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

Kyoni's page

Pathfinder Society Member. 431 posts. No reviews. 1 list. No wishlists. 3 Pathfinder Society characters.


1 to 50 of 431 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>

You might also consider the witch... She's a full arcane class and she can help a bit with healing if your party really needs it. The debuffs are wonderful, just pick your hexes carefully.

Just out of curiosity... you said most enemies/npcs/monsters gang up on the fighter because he rushes in first.

Could you change the terrain/situation to make sure your enemies are actually targeting other team members from time to time?

How many enemies do they fight on average? Do they fight small groups as well as larger groups of foes? (Single enemies are always a bad thing, imho)

actually I was talking about this


Table: Called Shot Locations

Location Type Penalty
Head Tricky -5
- Ear Challenging -10
- Eye Challenging -10
- Neck Challenging -10
Chest Easy -2
- Heart Challenging -10
Vitals Tricky -5
Arm Easy -2
- Hand Tricky -5
Leg Easy -2

According to that table targeting a hand should get a -5 to attack rolls... seems about right for targeting a light weapon in your opponents grasp. I thought your gaming group might use this as a guideline to target specific body parts. You don't have to introduce the full Called Shot rules. ;-)

This might be helpful:
Called Shots

Diego Rossi wrote:

"Targeting" in Pathfinder has several meaning. In this instance it mean both "selecting the object that will be hurled by the spell", an action that require no attack roll of any kind, and selecting the target that will be attacked by the spell. Again, selecting the second target don't require any attack roll. It is the act of attacking that require the attack roll. Refer to the"Aiming a spell" section of the magic chapter.

As written this spell can select any object as a target, regardless of it being in the hand or possession of someone, and hurl it away against another target. A ranged disarm without check against the target CMD is awfully good for a cantrip, even if limited to object that weight 5 lbs or less. There is only 1 non exotic one handed weapon weighting more than 5 lbs, the battleaxe. Add wands, potions, scrolls and other stuff and you have a extremely potent spell if you don't limit its ability to items that you "control" when you cast it.

.... ok your understanding of the spell is very different from everybody else, but a very interesting POV :-)

Most understand that you cannot disarm/steal with it and that picking up the object is "free" since it has to be unattended (spell that allow disarms/steal say so explicitly and explain what attributes you use).

I guess I'll ask DMs before every PFS game how they understand this spell as people don't agree about the possibilities/limitations of this spell.

thanks :-)

shadowkras wrote:
any ranged weapon will be better than this spell (this has been noted in pretty much every guide/advice I found about this spell)

Except that you don't need to carry a weapon around. You are always armed. There are other "uses" for spells other than direct combat.

Also, you cannot be disarmed or sundered, it has no ammo problem, and all you have to worry about is that your object has enough hardness and your targets don't have some type of "melts objects when hit" ability.

You still have the ammo problem: you need an object to hurl against your target. Picking up stones works for slings, too.

If your DM is picky, he will ask you to make Perception checks to find that grain of sand/dust (imho a very cheesy way to get around the "you need an object to hurl at your target"... the spell description says it requires an object to be hurled).

You are not "always armed": It's a ranged attack and a standard action to cast, provoking AoO if not casting defensively. You don't get to make AoO with this.
Any readying your action can be done with spells and ranged weapons... no advantage either.

How often do you get disarmed/sundered with ranged weapons, but not disrupted while casting a spell in that same spot? Especially since you get a -10 to concentration checks? unless you waste a move action?

Psychic Magic Rules wrote:
Thought components are so mentally demanding that they make interruptions and distractions extremely challenging. The DC for any concentration check for a spell with a thought component increases by 10. A psychic spellcaster casting a spell with a thought component can take a move action before beginning to cast the spell to center herself; she can then use the normal DC instead of the increased DC.


Plausible Pseudonym wrote:
I get -4 for target in combat, where's the other -4 coming from? Why aren't touch attacks suffering this as well? I don't know ranged rules very well.

-4 for firing a ranged weapon into melee combat and another -4 for your target having cover

ranged touch suffers this as well, but most monsters have way less touch AC (natural armor, armor/shield AC, ...), that makes up for the big malus

Your DM will have to DM-fiat whether cover applies from your position or from the position of the object or both, the spell doesn't say.

Plausible Pseudonym wrote:
It's pretty bizarre to me that you're worried about contributing levels 1-3 in combat by firing any cantrip into melee combat when you're a 3/4 BAB d8. Maybe just use melee and set up a flank?

I was trying to understand the PFS ruling of this spell.

I guess I was hoping the class guides to be wrong about this spell being "bad" as it sounded cool at first, but until the Devs decide to errata that spell for more clarity, there are better cantrips to pick for PFS games.

Ok, answering a buch of things here:

@Diego Rossi
I rarely use cantrips beyond level 3-4 in regular APs... not sure about PFS, but then I rarely see disarm builds sitting with me at the table, so this cantrip just got super-situational.
Lots of enemies are DR/something, even at level 1, thus this Cantrip wont do anything to them. Acid Splash is Energy damage and you only need to hit touch AC. -8 to your attack is huge at levels 1-2 when you don't have Precise Shot yet.

If you mean "are you targeting the object you flying" (and so you have to see or touch it), probably yes. I would say that you must touch the object you are hurling, the spell is very similar to Hand of the Apprentice.

Wait... you say I need to roll a first ranged attack check to "pick up the item", the roll another ranged attack check to hit the destination target with the item??? I hope I understood you wrong...?

Sure, a crossbow weights more... but even a simple sling is actually better since you can boost it with [material] bullets and enhance it magically (bypass many DR/[whatever]). Maybe a Psychic would dump his str below 10... but my Psychic Detective will not. I am trying to figure out how to be useful at levels 1-3 in a PFS fight (encountering your average mix of PFS encounters with resistances even a level 1).
In other words: what would I need to do, to not be carried through the first dozen scenarios I'll be playing in PFS?

Hurling stuff around certainly gets the bonus of "cool" but I could just sling bullets at that guy. That 1d6 bludgeoning still needs to hit full AC, Acid Splash targets touch AC (usually a lot lower, so you don't mind that -8 too much). And this still leaves the problem of DR/xy that you encounter even at level 1 in PFS scenarios.

In the end I still don't see any good reason for a Psychic or an Investigator to get this cantrip at levels 1-3 in a PFS game.
Targeting full AC with a -8 modifier, for classes that have no reason to get the Point-Blank & Precise Shot feat chain, that's very disappointing.
Psychic uses the bad BAB progression so I wouldn't get the Precise Shot feat chain with him, there's better feats to get out there.
Investigator focuses on melee combat after level 3-4, so there's no point in wasting two feats a low levels just to make Telekinetic Projectile "worthwhile"...

