|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Alexander Augunas wrote:
Skeld said, "Summons as a standard action." If that's true and not a typo, that's VERY good. It is usually a full-round action to summon a monster. That's worth the Diehard or other extra benefit in and of itself. It might even be better, depending on who you ask.
You can summon this as a standard action, but they can't act until your next turn, except.... They are not flat-footed, and they can take AOOs. So you can summon your creatures in front of you and start to establish a defense perimeter and carry on normal business on your next turn.
There is also an add-on benefit if you have Sacred Summons. That way, if you have both feats you don't experience redundancy, you can get some extra benefit.
The monster list has a nice assortment of evil outsiders like divs, ausuras, kytons, daemons, and even some evil fey, as well as a few standby demons and devils (which is important because creatures not on this list aren't subject to its benefits).
Edit: Oh, I forgot, there are some gremlins on the list too. No point in summoning low level evil creatures in greater numbers? Tell that to the pugwumpis.
You're welcome, Evil.
Above my pay grade, but I understand.
Just know that the shield champion was meant to be a functional melee character with the item they're named after.
The intention was always that shields would also be weapons that the shield champion would be proficient with, as well as an armor proficiency. I wrote it, so I know my intentions. Whatever one might think of the overall strength of the archetype, there was no intention to deliberately gimp it with a nonsensical disadvantage. That would be patently silly.
So, it was an oversight as far as I am concerned. Unfortunately, my remarks are not binding. You have my regrets for the inconvenience to PFS folks. Please FAQ it and I am sure it will be corrected.
Become a freelancer and have some aptitude for mechanics?
Scotch? <- Might be faster?
Sorry, long complicated question, Perhaps not the best place for it.
I have a very important question now... which other archetypes bear Jim's handiwork so I can give them the thorough read that they deserve?
My presence is mostly felt in the shaman, brawler, and a bit in the skald. So if I ever started to argue about the swashbuckler and the arcanist, I am a bit of out my element. I want to brag about stuff specifically, but honestly.. The Design Team really fine tunes a lot of our work to varying degree. To hog too much the credit would be overlooking that they carried the ball across the field goal quite a bit. Case in point, the shield champion got a pretty decent overhaul and a fresh coat of paint. Others required less. That's okay, that is an example of the process working as intended. I am so excited to share this book with people but these books are massive team efforts.
pippo pappi wrote:
The Visionary is a strong divination caster archetype for the shaman. That isn't everybody's form of sexy, but some people dig divination and wish it was more fun and easy. The Visionary aims for that.
When they cast spells like augury and divination, they jump right to the maximum (90%) chance for a useful answer. They cast spells like scrying in a fraction of the time, have a better chance of success, and can cast more divination spells through it. Then can look at you and figure out what bloodlines, domains, hexes, and mysteries you have. Plus, a good helping of some of the better divination spells which are sometimes exclusive to other classes like the wizard. At higher levels the wandering hex is still there to help round it out.
The naturalist can use summon nature's ally to call animal, magical beasts, or vermin. This is rises in level and replaces summon monster. They also add animal qualities to their eidolons, via the hunter's animal aspect. At high levels they can share those with themselves.
The spirit summoner is a bit of a summoner shaman mix.. gaining a spirit as eidolon and even some hexes. A little complex and interesting, but then.. summoners are not my personal forte.
pippo pappi wrote:
its possible have more shaman archetype info? :)
The Animist is genuinely weird and unlike anything else. I'm surprised he hasn't gotten noticed.
Animism is this belief that everything has a spirit which can be interacted with. Like diseases, houses, the terrain, constructs, your car. Herbie the Love Bug (1968) was an early cultural example of animism, and so is Christine by Stephen King. In Poltergeist 2, you see a native american shaman appeal to the spirit of Craig T. Nelson's car to start.
The animist gets an interesting mix of spells, like most of the speak with... series, including the druidic and clerical ones. Wizard spells that affect constructs, dream, skinsend, and spells that apply to the soul, even if their from the clerical and wizard lists.
The can communicate with bad conditions directly. I mean, they can actually talk to the shaken condition and argue with it. Tell it leave. It can ask the blind condition to cut you a break on the shaman's behalf. There is a small risk the bad condition might try to jump into the shaman, or just get stubborn.. though at higher levels the animist just points to the door and says "scram!" That doesn't make them a true healer, but its a neat quasi-healing function.
The animist is a skilled exorcist.
Later, the animist can possess other creatures... and objects. Unlike normal magic jar they go into their familiar (when not in other creatures) instead of some magic gem. They can then piggyback on the familiar's senses and coordinate with the familiar telepathically. When they grab other bodies, those go into the familiar (but at no risk to it). Object possession is as per possess object.
