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

Lastoth's page

549 posts. Alias of Hatch240.


RSS

1 to 50 of 549 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Titania, the Summer Queen wrote:

DD ends your turn period.

...unless you have feats that specifically state otherwise.

Actually DD prevents you from performing any additional actions until your next turn. Not the same exact wording you used.


Leadship feat for a wizard with all the crafting feats and a valet templated familiar, both have cooperative crafting. Get feats to raise his CL if you have open feats so you can get high CL requirements earlier (like craft rod).

Secondly, use simulacrum to clone him and/or his familiar as often as required so they can up production speed. You can hassle yourself with which traits will give you a better minor upgrade or which race works best(dwarf I think?) for as long as you like, but if all resources are available that's basically the best route.


FanaticRat wrote:
Has anyone ever had success playing a magus that didn't crit-fish?

Of course, groups carry with them more poorly optimized characters than well optimized ones in my experience. If "success" is living through the AP it's entirely probable you could do so. If success is dominating combat, it depends on how well or poorly built the other characters are.


wraithstrike wrote:
Lastoth wrote:

"Also the echoing spell analogy doesn't hold since the additional casting doesn't take an action to do"

Thank you, I'm glad we agree. For the same reason, the spell combat action can complete also.

That is not the same thing. A metamagic spell is completed and you then get the benefit. The benefit of echoing spell does not require anything extra.

To get the benefit of the magus ability does require you to continue to do things after DD so that analogy is not even close.

If you can't see the difference between "I must actively do things" and" this other thing is automatic with no effort at all" then I question your ability to understand any rule.

Frankly your inability to adhere to the logic of "no further actions" is astounding me. The magus would take no move action, no free action, no standard action nor any other action, not even a free action after the spell casting action completes. What action is the magus performing after the spell is cast? By RAW you'd need to cite the action the magus is taking which violates the rule, but you can't because any attacks are within the same action he cast the spell with, occurring simultaneously.


I return, hat in hand:

http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2l7ns&page=492?Ask-James-Jacobs-ALL-your-Qu estions-Here#24583

It appears JJ disagrees. I'd have to concede the point even though I completely disagree and there's nothing stating you interrupt your current action in Dimension Door.


"Also the echoing spell analogy doesn't hold since the additional casting doesn't take an action to do"

Thank you, I'm glad we agree. For the same reason, the spell combat action can complete also.


Another way to look at this is a wizard casts dimension door with echoing spell, using a 7th level slot.

DM: HAH! You arrive at your destination and you don't get the spell back as you should because your turn is over!

Player: But it was all part of the spell I cast!

Exactly this. It's all part of spell, more specifically it's all part of the action encompassed in casting the spell (the full attack action). It's not divisible.


That's fine, but there's no other way to read it from my end. You're only barred from taking further actions, not from finishing the action you're on. Also, don't obfuscate by calling full attack actions anything other than what they are, an action. Just because you can abort an action part way through (I only moved 10'! IT'S NOT A MOVE ACTION!) doesn't mean it's not an action.


Yes, it's likely I researched that myself when I first rolled my magus and drew that conclusion based on all that wording already. This was my refresher. I knew it worked by RAW, I just didn't remember the justification until I had to justify my actions again.

As a side note, dimension door likely prevents you from taking an immediate action, something I just noticed.


What part? That spell combat specifically combines everything into one action or that dimension door only says you can take no further actions?

:-)


no no, you swift BEFORE and charge up your shocking grasp, letting you deliver it for free anytime that round, and specifically to be included with your spellcombat action, as part of it. It specifically states it combined all of the actions into a full attack action.


Now I have to decide whether or not I want to waste the time it will take to find this post and present it, or to let it pass. I'm choosing to let it pass, but the summation of the point was that spell combat makes the full attack and the casting of the spell one action, and your turn is over after the action is done.

EDIT: Ah there it is, it's the wording of Dimension Door stating "After using this spell, you can't take any other actions until your next turn."

