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

Jodokai's page

FullStarFullStar Pathfinder Society GM. 1,266 posts (1,321 including aliases). No reviews. 1 list. No wishlists. 10 Pathfinder Society characters. 2 aliases.


1 to 50 of 1,266 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Jiggy wrote:
You have a very inaccurate understanding of what the people around you think. I recommend asking some of those people for their thoughts, digesting their responses, and rephrasing it back to them; then repeating that process until they say "Yeah, that's what I'm saying". Do that with a few different people and see if your perspective changes.

I wish I did, but I really don't. I say it in more negative terms, but it is completely accurate. I can take you though the numerous threads I've used to draw those conclusions. Take a look at all of the "the paladin falls" threads. People want a concrete set of rules to follow that applies to every single circumstance. They want rules to cover what should be the GM's area. People hate the magic crafting system, why? Because it requires a lot of GM oversite. Still not convinced? Look at how many times I've said "The GM can say no to things that are legal in the rules" and see the push back I get for those statements. As soon as I saw Shadow's post I KNEW he was going to get push back, sure enough, and with 5 people hitting Favorite too. Deny it all you want, and maybe you specifically don't feel that way, but the general feel on the boards is that anything that requires a lot of GM input is frowned upon.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Orfamay Quest wrote:
Shadowlords wrote:

Since when did the game need to be balanced....[...]

if [...] one person is taking the spot light it is your job as the DM to "balance" the game.

Under what other circumstances is this kind of nonsense acceptable?

If I go to the dentist and he drills the wrong tooth, it's not my job to fill the cavities he missed.

If I go to the mechanic and he forgets to re-attach the cylinder head, it's not my job to put it back on.

If I go to a restaurant and get served raw chicken, it's not my job to go back into the kitchen and cook it all the way through.

If I get onto an airplane and the pilot doesn't know how to find San Bernadino, it's not my job to navigate.

If I hire a carpenter and he forgets the fourth leg of my table, it's not my job to work the lathe.

As soon as I saw Shadowlords' post I started laughing, not because I think what he's said is funny, he's 100% correct as far as I'm concerned, but the second you suggest the GM should have some control over his game, this forum goes into an uproar.

The problem with all your examples is that you're putting in emphasis on the wrong person. The person in the dentist chair (you) is the Player Character, the Dentist is an NPC. In none of you examples is there a GM to speak of, since they don't really exist unless you believe in a higher power maybe.

I'm about to say something that most people on this board hate: As GM you have to right to say no. Even if a player brings a a perfectly rules legal character to the table, you can tell that player "That's not going to work for my game". You have that control as the GM. The players either accept that you're doing it so everyone enjoys the game more, or they don't, in which case, find better players that will trust you as a GM.

My advice is to play an Elf or Half-Elf and take the Spellbinder Archetype. It allows you to spontaneously cast 1 spell per level. So for example if you pick Magic Missile as your 1st level Spell Bond, you can convert any 1st level spells or higher to Magic Missile. This allows you to have your Controlling/Utility spells, but still have a blasting spell as a back up.

Fruian Thistlefoot wrote:

Yet if your good at preparing spells and planning then everything your saying that is a drawback becomes an asset.

Utility is KING and wizard has it in spades. Being able to design a spell list to defeat every challenge is amazing power.

You're right, utility is king, and in almost every instance the sorcerer has more of it. IF you think about, if you know exactly what's coming, the sorcerer can just go out and buy scrolls. In that case he's still better than the wizard, because not only will he have the spells he needs for this particular battle, but he still has his regular abilities too.

If you want to talk about the cost of that, both the Wizard and the Sorcerer need the exact same items, a Wizard then has to spend more buying scrolls and copying them into a spellbook that the sorcerer doesn't have to do. So if we assume they both spend the same amount on gear, and they both earn the same amount, what does the sorcerer do with the money he saves on not having a spell book? He buys the scrolls he needs for those particular battles.

Really no matter how you look at it, you're better off with a sorcerer. The only real drawback is having to wait a level for next higher spell level.

I only really skimmed this thread, but the easier you make it for the Gunslinger now, the more you're going to regret it later. At 5th level he'll start getting DEX to damage. As the characters level and fight larger CR monsters, the monsters' AC will continue to rise, their touch AC will continue to drop. With no house rules at all, a Pistoleer can reload as a free action (Rapid Reload Alchemical cartridges) at first level. The only saving grace is the 20' Range inc, but even at 60' he'll be better than most archers since he doesn't need STR like they do.

At 5th level you're going to see things drastically shift. Touch AC's are going to start dropping, he's going to get DEX to damage, will probably have Deadly Aim. Assuming he finds someway to reload, he'll be doing 2d8+18 (each gun 1d8+4 DEX, +4 deadly aim, +1 point blank) will do every round and rarely if ever miss. At 6th level (keeping the stats the same) he'll be doing 3d8+27 (iterative attack from BAB) per round and rarely miss. At 7th it will be 4d8+36 (Improved Two-Weapon Fighting). Also remember this is ranged, so he'll get full attacks more often than not. Again short range pistols may help on this a bit, but overall expect he'll get full attacks.

Arcane Addict wrote:
I cannot believe I forgot this one! Metamagic! Wizards don't take as long as sorcerers do when casting metamagic'ed up spells!

You should have left this one forgotten. If you're trying to prove Sorcerers aren't as good as Wizards, this is the worst possible argument you could make. Being able to apply any metamagic feat you know to any spell you cast at any time you want is ridiculous. To say that giving up your move action isn't worth this ability, when you are a class that can hit something 150 feet or more away is beyond ludicrous.

To answer the original post, there is very little reason to play a Wizard over Sorcerer. Most people play Sorcerers and have a "grass is always greener" attitude. The reality is that Sorcerers are far more versatile despite claims to the contrary. Most people who defend sorcerers usually play sorcerers instead of wizards (as if that isn't telling enough). There is really only a few reasons they'll throw up repeatedly, but if you look at them, they really don't bridge the gap at all.

