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

Lune's page

Pathfinder Society Member. 2,715 posts. No reviews. No lists. 1 wishlist. 8 Pathfinder Society characters.


RSS

1 to 50 of 2,715 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Aw... still nuthin?


Please let me know what you think about my Gun Juggler build:

Spoiler:
Str 9
Dex 16 (+2)
Con 12
Int 14
Wis 12
Cha 12

Gunslinger = normal Gunslinger
Bard = Juggler
Monk = Far Strike Monk
Alchemist = Grenadier

1st
Gunslinger 1
Deeds: Deadeye, Gunslinger's Dodge, Quick Clear, Grit, Gunsmithing, Two-Weapon Fighting (human), Deadly Aim (1st)
2nd
Bard 1
Fast Reactions: Deflect Arrows (bonus), Bardic Performance, Cantrips, Countersong, Distraction, Fascinate, Inspire Courage +1
3rd
Bard 2
Combat Juggling, Evasion, Point-Blank Shot (3rd)
4th
Monk 1
Flurry of Blows, Precise Shot (bonus), Fast Thrower: Quick Draw (bonus), Unarmed Strike (bonus)
5th
Gunslinger 2
Nimble +1, Rapid Shot (5th)
6th
Gunslinger 3
Deeds: Gunslinger's Initiative, Pistol Whip, Utility Shot
7th
Gunslinger 4
Weapon Focus (bonus), Empty Quiver Style (7th)
8th
Gunslinger 5
Gun Training 1
9th
Alchemist 1
Alchemy, Bomb 1d6, Extra Bombs (bonus), Mutagen, Throw Anything, Stabbing Shot (9th)
10th
Alchemist 2
Discovery: Explosive Bomb, Alchemical Weapon, Precise Bombs (bonus)
11th
Monk 2
Evasion, Far Shot (bonus), Empty Quiver Flexibility (11th)
12th
Gunslinger 6
Nimble +2

Important Items:
Handy Haversack
Gunman's Duster

This is for PFS play.

So the idea here is to be able to juggle guns to help with reloading and be able to throw other things when not shooting guns. This would allow him to two weapon fight with guns and still be able to reload. The rest of the build also lends itself well to throwing weapons.

I considered taking out the Alchemist levels and extra Monk level and just going with more Gunslinger. It would still give him the same amount of feats except Precise Bombs and Throw Anything (which would be less important though still good) and more BAB, Deeds and Gun Training 2. Regarding the Far Strike Monk level it is there for efficiency. It gets me 2 feats for one level. It also helps pick up some nice saves, allows me to go unarmored cutting out the cost of armor and making that Gunman's Duster that much more desirable. It also gives me Unarmed Strike as a bonus feat for when I'm out of weapons or cannot bring them with me. Flurry of Throws pretty much goes to waste as it doesn't stack with Two-Weapon Fighting or work with Guns at all. It is honestly hard to imagine why most Gunslingers DON'T go with a level of Far Strike Monk. A second level of Monk adds to saves again and gives another bonus feat while picking up another BAB.

I also considered taking MORE levels of Alchemist. That would give me the ability to get to Explosive Missile and more higher level extracts. Explosive Missile is very thematic and it works well with the build. The down side is that it would give less total feats which I am already short on.

I also also considered going with some levels of Fighter to get more feats and Weapon Training (+Gloves of Dueling).

There are some other feats that are missing here that I would have really have liked to work in. Rapid Reload would have been good to pick up but I can't find where to fit it in at. I understand how good it is but I also figure I could buy multiple guns and juggle them. I also could just throw things when I am finished with the bullets in one gun. I figure with the extra "hand" I will be able to use Pepperboxes without trouble. I think most GMs would allow me to reload two of them at once, even.

Improved Two Weapon Fighting is also something I regret not being able to fit in. Since the whole idea of the build is around firing as many guns as many times as possible it would be great. Sadly, I'm not sure where I would fit it.

Also, there is the third feat in the Empty Quiver line: Empty Quiver Flurry. This could solve the reloading issue. Again, not sure what I could skip to get it in any sooner.

Not sure how to solve these issues but if I could then the build would be perfect. Alas, I cannot have it all.

A couple of questions I had was exactly how far does Empty Quiver Flexibility go? Weapon Focus should apply. What about Gun Training? Deadly Aim should work with it right?