All damage from a kinetic blast is treated as magic for the purpose of bypassing damage reduction.

so the Telekinetic Blast (a kinetic blast wild talent) counts as magical... no matter what object you hurl and no matter what enhancements that potential hurled weapon might have.

Does that mean Telekinetic Projectile bypasses DR/magic? It should if people say Telekinetic Projectile is the watered-down version of Telekinetic Blast...
In that case, I now have an "at-will" magical weapon with no enhancement modifier... that would be "ok": I can now use it vs DR/magic monsters and incorporeal monsters (half damage), that's something.

Bane Wraith wrote:
Holding a touch spell, you are still able to accidentally discharging the spell by touching anything. Defensive Shock's description does not seem to help the matter either, having no wording one way or another to suggest the touch needs to be initiated a certain way... Can you possibly come up with something more concrete?

You can only discharge a touch spell when you touch something/somebody, whether on purpose or by accident. If somebody touches you, the charge doesn't go off: it's not about intent, it's about who initiates the touching.

You can't "rub yourself" on your enemy to trigger Defensive Shock on them.

You could push somebody into a trap (Node of Blasting, classic old pit, ...) and his movement (forced, but still his movement) would then trigger the trap.

Beguiling Gift is another good example for this consistent Pathfinder rule.

pH unbalanced wrote:
Is there a good way for a Rogue to get access to this? It wouldn't be bad with Sneak Attack dice added on.

can rogues get it? sure... it's a spell and you can get it via minor magic talent

bigger question: can you use it with sneak attacks?
I'd say no for flanking/surprising
If the enemy lost his dex to AC (blind?), maybe
The sneak attacking would be very much DM-fiat...

But I still don't see why a rogue would want to waste a talent/feat on that cantrip instead of getting proficiency in a good ranged weapon that can have magical enhancements and be made of special materials.
If you really want a rogue with minor magic, I still think Acid Splash is better.

Plausible Pseudonym wrote:
The reason to take it is Psychics don't get any better damaging cantrips and you can use it without having to buy, hold, or smuggle past the guards an otherwise superior basic ranged weapon. Hold a melee weapon (and maybe a shield), use your move action and this from range. That's not strictly inferior to a crossbow in all situations.

Hiding a sling and a handful of "metal marbles" shouldn't be too hard for a sneaky character.

If having an undetectable ranged option is a must, get this trait...?

Pathfinder Companion: Sargava, the Lost Colony. wrote:

Two-World Magic

Benefit: Select one 0-level spell from a class spell list other than your own. This spell is a 0-level spell on your class spell list (or a 1st-level spell if your class doesn't have 0-level spells). For example, if you are a druid, you could select mage hand and thereafter prepare it as a 0-level druid spell; if you are a sorcerer, you could select know direction as a 0-level sorcerer spell known.

Ok so let's try to compare things...

Acid Splash (cantrip)
deals 1d3 acid damage on a ranged touch

Elemental Ray (sorcerer level 1 power)
deals 1d6 + half sorcerer level acid damage on a ranged touch

Telekinetic Projectile (cantrip)
deals 1d6 bludgeoning damage on a ranged attack (potentially with a -8 to hit vs enemies with cover and fighting in melee)

Telekinetic Blast (kineticist level 1 power... finally found it)
deals half kineticist d6 + loads of extra damage (half level and con/str) on a ranged attack and you can throw heavier items at higher levels, too...
On top, the last sentence from that blast thingy seems to indicate you can use splash weapons at full effect (but don't get your "blast damage" as a downside):

Alternatively, you can loosen the strands of aether in order to deal damage to both the object and the target as though you had thrown the object yourself (instead of dealing your normal blast damage).

So... as Onyx Tanuki put it: Telekinetic Projectile would be a very crappy Telekinetic Blast... no real reason to ever take this cantrip unless it's for fluff.

This detail is interesting:

All damage from a kinetic blast is treated as magic for the purpose of bypassing damage reduction.

so the Telekinetic Blast (a kinetic blast wild talent) counts as magical... no matter what object you hurl and no matter what enhancements that potential hurled weapon might have.

Does that mean Telekinetic Projectile bypasses DR/magic? It should if people say Telekinetic Projectile is the watered-down version of Telekinetic Blast.

Dave Justus wrote:
X touching Y is the same as X touching X

As per the ruling about holding charges of touch spells and other spells like Defensive Shock, it does matter who is initiating the "touch" and who is recieving it.

WilliamD763 wrote:
Kyoni wrote:
Unless you are crazy enough to allow this spell vs enemy-held objects... (it doesn't say anything in the spell after all and I should not read stuff into it?)? but that is way stronger than any cantrip should be (steal maneuver for free).

Dunno if enemy-held objects (or even just objects on another being, like their helmet) would be allowed, but since the spell description doesn't mention that the object needs to start in your possession, I can see a situation where I might actually use this spell.

Seems perfectly reasonable that if the starting point and ending point are both within the range of the spell and the object is unattended, that it should work.

So, say you have a party member who specializes in disarming opponents, if you are next up in initiative order, you can make sure the opponent probably doesn't retrieve the weapon on his/her turn by flinging it at another opponent (or even a wall or other object) to make sure the weapon is no longer near the opponent.

Of course, this won't work for most two handed weapons or crossbows due to the weight restriction.

And you can do exactly that with Mage Hand... they both have the same weight restriction. With Mage Hand you could actually hover the item in front of one of your buddies to grab and use it.

Charon's Little Helper wrote:
(And your buddies only get 1 extra round - not 2.)

normal round + extra round = 2 consecutive "party actions" while enemies are not attacking ;-)

Charon's Little Helper wrote:
Kyoni wrote:

Also, what will you say when you get a witch in your party putting nearly everything not immune to mind-stuff asleep with a super-hard will save (no HD limits for the witch hex)?

I will say - that one's effectiveness seems to be overstated. If the GM doesn't do the single foe encounters, a mook can come over and wake them up without any problems.

Still handy since you knocked them down, and used up actions of both the target and a mook, but unless you have an ally who is already next to them and ready to CDG who is next in the initiative, it's rarely deadly.

You killed a full round of actions for the bbeg and the mook... the other party members just got 2 rounds to mop the floor with those 2 guys. Action economy is everything in pathfinder: We once had a group with a divination wizard and most of the group had the "Lookout" teamwork feat... give 2 of the "lookout" people decent perception and the DM will dread surprise rounds. HRHR

KingOfAnything wrote:

It's only confusing when you start trying to read so much into it. Let it be simple, and it is.