The first one you'll hear repeatedly is: INT is a better stat. Let's analyze that statement. Sure INT is skill points, and Knowledge skills, but the most important/most used skills in the game are Perception, WIS based and interaction skills (Diplomacy/Bluff/Intimidate), add in Favored Class bonus, and how much of a loss is this? But okay, let's pretend that we all agree that INT is the absolute most important stat in the game. Well, then all you have to do is play a Sorcerer that use INT as its casting stat. Rather have perception? Well, play a Sorcerer that uses WIS as its casting stat. There are bloodlines that allow for both.

The second one you'll hear is that it takes a move action to apply metamagic. If you honestly believe this is some sort of limitation, slap yourself, and read my first paragraph again.

The third one is really the only actual limitation. You get supreme versatility, but get higher level spells, 1 level later. Then again when you can spontaneously add Heighten Spell to all your spells, does it really matter?

You're right when you say if you know what's coming a Sorcerer can just buy scrolls. Sure Sorc-Supporters will say that you can't buy your way out all the time, while in the same breath say that a Wizard can add any spell to their spell book (which costs money). So I guess what they're saying is that Sorcerers can't buy their way out, but Wizards can,because if sorcerers could that would invalidate their argument and that just wouldn't be fair.

Sure you can leave open slots, but by the time your high enough level to afford to leave open slots, you (and the sorcerers) would have enough scrolls for those seldom used spells that can come in handy every now and then.

That said, there are a few tricks I use to make a Wizard more versatile. The first one is make an elf/half-elf and use the Spellbinder Archetype. This let's you pick one spell of each level to spontaneously cast. I use the Spellbinder spells to for blasting/attack spells and memorize all the utility/buff spells. There are some feats that will make you more sorcerer like, there's one that allows you to change a higher level spell slot into two lower level ones (yeah a feat to allow you to do what sorcerers say is a limitation).

I skipped a lot, but what about straight Kensai Magus?

PossibleCabbage wrote:
TyroAmberhelm wrote:
Honestly, the only thing that is keeping me from doing it is having all of my other players suddenly wanting to rebuild their characters.

If everybody got to rebuild their characters at level 6, would that really be so bad? I mean, what value is there in making people stick with a feat or an archetype that they regret taking? Like if you told the party "so-and-so is switching from rogue to unchained rogue, so if any of you guys want to retrain your feats or optional class features, go ahead (just run your plan past me first)" that wouldn't ruin the game or anything.

I mean, if you're playing a game where someone voluntarily decided to play a chained rogue, we're probably not talking about a pack of really hardcore pathfinder optimizers to begin with (don't get me wrong, I like the idea of rogues, but other classes do "rogue" better than the core rogue), so someone else probably wishes they had chosen something else at some level too.

Characters that started out as first level and leveled to 6 are vastly different from character that are generated at 6th level. Not saying one or the other is better, just different. As a GM I prefer the former and rarely allow a complete overhaul. As to the original question, I would have tried to talk the player out of playing a core rogue to begin with, and would be very excited that they wanted to switch.

I went with two weapon fighting and used Canny Tumble and Circiling Mongoose to full attack almost every round. If you go this method avoid Scout archetype and go Swashbuckler archetype for the extra combat trick and bonus to Acrobatics.

With two weapon fighting your first attack lowers their AC for your other attacks, and your last attack lowers their to hit for the party.

When people talk about the multiple will saves, don't dramatize it. It's two. Two will saves and you're destroying the party. It's not hard to get two crappy saves in a row. Heck playing a high level module in PFS, first room we walk into the Wizard gets hit with an Invisible Stalker. Rolls a 1 against the illusion, rolls a 2 on his Fortitude save, uses his re-roll and rolls a 1, he had the best will save in the party.

My advice is to load a clear crystal ioun stone into a wayfinder and never get dominated again. Cheap and effective.

As far as DPS: People ask questions like this all the time, and others try to give advice, but the reality is, the ones giving advice really have no idea what they're talking about. Not because they don't know the game, but because they don't know your game. There's a thread right now asking if a 40 STR is too much. I haven't opened the thread, but I would imagine people are telling the poster that 40 is way too high, when really we have no idea if 40 is too high or not. What if the Rogue has a 40 DEX, the Wizard has a 40 INT, and the Cleric has a 40 WIS? Now is a 40 STR too much?

The other mistake people make is assuming balance is between players and the GM. That will never be balanced because the GM can do whatever they want "Goblins in my world have 600 hp and carry around +20 Artifact Swords that are versus Touch AC". Balance is between players. If you all have 40's in your stats, everything is gravy, if one has a 40, one has a 28 and another has a 14, you're going to run into problems.

Falxu - No you still need Handle Animal, there's a FAQ. My personal take and what I believe the devs are getting at is that even if you raise the INT, it gets the mechanical benefits, but it's still an animal. You can't get the benefit of Awaken animal spell just by add 1 point of INT.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The only one that doesn't jive with me is: Do not prey on the weakness of others, and forbid this conduct from others.

Typically Irori isn't about telling others what to do. Each must find their own path to enlightenment and all that. I would make it more about setting the example than forbidding others.

I don't know if revolver ammo costs more, but paper alchemical charges cost 1.2gp to make. If he spent that 8000 gold on ammo instead of making the magic item, he'd have about 6,666 rounds. Let's say he gets off 2 shots per round at level 5, we'll say each combat is 10 rounds (which we all know it isn't)x 4 combats per day, that's 80 rounds per day, he could go 83 adventuring days before he ran out. If he's somehow using 2 pistols, he'll still get 41 adventuring days. Just as a comparison, in PFS this would take him to level 13.

As he levels increase he'll be shooting more rounds per round, but his wealth will also increase.

What I'm getting at is that the myth that the cost of ammo is somehow a balancing factor for a gunslinger is just that, a myth. It doesn't really matter if you let him have it or not the cost is actually negligible.

Right now the player is worried about ramping up his to-hit modifier and his damage modifier and thinks he needs all these magic items to do it, so is worried about the ammo cost. Eventually he'll figure out that since it's all touch attacks, he could have a Wizard BAB and still never miss, and since he's ranged, he'll always full attack, so even with relatively low bonuses to damage, the full attacking and never missing more than makes up for it.