So I have been enchanted with this Prestige Class since I first saw it but due to it being printed in an early Paizo product it is not legal for PFS play. It is too bad too because it is filled with campaign world based flavor and feel that it would add a lot to the PFS community. Also with some of the new books coming out that have bolstered Starknife and thrown weapon builds in general you could actually have an effective character out of the deal too.

Any chance this might get reprinted in a PFS legal source?
...please?


Devilkiller: Yep.

I have been considering which starting feats to swap out for with the Brownie. One idea was to give him Weapon Focus, Weapon Finesse and Slashing or Fencing Grace. This would allow him to take advantage of his high Dex in melee. The downside is that despite the little guy being fairly durable for a Familiar he would still have to provoke by moving into their square to attack and that just doesn't seem safe. Also, I would eventually be able to get him Point Blank Master and he can just use his bow in melee without provoking. Then I also wouldn't have to buy magic swords and bows for him.

The other idea I had was to give him Toughness (I think it still adds to Familiar HPs, right?), Endurance (to sleep in his armor) and Run or Fleet (to help shore up his poor move speed) and/or just get the Extra Item Slot feats. Outside of wrist for Bracers of Archery and foot for Boots of Haste or Striding and Springing I'm not sure what other slots he would actually need.

Ideas on which feats to swap out for the Brownie?


Oh wow. Didn't catch that. That actually helps a lot. Thanx! :D


I do not believe you can trade out Familiar feats that they start with.

I looked at Weapon Training but didn't see much I liked. Any specific suggestions?

The Brownie needs Deadly Aim to be able to do any amount of damage or else I'd agree with the Rapid Shot bit.


Elven Eldritch Guardian

The Build:

Str 12
Dex 16 (+2)
Con 15 (-2)
Int 8 (+2)
Wis 13
Cha 10

Fighter levels are all Eldritch Guardian
Witch is Beast Bonded Witch

1st
Fighter 1
Familiar, Point-blank Shot (1st)
2nd
Fighter 2
Share Training, Steel Will
3rd
Fighter 3
Armor Training, Precise Shot (3rd)
4th
Fighter 4
Deadly Aim (Fighter 4)
5th
Fighter 5
Weapon Training, Improved Familiar (5th)
6th
Fighter 6
Steel Will +2, Weapon Focus: Longbow (Fighter 6)
7th
Fighter 7
Armor Training, Weapon Specialization: Longbow (7th)
8th
Fighter 8
Rapid Shot (Fighter 8)
9th
Fighter 9
Weapon Training, Point Blank Master(9th)
10th
Fighter 10
Steel Will +3, Snap Shot (Fighter 10)
11th
Witch 1
Cantrips, Hex: Ward, Patron Spells, Witch's Familiar, Transfer Feats, Extra Item Slot (11th)
12th
Witch 2
Hex: Feral Speech

This is for PFS play.

The concept is for a very fey/sylvan elf with a brownie familiar who is also very fighty. I was considering making them both switch hitters as I can make them both fairly durable, but I couldn't afford to get the feats for any of the X Grace feats and still be passable at archery. I should be able to hook that Brownie up with some pimp gear. Mithril Chain Shirt will go a long way for the little guy. And with DR 5/Cold Iron and some passable HP due to Fighter HD with a decent Con (improved later with a belt) he should even be able to take a hit (or more likely not get hit).

By 8th level the Brownie will be doing 1d4+6 damage and will be getting 3 attacks per turn. That is before item bonuses or buffs. Most of the build speaks for itself aside from the last couple of levels. I want to be able to give the Brownie some Greater Bracers of Archery and the only way that I can figure to give him a feat is with the Beast Bonded Witch archetype. Its not so bad as by that level I will already have all the BAB that I need. The few spells will be nice. Ward is basically equivalent to Extra Item Slot for a +2 Ring of Protection and +2 Cloak of Resistance. And I get to give him an Item slot for the bracers. Feral Speech is also very in theme.

Suggestions? What traits would you take?


