|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Right now for feat progression I am looking at something like this:
Fey Foundling (1st)
5th level is a bit rough to wait to get TWF with my shield online (at least without losing it's AC), but I can't see doing it any earlier than that. Well, I could throw in a single level of Fighter and get it online 2 levels earlier, I guess. But that is further watering down the build and either not getting me into DD at 6th or knocking out the possibility of 4th level Oath of Vengeance. Unless I'm missing some way of getting one of those feats as a bonus feat somehow?
ElterAgo: You know... I had entirely overlooked the fact that Arcane Armor Training uses a swift action to activate. I guess I don't see that as causing an issue though. Any turn I am casting a spell I would not be attacking using Arcane Strike. I already knew I couldn't both Arcane Strike and Lay on Hands in the same turn. The only time I can see this coming into play is much later in my character's career when he gains the ability to cast spells as a swift action via Quicken Spell (likely via a metamagic rod). But then "issue" is a relative term when we are talking about those power levels.
DD is equivalent to full BAB with the Str increases. Smites will help on the hard to hit enemies as well and I should have plenty of uses of that especially if I go with Oath of Vengeance. Outside of that if you have any actual suggestions for making a small sized sword and board character hit better then I'm all ears. I'm not so big on archery. I would plan on using blasts from sorcerer spells for ranged attacks.
zza ni: Oh, I know. I was going to go with Mithril and the above mentioned Arcane Armor Training.
I think I will pass on the full lunar oracle idea. I have another build for a character doing that. It is a good build though. I thank you for your suggestions. :)
Woodoodoo: Paladin levels do count as caster levels. However, they are tracked separately from Sorcerer levels. Magical Knack helps to make up for 2 non-sorcerer levels. So if I went 2 paladin levels then I would still be counted as full caster levels but if I went with 4 then I would be character level -2 to for caster level.
I did consider Risky Striker. It seems too niche to me.
ElterAgo: I know of and have read (and contributed) to Oterisk's guide. In fact, the link to it here is down but the one on BrokenZenith's page is up and working. I have considered summoning him here to this thread. It worked the last time I tried. ;)
As for TWF, I think I will be alright on attack bonus with the added bonus from small size. I am figuring on starting with a 13 Str and bumping it up to 14 at 4th level. Dragon Disciple adds to Str and basically is full BAB between BAB bonus and the Str bonus. The trouble will arrive when I start TWF and Power Attacking. For that reason I am considering forgoing Power Attack in favor of Arcane Strike. The problem is that eats into Swift Actions for Lay on Hands. I wont always have to use both, though, so it may be a non-issue.
If you have a better suggestion for adding a bit more bite to my bark I am all ears. It is difficult to push damage out of a small sized character especially if going sword and board. But that is actually my goal so I am looking at what I have to work with within those constraints.
You are right on the Animal Companion. I think I'm just not going to focus on that for this concept.
My home group isn't overly optimized. Honestly, outside of myself my son is the next best optimizer and that is mostly due to my help.
The GM isn't lethal but he does make some fairly tough encounters regularly. Often we are left dragging at least one party member out. I think with this build I am not likely to be the one being dragged out but more likely to be the one doing the dragging.
I'm thinking I will either take 2 levels of Paladin to get to Divine Grace or take 4 levels and go Oath of Vengeance for the extra smiting goodness. So I will either be taking 1 or 3 levels of Sorcerer prior to going into Dragon Disciple.
I was also thinking of taking Greater Mercy and Ultimate Mercy later in the character's career. With a very high Charisma (probably 24 or higher by that level) I figure I will get a lot of mileage out of his Lay on Hands. With that Cha and Extra Lay on Hands he should have 11 uses without considering magic items. That is enough to activate Ultimate Mercy. It also should help considerably with getting more healing out of Fey Foundling with the extra dice from Greater Mercy. I mean... Fey foundling will also work off other sources of healing than Lay on Hands, but that is likely where he would get the most use out of it.