Entryhazard wrote:

Eh, it clearly means that the receiving allies must consider it a bonus feat as it skips prerequites, but this is just basic English

No it "clearly" does not mean that. The fact that can "clearly" see the same sentence in two completely different ways means nothing is really clear at all.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Zaetar wrote:

I just see it sitting there and gathering dust... and well, why not?

Someone went through all the trouble to think it, write it, refine it, then publish it. It would be a waste and an insult to the creators not to use their creations.

I cannot fathom a reason not to use them. If i'm not wrong the idea of playing d20 games is to grab a game setting, use its rules and books as guides and reference and then homebrew whatever else you want... not to be bound by the books. This groups even go and create stuff out of nowhere for us and people refuse to use it? It's dumb.

The only reason I can imagine for not using them is because the DM is way too lazy to make an effort and think about what he has to do to counter this new stuff. There has always been stuff created by 3rd parties that were later added as official content, why is this different? Why do DMs get scared of content from a different source?

The problem I have the 3PP is that not everyone has access to all the books the other players have. You mistakenly think balance is between the players and the GM, it's not. The GM can do whatever he wants so that will never be balanced. Balance is between players. All players should be relatively the same power level or it creates problems.

That said, I do universally allow Psionics from Dreamscared Press. The fact that it's available on d20pfsrd helps, but even it wasn't, I would still allow it. Love that stuff.

Hubaris wrote:
Battlefield Presence wrote:

granting each ally within 30 feet one teamwork feat she possesses as a bonus feat as a standard action

Its a teamwork feat you possess. Compare to:

Tactician wrote:

He must meet the prerequisites for this feat. As a standard action, the cavalier can grant this feat to all allies within 30 feet who can see and hear him.

Emphasis mine.

Re-emphasis mine

Josh-o-Lantern wrote:

None? None at all? level 6 makes you immune to Reverse psychology?

Thought you were referring to detect evil aura. Sure, if the player is playing a dumb paladin that just blindly opposes everything that might work. It still doesn't change the fact that a paladin shouldn't be traveling with an evil character, let alone an evil character trying to manipulate him.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Josh-o-Lantern wrote:
QuidEst wrote:

Reverse psychology. If he opposes everything you suggest, just suggest the opposite of what you want.

Also, if you aren't a divine caster with an aura, you don't detect as evil for another couple levels.

This. Every bit this.

Except they're 6th level, so none of that actually.

I agree with Heretek. You can't trick him by pretending to gradually repent. Sarenrae gives you one shot, you don't take it, you get smited. there is no:
"Well...hmm let me sleep on it a bit"
That won't fly. I think some of you focus too much on the "give them a chance" and are skipping the "one chance before you gut them"

As far as the "Stop me robbing or save the children", okay I'll save the children, but since we're traveling together, I'll know where you'll be later, and you'll either willingly give everything back, or you'll make a posthumous donation.

The real issue though is the one that's spelled out in the core rulebook. Paladin's can't work with evil characters. Yes, yes stopping an evil god, but you can't be like "Okay we need to stop this evil god in 40 years, so we'll just travel together until then" Or even, there has to be a reason why it has to be that character. Couldn't the paladin find a lawful good sorcerer to stop the evil god with?

Double-Chain Kama

I think it should apply to bonus feats at level 1, but shouldn't apply to a specific ability you don't have. For example if it said "bonus Rogue Talent" yes level 1, if it said "Bonus to <Specific Rogue Talent>" you have to wait until you actually have that specific talent. I don't really have any further proof and rules judgment, it's just how I think it should work.

I would treat Oracles like sorcerers. Yes their magic is divine, but they usually didn't ask for it, and some may not even want it (at least in some source material), so I wouldn't say they actually pray.

I didn't read anyone else's post, but in my opinion, this sounds like NG taken the the extreme. They will do anything for the greater good. That said, I firmly believe Dr. Doom is Lawful Evil. He wants to rule the world because he really believes he will do a better job and everyone will be better off, but he's willing to kill, torture or anything else to accomplish his goals. So depending on what your character is willing to do... I mean they could start off NG, then as the make more and more compromises for the "Greater Good" gradually slip down the spectrum.

The real problem is your stats. You need to find some way to get DEX to Damage (CHA to damage would be ideal, but I don't think that exists). My advice would be to be a Paladin of Sarenrae and get the Dervish Dance feat.

Since improved init was your first level feat, you could retrain it to Noble Scion: Scion of War. That would give you your CHA to Init.

I have an Aasimar paladin, and I was really excited about the wings, but what I've found out, is that two feats just isn't worth it. The number of times I've found it really helpful I could have just used a Fly potion and been better off, because the potion is double the movement of your wings. Add to that a Paladin only gets 2 skill points so your Fly skill is likely to be pretty low.

Something else you may want to consider is a level of Oracle to get CHA to AC.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Another feat you'll want to look at is Shapeshifting Hunter Ranger will stack with Druid for number of shifts per day. Druid stacks with Ranger for Favored Enemy.

Here's my build, which is sort of the opposite of yours, I really just took a level of Ranger to get Favored Enemy, and some rogue-like skills.