Well, that's great, because it's all one action as far as the mechanics are concerned. You just finish that action (it didn't say it interrupts your action) and you're done.


Spell combat combines the spell with the full attack action, which trumps the "your turn is over" clause in dimension door (according to the stuff I've read from the devs).

A regular magus would just quicken a shocking grasp, spell combat his dimension door, arrive at the location to deliver the free attack+full attack as per usual.

EDIT: Unless you have some special free way of quickening DD via some ability I'm not aware of, I can't see how quickening the higher level spell is better.


If it's obvious, is it still considered trolling?


Are you allowed to have more than one pearl of power for level 1 spells in PFS? Really, all a magus needs is intensify, magical lineage and about 15 of those things to get through any adventuring day.


Wolfcommander wrote:
with the dimensional line of feats will try to do the Nightcrawler bouncing teleport attack thing on them.

So you're going to take a line of feats that allow you to dimension door and make a full attack? You mean exactly what spell combat was already doing for you? Spell combat already allows you to dimension door & full attack. I realize you'd be able to divide up your attacks, but it doesn't make it a good choice. If you're into wasting feats just give him toughness and improve his saves instead.


StreamOfTheSky wrote:
Then the bonuses fall behind what a normal weapon could have and the lower arcana really starts to hurt.

LOL! That's absolutely hilarious, because I'm in Jade Regent right now with my magus and my black blade is more powerful than the artifact weapon at this point, and has been. Let me show you how this weapon tracks on Jade Regent:

So, by level...
1-2: Awesome, who got a +1 here?
3-4: Tied with the best magic items in the party
5-10ish: Better than the artifact weapon
11-18: Still better than the artifact weapon
19-20: Who adventures here?

Compared to weapons we've found it's clearly ahead (there have been no magical scimitars and I'm a dervish dancer). Compared to weapons I could have purchased with gold available while I had access to the proper size town it's vastly superior.

Sure, if gold is no object you're just as well off going elsewhere for your weapon. In an AP you won't be able to keep up with a black blade.


You know, I hadn't considered the issue of using both at once due to metamagic rods wording. I was only considering it for the sake of saving some action economy for several cheaper rods. I see the issue here now.


Via the use of craft rod, would it be possible to enchant a rod with multiple feats if you paid the 1.5x multiplier for additional feats? For example a quickened intensified metamagic rod?


Gregory Connolly wrote:
I think that way more because the disadvantage of the blade being intelligent becomes much more apparent in home games. Most GM's I know (myself included) simply can't resist the temptation to have the sword argue with the character at inappropriate times. I think that in high wealth games the advantage is less not gone. The same logic applies to crafting feats, if you are cash strapped and somehow can use them without the GM reducing your wealth by fiat, they are awesome. If you have access to all the magic items you need they are still good, but less so compared to the feats you didn't take.

Yes, my gaming group is a bunch of good friends. When I took my black blade my GM loved the concept and never had it counter me (though did suggest I become more violent to enemy arcane casters due to that being my blades focus).

I think you've hit on the correct answer (to me). The black blade is as good or bad as the GM wants it to be, this could mean keeping away from it entirely.


I still disagree with that Gregory, but since I only play in APs I will say I can't comment with the same level of certainty.

I can make educated speculation with reasoning though. Even in a high cash campaign it just means you're getting more money diverted to other things. Unless you run a campaign where your WBL exceeds stuff you want minus the cost of your weapon the BB is always coming out ahead on items. There are things (like inherent bonus items) which are so expensive you can't really say you'll get them for certain on every character every time.


Mathwei ap Niall wrote:


Uhmm, by not being weapon focused? The actual weapon contributes little to anything to the offense of a well built Magus.

Unless You consider the fact that it delivers your spells on a hit, which means the weapon delivers 100% of your relevant damage and non BB wielders have a harder time hitting from what I've seen because while they are dumping tons of WBL into a weapon. Meanwhile, the BB user is dumping his wealth into peripheral items to enhance his abilities while holding a vastly superior weapon for free.