I also considered Fast Healer but that requires 2 feats I wasn't planning on taking. If I did go this route then a single level of Unbreakable Fighter would be the way to go. But that would up his healing further from his Con bonus which would go up with levels of Dragon Disciple.
What do you think? Suggestions? Am I trying to do too much for one character?
Right. NOT DCs. Dice of damage. ...lapse of thought there.
I did give some feats that I would be interested in taking. Namely: Power Attack, Arcane Strike, Fey Foundling and Extra Lay on Hands. Although I didn't list them there is also Improved Shield Bash and Two Weapon Fighting. And there is the ever obvious Toughness. I do get bonus feats though with both/either Sorcerer and Dragon Disciple and several of these feats can be found there.
Edit: But out of curiosity, how would you build a fighty Halfling Sorcerer/Paladin?
So I am planning for an upcoming home game and considering different builds. I have kept this one rolling around my mind for a while and haven't really solidified anything. At this point it is basically just a collection of ideas. I'm trying to find things I want in this build's wheelhouse to see if it will be effective.
The basic idea is to get Divine Grace and Smite Evil from Paladin and for the rest of the build be mostly a gish. I would prefer the character competant in melee which shouldn't be too tough. Between small size bonuses to AC as well as armor and shield, big saves from Halfling, Multiclassing and Divine Grace as well as some defensive spells from Sorcerer I think it should be passable.
I know that it would be spreading the character a bit thin to have a couple levels into Paladin only to jump into a Sorcerer. I feel like it can still be an effective character with all that considered though. And anyway, I'm just looking for things that would help.
So some things I am thinking about:
Not sure what else I can add to the build to ease the pain of slowing Sorcerer spell progression and/or making it more gish friendly. That has kinda always been the issue with Sorcerer/Paladins. Anyone have experience to lend? I guess I am kinda looking for a generalist type character here that can fill several roles.
Sean H: If you go the route of the Magus I would like to offer a couple of strong suggestions.
First is to take the Magical Lineage Trait for Shocking Grasp.
My second suggestion would be to take the Arcane Strike feat as with Magus getting full caster progression they get good mileage out of that feat.
So I am considering making a character like this for PFS. I'm not entirely certain what to include. So, I will tell you the things that I like and go from there.
1. I want to make him earthy and acidish.
I also thought about sinking a level in to Crossblooded Sorcerer and picking up Earth Elemental and Copper Dragon (or maybe Green) Dragonic Blooded for changing elements of spells and increasing acid damage. With the decreased caster progression of Arcanist I can't fathom that being a good idea though.
2. I want an Earth Elemental as a Familiar.
3. I am thinking of going summoning heavy while mixing it up with my other spells.
4. I want Consume Magic Items. Mostly because it is cheaty in PFS. ;)
With those goals what would you do for the build?
kestral287: Yeah, you are probably right. I don't want to deal with table variation and without a straight rules based answer it is going to be subject to interpretation. Better to have my VC's ruling one way or the other.
If RAW was clear there would be no debate, but lets face it, it's not.
You are correct. But at least others are showing what rules they are basing their opinion on that show precedent. The rule you talk about does not reference Penache + Penache. It references Penache + Luck or Grit.
If you search these forums the same topic has come up several times, the end result ends with 1 pool, no stacking of the same ability.
Really? I did search and I didn't find anyone asking about Penache + Penache. I would welcome a link to these threads if you have it.
And, whether or not you, or I respect other people's opinions is not helpful here. Again, I am not looking for anyone's opinion. I need a ruling. If not from a Dev at least some rules that show precedent. Something hard. You understand? I can't go to my Venture Captain and say, "It is this way because this guy on the internet said so and myself and Grey_Mage respect his opinion." I think we both know that isn't going to fly. Now... if it was from a Dev, or a FAQ that showed precedent ... well, then I have something tangible to show them to base their ruling on.