Female half-elf druid (world walker) 7/ranger (trapper) 1 (Pathfinder RPG Ultimate Combat 43, Pathfinder RPG Ultimate Magic 65)
N Medium humanoid (elf, human)
Init +3; Senses low-light vision; Perception +27
AC 25, touch 14, flat-footed 23 (+8 armor, +2 deflection, +2 Dex, +3 shield)
hp 58 (8 HD; 7d8+1d10+14)
Fort +10, Ref +8, Will +12; +2 vs. enchantments
Immune sleep
Speed 30 ft. (20 ft. in armor)
Melee +1 scimitar +10/+5 (1d6+4/18-20) or
. . mwk cold iron shortspear +10/+5 (1d6+3) or
. . silversheen dagger +10/+5 (1d4+3/19-20)
Ranged ranged touch attack +8 (As Spell) or
. . sling +8 (1d4+3)
Special Attacks favored enemies (humans +4, undead +2), wild shape 3/day
Druid (World Walker) Spells Prepared (CL 7th; concentration +12)
. . 4th—freedom of movement, life bubble[APG] (DC 19), river of wind[D,APG] (DC 19)
. . 3rd—call lightning (DC 18), fly[D], greater longstrider[ACG], water breathing
. . 2nd—barkskin, eagle's splendor[D], frigid touch[UM], resist energy, wood shape (DC 17)
. . 1st—aspect of the falcon[D,APG], frostbite[UM], hydraulic push[APG], liberating command[UC], liberating command[UC], snowball (DC 16), snowball (DC 16)
. . 0 (at will)—detect magic, guidance, light, stabilize
. . D Domain spell; Domain Eagle domain
Str 16, Dex 14, Con 13, Int 12, Wis 20, Cha 10
Base Atk +6; CMB +9; CMD 23
Feats Alertness, Heavy Armor Proficiency, Natural Spell, Shapeshifting Hunter[UC], Skill Focus (Diplomacy), Tribal Scars
Traits ease of faith, narrows survivor
Skills Acrobatics -1 (-5 to jump), Diplomacy +15, Disable Device +13, Fly +3, Handle Animal +6, Heal +10, Knowledge (dungeoneering) +5, Knowledge (nature) +14, Perception +27, Sense Motive +19, Stealth +3, Survival +14 (+19 when tracking); Racial Modifiers +2 Perception
Languages Common, Druidic, Elven, Sylvan
SQ aerial evasion, elf blood, favored terrains (underground +4, urban +2), hawkeye, nature bond (Eagle domain[UM]), nature sense, track +1, trapfinding +1, wild empathy +8, woodland stride
Combat Gear wand of cure light wounds, blood-boiling pill (10), sharpstone sling bullets (20); Other Gear +2 dragonhide breastplate, +2 darkwood light wooden quickdraw shield[APG], +1 scimitar, mwk cold iron shortspear, ranged touch attack, silversheen dagger, sling, belt of giant strength +2, cloak of resistance +2, goggles of minute seeing, headband of inspired wisdom +2, lenses of detection, ring of protection +2, backpack, bedroll, belt pouch, belt pouch, blanket[APG], fishhook (2), flint and steel, grappling hook, holly and mistletoe, masterwork thieves' tools, sewing needle, signal whistle, soap, spell component pouch, spider's silk rope (50 ft.)[APG], spiritbane spike, string or twine[APG], thread (50 ft.), torch (5), trail rations (5), waterskin, whetstone, 4,975 gp, 9 sp, 2 cp
Special Abilities
Aerial Evasion (Ex) While flying you take less damage on a successful Reflex save.
Deliver Touch Spells Through Familiar (Su) Your familiar can deliver touch spells for you.
Druid (World Walker) Domain (Eagle) Granted Powers: Your spirit soars with the mightiest and noblest of all winged creatures.
Elf Blood Half-elves count as both elves and humans for any effect related to race.
Elven Immunities - Sleep You are immune to magic sleep effects.
Empathic Link with Familiar (Su) You have an empathic link with your Arcane Familiar.
Familiar Bonus: +3 to sight-based Perception checks in bright light You gain the Alertness feat while your familiar is within arm's reach.
Favored Enemy (Humans +4) (Ex) +4 to rolls vs. Favored Enemy (Humans) foes.
Favored Enemy (Undead +2) (Ex) +2 to rolls vs. Favored Enemy (Undead) foes.
Favored Terrain (Underground +4) (Ex) +4 to rolls when in Favored Terrain (Underground).
Favored Terrain (Urban +2) (Ex) +2 to rolls when in Favored Terrain (Urban).
Hawkeye +3 (8/day) (Su) Swift, gain bonus on one perception check or ranged attack.
Lenses of detection +5 to track with Survival
Low-Light Vision See twice as far as a human in low light, distinguishing color and detail.
Narrows Survivor You gain a +1 trait bonus to Initiative and Sense Motive checks. Sense Motive is always a class skill for you.
Natural Spell You can cast spells while in Wild Shape.
Shapeshifting Hunter Add your druid and ranger levels for favored enemy
Speak with Animals (Ex) Your familiar can communicate with animals similar to itself.
Speak with Familiar (Ex) You can communicate verbally with your familiar.
Track +1 Add the listed bonus to survival checks made to track.
Trapfinding +1 Gain a bonus to find or disable traps, including magical ones.
Wild Empathy +8 (Ex) Improve the attitude of an animal, as if using Diplomacy.
Wild Shape (8 hours, 3/day) (Su) Shapeshift into a different creature one or more times per day.
Woodland Stride (Ex) Move through undergrowth at normal speed.

I really went back and forth between Green Faith Initiate and World Walker. Green Faith Initiate would have made it a much better "Face" with it's bonuses to Diplomacy, but in the end having a Druid with Favored Enemy and Favored Terrain was just too enticing.

I took the Eagle Domain for the bonus to hit with Ranged Touch Attacks and Perception for Trap Finding. Also a Familiar gives me Ranged Cure spells.

Forgot to add cites: Link

John Compton wrote:

Favored Class Bonus for Half-Elves and Half-Orcs:

For the purpose of qualifying for favored class bonuses, half-elves are also treated as both elves and humans, and half-orcs are also treated as humans (but not orcs)—a byproduct of their respective elf blood and orc blood racial traits. Only characters that have the elf blood or orc blood racial trait count as a member of another race for this purpose.

Bolding mine.

Pathfinder Society does allow Half-Elves to count as Elves or Humans, the only restriction is that Half-Orcs can't get Orc feats/traits.

EDIT: And yes re-training is still allowed.

Scott Wilhelm wrote:

I would recommend the OP start turning into a Deinonychus. I would recommend one or more levels in Warpriest and taking the Blessing of Destruction. Every Natural Attack the OP takes Weapon Focus in will have a Base damage of 1d6, and the Destruction Blessing gives a +1 per 2 WP level on every one of those attacks.