It does exactly what it says. You can't game any extra or special effects from what you throw. If you throw things with hardness 6 or better, they won't break.

Except in that case nobody will ever use it:

any ranged weapon will be better than this spell (this has been noted in pretty much every guide/advice I found about this spell)

Acid Splash and the other cantrips have their reason to exist (elemental damage, touch AC, but less total damage) vs normal ranged weapons.
Telekinetic Projectile becomes useless even for a 1st level character: even a crappy sling (arguably the worst ranged weapon) is still going to be better (magical ammunition/material/...).
Sure, the spell has a "builtin" mage hand, but the real mage hand doesn't destroy scrolls/wands/potions when moving objects.

So yes... by your interpretation, I'm better off with the mage hand cantrip and a nice ranged weapon (Investigators get shortbows and crossbows on top of slings).

Unless you are crazy enough to allow this spell vs enemy-held objects... (it doesn't say anything in the spell after all and I should not read stuff into it?)? but that is way stronger than any cantrip should be (steal maneuver for free).

Charon's Little Helper wrote:
Diachronos wrote:

He was wrecking almost everything he touched. Swashbucklers tend to do that when they're adding their level to each attack's damage.

Ummm... if you think that Swashbucklers have crazy damage, you haven't run into true DPR builds. They get that damage/level to make sword & board without TWF solid. Heck, at level 7+ samurai basically get the same (with Chain Challenge) only it's not precision damage, can be multiplied on a crit, and can be used with any combat style. (They can churn out pretty crazy damage with TWF.)

Swashbucklers are fun (when they don't run into saving throws which wreck their day) but they're hardly OP.

I have to agree with Charon's here... get a Magus in your group using a rapier. Then wait for the keen rapier to critical (on a 15-20 roll, thats almost every 3rd hit) with shocking grasp: 2d6 + 10d6 ... with intensified metamagic shenanigans? 2d6 + 20d6... that's the damage of a magus at level 5!

Also, what will you say when you get a witch in your party putting nearly everything not immune to mind-stuff asleep with a super-hard will save (no HD limits for the witch hex)?

Players that take away the fun of the group should probably be left out of some game nights to help them realize how un-fun it is to be left out.
Also unless I'm mistaking, much of the Swashbuckler damage is precision damage? so most elementals and constructs are immune to it? Hogging the spotlight should mean that foes prepare for his tactics as they'll know about him and what to expect from him.

KingOfAnything wrote:
Kyoni wrote:

It means the hurled object does not get it's hardness applied to resist its own damage... after all, if it's the [force] that does the 1d6 points of damage, why should a piece of paper take more damage than the rock of adamantine, when both deal the same amount of damage to the target?

why would a piece of paper end up shredded while metal is unscratched if both get "surrounded with a TK field"?

Because hardness applies to both physical and energy damage? and [force] is a type of energy damage?

It is basically a mini-Telekinetic Blast. Almost exactly a mini blast. It is not a [force] effect, it is a psychic/aether effect.

Ok and if it's not physical nor energy... what is it? how does untyped damage work here?

Energy damage depends on the material:

Rules wrote:

Energy Attacks
Energy attacks deal half damage to most objects. Divide the damage by 2 before applying the object's hardness. Some energy types might be particularly effective against certain objects, subject to GM discretion. For example, fire might do full damage against parchment, cloth, and other objects that burn easily. Sonic might do full damage against glass and crystal objects.

I guess my regular group (non-PFS) houseruled it "wrong": wooden door didn't get any hardness nor half damage vs fire attacks.

And whether force is particularly effective...? I have no idea how PFS rules this one, TBH (I'll have to look that up). For us [force] worked full-strength vs pretty much every material.

Imho it's bad to compare Telekinesis (I couldn't find Telekinetic Blast) with Telekinetic Projectile, transmutation vs evocation is a big difference here, and the hurled object doesn't take any damage with Telekinesis.
Telekinetic Volley is much like the "Violent Thrust" use of Telekinesis... also a transmutation spell and no damage to the hurled object.

So... in many ways Telekinetic Projectile doesn't make sense, compared to supposedly similar spells.

In closing: I think Telekinetic Projectile needs a full rewrite, because this is just soooo confusing.
It would be a shame to ban it from PFS (especially since Psychic Detective could really need a nice combat thingy to gap the first 3-4 levels), but right now I guess it just needs too much DM interpretation/house-ruling.

Many people use this TK force image... however [force] has a huge side-effect, imho:
It gives the spell an implicit [force] descriptor... and that would open another nasty can of worms.

It means the hurled object does not get it's hardness applied to resist its own damage... after all, if it's the [force] that does the 1d6 points of damage, why should a piece of paper take more damage than the rock of adamantine, when both deal the same amount of damage to the target?
why would a piece of paper end up shredded while metal is unscratched if both get "surrounded with a TK field"?

As the spell clearly does not have the [force] descriptor, I disagree with "TK force" effect/field.

Diachronos wrote:

I have one person in my group who's insisting that "feinting is bull$#!@" because it allowed the rogues the party was fighting to seriously injure his swashbuckler with sneak attacks despite the swashbuckler having improved uncanny dodge, and those sneak attacks contributed to his death later in the fight.

Granted, I may have gone a little overboard with the rogues' feinting ability because I'd gotten tired of how obnoxious he was being about how his character was untouchable...

Sooo... you changed an encounter because you were mad and got the player's character killed? that's kinda sad....?

If he was so untouchable (armor class?)... how hard was he hitting? how good were his will saves?
And why not just tell him OOC that his obnoxious behavior is killing your fun of DMing this group? After all we are all playing/DMing to have fun with friends and nice people?

Cheating on monster saves or having more monsters pop up out of the blue just to drive home the point that you are the all-powerful DM, is a surefire way to annoy your players. A DM, by definition is all-powerful because (s)he is _the DM_.