In case anyone is wondering this is the build concept I have in mind:

Spoiler:
Elven Eldritch Guardian

Str 12
Dex 16 (+2)
Con 15 (-2)
Int 8 (+2)
Wis 13
Cha 10

Fighter levels are all Eldritch Guardian
Witch is Beast Bonded Witch

1st
Fighter 1
Familiar, Point-blank Shot (1st)
2nd
Fighter 2
Share Training, Steel Will
3rd
Fighter 3
Armor Training, Precise Shot (3rd)
4th
Fighter 4
Deadly Aim (Fighter 4)
5th
Fighter 5
Weapon Training, Improved Familiar (5th)
6th
Fighter 6
Steel Will +2, Weapon Focus: Longbow (Fighter 6)
7th
Fighter 7
Armor Training, Weapon Specialization: Longbow (7th)
8th
Fighter 8
Rapid Shot (Fighter 8)
9th
Fighter 9
Weapon Training, Point Blank Master(9th)
10th
Fighter 10
Steel Will +3, Snap Shot (Fighter 10)
11th
Witch 1
Cantrips, Hex: Ward, Patron Spells, Witch's Familiar, Transfer Feats, Extra Item Slot (11th)
12th
Witch 2
Hex: Feral Speech

The concept is for a very fey/sylvan elf with a brownie familiar who is also very fighty. I was considering making them both switch hitters as I can make them both fairly durable, but I couldn't afford to get the feats for any of the X Grace feats and still be passable at archery. I should be able to hook that Brownie up with some pimp gear. Mithril Chain Shirt will go a long way for the little guy. And with DR 5/Cold Iron and some passable HP due to Fighter HD with a decent Con (improved later with a belt) he should even be able to take a hit (or more likely not get hit).

By 8th level the Brownie will be doing 1d4+6 damage and will be getting 3 attacks per turn. That is before item bonuses or buffs. Most of the build speaks for itself aside from the last couple of levels. I want to be able to give the Brownie some Greater Bracers of Archery and the only way that I can figure to give him a feat is with the Beast Bonded Witch archetype. Its not so bad as by that level I will already have all the BAB that I need. The few spells will be nice. Ward is basically equivalent to Extra Item Slot for a +2 Ring of Protection and +2 Cloak of Resistance. And I get to give him an Item slot for the bracers. Feral Speech is also very in theme.

Suggestions?


Lorewalker: Those rules were all clearly fabricated. There is no such thing is "Paffifinder". ;)

Yeah, I dig. I think I'm done here because those rules are the same ones I already knew about. They do not outright say that they can wear armor. It says they can wear "Barding" which is different. I don't really care to argue against how I would prefer it to work but I'm sure you can see where that counter argument would go.

So let me just throw it out there: Is there anyone who believes that a Brownie Familiar could not wear armor, use a bow or a shield?


Lorewalker: Look, I agree with you so don't take what I say as me arguing with you. That isn't my intention. The problem with when you say, "The books make it legal..." is that you are not quoting a rule to support your viewpoint. It is the equivalent of saying, "Because reasons."

And when you say, "But an outsider [familiar], specifically one that has hands, can wield any weapon that can fit its hands." you aren't backing that up with facts. I understand that it isn't explicitly forbidden. It might not even be implicitly forbidden. But it is not explicitly allowed.

As I said, Pathfinder is a permissive system. You have a list of rules telling you what you CAN do. Unless there is a rule allowing for something you are likely to run up against a brick wall of a DM who says you can't and then have nothing to show to prove your point. In fact, the only thing you will have is "Well, there is nothing saying I can't..."

I don't want to go in with that weak ass argument. I don't want to design a character on shaky ground.

So, to repeat:

Me, earlier... wrote:

I need something saying that I CAN do something, not the lack of something saying that I cannot.

That being said, are there rules somewhere that I am not aware of stating that Familiars CAN wield manufactured weapons?

Is there a rule somewhere that states that Familiars CAN wear armor? (I know they get a Barding slot but technically that is different than armor.)

What about a Shield?... where does that fall?

What about slotless, non-activated magic items? (I know about Ioun Stones but what about other similar items?)


Lorewalker: Yeah, I read that entire thread back in the day. It is about as clear as mud. Questions pop up on the vagueness that is the current ruling constantly so I know I am not alone. I appreciate the fact that a ruling was made but it is very out of date and unclear.

Posts like Aram Zey's, while exciting if true, only add to the confusion. I also saw your post here that shows there is some confusion about whether or not Familiars are even allowed to use manufactured weapons at all.

The opinion shared stating they cannot use manufactured weapons.:
Jessex wrote:
Sometimes there are going to be rules that just are. This is one of those times. Familiars and AC's cannot use weapons. Familiars do not require Handle Animal. That is simply the way it is.

I don't want to spread mistruth and honestly I do not know where he came to that conclusion from. I think it is possible he got the information on Animal Companions mixed up with that of Familiars.