If the OP takes Shaping Focus, his nondruid levels count as Druid levels until level 8, which will allow for Huge Animals, including the Megaraptor and the Allosaurus. I'm not sure which I like better.

If the OP is Human, then he can take Martial Versatility Weapon Focus and apply WF, and therefore Sacred Weapon Damage, to all natural attacks regardless of what form he takes. He can also take 2 levels in Ranger, Improved Natural Weapon, and Martial Versatility Improved Natural Weapon.

And he can always just cast Strong Jaw on himself, perhaps via a Wand.

Wow, that's impressive.Some REALLY good ideas here.

A hunter- standard melee build with Pack Flanking, Paired Opportunists, and Outflank. A small cat with maxed DEX for tripping, and a Barbarian with Paired Opportunists, and Outflank. Make sure they all have high crit weapons, and unleash.

EDIT: Or a negative channeling cleric that dazes, and a Damphir something.

Something to take into account, I doubt the ranger will actually stay a switch hitter. Eventually (around level 6) the player is going to realize that using a bow is SO much more effective than their sword, they'll just stop using the sword altogether. I say 6th level because that's when they can pick up Point Blank Master and not provoke anymore.

Jayson MF Kip wrote:

I'd like to see a answer too, but maybe we shouldn't jump down Paizo's collective throats over writing a simple answer to a simple question (RE: Pack Flanking) while they try to get a (likely) complicated answer to a more complicated question (RE: This).

Keep up the good work, PDT.

I'm not sure one snarky comment qualifies as "[jumping] down Paizo's collective throat", but in my defense this thread has been here since August and has 176 FAQ requests compared to the Pack Flanking thread I couldn't even find the last time I looked.

Berinor wrote:


Hmm... so the devil said, "Come into my tent if you are interested in a deal." The paladin then entered.

Now, this means there are really two possibilities. Either the paladin intends (or is open to) a deal with the devil or not.

If he's open to a deal, he's fraternizing with evil things and is open to falling.

If he's not open to a deal, he's lying by omission when he enters the tent. I have seen people on these boards say that any kind of deception by a paladin is grounds for falling.

An overly legalistic deity might not cause the paladin to fall since he doesn't know what charge to prosecute him for.


Or the Paladin read their Code of Conduct and saw:

Paladin's Code wrote:
. Under exceptional circumstances, a paladin can ally with evil associates, but only to defeat what she believes to be a greater evil.

And thought maybe the DeViL could help him defeat a greater evil.

noretoc wrote:

Maybe you should reread the OP. Especially this sentence.

op wrote:
During this plane hopping escapade I thought it would be fun to have the party approached by a deal-making demon. He asked if anyone interested in making a deal please enter his tent. what? Or in other words, explain the terms of the deal, who did what to get what? Where was payment for services discussed? You missed the most important part of my post:

Jodokai wrote:

That's a deal. If a salesman says, "Hey look at this" and you look, you are not all of a sudden obligated to buy it. No deal has been made.

Double Chain Kama. Dual Wield and reach all in one weapon. I'm not sure, but it might be finessible since it says "Use as a Kama", but check with your GM.

noretoc wrote:

Sorry, I can only see yours. But yes, it is flawed. if a DEVIL, says come in here if you want to make a deal, and then you go in there, unless you failed "temptation by fiends" class then you are on sketchy ground. The fiend has said straight our he wants to deal and "DEVIL" and "deal" should be a warning flag that Paladins should heed. Under no circumstances should he ever do what the DEVIL wants. No matter how innocent it seems. That is how DEVILS work. Any paladin worth his smite should know this.

This is my opinion. I don't think the OP is wrong. I would not make him fall, but he would get a slap on the wrist most definitely. OP wasn't a Dick. He was playing a DEVIL.. This is what they do. Paladins should know better and be better. Anyone who want to get their knickers in a twist because I feel this way, enjoy your wedgie.

Except that's not what happened. Devil said Look, Paladin looked. Here's how it could have gone, and no one would have known which way it would go until the Paladin looked:

Devil: Hey Paladin look.
Paladin: *Looks and sees an image of an orphanage being ransacked by demons
Devil: I can help you stop this if we can make a deal.

That's a deal. If a salesman says, "Hey look at this" and you look, you are not all of a sudden obligated to buy it. No deal has been made.


Well it was my Half-Elf Rogue, until Unchained came out, now he's my favorite.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The bigger problem is the Lawful Evil Gunslinger that is one of his companions.

OP wrote:
Now, I was hoping that one of the neutral characters would be interested, and if all else fails the LE Gunslinger might be game.

Lemmy wrote:
Personally, I think the player should be allowed to roll even if it's impossible to succeed, though the GM should saying something like "Are you sure you want to do that?" if the character can be expected to know how difficult a task is.

The problem with this is that it's completely GM dependent. What one GM says is impossible, another may allow. Since there's no way for the player to know how the GM will rule that particular use, I feel it's only fair to let them know ahead of time.

Mysterious Stranger wrote:

A lot of the people who argue that because other skills allow things that are impossible in the real world bluff should also. This has a lot of validity but the thing they are forgetting is that the other skills have limits and so should bluff. Jodokai used acrobatics as an example stating that with a high enough bonus you can jump 20’ straight up which is clearly impossible in the real world. In this he is absolutely correct, but what acrobatic will not allow is jumping from the floor of the bottom of a 1000’ cliff to the top.

Bluff like any other skill should be able to do amazing things with a high enough roll, but there are still limits. Too many of the people here don’t think there should be any limits. The limits on bluff should be about the same as other skills

No, but with a high enough roll you could jump back up that 1000' cliff to the top. Falling is not a limitation of the skill, it's the addition of falling rules. Acrobatics saying you can negate 10' of falling damage isn't a limitation of the skill if you take damage from falling more than 10' it's just the rules. Acrobatics is limited though, but your movement speed, and really, the only example of this is in acrobatics. None of the other skills are limited at all.

What's the limits on Perception? You could be an invisible statue that makes absolutely no sound at all, and with a high enough perception, I'll know you there. What's the limit on stealth? As long as I bet your perception and make it to concealment before the end of my turn, I can walk right in front of you in the middle of the desert at high noon, and you won't see me.