Mathwei ap Niall wrote:
This post here is the part I have the most trouble understanding. Pathfinder design is really simple, casters rule martials drool.

This is a straw man, not worth responding to, but I will identify it as a signal of a really weak point where the user feels obligated to justify his opinion with rhetoric instead of substance.

Mathwei ap Niall wrote:
Ever since the class was introduced it has overwhelmingly been apparent that the class was designed as a new way to get a spell onto a target and any attempt to focus on anything but that reduces the effectiveness and power of the class.

Obviously we agree here

Mathwei ap Niall wrote:
A blackblade reduces a Magi's magical ability (the degree is unimportant, any reduction is bad) by making them wait longer to get their built-in power ups.

OK, well since the black blade reaches bonuses far faster than any player with a standard weapon could, then how does this reduce his damage delivery? He's hitting more. Also his WBL is invested in stat items, pearls of power, and other items the standard magus can't afford cause he's saving for a +3 weapon when the BB had +3 two levels ago.

Mathwei ap Niall wrote:
Of all the existing optimized Magi builds, only one of them actually really uses the blade and even then it's only contributing about 10%-15% of the damage the build does. Everything else is strictly spells and arcana with the weapon only being used to clean up mooks to unimportant to waste spells on.

You and I play a vastly different game, I see. In my game my black blade delivers all my spells. It hits a lot and saves me a boatload of cash I can invest elsewhere. It's also delivering free action intimidates (well, free to ME as the owner, still costs the blade an action) and assisting me on all my rolls. I can't really imagine a non BB magus being better.

I strongly encourage you to give BB a try before naysaying it.


Valet archetype familiar is probably the best thing you can do for yourself as a crafter, assuming the campaign doesn't consist of frequent weeks of downtime (in which case the double crafting speed isnt an asset).


Yeah, those are certainly options, but they're consuming resources each time I need them. I ideally I'm looking for my familiar to be able to intimidate because it will allow me to decide who to intimidated based on who needs to fail a save.


As I've been looking at ways to maximize save DCs I've seen that eventually you can accrue no more +1DC feats and are forced to resort to debuffing saves. Part of that is intimidate and it seems like a great action for a familiar, but most familiars don't have it as a class skill and also have a low charisma.

Is there a way to build/itemize a familiar for this and overcome the -4 size penalty?


Having played a black blade, I'm not sure how a normal magus gets by with his cheap and insufficient WBL weapon. To me the black blade is obviously more powerful based on how much WBL you have to spend on other stuff since your offense is taken care of and your defense is mainly mirror image for the first part of your career.

My question is "why is the normal magus so terrible compared to black blade".


You're misunderstanding, I use blood money to supply the materials for the fabricate (diamond dust) which after fabricate is cast becomes a real diamond. Had I not cast fabricate the mats would disappear.


So I was looking at how to get my inherent bonuses on my wizard in later levels. I saw a lot of convoluted ways to achieve a 52 strength to allow blood money to do your wish materials for you.

Is there something stopping you from simply using blood money in small increments to make diamonds worth about 3k each or so, and then combine those smaller diamonds with another fabricate spell later to achieve a 25k diamond and your wish material components?

Doesn't this also create a problem where you're just fabricating wealth?


Chengar Qordath wrote:
I'm not sure if that combo is RAW-legal, since Greater Magic Weapon has to be used on a weapon, which the amulet technically isn't. Plus, one could argue that the the bonus granted by Greater Magic Weapon isn't the same as the one a weapon gets for being a +X weapon.

To the contrary, that's exactly what an amulet of the mighty fists is for.

Secondly, one COULD argue that the enhancement bonus EXPLICITLEY NAMED IN THE SPELL, which it actually grants as an enhancement bonus, isn't actually the bonus they said it was. Any other man would be well within his right to laugh the person stating that out of the room.

In my world (RAW), an enhancement bonus is an enhancement bonus. So what if it doesn't stack, it's not stacking with anything here.


http://www.d20pfsrd.com/traits/regional-traits/wayang-spellhunter-minata

You're not looking hard enough, the FAQs for relevant abilities are often cited at d20pfsrd. They need to remove proprietary names for things on that site for legal reasons, and wayang is apparently owned by paizo.

