Don't try to focus on the scarce food/water part. PF is not really set up to deal with such mundane problems in an interesting way past level 3.
Mythic characters can have mythic problems: Rampaging creatures of legend. Weird undead plagues etc.
I think the key theme of post-apocalyptic stories is rebuilding. Maybe once they gain their first mythic rank, they start accumulating the fragments of broken civilizations. At first, they have a small group they have to protect and provide for. Eventually it will grow to a thriving city and then a nation. An oasis among the wreckage.
Providing food and water for 4 Spec. Ops. guys in the forest: easy.
If you want their kingdom to live through the ages, and you want to use King-maker rules, I suggest you increase the timescale.
Erik von Oseff wrote:
that's not quite it. The sorcerer can change the spell in the ring. So by buying a spellbook, and a ring the sorcerer gains access to *all* utility spells of a given level for a partly level squared x 1500gp.
How are you dealing with misfires? With cartrages you misfire on a 1-4. With 6 attacks per round, that gives you a misfire chance of 73% per full attack. (And this is assuming that your DM is nice and lets you stop shooting in the middle of a double shot). You probobly want to trade one of those pluses for a luck enchantment. That way at least you will be able to burn grit to not blow your gun up.
The skill tax is 1 point per level. Is that really worth 6 feats? Would you make the trade in the other direction?
Though I don't want to seem like I am against the idea. I love the idea of a fighter archetype that trades some bonus feats form maneuvers. I just feel that there is a missvaluation of the maneuver feats going on, cause I would also like to be able to play a maneuvering paladin and have more than 1 feat pre level 15 :p
About the initiator feats: Now that I think about it, I feel that the way maneuvers are balanced is that you can't combine them with full attacks. In this way, a regular class (say a paladin) does not benifite excessivly from the initiator feats because he can't make full use of his smite if he gives up his full attack.
So, I think it would probobly be ok to reduce the feat chain to maybe 4 feats at 3 bab, 6 bab, 11 bab and 16 bab.
The only thing to look out for is to limit the number of boosts that these feats give access to, since most martials have no use for their swift action and that would just be free power.
This way, the fighter archetype could trade in say 6 or 8 feats for a broader range of diciplines, more stances, or the ability to learn (more?) boosts.
Also, you could then make a ranger combat style for these feats :)
About the fighter archetype: I think that if it looks fair to give the fighter the maneuver feats at a 2 to 1 rate, then the maneuver feats are overcosted. As I see it, those feats are already aimed at fighters, since most other classes cant afford to invest 6 feats in a feat chain.
So either the feats are too weak, or the archetype is too strong. My problem with the style feats (which I love) is the same. The pre-reqs are so made to expensive to limit access to the feats, but masters of many style monks and unarmed fighters get access to the styles super early, since the intent of the feats was allways that you could do cool things with them and build a character around that. The end result was, everyone who wants to use styles has to dip one of those classes.
The 10 / 03 / 13 FAQ suggests drawing an arrow 3 times is the max you can draw is a reasonable limit.
The 10 / 03 / 13 FAQ suggests drawing an arrow 3 times is the max you can draw is a reasonable limit.
Your body fights diseases and poisons differently. A disease is a micro-organizm that attempts to trick your body into ignoring it. If you your body was bad at fighting off things it had never seen, we would all be dead the next time the common cold mutated (thats every year :)) The human body is really really good at adapting to new pathogens.
A poison is a molecule that physically destroys some subsystem of your body. Your liver fights this by filtering every foreign element from your blood stream and then putting back the things you need. Its a "deny all" system that is not tricked by foreign bodies. You could drink anti-freeze (please don't) and your body will *try* to filter it.
A Fort. save represents how strong your immune system / liver is, and how well it adapts to new dangers.
Re: no crits
If twilight blades disrupt matter, would it not be worse to have your heart atoms disrupted than your arm attoms disrupted? Hence, crit.
The maneuver is not actually ranged as far as I can tell. Its a flat 20ft thats charge distance.
Also, you would presumably not have this as your primary attack mode since there are not that many maneuvers that let you throw your shield.
I think a style feat that just lets you actually *use* these maneuvers is a bad idea. It eats your style since you can only have one to give you a short range attack once per combat.
captain america never needed to pick up his shield. I mean that's at least 1 aoo. And your foe might grab your +5 shield of kick ass.
really, if you think a free bounce is too strong, just raise the level.
I am not a fan of a style feat. It basically makes the throwing maneuvers useless without a feat and feels like a patch. An analogy is if there was a rule that said "wizards lose all spell casting when they deal damage with magic." And then they make a feat that lets you not lose all magic. It becomes a tax for that type of character.