Mysterious Stranger wrote:

The other thing people seem to think is just because you bluff someone that the person will continue to believe you. No other skill works this way so why should bluff. If I make my stealth roll and you fail your perception roll you don’t see me. But if circumstances change you may be able to spot me even though I made my stealth roll. For example if I make my stealth roll and then move through an area with no cover or concealment you spot me. Bluff should work the same way. If you successfully bluff me to believe the sky is purple it works until I get a look at the sky and see it is no longer purple. I don’t become color blind because you were able to bluff me anymore than I become blind because you were able to use stealth against me.

I don't think anyone is saying Bluff is a permanent effect (at least I'm not, but I haven't read every post), but what you're suggesting is like the GM saying to the person using stealth, "You moved, your situation changed, so you not stealth anymore"

The way I feel Bluff should work, I convince someone standing outside that the sky is purple, they look up during the conversation in their attempt to prove I'm lying, but I'm so good at lying and convincing people he accepts my rational for why what he is seeing is actually purple. I walk away. He starts to mull it over in his head and the lies start to unravel, and eventually he realizes he's been duped.

Kryzbyn wrote:

I have been told before that " bonus is so high, that I'll probably pass my bluff check, even with the -20 for being impossible", like that would work. The scenario was being able to bluff a wyrm dragon about something it already knew was false.

Now, the rules plainly state, that if he passes, the dragon believes the lie. However, that is actually impossible, not a -20 impossible.

So, as DM do I:
1)Not even offer a roll.
2)Let the player roll, and say they fail anyway.
3)Another option that involves the player.

In my opinion you're arbitrarily limiting that skill as GM fiat, and you should probably tell the player, "You're pretty sure the Dragon will never believe that" not not even roll.

EDIT: Something I think people are forgetting, is that there is a defense against Bluff: Sense Motive.

voideternal wrote:
What does that mean for bluff? Well, it means that some skills are allowed to be pseudo-fantasy at high levels, and some skills are not. Skills in pathfinder are not created equal, and it's up to each table to decide the pseudo-magicalness of a high modifier bluff.

Why? I mean I get every GM gets to decide how things work in their game, but why are the social skills considered broken because they allow impossible things, but Survival isn't? Why do we accept one but not the other? Why does it seem fair that someone who focuses on getting a high Survival skill do everything that skill allows, but someone who focuses on Bluff can't?

Mysterious Stranger wrote:
High jump is a Ki ability even when it does not use a point of Ki. This is not different than a monks unarmed attacks being counted as magic. To say you are not using Ki is false. While the original monk does not state this explicitly both the Quinggong Monk and the Unchained Monk do state this. To say you are not using Ki or magic is false.

LOL Seriously? That's what you got out of that conversation? Let me help you out then I'll shorten it to the last couple of sentences:

Jodokai wrote:

But okay that's a monk, he's mystical. So let's take a Rogue with a 30 Acrobatics. Roll a 1 and he beats the world's record by 4 feet. Average roll (10)he beats it by 9 (for a standing long jump).

Or we can go back to perception if you wish.

So basically nothing you said refutes my point at all and you're just picking at semantics.

CampinCarl9127 wrote:
I am not required to respond to every single post you have made for any reason. Irrelevant.

Sure ignore every post that proves you wrong then you'll always be right great plan. o

CampinCarl9127 wrote:
Your assumption is wrong. You made a strawman argument by misrepresenting the opposition. You clearly don't understand what the definition is despite having the quote here. Either that or you fail to realize why your post was, in fact, a strawman, which is a failure of language comprehension either way. Apparently you don't even understand the definition of ironic. I'm amazed that you argue about complicated language issues when you fail to comprehend the meaning of words.

If you think that was a straw man, I'm not the one who doesn't understand words. If it please explain how what I did is a staw man. I realize you can't, so feel free to ignore this post that proves you wrong too. I made a comparsion. I did not misrrepresent his argument at all. Which brings us back to irony, you attacking my while obviously have absolutely no clue what you're talking about, is very ironic.

CampinCarl9127 wrote:
But this entire argument is pointless and adds nothing to the thread topic, just like the majority of the rest of your posts, and I will not respond to meaningless and incindiery comments. Good day.

I agree, but I didn't insert myself into your conversation while ignoring the majority of what you said so I could only attack the easy arguments taken out of context of the larger whole. You did that so feel free to climb off your high horse. You came in here just to attack me. You went after the only comment I made that you could attack and went for it. Don't sit there and try to pretend I'm the one being the ass.

CampinCarl9127 wrote:

Edit: I also like how your argument about skills being able to do impossible things is supplemented by haste and a ki point, a magical and a supernatural ability.

I also like how you ignored every other post I made and only concentrated on the one time I used Haste and a Ki point. Nothing to say about perception then hmm?

Okay, my monk alone has a 30 Acrobatics. He's level 11 so has a 60 move speed. that gives him a 42 jump without a single bit of magic or Ki at all. that means he can, without any type of running start, just straight up 10', and that's assuming he rolls a 1 on the d20. It also means that he can, again with no running start just stand in one spot swing his arms and leap 43 feet, or 40 feet in game terms, on a roll of 1 on the d20. So without magic or supernatural ability, or even a running start, I can destroy the world's record for long jump by 10' on a 1. Make it an average roll, and I beat it by 20'. Take out his extra movement and he still beats the world record by 1 foot, again without a running start, and just for the record, the longest standing long jump is 11'. But okay that's a monk, he's mystical. So let's take a Rogue with a 30 Acrobatics. Roll a 1 and he beats the world's record by 4 feet. Average roll (10)he beats it by 9 (for a standing long jump).

Or we can go back to perception if you wish.

I'll spoiler the Logical Fallacy argument, and your incorrect use of irony (which actually is ironic) so as not to further derail.

I'm assuming we do agree that my statement was not a straw-man. As far as irony, since the definition I gave of straw-man exactly matches the definition you posted of straw-man, there is nothing ironic in that statement at all.