The point is that I would like to be able to make a character that has a Brownie as an Improved Familiar and is fully armed the way a character would be without getting a crosswise glance from a DM. I would like to be able to backup that this is doable with facts from a FAQ or the equivalent. Pathfinder is a permissive system. I need something saying that I CAN do something, not the lack of something saying that I cannot.

That being said, are there rules somewhere that I am not aware of stating that Familiars CAN wield manufactured weapons?

Is there a rule somewhere that states that Familiars CAN wear armor? (I know they get a Barding slot but technically that is different than armor.)

What about a Shield?... where does that fall?

What about slotless, non-activated magic items? (I know about Ioun Stones but what about other similar items?)


Lorewalker: Um, that is Aram Zey. Does it get more official? ;) What if we got Marcos Farabellus in here?


Lorewalker: So you believe that it is an accident that they were only referring to Animal Companions there and that they meant to include that whole section for Familiars rather than the sections where they specify Familiars? You know I can't just take your word on that... ;)


GM Aram Zey: Hm... Brownies sadly do not come with a bow. Thank you for the idea, though.


Lorewalker: But I swear it used to actually be in the FAQ. Perhaps I am just remembering incorrectly.


Ferious Thune: I swear it was there but when I re-read it... did they remove it?!


Ah, thank you for that bit of wisdom, Lorewalker! :)

Where are you getting that a familiar has only two body slots? Please provide me with a quote and/or link. The part that you quoted says what part of the chart that they use. It does not say that familiars only have a barding and neck slot. Are you perhaps confusing the part where it talks about Animal Companions?

I hadn't thought about the actual pricing of Tiny sized items. I guess I would have to go with a resizing bow if I wanted the guy to get a Tiny sized bow.


So lets say I have a character that has Eldritch Guardian levels and gets Improved Familiar to obtain an Brownie Familiar.* What kind of gear could this Familiar use?

*I understand it is a point of contention whether an Eldritch Guardian qualifies or not...:
For the sake of argument lets just say that this character is able to meet the requirements through whatever means necessary. If he has to take a number of Wizard levels to qualify for Improved Familiar that doesn't prevent him from also having Eldritch Guardian levels.

Could he use a bow and arrows? (using all the combat feats the character has thanks to Eldritch Guardian)
Armor?
Wonderous Items?

I found this but it doesn't really answer the question.


Ah, I have been away from the boards for a while. Jason, thank you for posting. :) That is about how I had it figured. I honestly never really understood why two feats that are purposefully placed together on an archetype would be made to not work together.

Purple Dragon Knight: Ok. Seems as though we are on the same page here. FYI - in my son's character's situation he will be using a bardiche one handed via Phalanx Soldier and will have a shield in his other hand along with Two Weapon Fighting and Improved Shield Bash. So he will be good with covering his adjacent squares and threatening throughout his reach. Its a very Spartan build.

Also with the advice from this thread he will also be going for the Vanguard Style line of feats. Saving Shield was already part of his build so it is only natural and fits very nicely. ...it will require the buying of another book though.

So, with Jason's post are we all on the same page now?


Wait... what? Why are you saying that you can only "move to a space where you have enough reach to attack the enemy *in the square that right next to the one that triggered the AoO*."? That is not in any of the feats being discussed?

Hang on... is this with you assuming that the character possessing these feats does not have reach? He is using a polearm.

1. I agree that you only get to make one attack on the opponent before they reach your ally for them passing through your threatened square. (That may be beyond your reach but withing your threatened area, but being that you can move "as part of" your attack this is largely moot.)

2. I understand that this has to be within reach. (Obviously if you want to make an AoO that is an attack you have to be able to actually attack them.)

3. I also understand that you need to land adjacent to your ally to be able to use Bodyguard when they get there and then try to attack your opponent.

Provided all of these happen then you get to make one attack on the enemy for passing through your threatened square and then you get to use another AoO to buff your ally's AC. Correct?

I understand that you may not be able to always do all of these. Your feat could be glued to the floor preventing movement not allowing you to get to a position to make an attack on the approaching enemy from. Adjacent squares within your movement zone could be occupied preventing you from becoming adjacent to your ally. But, if all 3 things are true then what I say is true as well, right?: 1 attack on the enemy for movement, one AoO to buff your ally's AC via Bodyguard.