At high levels they can interact with incorporeal creatures, and even go ethereal.
They forfeit a fair number of hexes, but they still have a wander spirit and wandering spirit hexes, so you can round them out a little.
Its a weird, neat archetype and I'm kinda proud of it. Hope people like it.
Jim... So does primalist stack with untouchable? Just double checking. If so, I am so going to make an anti-magic bloodrager...
Okay, a few caveats. Its 1 am for me right now and this is my last post of the night. I'm also answering unofficially. Heck, I couldn't answer officially if I wanted to, but you know what I mean. I want to say that before some jerk plays the gotchya game with me.
I think its okay to mix them.
The primalist is a "modification of the bloodline class feature". Which is unfortunately super broad and covers different things. I.e. spellcasting and bloodline powers.
The untouchable replaces just the spellcasting and bloodline spells specifically for spell resistance.
There should be no issue.
I can, however, foresee a nitpicker arguing that you can't do piecemeal the exchanges.
However a bloodline power has nothing to do, strictly speaking, with spellcasting (and blood spells). Its just that the term "bloodline class feature" is a pretty broad umbrella that covers two different concepts.
Again, I think you're safe. I wouldn't be surprised if it came up though.
Okay, here are some notes about the flame dancer.
A low level ability to use Performance to mitigate high heat conditions and help allies who have caught on fire.
A 3rd level ability to grant allies the ability to see through flames and smoke without penalty as long as there is light, plus the gaze of f lames oracle revelation. replaces inspire confidence.
A little later they grant fire resistance to allies.
Eventually they go back and add in a nice handful of wizard fire spells (up to and including fireball)into their spell list.
Sure, it's kind of a nature bard. They can access some druid spells. They also gain a new bardic performance that allows them to grant an ally an animal aspect, based off of the hunter's animal focus ability.
Insain Dragoon wrote:
I was mainly concerned with max number of feats grabbed because of attempts to grab entire feat trees and such.
I gotchya. Looks like 3, practically speaking, till you hit 20th. The language says that you can use the ability again within the duration, but to specifically replace chosen feats. Nothing is said about taking additional ones.
That is correct on both counts.
You can dole out those uses as you see fit. Every feat grabbed is one use that lasts 1 minute. So I picture you can save them for your whole adventuring day, or (at higher levels) you could nova them out with three feats in one encounter.
The break points when the brawler can access more combat feats with increasingly faster actions are 6, 10, 12, and 20.
The maximum number of extra feats is typically 3.. except at level 20, when you're only limited by the number of uses you have left.
Insain Dragoon wrote:
4 + Int modifier
Insain Dragoon wrote:
-do any archetypes swap out brawlers flurry?
Insain Dragoon wrote:
-do any archetypes/feats change what weapon groups you can flurry?
At higher levels the Shield Champion can chuck that shield as a ranged weapon as part of her flurry.
Sorry, I did not scour the feats.
Insain Dragoon wrote:
-I remember a concern being how often one could use martial versatility to grab multiple feats. How many times per day could a level 11 Brawler grab max feats in a usage?
The break points at 10th and 12th level. The number of uses is 3 + half Brawler level (minumum 1). So that is 8 and 9 uses per day. Each time a single feat is acquired, that is one use per day utilized.
At 10th level and 12th level, the brawler can theoretically grab a maximum three feats in a single round. The difference being, what action is required to get those three feats. Then can, of course, acquire less feats, but you wanted to know the maximum.
Insain Dragoon wrote:
There's not a single capstone, but rather a small suite of goodies. A bonus combat feat, improved awesome blow, and they can use martial versatility to obtain any number of combat feats that they want, as a swift action, that they have daily uses to pay for.
Yessss.. But I think *Full Access* is a bit misleading. They can add a sorc/wiz spell to their spell list for every point of their CHA modifier (minimum 1). Every level after they take the hex, they can replace out one of those spells for a new one. They cast them as Divine Spells and use WIS as the casting modifier for DCs.
So yes, but only for a small handful of spells.
EDIT: Punctuation improvement to add clarity. And I guess a couple Wizard spells would spruce up your selection.
London Duke wrote:
Jim... At this point I will settle for anything you could provide. It's long been a character I have hoped to play and optimize.
Well, she is proficient with all shields but the tower shield. Unlike normal brawlers.
She can throw a light or medium shield as a thrown weapon. No improvised weapon penalties. Shield spikes do apply. Assumed to have Far Shot for this purpose only. At 7th level, this throw shield can be used to make combat maneuvers.
At 5th level there is an ability to make it come back.
At 15th level there is powerful damage absorbing ability if you're going to be dropped below 0 hit points.
EDIT: There is a lot more, and stuff about how brawlers flurry factors in, but I am trying to stay in preview mode. A couple good bonus feats if you meet the prerequisites.