Now, if you want to call someone out by showing them changing their opinion feel free. I'll state now that I don't really care. People are allowed to change their opinions. Whether or not they did and whether or not it gives you warm fuzzies because you feel superior saying "Ha, caught you! You didn't say no takesy-backsies!" ... well that just doesn't really help. But, you know... at least you get +1 point of internet cred. [smaller]Where can you spend that again, btw? I have a small pile accumulating ;) [smaller]
As for the Channeling FAQ: I see the response as purposefully including more than just Channeling. Don't you? Lets look at it again:
The Channeling FAQ wrote:
Bolding mine. The entire first sentence is giving a general answer and rule of thumb. The second sentence is applying that rule of thumb to the specific question of Channeling.
I do appreciate the FAQ. I'm going to click it myself. Hopefully others will find getting an answer useful.
K-kun the Insane: I feel the need to point out that it doesn't matter how high you go in PFS that no ruling anyone gives is consider written in stone. Any PFS GM is welcome to interpret such rules however they wish to do so at their table. If it is left ambiguous in the rules they are all welcome to make their own ruling.
The only things that are set in stone rules wise in PFS are explicit rules in the books, errata and FAQ. Developer postings are to be strongly considered by are also not a hard rule.
That being said, without a Dev post on these boards the best I can give you is "expect table variation". In fact, unfortunately, even with such a post you are likely to receive the same response.
Grey Mage wrote:
Where in the rules does it say they stack?
Did I say that it says in the rules somewhere that they stack? I recall only asking questions.
That being said, at least Byakko gave some rules precedent for them not stacking but remaining separate pools. Meanwhile you have not backed up your opinion with rules at all. I understand that Luck, Penache and Grit all are part of the same pool. That is in the rules. But the rules you have quoted do not reference what happens if you receive Penache from two different sources. Since that is the nature of my question, that is what is important to me.
I do not mean to sound overly critical. Your opinion is entirely valid. But I am not looking for an opinion. I want to know how the rules work for this situation. I do not want to have to deal with table variation and would prefer having something to point to in the rules. Thus far, Byakko has come the closest to providing that. Thank you, by the way, Byakko.
kestral287: Yeah, not how I'd run it either. However, I think I would find a middle ground. Probably I would make it one pool but allow Cha to be added twice. So it would be one pool but slightly larger from having it from more than one source. But yeah, you are right. This is a PFS character, I want the RULE not someone's opinion. Thank you for your input.
For what it is worth, I think it makes the most sense to follow the Cleric FAQ as precedent as the Sidebar doesn't reference receiving the same kind of pool twice.
Forsetti: There are other differences in the pools if you read beyond the part you quoted. Like, for instance, what you can use them for. But you are correct, they left that one part out and it does remain vague. It would be nice if they included in that sidebar something saying, "If you get the same pool (Penache, Luck or Grit) from two sources then the rules for it are X." But they didn't. So I am left with having to ask here.
If you shield bash without improved shield bash you will lose your shield bonus to AC as well. You may know this but just pointing it out in case you do not. You may be further ahead getting a spiked gauntlet on your whip hand.
Also, with Cavalier those aid checks coming in as AoOs are made a lot easier by having the paired opportunist feat that you get for free.
Mama Bess: You do realize that for Bodyguard (I see your character took that feat) requires your ally to be adjacent regardless of your reach, right?
edit: And, as others have pointed out, you need Improved Whip Mastery (which requires weapon focus: whip, whip mastery and BAB +5) in order to threaten with a whip. Even then, it isn't for the full reach of the whip. It is for your natural reach +5'.
IMO, it is better to go the route my son did: he went with Phallanx Soldier Fighter and wields a polearm one handed and a heavy shield in his offhand.
I'm afraid that there is a much larger problem that has been missed:
Dwarves are Medium.
Without special feats it is an inappropriately sized mount for a Dwarf and just plain not possible.
Fear not! I have a solution:
So my solution is: Ponies all have Slow and Steady. Because they are Dwarf Horses.
You saw that RAW they are one pool but can you provide anything showing that this is the case?
Just to let everyone know, I have no interest in Pathfinder Society... at least not much interest.
So you are worried about table variation and you are NOT playing PFS? How many private home games are you planning on playing this single character at?
Gwen Smith, heyyon: We have been over this before. The only thing we can give is personal opinion as there has been no ruling on this.