So you are on the side of them working together now then with the caveat that there has to be something other than the attack itself provoking? I'm fine with that interpretation because that accomplishes what the character needs to have happen. I do, however, wonder why you limit it to that.

The feat says:

Quote:
Until the beginning of your next turn, you may make attacks of opportunity against any opponent in this threatened area that provokes attacks of opportunity.

It doesn't say that they have to take the attack of opportunity. It just says they have to provoke.

I can understand why that would rub someone the wrong way but remember that you are increasing your threatened area, not your reach. If they do something in your threatened area (that is increased by Combat Patrol) that provokes then you get to make an AoO against them. Ah, but what if they are within your threatened area but not within your reach? Thats ok too because the feat says:

Quote:
You may move as part of these attacks, provided your total movement before your next turn does not exceed your speed.

It doesn't say that you have to move before making these attacks. It doesn't say that you have to move after making these attacks. It says, "You may move as part of these attacks...". That is important wording. It means that you can move to a place where you are both adjacent to your ally, within reach of your enemy and make your attack.

It also is important that it states "attacks" with an "s". So, plural. Meaning you can make more than one. Whether it be via multiple provoking actions (like say from both their movement and attacking your ally due to Bodyguard) or via a Fortuitous weapon, etc. This is important as a character like this who is fighting with a polearm, enlarged and under the effects of Long Arm is going to have a reach with a diameter of 60' (Large size has natural reach of 10', reach extends that to 20', Long Arm increases that by 5'. 25' reach x2 plus the 10' the character takes up=60') and if they have BAB 10 their threatened area is going to extend 10' beyond that. It is not just possible, but likely that when an opponent approaches your ally that they are going to pass through your threatened area (movement provoking an AoO) thus causing you to move to an area where they will have to move through your threatened zone AND your reach thus provoking an AoO from movement. Then when they finally make it to attacking your ally like they wanted to you will get another AoO via Bodyguard.


Jayder22 wrote:

Lune, It looks like you and I are in agreement as well. I think some of the confusion is stemming from your opening question which doesn't state anything about the opponent provoking from moving, just attacking your ally.

You might be correct about my wording. I guess I just thought it was obvious from the wording in Combat Patrol. To be fair I have tried to clarify several times.


Purple Dragon Knight: So if an opponents movement provokes in your Combat Patrol you are able to move adjacent and use Bodyguard when your ally is attacked. Right?


I am not discussing the Vanguard line of feats here. I also believe he was using that yerm both specifically for those feats and as a general dictionary definition word.

Nonetheless, I believe we are in agreement on your first paragraph when you stated that you can move when the enemy provokes from movement to arrive adjacent to your ally and use Bodyguard when they get attacked. I never suggested anything else.

With that in mind I'm not sure of how you reached the conclusion you did in your second paragraph.


Purple Dragon Knight: "ward" is not in the rules text being discussed here. But if I take your meaning correctly you are assuming that the character being discussed here is intending on only Bodyguarding one character within his Combat Patrol. I assure you that this is not the case. He does this for all characters within his Combat Patrol to the limit of his movement, reach and number of AoOs.


KingOfAnything wrote:
I'm not convinced that 1. The Aid Another action is considered a melee attack, and 2. The enemy "provokes" when they attack your ally.

1. It isn't. Normally. Read the "normal" section of Bodyguard. It says "Normal: Aid another is a standard action." Nothing requires it to be a melee attack. I'm not sure where you are getting that from.

2. Yep. He also provokes from movement for moving through your threatened area. So where is the issue here?

Also could you respond to my numbered post above as that spells out my understanding of the events and mechanics.


Heh, ninja'd by Scott. It is odd that Mark, Scott AND I are all of the same mind on this.


Hm... Mark's opinion seems to echo mine on the topic almost completely. The only place I think we differ is he seems to believe that Combat Patrol doesn't increase the area in which you threaten AoOs. I believe that it does due to Jason's post here which outright states that it does. Note that it doesn't actually increase your reach, just your threatened area which still requires you to move to be within reach. Vanguard Hussle doesn't require this movement.

Basically: reach is not completely synonymous with threatened area though there is often a lot of overlap.


Also, thank you Kalindlara for stopping by and clearing up ambiguity in how you believe this works and otherwise.