I think there are 2 strategy basics, a DM should always remember:

- action economy
if you are sending in your BBEG alone, he won't stand a chance, 4vs1... simple math
make this 4 players vs 1 BBEG + 2 lieutnant + 5 mooks and that fight looks a lot better
another important thing is surprise rounds

- magic is part of the world
while not all humanoids might know how to throw fireballs themselves, most of them will know the average radius of an average AoE spell... that is general battle tactics 1-0-1, even goblins/kobolds/you-name-it will know that huddling up is a great way to tempt a wizard into "burning hands" this nice little "pack"
even wolves in real life always try to surround their prey, and they are not "smart" by roleplaying standards (animal intelligence), so why can't a simple tribe of golbins not do the same

as the existence of magic is common knowledge, so is the fact that armor hinders arcane magic and divine magic requires a holy symbol/focus of some kind...
a cloth-wearing humanoid is probably vulnerable to fortitude spells (rogueish or wizardish), a metal-wearing humanoid is probably vulnerable to reflex spells (clericish or fighterish, wearing heavy armor usually indicates low dex, too)
Physical attributes (str, dex, con) should be visible (even under the armor): guy has large shoulders, there's a good chance he's strong, moves with grace of a feline, probably high dex, rosy cheeky and looks "tough" indicates high constitution. People who have seen their fair share of fights should notice such things in the blink of an eye.

Now if your players then decide to mix their armor up to confuse their foes, that's a clever way to disguise, reward them for outsmarting their enemies :-)

My opinion: as long as everybody get some time to shine with their specialty I don't see a problem. We actually had a DM with my regular group that got voted to not DM any more: he felt like it was necessary that every encounter ends with the players near 0 hitpoints and he often "cheated" encounters just because he thought it would be more challenging... for us players it was actually less fun and more tedious because we didn't feel like we got rewarded for clever planning and we ended up near death all the time, no matter how smart or stupid we acted (when we acted stupid as a result, that DM would cheat the encounter to save us from death-by-stupidity, making these games even less fun). Smart teamwork should be rewarded, not punished.

So my big question to you: are your players having fun or do they think all encounters are too easy no matter what? are you unhappy because you never ever get a single encounter that seems to be partially challenging?

Another interesting question would be: can you manipulate "ghost touch" items with it and hit ethereal creatures with it?

that could fall under the "magic item" exclusion, however an item considered to exist on the material and ethereal plane should affect incorporeal creatures: you are hurling a "dual-plane" object at them...?

3 people marked this as FAQ candidate.


I've been unable to find any PFS "official" Ruling about the Spell "Telekinetic Projectile".

Spell Details:

deal 1d6 points of bludgeoning damage to both the target and the object. The type of object thrown doesn't change the damage type or any other properties of the attack, even if you throw a weapon or magic item in this way.

Obviously, hurling a weapon with this spell does not change the bludgeoning to slashing/piercing (aka damage types), nor does this apply any magical weapon enchantments. This one is obvious.

Less clear is whether hurling cold-iron/silver/mithral/adamantine objects will bypass resistances of monsters?
-> Reading up various feats/spells that alter "damage type", "type" always seems to refer to slash/pierce/bludgeon only.
-> The spell "Versatile Weapon" ( hints that the material is considered a "physical property of a weapon" (thus a "property of the attack"?)... so one could say that the material of the object is irrelevant and does not bypass any DR the target has.
However in that case it should also mean that the 1d6 damage taken by the hurled object does not take it's material-related hardness into account (adamantine?): the hurled object (but not the target) would take the "full" 1d6 points of damage, even if you are hurling a lump of adamantine? If you ignore the object's material for target damage you'll have to ignore it for "source damage", imho you cannot have the "best" of both worlds (arguably).
This means you could potentially smash adamantine weapons (or magical items) of enemies into pieces? (after disarm of course, I firmly believe this spell should only work on unattended objects)

Not clear at all is what happens when hurling splash weapons?
You are hurling a glass bottle... the fact that it holds chemical liquids is (imho) totally unrelated (but very relevant). As such, the content of the bottle should be treated independently (after all you are required to hit full AC, not just touch AC with this spell) -> when the bottle breaks, the chemial content should do it's own full effect?

If I missed something important on my google-fu while searching for my answers, please do tell me. :-)

PS: I really need a PFS answer, this is important for my PFS Psychic Detective. :-)

Hexcrafter Magus specializing in weakening the enemy (spell-combat with a major curse or black spot? yessss).

Inquisitor of Cayden Cailean (great fun as a "Rock Stepper" dwarf): "Stupidity does not equal bravery, and bravery should never be sought at the bottom of a keg."
Combine the racial feature "Stubborn" with the Spellbreaker's "Strong-Willed" for more thick-headedness. ;-)

So.... you are telling us that a single normal bee would be able to lift a giant because encumbrance/armor rules don't apply to flying in Pathfinder rules?

In general you need to be one size smaller then your mount (as per the mount rules).

And I'd say that lifting a creature ("kidnapping style") requires a successful grapple (even if the creature is willing) to show that you get a good grip on that which you want to carry away (you are basically rolling grapple vs gravity).

With just these two, you limit quite a bit of nonsense. ;-)

nate lange wrote:
@kyoni- i know its not a strong build (i keep saying its not a strong build), but the OP asked for it so i'm trying to generate a build that won't be a total anchor (instead of just telling him to change his mind)... its like when someone asks for a rogue build: plenty of people point out that you'd be better off with a vivisectionist (which is basically what you've done), which while true may not be what they want- so i'm the crazy guy trying to figure out how to build a rogue worth playing... or, in this case, a magus/MT worth playing.
Cyrad wrote:

My character being a guardian of an ancient library, she's more likely to create magical traps and cast utility spells rather than drop stink bombs and throw fireballs. I slowly realized that most of the spells that would interest her are strictly divine spells.

My GM being an incredibly awesome guy, I'm now considering reworking her as a magus mystic theurge.

I'm fairly certain that giving the OP a list of traps/runes/and utility spells from the wizard list and how to access them, was an appropriate answer.

The idea of mystic theurge was a bad one and the OP finally agreed to drop that idea.
Telling someone how to do a mystic theurge that the OP will regret after a few gaming sessions is not doing him a favor.

But I don't believe in class names /class feature names anyways, if that concept/idea was better served by being an arcane duelist (bard) for various reasons, then I suggest it (and I did).

nate lange wrote:

like i said, its not optimal... it isn't quite dead weight either though.

round 1: use a swift action for extra +2 enhance on weapon (i know magus can do that too, but we're aiming for the fighter's +11...), cast divine favor, and move to set up a flank for next round [now up to +10, +6 base plus +2 extra enhance and +2 luck]
round 2: cast haste with spell combat, 5' step into flank, full attack [flank balances spell combat penalty; haste bonus puts you at +11, matching full BAB's normal bonus- plus you've buffed everyone else]
round 3: if party needs more buffs cast aid and full attack, if not cast shocking grasp and full attack with spellstrike.

its not the dpr that a straight class magus can kick out (obviously), but if its what he wants to play its not a worthless/unworkable build.

