melee, -4 for half-orc(B), and -4 for Bulk Human(C). Total -12. Or is it just -4 for any people in the way?
I'm surprised that SR and DR haven't been brought up more. While there is probably no real way to price them exactly compared to a feat, their pricing is a big issue in my opinion.
ARG wrote:
Exalted Resistance (3 RP): Prerequisite: Outsider
(native) with ties to Elysium, Heaven, or Nirvana; Benefit:
Members of this race gain spell resistance equal to 6 +
their character level against spells and spell-like abilities
with the evil descriptor, as well as any spells and spelllike
abilities cast by evil outsiders.
Benefit: Members of this race gain spell resistance equal
to 11 + their character level.
How did these get through?
To be perfectly honest (following the current vanilla base prices) I would leave Exalted Resistance as is. I'd make Lesser Spell Resistance an Advanced Trait, costing 6 RP. And I'd make Greater Spell Resistance a Monstrous Trait, costing 9 RP. Yeah it's expensive. Why on earth wouldn't it be?
And then Damage Reduction. Why is DR 5/Magic priced and ranked higher than DR 5/silver. Sure you can get a silver weapon cheaper than an enchanted one, but let's be honest, outside of vampire/werewolf themed campaigns, how often are the PCs going to encounter enemies with silver weapons? where as, once you reach a certain level, all enemies are going to have enchanted weapons and some beasts will have claws that count as enchanted. I can understand Fey DR being cheaper (it requires Fey type), but not Moon-Touched DR. I would knock Moon-Touched up to 5 or 6 RP (DR 5/Good/Evil/Law/Chaos is 6 RP). And move Damage Reduction down to advanced.
Unfortunately, these prices are a little ambiguous, as there is no real direct comparison to draw.
Alchemists could inject their tumor with a bomb, then detach it from their body and throw it like a sentient suicide grenade.
Beat that!
Just a regular bomb?
Maybe feed the tumor an extract like shock shield so it can discharge it when thrown.
Back in 3.5 I had a Sorceror who could cast Cure spells (I don't remember how I managed that). Usually did that through my cat familiar. Buttons the medi-cat. Shame clerics don't get familiars.
Keep in mind, that to deliver a spell the familiar has to take a standard action to deliver the touch.
Can a familiar hold a charge? p. 185 of the CRB: If you don't discharge the spell in the round when you cast the spell, you can hold the charge indefinately... If you touch anyone while holding the charge, even unintentionally, the spell discharges" - being thrown at someone would count as touching them unintentionally...
does not picking up your familiar to throw is count as "touch anyone while holding the charge, even unintentionally, the spell discharges". it is not specific on who you are touching, just someone not already charged with the spell.
True. Though if the spell had multiple touches (like it would need to be passed around) only one would discharge on you for picking up the familiar.
Edit wrote:
And you may have some guess room if you pick up the familiar, THEN cast the spell
Yarzoth wrote:
I don't think I'd let the familiar deliver the touch spell by being thrown at the target. Only one limb of the familiar is "charged" and it is tumbling through the air. It's just as likely to hit the target with its back or face.
I don't recall it saying anywhere that only one arm or hand is charged (hence it can be delivered though any appendage when making a full round/natural attack.
A draconic bloodline Sorcerer with their claws and bite out and holding a charge can make a full round attack (2 claws and a bite) and whichever hits first delivers the spell. It's not stuck in one limb.
Round 1
1.) Cast the spell with a standard action, choosing your familiar to deliver it.
Round 2
2.) Throw your familiar as a standard action at an ally. Ranged touch attack vs his touch AC. If it hits, the familiar has unintentionally touched the target, discharging the spell.
----Perhaps give the ally a Reflex Save to catch the familiar if they have a free hand.
3.)Ally picks up the familiar as a Move action if they did not catch it (discharging the spell on them again).
4.)Ally throws familiar at the next target as a Standard Action (again ranged touch attack vs Touch AC).
5.) Repeat steps 3 and 4 until the spell runs out of charges (or the familiar dies from being thrown around too much).
In the campaign I am running one of my players is going to be using the Crossbowman archetype from the APG. His character essentially lost all his Strength and Constitution and got turned small size (got turned into a child), so I'm letting him do some re-classing. He's going for a Crossbowman (it makes sense for his character) with heavy stealth. My problem is, reading over the stealth and sniping rules, it doesn't look possible to use the Crossbowman's Deadshot (and Improved and Greater) with sniping.
Deadshot requires you to attack using a readied action. Sniping requires you to use your move action after firing to attempt to hide again. Readying an action is a standard action, and you can only ready a standard action or less. As such, using Deadshot would break stealth and he would not be able to attempt to stealth again until his next turn.
Am I reading this correct? Because that really sucks for him. Especially with the Crossbowman's bonus to Sniping stealth checks. It is obviously intended for a hidden sniper, but according to the rules, you can't stealth after using Deadshot, the class's main perk.
Is this right? Is there a solution, or am I going to have to homebrew this?