Hmmm, perhaps it would help if I explained my understanding of how this works.
1. Attacks of Opportunity happen before the provking action. I would assume that Combat Patrol works no differently here except for the fact that it allows you to move out of turn in the way that it states. So, after setting up a Combat Patrol I think everyone agrees that if an enemy moves within your Combat Patrol zone that this movement provokes an AoO thus allowing you to move to a point adjacent to your ally and within reach of your enemy. Right?
2. Now that you are adjacent to your team mate and have arrived prior to the enemy completing their action you "may" to make an attack of opportunity.
3. Now that you are adjacent to your team mate if your enemy chooses to complete his action by attacking your team mate this should also provoke a separate AoO per Bodyguard as it is a separate provoking action.

Am I missing something that makes this not work? At which step are you suggesting it falls apart?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The simple question is: do these feats work together?
Bodyguard

Spoiler:
Your swift strikes ward off enemies attacking nearby allies.

Prerequisite: Combat reflexes.

Benefit: When an adjacent ally is attacked, you may use an attack of opportunity to attempt the aid another action to improve your ally’s AC. You may not use the aid another action to improve your ally’s attack roll with this attack.

Normal: Aid another is a standard action.

Combat Patrol

Spoiler:

You range across the battlefield, dealing with threats wherever they arise.

Prerequisites: Combat reflexes, Mobility, base attack bonus +5.

Benefit: As a full-round action, you may set up a combat patrol, increasing your threatened area by 5 feet for every 5 points of your base attack bonus. Until the beginning of your next turn, you may make attacks of opportunity against any opponent in this threatened area that provokes attacks of opportunity. You may move as part of these attacks, provided your total movement before your next turn does not exceed your speed. Any movement you make provokes attacks of opportunity as normal.


So, can a character who has both feats set up a Combat Patrol and if another character who is within that Combat Patrol gets attacked move to a point adjacent to that character and use an AoO to use Bodyguard to increase their AC?

I have read several posts on this combination and have seen a lot of great feedback from Jason Nelson (the creator of Combat Patrol). I have a pretty strong feeling that the answer is "yes" due to the number of people who understand that it works this way, the feedback given by Jason and the fact that the Animal Companion Protector Archetype is given both feats as bonus feats. It seems to me like these are pretty clear indicators that they work with each other but despite all this and the fact that my son has been playing a character that uses this as his primary schtick for over a year with a multitude of GMs all who had a prior understanding of this combination from previous experiences we have ran into our first resistance to this recently.

A PFS GM at our FLGS has stated that they do not believe that they work together. Apparently they are so adamant about this that they are not willing to allow the combo despite other local GM rulings. In fact, unless I read the situation incorrectly it sounds as if they are completely unwilling to GM for the character. Despite this reaction I respect this GM very much and otherwise see very eye to eye with them and would rather avoid this as a topic of contention.

Unfortunately, I do not understand their perspective on this topic well enough to provide a counter point on this topic. As I know this GM frequents these boards hopefully they might drop by and explain their perspective. I am not trying to be dismissive of their perspective, I just don't understand it well enough to restate it in any way that would do it justice.


So are you saying that in a home game if I was playing a character in a game you ran and I wanted to sell a bead from a Strand of Prayer Beads that you would make it so that there are no NPCs in your world who would desire to buy such a thing?

And if they were going to buy it how would you determine the price of it?

I'm not talking about house rules here. I'm just talking about using the rules that are part of the core book.

Now, I understand this isn't what PFS is about. But that is why I am asking here.


I'm not sure what you mean about being "standard" part of PF rules. Logically I don't see anything stopping a character from buying a Strand of Prayer Beads, removing a bead and selling it for it's worth. In fact, I think the only thing stopping it is a house rule preventing an NPC from purchasing.

I know PFS has all kinds of house rules so that is what I was asking about. It appears this is one of them.


BNW: Ah. Was it a single bead? Or a strand with reduced/added beads? I don't need to know the scenario, just curious how it was done.


Hm... a thought just occurred to me. If I cannot purchase the item with one of the pieces removed could I sell one of them?

As an example could I sell the Bead of Smiting for 8,400gp immediately upon purchasing the Strand of Prayer Beads? Or could I sell the Black Pearl for 850gp when buying the pillbox?


The basic questions is whether or not I can purchase items that come in separate pieces piecemeal or not in Pathfinder Society.

Examples include things like the Strand of Prayer Beads. If I have a character that just wants to get the Bead of Karma and doesn't want the Bead of Smiting could he purchase a Strand of Prayer Beads with the Bead of Smiting removed at a price discounted by the value of the Bead of Smiting (16,800gp) for a total of 29,000gp?