It specifically states you never lower a spell level, no matter what.


I abuse this enchant rather frequently by getting a courageous AOMF (which is dirt cheap with no enhancement bonus) and a flawed Pale Green Prism ioun stone for all day heroism. In late levels you can have the party buffer drop a 16th level greater magic weapon on your amulet each day to get a +3 bonus.


No, read the trait description, it specifically excludes that possibility.

Elemental spell and intensify are more than enough for the bulk of your progression. Maximize and quicken should be added later on to pair with spell perfection. Don't plan on exceeding a first level spot for your main spell in my opinion, because you can load up on pearls of power (1st level) and just keep yourself pumping out damage all day like that. At level 11 I have 15 pearls of power (1st) and I can sustain spell combat every round for extended periods. Make sure you get both spell penetration feats.

A ring of Wizardry (1) isn't out of the question late game.


The thread is getting hijacked, the status of the divine spells in the group aren't really relevant. Appreciate the input but it's not the thread for it.


Tin & Thac, thank you. I tinkered with some stuff today and found that at the end of the campaign as an evoker I'd be running such massive bonuses to firesnake that I wouldnt need as much spell pen (but I took it anyway). Espcially considering an evokers second roll vs spell penetration it seems overkill (though I trust it will not actually be overkill).

I've toyed with the straight mage to make him Void specialized so he is more focused on SOS since he gets that awesome save debuff ability. Not sure what school he will focus on, but more than likely necromancy or transmutation for the SOS abilities. Even bigger questions about what spell to specialize/perfect. I have thoughts of one of the dispel magics, just to set myself up as a caster killer.


DrDeth wrote:
Ah, so you play Rocket tag. In most games, where encounters last 6+ rounds, like the way the devs play and my groups play, in combat healing is a Must. Nevermind.

We frequently reach the end of our haste spells in our current healerless campaigns without deaths (both at level 11 now). Rocket tag requires some squishy players. We usually get by with front liners who can mitigate a pounding. Also the notion that in combat healing is a must is purely conjecture. At no point is casting a healing spell more valuable than stopping one or several monsters from attacking. At no point is any heal spell going to make up for the melee damage a mirror image will prevent. If you haven't tried it, don't knock it. At first I felt odd about going healerless, but it caused me to examine what I was playing and prioritize some defensive thinking in early rounds to get out in front of damage before it happens.

In fact, that's why I'm up on these mage builds right now, because I see the value of a high initiative dazing spell and how much damage it can shut down. Action locking opponents via dazing spell, slow, obsidian flow and other harrying spells each prevent more damage than any other spell can. Even if I take the CB sorc dip to make my DPR numbers less bad, it's not going to invalidate all the control and preemptive healing I'm able to provide via halting incoming damage.


No, I will not focus on anything but int and dex, charisma isn't used on a paladin only taking one level. I didn't need it for smite, I needed it to get precise shot without point blank shot early on. The only function of the first level is to obtain all martial weapons for the EK requirement. Getting precise shot free saves me another feat (by either skipping or delaying PBS).

Shifting to the CB dipped wizard: The more I dig around the more it seems that dazing spell is the best CC in the game, and you need a damaging spell to apply it to. This means I'd be blasting one way or another with it, so one level of cross blooded gives me a LOT of power, making blasts completely legitimate.

The first level of CB sorcerer looks like this: We get a bonus feat at first level, I'm thinking of taking

Spell Focus (Evocation) (+1DC to evocations)
Mages Tattoo (Evocation) (+1CL to evocations)
Spell Specialization (Burning Hands) (+2CL to Burning Hands, swapped to fireball at 6th)

Also the trait Lore Seeker, which gives 3 spells +1 CL and +1DC, which I would apply one of to burning hands (the other to fireball, not sure what on the final one.)