Except you could have given haste to your group with a straight magus just fine... I don't see what cool buffs your cleric levels add for that group, that they don't already get... unless you swap divine favor for prayer, and to me flanking does not count because everyone, even the fighter would want this, to hit more reliably anyways.

suggested Monster AC for CR level 11 is 25... that is +-0 partylevel vs. monsterCR average AC (thus not supposed to be very hard)

nate lange wrote:
spell combat will be more useful for cleric spells since it will let you get off self/party buffs and still be able to attack; spell strike could be fun with the inflict spells (as you mentioned), bestow curse, or poison- or (if you happen to have Close Range) things like the alignment based smites, searing light, and spit venom, but clearly won't be a game changer.

what party buffs? you didn't use any (haste is available to magus , too)... by the end of round 3, most fights should already be "under control".

your problem with inflict/bestow curse/poison/... will be your low caster level and wisdom, all those require saving throws.
- you have to hit AC ~25 with your +11 (and I don't see how your iterative hits are going to hurt anyone thus making full attacks pointless, you are better off trying to stay out of harm's way with your lower hitpoints)
- you have to get through saving throws where monsters have a +14 or +10 to their save (good luck, you'll need it)
- and you might have to pierce spell resistance on top of that!

Cyrad wrote:
Glyph of Warding really appeals to me

Rune of Warding

School abjuration; Level sorcerer/wizard 3
They function as a glyph of warding (blast glyph), though unlike a glyph of warding, these runes are always visible.

enjoy :-D


the big problem is: magi live and die with spell strike / spell combat...
that means:
- having enough attack bonus to hit your enemy (you are not targeting touch AC here)
- having enough int to beat saving throws on a reliable basis
- having enough caster levels to bypass spell resistance

you'll notice that most mystic theurge builds try to compensate those by either picking spells that don't require these (especially attack rolls):
buffing, summoning, ...
or builds that specifically make up for the lack of caster levels with traits like magic knack (+2 CasterLvl), however you can only get magical knack OR magical lineage (which is a staple for magi: intensified shocking grasp)

so while this wont be too hard on "lower" levels (7-12), by level 14-15 this will become really tough!

magus6/cleric1(check if your DM allows this first, though)/mystic theurge5, means a BAB of 4+0+2=6 at level 11...
at this level a straight magus has a BAB of 8 and a fighter a BAB of 11

thanks to class features and spells a magus can actually bump his attack bonus to fighter-levels and higher quite easily
(+3 from arcane pool buff as a swift action and he gets magic weapon and haste from his class spell list, on top)

@nate: not taking weapon enchantments into account (which a magus can have too), what cleric-features/spells do you suggest to get those missing +5 BAB back? (1-3 level cleric spells only)

- bless only gives +1 morale or
// aid +1 morale (and some sorely needed hitpoint)
- prayer +1 luck or
// divine favor +2 luck (for being caster level 6 on the cleric side)

also the mystic theurges low hit dice (d6) would put you at serious risk on that front line

better be a straight bard in this case

also, what cleric spells would you suggest using with broad study spell combat/spellstrike? other then "inflict" spells, I don't see anything interesting at first glance?

Move action or part of movement (as per drawing weapons) maybe quicker if you have "quick draw"? But that requires a nice DM.

I advise against the cleric-multiclassing or mystic theurge.

If all you really want is some extra spells that grant you trap-like runes, wards and such:

Alarm - Wards an area for 2 hours/level.
Arcane Lock - Magically locks a portal or chest.
Create Pit - Creates an extradimensional pit.
Web - Fills 20-ft.-radius spread with sticky spiderwebs that can grapple foes and impair movement.
Explosive Runes - Deals 6d6 damage when read.
Sepia Snake Sigil - Creates text symbol that immobilizes reader.
Spiked Pit - As create pit, but filled with spikes.

all of these are on the wizard spell list and you can gain all of these through the magus arcana:

Spell Blending (Ex)
Benefit: When a magus selects this arcana, he must select one spell from the wizard spell list that is of a magus spell level he can cast. He adds this spell to his spellbook and list of magus spells known as a magus spell of its wizard spell level. He can instead select two spells to add in this way, but both must be at least one level lower than the highest-level magus spell he can cast.
Special: A magus can select this magus arcana more than once.

No need to multiclass into anything divine... what specific cleric spells did you have in mind that you absolutely want? because if you are out for bless and such, then you are better off exchanging your magus for a bard (arcane duelist), you'd get a good bunch of group buffs (good hope, for one) and get to channel your magic into your weapon with arcane strike and bladethirst. (Also: bard would fit the librarian knack for knowledge?)
Don't mix cleric+magus (or any spellcasting classes), you'll sorely regret it when enemies with spell resistances start to show up regularly. And since you are already level 11, that's bound to happen soon.

Faerie fire specifically says it counters 3 specific illusion/glamer spells because they are concealment effects... however Mirror Image is an illusion/figment and nothing in it's description say anything about concealing: mirror image creates illusory clones, that's not concealment it's cloning.

Slamy Mcbiteo wrote:

Nope not all of them but I am running the AP as written so there are a lot of single encounters. As for being with in 30 feet of the baddie that is not an issue there are several party members in front of him, the witch has a buffed up DC I believe it is 20 currently so even the high will save class at level 4 still have a 50% chance to miss and currently as written no one is immune (no elves, no dragons, half dragons,...)

So yes I could change the encounter to deal with the witches ability but that seems wrong. So yes I could add extra creatures to wake up the sleeping I could raise the CR of the encounter that seems wrong. I guess I could rework each encounter so the CR remains the same but there are multiple creatures....why did I buy the "AP" then? I could start giving out "Protection from Law" every where to negate it..that seems wrong.

It seems to me that this one ability causes the way we look at encounters much differently, we are forced to react to it and change them to actually make them viable. Attacking a level one party with an Ogre seems stupid and trivial now. Actually the party started carrying Coup de grace weapons, high crit weapons to make sure the fort saves failed. So now the party is effected by this one ability also...

I have let it play out but in reality I can see it ruining the game slowly as both the GM and the players loss interest....the issue is really the ability to screw and encounter with single one dice role.

Then why not be honest and talk with that witch?

Tell him/her that you don't have the time/knowledge/... to change all the encounter of that AP to make the encounters challenging for them and you'd like him/her to trade that slumber hex for something that does not ruin single-monster encounters all the time.

If that player is remotely concerned about his and the group's fun, he/she'll agree to drop slumber for something else.

By the way: how the blazes did the witch get to DC20 at level 4? how high is the witches int? point buy? already decked out with headband of intellect +4?