That being said, RAW states that untyped bonuses from separate sources stack. Being that the bonuses are untyped and the sources have different names I believe that they stack. If there is RAW that supports them NOT stacking, I have yet to see it.
If I get two Penache pools from two different sources (like say Swashbuckler and Kata Master Monk) how does this work?
Do they stack? Do I double my Cha bonus like I do for Luck + Penache? Is it all the same pool and the size doesn't change by having two pools but I can use it for all of the abilities I gained the pools for? Some other thing?
Inspiring Commander is 3rd party and not allowed in PFS. If you are concerned with what your DM would rule in a private game just ask him before you play.
I can tell you from personal experience that Order of the Dragon is definitely the way to go for such a build. Table variance is something you will have to deal with but it should be a quick thing before each game. Just let the DM know that you don't have a dog in the race but you just wish to know which bonus to apply. No argument needed, just a ruling.
Fools for Friends is a campaign trait and not PFS legal. Also, from my experience, DMs in most private home games also disallow campaign specific traits.
Oh, god, your right. Sometimes I do not think that the Devs understand the consequences of retconning a ruling.
And lets not mistake things. This is definitely a retcon as the wording of the ability directly opposes the FAQ.
edit: Also, I agree. This is one change I will be ignoring. Mostly because it causes more problems than it fixes.
I interrupt this broadcast to bring you this important message from your local voice of reason and logic:
Cap. Darling doesn't realize that he is likely to have just started a debate. Before it begins let me just state that he is not alone in this opinion. I have always believed that Saurian Shamans (and all of the Shamans) get Wild Shape at 4th and then it upgrades at 6th. I believe that mostly because that is what it says. Good reason, right? ;)
I return you to your regularly scheduled debate...
So a friend of mine ran a PFS scenario for us over the weekend and I wanted to make sure we did it correctly.
My son and I were playing 3rd level characters and another friend had a 1st level character and the DM played Kira at 1st level. We decided as 2 of the actual players had 3rd level characters that we would play at the higher subteir. We did alright (aside from having to deal with a swarm that was a pain) and finished the adventure.
The question is, my son and I get the out of subteir bonus on the chronicle sheet. I get that. But what about the 1st level player? And what about the GM? Do they get the 1-2 because that is the level they are? Or do they get the subteir reward because that is the level they played at?
What about the loot? Do we all get access to the higher teir loot?
Duncan888: I just wanted to compliment you on your build. After your first post I did a bit of research and came to the EXACT same build as you did before I even saw it.
I thought about trying to incorperate some of Scott Wilhelm's ideas for Snake, Monkey and Panther style but that requires too many feats to fit all of it into a single build. Plus MoMS Monk doesn't get to pick Combat Reflexes as a bonus feat so that cuts into your level based feats. Going with Lore Warden or Unarmed fighter could provide more feats but then that is detracting more from Magus. I guess it is all a balancing act of which Jediness you want more.
BTW: On the off topic of people in denial about Yoda being a melee badass - it was well established even in the earlier movies that Yoda was one of the best Jedi Knights of his day. This is 100% canonical and is reiterated in several sources outside of the original movies, the prequel movies and Clone Wars.
No I don't consider it to be obscure. I never brought up the word obscure, so I don't know why you're bringing that up.
Because you had said, "Are you saying that because people do those builds that they make sense or are balanced, or what?" Perhaps I assumed incorrectly that the problem you had with these builds is that they were niche corner cases and were obscure. But to answer your question, yes. I do think that they make sense and are balanced (to the same degree as many things in Pathfinder). But then, perhaps I have a more creative and open mind than some others may to such things.
The monk-druid I'd take issue with balance wise, since it would use monk's fist damage modified by monk's size when in my opinion it's assumed the monk is in their natural form when performing such attacks. In addition many creatures don't have the anatomy to perform strikes the way that humanoids do, the only people who are presumed to be able to perform unarmed strikes, since natural attacks are assumed for most non-humanoid shape creatures.