I suppose an argument could be made that my statements were argumentum ad absurdum, but it would be a stretch. His argument is that Bluff should be limited to what is plausible. My counter is that there is a lot in this game that is not plausible, which he accepts, so why should Bluff be judged by separate standards, and I gave examples of the implausible things that people accept. You would have to make a case as to why judging Bluff on the same scale as those other abilities is absurd, and that doesn't seem likely.

DM_Blake wrote:

I'm pretty sure the underlying assumption is that the person making the Bluff check said something that is believable to begin with.


Because walking up to a guy and saying "You're a chicken" is not a bluff. At best it's a joke. At worst it's a symptom of insanity (on the part of the speaker). Or just a plain stupidity. But it's definitely not bluff.

You tell a guard "Hey, I'm a friend of the king" and make a Bluff check, he believes what you say is true - because that IS a bluff and subject to a Bluff check and if successful, it does what the Bluff skill says. But if you tell a guard "Hey, you're a chicken", he doesn't believe you. Ever. Because your "bluff" was completely impossible in the first place because that was not even a bluff in the first place.

In short, being insane and rambling about impossibilities like a madman is not a Bluff check at all. No roll required, no chance of success.

No argument from me here at all. The skill even says if the lie is intricate it takes longer. I use Diplomacy as an example. When you use Diplomacy to change an attitude it takes at least a minute. Using that scale, to take a lie and make it a fact in that person's mind you have to go though several steps depending on how far from fact it would be to that person. "The sky is purple" is pretty far from fact, so I wouldn't be opposed if a GM said it took 10 minutes or longer.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
DM_Blake wrote:
I would be upset if the GM just makes up rules that hearing ninjas is impossible.

You mean like saying Bluff doesn't say the target believes what you say is true?

DM_Blake wrote:

But your straw-man was pretty thin. There's a difference between my posts about a simple, everyman skill that every commoner in the game can do, and magic. I tried to show the difference with examples. There's a difference between my examples and you're straw-men: in my examples, I FOLLOW the rules. In your straw-men, your straw-GM BREAKS the rules.

That's quite a difference indeed.

Please, I am so sick of people on these forums not knowing what a logical fallacy is. In order for my statements to be a Straw-man, I would have had to say that your argument is X, and then attack X. Since I did not say your argument is X, and I did not attack your position as if it were X, it is not a straw man.

Here's something you refuse to wrap your mind around: Skills in Pathfinder can do unbelievable things. Last weekend I saw a monk roll a 100 on his acrobatics check to jump (with Haste and a Ki point). If this happened in your game, would you allow the monk to leap 100'? This is absolutely impossible to do in real life. Do you allow someone with a 35 perception to hear a bow being drawn through a 1 foot thick wall? I assume the answer is yes since it's in the rules. If you allow those skills to do unbelievable things, why do you limit Bluff to only what you believe is possible? Did you see the movie Dogma? Matt Daimon convinces a Catholic Nun that there is no God using just words in a short conversation in an airport. If you allow all these other action movie actions, like using two weapons offensively at the same time, or shooting 5 arrows a turn, or doing a standing jump of 100', why can't Bluff be used the same way?

EDIT: Oh and if your commoners can beat a 30 DC Bluff check, I'm pretty sure Bluff isn't the problem.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

This is my PFS Unchained Rogue at 9th level

Male half-elf rogue (unchained, swashbuckler) 9 (Pathfinder RPG Advanced Player's Guide 135, Pathfinder Unchained 20)
CN Medium humanoid (elf, human)
Init +10; Senses low-light vision; Perception +19
AC 31, touch 18, flat-footed 24 (+7 armor, +1 deflection, +6 Dex, +1 dodge, +2 natural, +4 shield spell)
hp 69 (9d8+21)
Fort +8, Ref +17, Will +7; +2 resistance bonus vs. disease, +2 vs. enchantments, +3 morale bonus vs. fear
Defensive Abilities evasion, improved uncanny dodge; Immune sleep; Resist daring
Speed 30 ft.
Melee +1 adamantine gladius +13/+8 (1d6+9/19-20) or
. . +1 gladius +13/+8 (1d6+5/19-20) or
. . dagger +14/+9 (1d4/19-20)
Ranged hand crossbow +14 (1d4/19-20)
Special Attacks sneak attack (unchained) +5d6
Rogue (Unchained) Spell-Like Abilities (CL 9th; concentration +7)
. . At will—minor magic
. . 4/day—major magic
Str 10, Dex 26, Con 14, Int 12, Wis 10, Cha 7
Base Atk +6; CMB +6; CMD 26
Feats Canny Tumble[ACG], Circling Mongoose, Dodge, Improved Two-weapon Fighting, Mobility, Skill Focus (Acrobatics), Spring Attack, Two-weapon Fighting, Weapon Finesse
Traits indomitable faith, reactionary
Skills Acrobatics +31, Appraise +5, Bluff +10, Climb +7, Diplomacy +2, Disable Device +22, Knowledge (dungeoneering) +13, Knowledge (local) +13, Perception +19, Sense Motive +4, Sleight of Hand +20 (+22 to conceal the ring in a search), Stealth +20, Survival +0 (+2 to avoid becoming lost), Swim +5; Racial Modifiers +2 Perception
Languages Common, Elven, Varisian
SQ debilitating injury: bewildered, debilitating injury: disoriented, debilitating injury: hampered, elf blood, rogue talents (combat trick, combat trick, fast stealth, major magic, minor magic)
Combat Gear potion of darkvision, potion of fly, potion of spider climb, potion of touch of the sea, wand of cure light wounds, caltrops; Other Gear +3 mithral shirt, +1 adamantine gladius[UC], +1 gladius[UC], crossbow bolts (30), dagger, hand crossbow, amulet of natural armor +2, belt of incredible dexterity +4, cloak of resistance +3, eyes of the eagle, ring of unquenchable passions, wayfinder[ISWG], backpack, bedroll, belt pouch, chalk (10), cold weather outfit, flint and steel, grappling hook, masterwork thieves' tools, mirror, piton (10), soap, spiritbane spike, thieves' ring, torch (5), trail rations (5), waterskin, 832 gp, 7 sp, 8 cp
Special Abilities
Canny Tumble +2 circ bon on melee atk vs. opp whose space you moved through without provoking AoO.
Circling Mongoose Move 5 ft. with each attack vs. a single adjacent foe as a full-attack action.
Cold weather outfit +5 Fort save vs. cold weather.
Daring +3 (Ex) +3 save vs. fear.
Debilitating Injury: Bewildered -2/-4 (Ex) Foe who takes sneak attack damage takes AC pen (more vs. striker) for 1 rd.
Debilitating Injury: Disoriented -2/-4 (Ex) Foe who takes sneak attack damage takes attack pen (more vs. striker) for 1 rd.
Debilitating Injury: Hampered (Ex) Foe who takes sneak attack damage has speed halved (and can't 5 ft step) for 1 rd.
Elf Blood Half-elves count as both elves and humans for any effect related to race.
Elven Immunities - Sleep You are immune to magic sleep effects.
Evasion (Ex) If you succeed at a Reflex save for half damage, you take none instead.
Fast Stealth (Ex) Move at full speed while using the Stealth skill at no penalty.
Improved Uncanny Dodge (Lv >=13) (Ex) Retain DEX bonus to AC when flat-footed. You cannot be flanked unless the attacker is Level 13+.
Low-Light Vision See twice as far as a human in low light, distinguishing color and detail.
Major Magic (Shield, 4/day) (Sp) Gain the chosen 1st-level spell as a spell-like ability.
Minor Magic (Detect Magic, At will) (Sp) Gain the chosen cantrip as a spell-like ability.
Mobility +4 to AC vs. AoO provoked by moving out of or through a threatened area.
Ring of unquenchable passions +2 resistance bonus on saving throws against disease.
Sneak Attack (Unchained) +5d6 Attacks deal extra dam if flank foe or if foe is flat-footed.
Spring Attack You can move - attack - move when attacking with a melee weapon.
Wayfinder (empty)