I think you should either raise the level of the throwing maneuvers if you think they are too strong, or force the initiator to spend another kind of action. Maybe its a swift action to catch the shield or something. That means you can't boost the same round. Or maybe you have to move to where it would fall.
I would really like it if it said something like: "... If the initiator hits his target with the thrown shield, the initiator's movement does not provoke attacks of opportunity from his target. If the initiator ends his turn where the shield lands, he can catch it as a free action. "
This way you can throw the shield and close the distance "behind it" to avoid AoOs from large creatures.
(I shudder to think of what would happen to capt. America if he met a monk with snatch arrows...)
Some thoughts on the shield throwing maneuvers from iron turtle. I feel these maneuvers are really cool, but they encourage weird behavior.
Clearly, they are to be used in place of a melee attack, like when You don't want to get close to target since with a range of 20 ft you could just charge the target. However, doing so disarms you of a good chunk of your AC and makes you incapable of using the entire Iron Turtle discipline. (unless you crit with a 20/x3 weapon)
So those maneuvers encourage you to carry a bunch of shields and to throw your mundane shields, which in turn makes crits less exciting.
You could let the warder catch his shield if he ends his turn adjacent to the target. Gives it a nice captain America vibe. Maybe make it so he does not provoke for moving from that enemy if he hits, but can catch the shield regardless (it functions like a boomerang if he misses.)
Someone already posted this, but I will put it up again because it is relevant.
As I understand it, undead are Evil because they hunger for the life of the living. A skeleton left alone will seek out the nearest sentient creature and destroy it. They are evil because they actively seek to extinguish all life. You know what else actively tries to extinguish all life? Daemons.
Negative energy is neutral, but when it is given agency it does things that sure look evil to us.
If in your Golarion undead don't do that, then they can be neutral.
Just looking at veiled moon maneuvers. Here is some feedback in no particular order:
I notice that you specify the save DCs in every maneuver as "DC 1X + primary initiator attribute modifier modifier." I think you should just put how saves work in the general manuever rules section like it is for spells in the CRB. You could say: "saves are always 10 + maneuver level + primary attribute modifier" You'd save like a page of printing costs :D
Swift Claws: Do I roll 2 attack rolls or do I roll only one attack and do the damage of both weapons? Since you say "attack action" Can I use this maneuver to make attack-equivalent Combat Maneuvers like trips and disarms?
Offensive roll: Does this maneuver let me move before and after my attack? is the 10 ft of movement free? I think it should be a full round action and let the initiator move his speed.
Ghost hunting blow: Shouldn't this be a boost? Or does it give you an attack as a swift action?
Formless Dance: So this grants a divination effect, should this be blocked by Mind-Blank and similar effects? If so, you need a "divination" tag of some kind.
On that note -> The various mind-effecting maneuvers are not explicitly "enchantment" effects. Thus, creatures that have bonuses vs enchantment effects won't benefit. Is this intended?
Altered Penumbra: I think you meant "minor image." Mirror images have to share space with the caster and functionally give miss-chance. Also, duration should be "1d4 rounds." Also, this should be a figment. Glamers alter an existing object, while figments create holograms.
If I am targeted by a fireball, use this counter but fail to leave the area of effect, I'm still effected, right?
Also, I like that the ability matches its flavour. You only get to teleport if your foe can't see you :D It's subjective reality.
Ethereal Reminiscence: This is looks like an out-of-combat maneuver. Can I use it out of combat? I assume that the save DC is supposed to start at DC 18 for the first initiation. However, you could read it as "+2 of every time he has initiated this maneuver *including this initiation*"
Finally, I think instead of using "in the last 24 hours" you should way "since he last rested for 8 hours." This way you would not need to keep track of when you used the maneuver in the last day. For example, say I heal at 8AM(DC18), 11AM(DC20) and 3PM(DC22) on Monday. Then when healing on tuesday, my DCs would be: 7AM(DC24), 9AM(DC24), 11PM (DC22). Not very intuitive...
Flicker Strike: This maneuver makes me happy. I can finally play Master Yi from league of legends :D
Breath of the Moon: So confusion says that, if attacked, the creature continues attacking whoever attacked it for the spells duration. You should probobly say something to the effect that the initiator does not count as having attacked the creature for this purpose. Though that may be implied...
Stance of the Ether Gate: This stance also makes me really happy :D I love teleporting and I love the Nomad-Psion ability to teleport at will. That being said, Since this stance has strong out-of-combat implications, a few thoughts: Can I take other creatures with me? Does it work with the Dimensional Agility chain of feats? That would be cool as hell and possibly a little too strong.