I guess this is why I strongly dislike gunslingers... they don't bring anything to a table except damage.

So If I were you, I'd consider the gunslinger like a blasting wizard and be a support-oriented spellcaster...:
- bard (magician archetype?)
- cleric
- druid
- inquisitor
- oracle
- witch

personally I'd take the witch, but that's a matter of taste

Devilkiller wrote:
Touch attacks are a trivial barrier at higher levels. At lower levels they do provide some control, but the standard stagger effect would still have no save. I've tried to provide some evidence that this is a decent power. Some have proposed that it is flat out overpowered. Obviously opinions vary. The fact that they vary from "useless" to "overpowered" is odd but perhaps not unusual for the message boards. Regarding the Witch's Slumber hex, I think that's a pretty high powered option itself, but at least the enemy gets a saving throw, and if that save succeeds the enemy is immune for 24 hours. The fact that the Gentle Rest combo can act as a no-save "clean up" to failed Slumber attempts doesn't make it any better.

I ask again: if the touching is trivial for you (it is not for me)... would you agree to make the entire ability a ranged ability that has a saving throw, but WITHOUT the touch attack part?

yes? no? why?

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Devilkiller wrote:
I just want the monsters. and PCs for that matter, to have a fair chance against a sleep effect which will likely result in their death.

Why is the touch attack part not chance enough? why do you need to double the chances of failure? if you double it nobody will bother with it any more.

It seems like their cleric's chance to hit with his touch attack is unusually high in your games?

Devilkiller wrote:
Regarding our "lonely BBEG" comment, many encounters published by Paizo and other companies only feature one monster. Most DMs I know run mostly published adventures and want them to be as "ready to run" as possible right out of the box.

Unfortunately this is often close to impossible... whether it's Gentle Rest or another combo, some players will come up with something that works really well and make part of the published encounters a push-over when they shouldn't be. That is not a problem with Gentle Rest, it's a problem about the general balance that does not and will probably never exist... it's up to the DM to balance encounters. And yes that takes quite a bit of work and time.

Devilkiller wrote:
What happens to single foes is important. I’d also like to point out that they’re not always BBEGs. Not every monster should need a supporting cast of mooks. Anyhow, even if a fight has 2-4 foes it would often be pretty efficient to take out 1 per round with a coup de grace combo.

The last one... because while an enemy is standing nearby, coup de grace provokes AoO from all of them... taking 3 solid hits from 3 enemies while performing the coup de grace, could seriously hurt the fighter, especially at lower levels. Or one of the enemies could, instead of hitting for damage do a maneuver to trip the fighter: no coup de grace until the fighter gets back up.

Devilkiller wrote:

Round1 - Encounter starts at some distance, PC-Sorcerer casts Spectral Hand while PC-Cleric, PC-Magus, and PC-Fighter move towards melee range. The Witch does...something...

Round2 - Either the Sorcerer or Magus hits the victim with Frigid Touch. Cleric hits monster with Gentle Rest, Fighter performs coup de grace. Fight Over.

the witch uses her slumber hex on the first round: sleeping foe, the fighter coup de grace's, while the cleric, magus and sorcerer are watching

but then I'm not sure why the sleep + coup de grace would be any better then everybody just whacking the lone monster good? between the magus and sorcerer and fighter they should have enough damage to kill your monster on the first round anyways?
Magus with shocking grasp (no save)
Sorcerer with one of the many damage spells (burning hands / magic missile / ??? )
Fighter with power attack
your lone monster would survive three solid hits?
Make the cleric an evangelist archetype and he can add +1 atk and dmg to the magus and figther with bardic performance.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lifat wrote:
@Kyoni: So you are basically saying that a 2nd level spell is better than a first lvl domain power? Shouldn't it be? And I'd even argue that Hold Person works on far fewer targets than the 1st lvl domain power.

A domain power should be usable throughout an entire PCs career... if it becomes worthless (ie: never used) at level 3 then I'd rather pick a different domain that stays useful even at levels 7, 12, 18...

Lifat wrote:

@Kyoni: I agree with you that putting a save on the entire thing is going to far!

Would you really say that a save on the secondary effect would hamper the domain power so much that you would never choose it?

It would be the same thing as just houseruling the entire sleeping part away.

To sleep a target you need to:
- touch it to make it staggered
- touch it AGAIN to make it sleep
and you want to put a save on top of that?

some people already pointed out that this touching has roughly a 50%-70% to land... let's make it simply a 60%, ok?
first hit chance 60% to stagger
second hit chance 60% * 60% -> 36% to sleep
which is already rather low

now if we assume the save has a 70% chance (most probably less due to MAD cleric) to still affect the target we are down to 25% chance (most probably less then 20%) of actually having everything go as smoothly as you'd like...

As I said: a lot of other classes can do this with a single standard action (spells, hexes, whatever)... so it's already unlikely the cleric will do this because others will be quicker, as they don't need two melee-rounds to set it up. Spellcasters can do this before the monster even reaches melee.
So this ability is already weaker then spells, make it even more weak, and it's not even worth considering.

I'd really like to see some numbers from the "needs a save" crowd, because some numbers are off if you feel that the chance of success is more like 70%+ and not 40%- for the sleeping going as smoothly.
So what are the str/con/wis/cha stat of your clerics, what level are they and against what CR of monsters do they succeed so easily?

Ilja wrote:
Hey Kyoni, that's uncalled for and a fair bit off-topic. Let's leave the assumptions of foul play and the off-topic fudging rants at the door and discuss the actual ability, shall we?

I did discuss the actual ability... and I keep asking again and again why the "touch attack" part is dismissed so easily by Devilkiller and others and they keep insisting how important that saving throw is.

I put the "rant" in a spoiler... better?

No magic means there are no arcane spellcasters at all? and no divine casters too?
Or just no magic items?

If this is your first time DMing, I heavily advise against any houserules, especially such drastic ones, that change the entire game balance.
You need to get a decent understanding of the balances and mechanics before tinkering with them. And this is not something DMs can describe to you on a forum... it's something you need to know from experience.

If this is not your first time:

Make a list of available classes, don't go "you could, I advise against it".

What's wrong with paladins and monks when magical classes are not available? because otherwise there's fighter/barbarian/rogue/ranger?

Also, how do you intend to handle the healing? Be aware that spellcasting draining HP means somebody patching people back together. Without magic?

What's stopping some PC to hand his gems to another PC because he doesn't want spells? What will be the consequences?