This means at first level my burning hands does 5d4+10 damage... at first level... It's pretty substaintial DPR for a caster right off (even though my focus will really be CC).

I know I could go straight wizard for slightly better optimization of utility and control, but that one level sorcerer dip makes every fireball over 50% better. It's a lot to miss out on.


DrDeth wrote:
Yes, he can know them. But will he? The advantage of a Cleric is that tomorrow he can cure Blindness, etc. Lesser Restoration is a must do, but the others? And if he's stuck in melee how does he heal others unless he has Channel?

He wouldn't, healing in combat is terrible at every level for clerics. We've moved away from it because almost anything is better than wasting action economy on those spells. We've had numerous campaigns that have been a lot better since moving out of the "this guy is our healer" mentality.

Keep in mind his combination of shield other (to share damage with them) and his swift self healing *IS* good action economy, and far more healing than we usually get, so he's a big bonus.


I'm not aware of which spells oracles lack. I looked for the major ones (remove curse/disease and restoration) and found them all to be present. I felt the oracle would be exceptional in that role since he's not blowing his spells on control/healing being melee focused.

Certainly a paladin will be strongly encouraged, but if I'm going to run a pure wizard the paladin might be better off as a ranged oath of vengeance paladin, and the bard could also focus on archery for a better balance.


Yes, I'm aware of the traits. It's still a toss up if wayang spell hunter and magical lineage stack. A free daze on every slow spell is pretty amazing for both the EK and the straight mage build. The bonus to caster level becomes less appealing as time goes on but manipulating the level of the spell after metamagic is enticing right up through level 17.


I think, in the cases of the EK or pure wizard build, I'd like to focus on SOS spells like slow. With wayang spellhunter and/or magical lineage on slow I can be throwing out dazing/persistant slows pretty early.

The EK in particular is interesting because with a relatively high chance of critting he's going to eventually be simply including his slow spell whenever he crits and selecting his crit target at one of the recipients. I can imagine the first couple rounds are spent setting up a lockdown situation, but later rounds he can join in the range DPS fun and add more control as needed.

I kind of worry about being a full spell level behind with the EK but when your main spell comes online at third and you only need a few levels on it for your main metamagics you're doing okay. Also the prospect of things are are simply immune to magic is always out there so the archery would really help.


Dave Justus wrote:

Nothing wrong with any of those builds, although I think the archer paladin ek would be the worst choice in a party that already looks like it will be pretty martial heavy (presuming your newer players go martial.)

Another option though might be a witch instead of a wizard. This might be especially good if you really want to play an archer for one of your new players. Witch isn't any simpler than wizard as far as spells go, but it does have the nice fallback of slumber or evil eye if the player doesn't know what else do to. I think that makes it a very good class to learn to play full casters. You have all the options, but you also have a simple and effective 'default' action if you don't know what to do.

The EK build is an archer, shouldn't conflict with melee.


Edit: It's actually a mobile fighter and an oracle of battle, so melee is covered for the most part


Cross posted from ROTRL forums for maximum solicitation.

So our ROTRL group will be starting in the near future, and so far it seems we have a mobile fighter, an oracle (of battle), two newer and undecided players and then myself. I was originally looking to play an archer, but the party could use some arcane casting and I'd rather not shove a "You should try a wizard" statement on a new player. I'm pretty sure the AP runs to 17, so that's what I've been looking at.

I've played wizards before in previous editions. I'm pretty well researched, so I have it down to three choices:

1) A Paladin1/Wizard1/EK10/Wizard6 archer/mage. This brings lots of versatile ways to do damage and bring utility/control but the drawback is the -2CL from the paladin and EK levels.

2) cross blooded draconic/orc Sorcer 1/ Admixture Wizard 16. This thing brings a lot of daze based AOE damage for wide area control and mook cleanup allowing the party to focus on the BBEG. A slightly less noticeable -1CL is the drawback here.

3) Wizard 17. Just straight wizard with a lot of single and wide area control stuff.