Vaporform Crash: Incorporeal creatures usually have no strength score and get stuff like Charisma to AC. What happens when you make a ghost or shadow corporeal? Do they lose their incorporeal touch attack?
Being incorporeal also means the initiator can't hurt anyone for 1d4 rounds. Though I suppose the force manuvers would work...
Phantom Penumbra: I think I see what you mean by mirror images. This is a strange use for that spell since there is no real target to hit. You may be better off just reproducing the relevant text. Also I this should be a figment, not a glamer. Glamers alter an existing object, while figments create holograms.
Dispersal Strike: A powerful foe dropping all their stuff is a funny image. I have never played at really high levels, so this is speculation: For an npc foe, losing all equipment is basically a death sentence. Since pathfinder has moved away from straight save-or-die effects, does that make this ability too strong?
Flashing Ether Touch: I think terminal velocity in PF is achieved after 200ft. just a flavour/rules mismatch.
Eclipsing Moon: "Each successful attack gains a +2 circumstance bonus" I assume that this is a to-hit bonus, but an attack can't be "successful" before you roll to hit.
Lunar Penumbra: Can I use this ability to cause a foe to hit himself? :D
Anchoring Spirit: I feel that it should be possible to overcome the teleportation restriction with an opposed initiator / caster level check. Otherwise, you've shutdown almost the whole veiled moon discipline. Also, what happens when two disciples both enter this stance?
Banish to the Beyond and a general though to incorporeality / ethereal plane shenanigans: You should clarify your cosmology. Does being on the ethereal plane make me incorporeal? I seem to recall that force effect function from the material to the ethereal but not vice-versa. Its unclear to me how being incorporeal and/or ethereal interact.
Also, specific to Banish to the Beyond: How does this ability work if you use it while you are on an outer plane?
This is also a problem for a large chunk of Veiled Moon. Isn't the ethereal plane only accessible from the material plane?
</wall of text>
My personal favorite is Efreeti Touch Your fist creates a cone of fire!
You can get it early with Master of Many Styles, or have the fire do more damage with Monk of the Four Winds.
In theory, those two archetypes don't mix, but that's only because they both replace the cap-stone. If you are really only going to be using a couple of styles, you can try to convince your GM to let you stack them anyway.
Iron Bulwark sounds too descriptive to me. Its sort of like calling your discipline "shield fighting." I like the names like "Scarlet Throne" because they are a little whimsical. How about "Dancing Mountain" or "Iron Tower"?
For unarmed combat, it would depend on what other theme the unarmed combat uses. If its mostly about punches, kicks or throws or what not. How about "Subtle Hand" or "Ursine Roar"
Orfamay Quest wrote:
Orfamay is right. You give him exp for this, and you will get everyone trying to run solo encounters. His reward was being awesome for 20 rounds of combat that session.
What was the guy that was watching the rogue doing during this combat? Why did he not help?
Ok, fine :D
I think the only problem is that you can re-apply the daze. I think I would be fine with it if it was limited to once per target per spell. I think if you squint a little, you can read Dazing Spell to mean that :p
Once you do that, I don't think its very different from a maximized empowered dazing fireball. You trade focus, for more targets and more damage, which is fine
I don't usually play at high-levels, so I did not notice the lantern archon bit.
Thinking about it, dazing spell is silly because you can throw a dazing spell every round, and the effect lasts multiple rounds. It really needs a rider of "A creature that (saves against/is affected by) your dazing spell, can not be dazed by this metamagic feat for 24 hours.
Not sure which condition should grant immunity, but something like that.
You know, I'd be ok with Dazing spell working on summon monster. I mean, you are summoning a critter that is 3 spell levels behind you. It won't hit anything. And sure, you can lower the modifier with those two traits, but that's a problem with stacking traits that shouldn't.
Even with spell perfection, you can only cast summon monster 6. At level 15, I don't think that's going to be over-powered.
This is starting to sound like "but I have an invulnurability piercer proof invulnurability shield!"
also, your fireball does nothing against a pile of level 2 warriors and a level 1 cleric. Half the warriors pass the save, feed the cleric a potion, and then he channels to heal.
or the warriors spread out and take cover. For a +3 total to their save. You will hit 5 or 6 guys, and they wont even go down. Then the cleric heals them.
also, towershields stop fireballs, since bursts don't go around cover.
I am playing a cryonamcer sorcerer in kingmaker. Some suggestions:
Mages tattoo is a great investment, as is tattoo sorcerer.