Honestly all of this sounds like too big a change... I seriously advise against it. I fear this will end with a martial-centric group who'll just ignore spells altogether as in a no-magic world enemies shouldn't have access to magic either.


coup de grace provokes an attack of opportunity: lonely BBEG problem again

also if you really want to put a saving throw on gentle rest, I'd be fine with that under the condition that you make it ranged and remove the touch attack. That way you get your precious save and I have a decent chance to have this ability actually work.

Because as long as killing the monster outright is more efficient then trying to sleep it with little chance of success, I'll just go ahead and rage-pounce it.

anecdote about fudging saves:
But the more I read what you are writing the more I fear you are the kind of DM that adjusts saves and HP on the fly if dice don't go your way? (I might be wrong though).

I've seen one DM once, who fudged dice of saving throws because he didn't like how his monsters were debuffed/cc'ed...
- at first everybody stopped using those spell and it mostly ended in buffing the party then magic-missile & rage-pounce it to death
- then when he wondered why we didn't use tactics, and we explained how this was pointless
- finally, we enforced that ALL combat dice would be rolled in the middle of the table
- since then the chances of his monsters making the saves has drastically decreased

This little anecdote is to underline how players will always try to find the strategy that's most likely to work. Put too many chances to fail on gentle rest and nobody will take it any more...

so back to my question...
Are you fine with this change: Make it a saving throw ability, but make it ranged and remove the touch attack requirement?

Diego Rossi wrote:

Freedom of movement allow you to move normally under the effect of a slow spell because the spell say that if work against slow. The use of the conditions has some weird effects sometime.

Slow was a spell that reduced your movement, now it impose a condition.

However the text clearly says move AND ATTACK... if you drop that "and attack" from the spell's first sentence, you'd be right, but why specify the "and attack" then? breaking out of combat maneuvers is not an attack but an opposed check...

Also if all this spell does is negating the reduced movement or being entangled, this spell should not be a 4th level spell... would be more in line with slow and haste (3rd level) in that case.
Hold Person is level 2
Hold Monster is level 4

Do you think it should suppress Flesh to Stone? why yes, why not?

Diego Rossi wrote:
You are still under the effect of the spell, it simply don't suffer its drawbacks.

Ok, my bad, I missed that suppressed instead of canceled part. Since FoM lasts 10min./lvl we never had this issue.

Diego Rossi wrote:

Maybe you should cite the whole paragraph:

PRD wrote:
This spell enables you or a creature you touch to move and attack normally for the duration of the spell, even under the influence of magic that usually impedes movement, such as paralysis, solid fog, slow, and web. All combat maneuver checks made to grapple the target automatically fail.

Daze, stagger, stun,don't impede movement, they take away actions.

If we follow your line of thinking freedom of movement would allow to act to people asleep or dead.

If stagger is not canceled by Freedom of Movement... why does Freedom of Movement cancel Slow?

Slow Spell wrote:
An affected creature moves and attacks at a drastically slowed rate. Creatures affected by this spell are staggered and can take only a single move action or standard action each turn, but not both (nor may it take full-round actions).

It says staggered right there in the description.

Freedom of Movement specifically calls out Slow as one example of spell it counters, so I'd say anything that applies "staggered" and is a spell or spell-like is countered. However Freedom of Movement does not cancel sleep and I see no reason why it should... but you have to stagger a creature before the second touch will sleep it, anyways.

PRD wrote:
This spell enables you or a creature you touch to move and attack normally for the duration of the spell, even under the influence of magic that usually impedes movement, such as paralysis, solid fog, slow, and web. All combat maneuver checks made to grapple the target automatically fail.

Imho this means any magic taking away your standard and/or movement action is canceled by Freedom of Movement. The word "even" makes the difference for me, though I'm not a lawyer and not that good at grammatical finesse.

Being dead is not a magical effect that prevents you from acting, it's you not being alive any more.

Sleep is a good question... at my tables we handle it like this:
"mental impediment" -> requires protection from mind-magic
"physical impediment" -> requires protection through freedom of action
but that's probably a houserule, unless it's RAI? it's justified for me because it cancels paralysis and similar effect that stop the body from moving like it should without that magical impediment...

That actually makes me think that if you really want to put a save on Gentle Rest it should probably be fortitude... how is that a mental ability (aside from the sleep spell being will save?). Most fatigue/exhaustion magic use fortitude? so do most effect that stagger and allow a save or have anything to do with death: fortitude.

Lifat wrote:

@Kyoni: You are missing the point. We aren't trying to say that there aren't overpowered choices out there. We aren't saying that the Gentle Rest cannot be stopped in any way. We are saying that it is too good for the price you pay (essentially nothing since the rest of the Repose Domain is quite good aswell).

We aren't saying ZOMG TO POWERFUL MUST BE BANNED! We are saying that it could definitely do with a save, at least on the second part of the ability to make it more on par with what you should be comparing it against... Other 1st lvl domain powers.

If you absolutely want to have it be a save I request that it doesn't require a touch attack any more... usable at 30ft range... sounds fair?

Having it require TWO touches for the sleep and a save and stoppable by spellresistance, puts into worthless category. Because that's way too many chances to fail, and I'm not waisting my standard action to maybe-with-lots-of-luck take away his move action.

And for *** sake give those BBEG some sidekicks... this game is about action economy, so of course a 4vs1 fight is not even remotely fair... just giving that big dragon a bunch of measly kobold slaves will change the entire fight!

Other cool cleric domain powers have been pointed out by others already (I love travel and liberation), but why only compare to other clerics? it's not about what a cleric can do, but what characters can do, would you accept this power if it were a witch or a sorcerer doing this?

Karui Kage wrote:
A Will save is better than nothing at all, and the Witch hex also has the 'once per creature per 24 hours' limitation. If you make your save, they can't try again. Heck, even if you need a natural 20, that's still a 5% better chance you'll negate the effect then what this ability has (IE: no way to prevent it).

Ok, I did not intend to continue in this thread because people seem to camp on their POV no matter what... but here I go again.

Gentle Rest: is a touch and is (sp)=spell-like, so it needs a touch attack (two for the sleeping) AND it needs a spell resistance check.

Witch Hexes: The save to resist a hex is equal to 10 + 1/2 the witch’s level + the witch’s Intelligence modifier.
All of the follow hexes are (su), so you bypass spell resistance and none of these require touch attacks!