I know a wizard is well regarded for any party in this AP. Will 1 and/or 2 be noticeably "behind" what the AP demands for spellcasting? What do you recommend here?


So our ROTRL group will be starting in the near future, and so far it seems we have a swashbuckler, an oracle, two newer and undecided players and then myself. I was originally looking to play an archer, but the party could use some arcane casting and I'd rather not shove a "You should try a wizard" statement on a new player. I'm pretty sure the AP runs to 17, so that's what I've been looking at.

I've played wizards before in previous editions. I'm pretty well researched, so I have it down to three choices:

1) A Paladin1/Wizard1/EK10/Wizard6 archer/mage. This brings lots of versatile ways to do damage and bring utility/control but the drawback is the -2CL from the paladin and EK levels.

2) cross blooded draconic/orc Sorcer 1/ Admixture Wizard 16. This thing brings a lot of daze based AOE damage for wide area control and mook cleanup allowing the party to focus on the BBEG. A slightly less noticeable -1CL is the drawback here.

3) Wizard 17. Just straight wizard with a lot of single and wide area control stuff.

I know a wizard is well regarded for any party in this AP. Will 1 and/or 2 be noticeably "behind" what the AP demands for spellcasting? What do you recommend here?


I've seen very little mention of the possibility of using a crossbow with the crossbow master feat on an Eldritch Knight to trigger swift action spells from range. I'm wondering if anyone has any builds they could point me to for this purpose, and how they might have performed. Obviously the niche here is to eventually have a high threat ranged weapon with which to trigger spell critical, so you can pump out some damage. My thought is to use snowball intensified with magical lineage for some damage assistance with heft to it.

Anyone have any advice on this? I'll be using something along the lines of divine hunter1/Wizard (scryer)1/EK10/wizard to finish.


Imbicatus wrote:
Urban ranger works very well, but I thought I'd just throw out one more option: Have you considered the Zen Archer monk? They are great Switch Hitters in that they can unarmed strike at low levels if people get close, and shoot them in melee after 3rd level. Dwarves make fantastic Zen Archers and ZA keep fast movement to overcome the 20' move speed. Just a thought.

Actually, any archer who can get Point Blank Master is way better than a switch hitter IMO. You don't need to split your focus on two things and can specialize on the vastly superior archery the game offers. Switch hitting is what people want to do when they're thinking of a cool character. Straight archery is what people do when they see how much better archery is than melee in pretty much every way.

On the other side of that coin, all you really need to be effective in melee is power attack, so if it's not too much out of an archery build you can take it, but the archery feats are almost always far better than getting power attack due to how little you melee as time goes on with a ZAM/ranger or any class that picks up PBM early.


Jaime Sommers wrote:

What if I don't have access to instant enemy (such as from playing in a Core Rulebook only campaign)? How would you advance your FE options?

(Rise and shine, sleepy thread!)

Speak with the GM, read the players guide to the AP. If you're running homebrew he should provide what would be good FEs. If you're running an AP just read the guide carefully and it will tell you what would be good.


Chris Kenney wrote:

Magi only really function well as pure melee blasters. You are just too dependent on the blast spells for your damage to waste much of your store with buffing.

I can only tell you my experience, but I have (at 10th level) 7 first level spells and 12 pearls of power (1st) in addition to 9 arcane pool... I can blast all day with that many spells, I use spells of level 2+ as defensive and "additional" blasting capacity, but realistically I dont blast much from those. It's all about ultility and defense up there with a scorching ray and intensified burning hands and acidic shocking grasp for some help. If I need any of those a second or third time, that's what recall is for.

In any event, I buff every single fight on my magus. Usually you need to move to get up there anyway, may as well mirror image + move. With Dervish Dance a full attack looks pretty good even without a shocking grasp.


So you're looking for a way to perform a dirty trick, but quickly? Let me google that for you...

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/quick-dirty-trick-combat


not that you can afford the feat tax, but vicious display in combination with shatter defenses can keep your sneak attack rolling for any ranged rogue.

1 to 50 of 549 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com 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.