Spell Specialization is the most bonkers feat ever.
The spell Windy Escape is great for low-level survivability.
Burning arc(Freezing arc for my sorc) Has been my main damaging spell from level 3 to level 7 (where we are at right now) It is better than fireball, since it is easier to target and has the same damage cap.
Get at least one good +1 meta-magic feat, so that you can use your upper level slots efficiently. You can get mostly utility in your level 3 slots and still use them to throw out burning arcs when you need to.
For a pyromancer, I would suggest either Reach Spell, Focused Spell or Elemental spell. Reach helps with Burning arc's short range, Focused spell gives more save DC and Elemental spell helps with resistant creatures.
In theory, since elemental spell does not modify the spells descriptors, you can still apply the draconic bloodline arcana to your icy-fire spell :D
Also, the draconic bloodline is my favorite for blasting. At level 6, my sorc was routinely throwing out 40 damage freezing arcs.
Some things I noticed after a quick read-through:
Body of Night (stance): This is a huge boost to stealth. This moves dedicated stealthers from "hard to spot" to "invisible." You may consider making the stance give you a competence bonus instead of an untyped bonus. That way, at least it won't stack with the cloak of elvenkind.
Greater unarmed strike: Why is the list in reference to small creatures? Medium is usually the standard, but you can just list both.
Lightning recovery: It says that you can recover counters as an immediate action, but using a counter is an immediate action, so you can never do that. I am also not sure if using a swift (for boosts) action and an immediate action on the same turn is allowed. The feat is already limited per encounter, you might as well let it be used as a free action.
That being said, I would limit this feat to maneuvers lower than your max level. That way, it becomes a utility ability rather than a way to just boost DPR. I don't think you want someone to take this multiple times and just spam their strongest maneuver all combat.
The martial training feats: They seem interesting. I think if I was building a character I cound use them either to get a bunch of boosts and counters to augment your regular abilities, or get strikes and build a vital-striker type character.
You may want to make the BaB pre-reqs either all odd, so that a non-fighter can pick these up when he gains feat-levels or all even, if you want to make them more fighter friendly. Having them available every 3 levels feels weird and does not really match any progression.
The only problem I see is that martial stances are much better than other feats. You may want to deffer getting a stance to martial training 2. For example, Inner Sphere Stance gives +2 AC and +2 to will saves. To a fighter-type(That uses TWF) that is way better than iron will, and most fighter-types take iron will.
Inner/Outer Sphere Stance: Does this work with unarmed strikes? What if I am wielding a longsword in one hand? Can I say that my other hand is "wielding" an unarmed strike? What If I never attack with my off hand? What if I don't even have Imp. Unarmed strike? What if I don't have TWF?
Deadly Strike: I agree with Alice Margatroid. I feel this ability is very situational and pigeonholes the stalker into high-crit weapons. What if the damage scaled based on the weapon's crit multiplier? Then the ki-based boost would be nicer with high-mult weapons and it would create an interesting choice. I want to see more people wielding scythes and picks :D
I really wish I was starting a new character... I want to play the martial adepts so bad :)
Fun fact, the C standard library has that problem. We tested it in a compsci class by generating bits and casting the result to a bitmap. Use the unix syscall to get random numbers. Its better written :)
All I will add is that if the warlord was really meant to be optimized it would focus on maneuver recovery through charging and dropping enemies to 0hp instead of investing feats on bull rush (which sucks) and using a keen nodachi instead of a greatsword. Dropping int to 0 will also add some fighting power and, finally make him a heaven born aasimar instead of human (he really does not need the feats) for better str and cha. Then you should compare it to the optimized (thou not fully) barbarians posted. But again, the point was not to create the strongest damn character possible, but to show an average non optimized warlord vs a non optimized barbarian and se how one outperformed the other in most areas.
I'm not actually sure that makes it better. Your damage comes from maneuver adds, not crits, so the nodachi actually lowers your damage. Also, the quick bull rush is actually pretty good when you can full attack, since it provokes and gives you a free attack (Interestingly, that AoO would benifite from Furious Focus :p)
The heaven-born assimar is nice, but does not fit every campaign. In any case, I'd rather save a feat-slot for iron will, or what ever martial maneuver feats will be in paths of war.
Also, if you are fighting enemies that you can drop in one round, you don't really need to recover maneuvers.
We are not getting into a char-op competition, (or at least I was not). I just wanted to see a meaningful comparison between two characters that might actually see play. I made a barbarian because I thought that I, personally, would not have built the barbarian the way you did.