Misfortune (Su): Will negates; creature cannot be the target of this hex again for 1 day. (Extend duration with Cackle)
Slumber (Su): Will negates; hex can affect a creature of any HD; creature cannot be the target of this hex again for 1 day.
--> Eternal Slumber (Su): same thing
Agony (Su): Fortitude save negates; creature cannot be the target of this hex again for 1 day.
Delicious Fright (Su): Will reduces the duration of this hex to 1 round. mind-affecting fear effect no usage limit here! put a second fear effect to shut down that enemy completely
Hoarfrost (Su): Fortitude negates; creature cannot be the target of this hex again for 1 day. cold effect
Ice Tomb (Su): Fortitude half dmg; cannot be the target of this hex again for 1 day.
Retribution (Su): Will negates no usage limit here! great against melee foes
Death Curse (Su): Will negates; third round = Fort save or death! cannot be the target of this hex again for 1 day

Don't forget that survival is mostly about following tracks, finding north, and finding food/drink.

For catching rabbits/food, I'm fairly sure that setting up simple traps would be know by both. Rabbits/birds also exist in parks in modern cities... why shouldn't a street urchin have learned how to catch these? when you are hungry/starving you'll be happy to eat anything you can get your hands on.
A street urchin should know similar methods to catch rain, purify water from pools, figure out north through moss on trees/houses, ...
and while a street urchin might not know the tracks left by panthers and bears, he'd know wolves (dogs) and most humanoids just fine.

But looking at tracks to ID the creature who left it would be covered by knowledge skills anyways... survival is for following those tracks.

The only thing that would be weird, is if a street urchin knew how to assess dangers in wilderness (ravines, quicksands, ...). But usually I prefer to roll knowledge geography for these (but that's our table's houserule). It also gives knowledge geography more uses, because right now it's a rather pointless skill.

Natural hazards are already covered by Knowledge Nature: DC 15 + hazard's CR

Is your group already out-performing you?

Also, what would happen if your character talks to that fellow character needing an armor upgrade and just hand him your breastplate and agree that in exchange you get the big cut on gold so you can buy/order something useful soon?
If your character hands that not-useful item to another group member, that usually has the DM worried because his loot distribution did not turn out as he wanted, he should ponder the "why" at that point.

Also, be aware that talking "I got less wealth", is usually not the best way to tackle the problem... better say: hey, that breastplate is seriously hampering my mobility, I can't move in that darn thing! Explain to your DM how that breastplate will penalize your dex, which is your most important attribute: you have a +4 but breastplate limits you to +3 and slows you down, which is not a good idea for an archer who might want to get out of a danger zone.

Two more things that might be helpful to sort this out:

you and your fellow players should make a google-doc list of all items and who has them, that way your DM can always check who has what and adjust more easily.

Also, if that DM is an old AD&D / 3.5 DM he might be under the false impression that you, being an archer, need the equipment for becoming a switch-hitter. While some builds can do that in PF, it was way easier before. Make sure your DM understands that you want to purely focus on archery and mobility.

A DM handing out weird items is not necessarily because he wants to penalize you but often because he might think "oh, if that was me, I'd love this to be able to do that" but your way of playing your character and your expectations might be very different. Talk to him about what you expect out of this character and how you intend to fit into the group, because he might have the wrong idea.
Don't talk about wealth, that might be considered whining to get a bigger share.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bruunwald wrote:
Why don't you GM? Then you can act on all of your "suggestions," and maybe not be so angry about it all.

I already do... and it's not a gripe with the fellow DMs at my two tables, we all enjoy the games we have and learn from each other on occasion.

It's a gripe about DMs coming to this forum and complaining how their players beat the lonely BBEG because power X from class X is "broken/OP/whathaveyou"... these powers are not overpowered or broken.
But maybe these DMs need to learn how to do encounters right? And get a new point of view on how you can ramp up difficulty other then HP-slugfests... hence this thread to collect opinions and ideas.

Have a look at the last few pages of this forum concerning overpowered class features and what people suggest to correct this: 9/10 it's, why is that BBEG alone? where are his minions?

Claxon wrote:
As far as your character being overly concerned with his death, perhaps he's not meant to be an adventure if he is this afraid of death.

There is a healthy middleground between biting dirt every second fight and a 50-33% chance of biting dirt on one particular challenging encounter after 3 "normal encounters", as you say ;-) and only with the wrong tactics, as you admitted yourself...

I'm asking all the DMs out there posting about how their players ruin their BBEG because class ability X is sooo unfair and their poor BBEG does not stand a chance.

Fights should not come down to "which side has the largest healing&HP-to-damage ratio".

Karui Kage wrote:
One cleric, with quicken spell-like ability, could put down** spoiler omitted ** on the first round with a single touch. By that point, PCs are likely 17th-18th level, so beating an ** spoiler omitted ** isn't all that difficult. Granted, still need to get to him to touch... but if you can, game over man, game over! lol.

Why on earth is that CR ~17 BBEG standing all by himself, with no contingency plans nor access to "Freedom of Movement", a lowly level 4 spell?

Freedom of Movement wrote:
This spell enables you or a creature you touch to move and attack normally for the duration of the spell

Daze, stagger, stun, paralyze, ...? not doing anything!

As for sleep: witches can do this from level 1 (Slumber Hex) too and good luck with the saving throw, you'll fail. And since that Hex is SU (read supernatural) Spell Resistance does NOT apply...

I've already driven our DM insane by targeting his high-levelmonsters with some cute witch (su) hexes... and with enough knowledge I know which one is the monster's low save: fort or will.

Actually there are only 3 (SP) witch hexes... neither of these will ever require me to roll vs SR (a summon, a dream thingy and woodland stride; still puzzled why woodland stride is SP for the witch???)

To go more into detail, you could use the kicking character's strength modifier plus some bonus to determine how far away the weapon will slide...
(in squares)
modified by the weapon's weight: a dagger will slide farther then a longsword then a greatsword.

the bonus could be something along the lines of +1 for every 5 increments you beat the CMD to succeed on the maneuver?

MurphysParadox wrote:
Character death is absolutely meaningless after about level 9 because you can just hop over to a temple or teleport to home base and get a rezz (or, heck, have the party's cleric/druid/whatever raise the person on scene).

This might be true from a metagame perspective, however RP-wise my character would seriously question his skills, if he's biting dirt on a regular basis... can he change something to fix this (items/magic)? if not, should he stop chomping off more than he can chew (less powerful foes)?

or maybe he cannot fix it and should just retire before the gods refuse to give him yet another chance at "life"?

1 to 50 of 431 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>

©2002-2017 Paizo Inc.® | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
Need help? Email or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours, Monday through Friday, 10:00 AM to 5:00 PM Pacific time.

Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, Starfinder, the Starfinder logo, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc. The Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Legends, Pathfinder Online, Starfinder Adventure Path, 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.