This is the Circling Mongoose two-weapon fighting build. I went swashbuckler archetype because of the bonuses to Acrobatics and the ability to take Combat Trick twice. This is not a simple build, and requires quite a bit of math and figuring on the fly. Building up to Circling Mongoose isn't bad, and Spring Attack is amazing because you can attack from a square an ally is already standing in (see Core Rulebook FAQ) which allows for a lot of sneak attack goodness.

I'll try to break down a combat round with Canny Tumble and Circling Mongoose, and two weapon fighting:
If you aren't adjacent to the target, you move up to them moving through a threatened square rolling Acrobatics. If you beat their CMD, they lose their DEX bonus, so you get sneak attack, and you get +2 to hit from Canny Tumble, if you don't beat their CMD, well you get +4 to AC from Mobility so hopefully they miss.

Next round, now that you are adjacent to the enemy, you combine Canny Tumble and Circling Mongoose. You take a 5' step, which provokes, so you use Acrobatics. This accomplishes the same thing as above (denied DEX for that attack, sneak attack, and +2 to hit). If you hit, yiy apply your Debilitating Injury: Bewildered (-4 to AC vs You) you take another 5' step and hit with your off-hand. You're considered Flanking, so that's +2 to hit and you get sneak attack, they are at -4 to AC from your Deb Strike. If that hits, you take another 5' step and hit with your iterative attack with the same benefits as before (+2 and sneak attack for flanking, -4 to their AC). If that hits, instead of applying your Debilitating Injury: Bewildered (-4 to AC vs You), you apply Debilitating Injury: Disoriented (-4 to hit you, -2 to hit anyone else).

This let's you pretty much get sneak attack every time you attack. If you look my Acrobatics is +31 at 9th level so I don't need much more than a 5 on the d20 to beat most CMD's, but that's with a Half-Elf's Skill Focus and a ring of unquenchable passions.

EDIT: I don't take Scout because I can get Circling Mongoose to come online at 8th with the Swashbuckler Archetype (or 9th without it) and the Scout comes online at about the same time. The trade-offs are Scouts keep their Trap abilities, Swashbuckler Archetype doesn't, but Scouts don't get full attacks with sneak attack, Circling Mongoose does.

blackbloodtroll wrote:

Nobody has posted a full caster build?

Where are the build that shape reality?

They only exist in theory crafter's heads. I find it VERY telling that Gunslingers are banned but Wizards aren't.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
DM_Blake wrote:

Put me in a world where magic works and then throw some magic spell in there with the talking, and I'll peck the ground for seed like anyone else.

But just talking?

Ain't gonna happen. Ever.

And no amount of Bluff skill can achieve something like that.

If you don't start out with something believable, you auto-fail. Period. Because you just can't talk anyone into believing something that is obviously not true unless for some reason they WANT to believe the untruth (in which case, you're really just permitting them to believe what they want to believe). All other cases of OBVIOUS untruth are auto-fail.

Fair enough, but don't get upset if you're sleeping and you make a 36 perception check to hear the ninja about to kill you and your GM says "Nope, hearing a Ninja while you're sleeping in impossible, so you're dead"

Heck while we're add it, don't get mad when the GM tells you can't shoot 4 arrows a round because that's impossible. You can't use your Manyshot feat because any kind of accuracy with two arrows on a string is impossible. Two-Weapon fighting is pretty much impossible too. Gee what a boring game.

If you want mobility, Unchained Rogue with Canny Tumble and Circling Mongoose is AMAZING.

Yes, allow it. If realism is a problem, you might be playing the wrong game. I seem to be bring this up a lot, but it is relevant. Ever seen a character with a 35 Perception? Not that difficult really. Did you know that with a 1 on a Perception check they could hear a bow being drawn through a 1 foot think wall from 10' away? That's not wonky reading of any rules. Look at the DC for perception checks: Hear a bow being drawn DC 25 through a wall +10 DC 10' away +1 DC. Is that really any more believable?

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Well, we now know that Pack Flanking is a combat feat. I'm sure the four people that effected are very happy to know that.

1 to 50 of 1,266 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2016 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.