Have you taken a look at prototype00's guide for Bear Fisted fighting? I think you may have underestimated the potential of such a build. I know that your retort will be that you don't think it is balanced but I will remind you that this thread was a rules question. The original poster was asking about the legality of his question. Your opinion on whether it is balanced is not required for it to be legal. ...of course you are still welcome to share it.
And, as has already been pointed out by the others, your opinion is an incorrect reflection of what the rules state.
Wait... so you are saying that the reason they put those rules in the book after considering this during the development of Pathfinder is because they thought that it was unbalanced when they made the system? Or just that because they have failed to make any change or update disallowing it since the release of the system that this would be because it is unbalanced?
I'm sorry, that doesn't make any sense at all. And if the Devs thought that it was unbalanced or misinterpreted they could have done an errata or FAQ. The fact that they haven't makes it a safe assumption that they believe that it is balanced and does not need a FAQ or errata. I would point out that you, yourself are making an assumption thinking that the Devs do believe that it is unbalanced or misinterpreted but I am not even clear if that is what you are saying as there seems to be no basis for this assumption outside of your personal opinion on game balance.
If it isn't obvious I fall into the group of people that believe it is just as balanced to allow Unarmed Strikers to use Natural Attacks in combination as it is for Manufactured Weapon users.
I'm sorry that you dislike my wording. Once again, I believe this is balanced. Apparently we disagree? Maybe we don't because you say that is exactly what you are advocating? Honestly, I am confused at this point if we have a disagreement.
Nonetheless, I believe it is irrelevant to this thread as the OP is not asking if it is balanced or not. He is asking whether it is legal within the rules.
Doesn't mean I can't contribute my logical opinion. There's all sorts of things that can be broken by simply following strictly what the rules state and ignoring everything else. Reasonable groups or GMs don't allow certain blind "as written" following of rules.
And likewise, I never said you cannot share your opinion. Feel free. I simply stated that it is not relevant to the topic of this thread. People come to a rules thread to find out if something is rules legal or not. Discussing whether or not something is balanced or not isn't typically very helpful to the individual and typically belongs in a different forum. I have a feeling this will not deter you, though... so feel free to keep sharing, I guess.
The rules question has been answered.
Why are so many people focused on rolling, is this not a roleplaying game and not a rollplaying game.
I would like to point out that these two things are not mutually exclusive. A single person can enjoy both things. This is possible.
Neither are so-called "Power Gaming" (aka, making an effective character) and roleplaying. Some people enjoy both things. This is also possible.
To me it sounds like your players are telling me that the change you are suggesting would affect their fun. This has been echoed in by several in the thread. Personally, I agree. I like iterative attacks and taking that away from martials is definitely a nerf. It should matter less what we think though. My concern would be if you were dismissing your player's opinions, though.
Good suggestions have been given here on how to speed up your game. Action economy changes and removal of iterative attacks isn't the solution to this problem. One other suggestion I would like to offer is the use of initiative cards and assigning the tracking of initiative to one player (even perhaps giving him a small reward for doing so).
The Songbird of Doom: A Guide to a most unlikely tank and Mechanism of Mass Destruction (Warning: GMs will hate you)
The Songbird of Doom: A Guide to a most unlikely tank and Mechanism of Mass Destruction (Warning: GMs will hate you)
The Songbird of Doom: A Guide to a most unlikely tank and Mechanism of Mass Destruction (Warning: GMs will hate you)
Joesi: Did you think that the builds that I actually mentioned were "obscure"? They are all from the Core rule book. I'm not sure what your definition of "obscure" is.
As far as whether it is balanced or not... well, I think that was all considered during the advent of Pathfinder. If the Devs didn't think it was balanced then they wouldn't have wrote it into the rules the way that they did. If it isn't obvious I fall into the group of people that believe it is just as balanced to allow Unarmed Strikers to use Natural Attacks in combination as it is for Manufactured Weapon users. Luckily, the rules agree with me.
By the way, "the issue at hand" is not whether they are balanced or not. That is not the topic of the thread. The OP is asking if it is legal. And the answer to that is an unequivocal and resounding "yes".