Brandon Hodge wrote:
Not arguing with you Brandon. My only counterpoint would be those rules didn't make it into a Core Product. Also, and I have to be careful because I don't want Bulmahn to get mad at me, speak with haunt doesn't require the haunt to be triggered. I mean, it can be cast just outside of the trigger range and the use of the spell never triggers. The onus is on you to detect it and have prior knowledge of it however, and we know that isn't always easy. You can also use the spell after it has been riled, of course. That's also handy for those higher level haunts with a 1 minute reset time.
I'd have liked to have seen it be 3rd level though.
The rapping spirit methodology does require you to wrangle and beat up the haunt before you can implement it. I won't BS you, I had forgotten it about that technique though. I think that is a great point to bring up, and excellent for lower level haunts. I can't apologize for the spell though, because by the time you're 7th or 8th level, a single haunt can be nasty business.
Evil Midnight Lurker wrote:
Deus is also the name of a rogue AI in the Shadowrun RPG setting. Robert's reference to the Renraku Corporation is the clue. Deus takes one of their arcologies hostage.
I am going to discontinue, based on what Jason Bulmahn posted.
I can't take back what I said, but my words did get somewhat hijacked by other posters. The rapier is an interesting weapon, however when I casually chose my words I wasn't thinking of it. I was thinking of the spear, to be honest.
There's also the spiked gauntlet, punching dagger, and the light pick.. and so on. All piercing weapons.
I'm not discounting your concern.. just bear this in mind.
Kobold Commando wrote:
Sure, but I was only speaking about new mechanics, and I am sure the swashbuckler needs some consideration too.
This is a thread derail though, which I contributed to, but I'm going to cease-and-desist now. :-)
And maybe they did just that. I don't know.
You're missing the point the started this. If you start making Dexterity do the job of Strength as well as what it does already, across the board and not in one specific class, there is no point to Strength. Keep doing that, and you will run into problems.
I take your point TOZ.
(oooh, that was really unintentional)
But I was referring to adding additional mechanics. Not pre-existing ones.
Dennis Baker wrote:
Dervish Dancer and the Agile weapon property remain the only ways I'm aware of to get Dex to damage.
Which make them flavorful exceptions. I think we agree there is no need to create more.
To riff of what Dennis and Ross said.
One game balancing factor that exists is the need to have a decent score in more than one ability. When an ability score functions outside of its traditional role, one ability score becomes less valuable and another becomes twice as useful.
Allowing a PC to focus stat-boosting items and level increases on that single ability score instead of spreading them out.
When you add certain feats and class abilities, this magnifies the situation considerably.
Personally (and I emphasize this as coming purely from me), I would not characterize this as being "anti-optimizing" so much as not making it too easy.
Edit: I see Dennis has edited his post. Yes, beyond this, further discussion should be its own thread.
Ross Byers wrote:
Those are great questions. Exactly what I had in mind.
I don't want to create work for the Design Team, but I have what I think is a cool Blog Post for after the book is released and the previews are over.
A blog article that explains what criteria they would place on a spell to make it a "shaman spell", and so on for other classes that get their own spell lists.
That way, they're not caught up trying to retrofit a lot of older material from other product lines, but they give some advice to GMs who want to make those decisions for themselves. Like what exactly is the difference between most a cleric/druid spell that is good for the shaman versus one that is not appropriate. I often advocate that GMs should be unafraid to make those determinations (and still do), but some guidelines never hurt.
You'd probably have disclaimer it was not valid for PFS (which require uniform rulings), but it would give some pointers for the folks at home.
Just a passing thought.
I am not confused, but I am posting to get a second opinion and to see if someone knows of a reference that I couldn't find with a search.
So here's the deal:
Druid is able to wildshape and take the universal monster Grab ability. This grants a +4 circumstance bonus to maintain a grapple.
The Core Rule Book says that when you maintain a grapple you get a +5 bonus. No type of bonus is mentioned.
So the wildshaped druid gets a +9 bonus to maintain a grapple?
(I'm aware of size restrictions, for simplicity let's assume the druid has the size to grapple his/her opponent)
Chris and Mike,
I have actually allowed a neutral aligned gnoll in my Mummy's Mask campaign.
(Personal tragedy caused her to become disillusioned with Lamashtu and convert to Pharasma... and her work with the poor and destitute as a skilled midwife has granted her tolerance and grudging acceptance by civilized locals)
Does this book have stuff for neutral gnolls?
That's fine, Tangent101.
I sort of want back up a little, because I don't want to attribute everything to "Gms telegraphing the plot", because I actually don't think that sums everything up in a single neat package.
It just feels like a lot of the push back comes from GMs who are reading but not actually running the AP. I maintain it is not a novel.