Or what if I were to purchase a Noble's Vigilant Pillbox and then then swallow one of the pearls? Could I then replace one of the pearls at the cost of the pearl itself? If not but I wanted to replace the pearl would I have to sell the entire pillbox back at half price (reduced by the cost of the swallowed pearl) and then buy a new one at full price?

I am sure there are other items that are much akin to this situation but these are the two that I am most interested in.


Ok, well I sent my email on this back on 5/21. My email address will be changing soon. PM me if you get an undeliverable bounceback.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Will.Spencer wrote:
Lune wrote:
That being said, the purpose of this thread was not to complain. It was to look for other options now that it is gone.

Craft your own item with a Luck bonus.

DISCLAIMER: This thread is currently in the Advice forum, not a PFS-specific forum

And that is all well and nice except for games that do not allow custom item creation. That is an alternate rule and isn't allowed at all tables (or even most tables from my experience). I'm not just talking about PFS here, although that does represent a large player base. This might be hard to believe but there are a LOT of tables that follow the latest errata and do not use alternate rules.

That isn't really the point here, though. To me it sounds like Paizo is making a change that represents the thought that a Luck bonus to AC in general is worth more than just 2,500gp. The statement was made that it is too easy to get a bunch of cheap AC items and that it was throwing off the balance of the game. If that is true then that is an issue that runs to the core of the system. Also, if that is true then it is a problem that can be resolved by adjusting the pricing of a luck bonus to AC.

Removing the only item (that is available to everyone, not just casters) that provides a luck bonus to AC is not the way to resolve the stated issue. Changing the price is.

I am completely with the crowd who believes the real underlying problem is Fate's Favored. In fact, I would bet that a truthful answer from any Paizo Dev would be that they do NOT think that a +1 luck bonus to AC isn't worth 2,500. Mostly, I don't think they would want to say that as it would be akin to stating that it is a flaw that is at the core of the system and I don't think any of them believe that.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

It is built into the basic system. If it is too easy to get then it has been too easy to get since 3.0. Take a look the table was the same back then and the luck bonus existed then as well. So if that is a problem then it is a problem that is inherent to the system. If that is the case then maybe repricing how much Luck bonuses cost would be a better solution. Removing them from existing in a form that a player can purchase is NOT a solution.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

I have no problem with the item getting nerfed. I think that removing a luck bonus to AC is a bad move from both a mechanical and RP standpoint. The luck bonus matches both flavor and the mechanics of the game. I can understand removing the crit-be-gone part of it as that is difficult to price.

I think it is disingenuous to say that it was done because AC is too easy to get. The luck bonus to armor is something that has been codified in the system since previous iteration of the game and has never caused a problem in and of itself. Currently there is no item to take the place of obtaining the luck bonus. I didn't think that the Jingasa was a problem. It actually made you pay for a feature that you may not want (the crit-be-gone bit) in order to get something you did want (the luck bonus to AC).

If anything I think that the removal of the luck bonus hurts the power curve for the character types who would be most likely to buy it as there is nothing anyone can get that takes it's place currently.

No, I think a better option would have been to change it's price if the power it gave was out of line for it's price. Changing the item to something that doesn't resemble what it was meant for and doesn't give the mechanics that people are looking for is a mistake.

That being said, the purpose of this thread was not to complain. It was to look for other options now that it is gone.


Jared: Why would you do that? The Jingasa cannot be upgraded. The ring can. Mechanically speaking there is no reason for it. Also, for RP value your character can still wear a Jingasa whether it is magical or not so I am fairly confused...


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Wonderstell: You are starting with the knowledge that the item price is 5,000gp. What I was asking is for you to NOT start with that assumption. Show the math behind how YOU would price it. Deflection bonus is codified, so is having multiple different abilities. The crit part of it is not. What gold peice value do you put on that ability?

Azten: One time EVER. Not once per day. Ever.


6 people marked this as a favorite.

You would think with all the Mithral pricing that they would have found the time to tell us how much Mithral barding costs...


Hmm: Actually, what I am most looking for is an item that gives a Luck bonus to AC.


Lyric the Singing Paladin: Nah, I saw it. I liked it. Very creative and says what a lot of us are thinking. Also, I just put together that you are Hmm. :)

Olaf the Holy: That is not accurate. See the link above.

Wonderstell: I already shared the same link above, as stated. If the base value for the +1 Deflection is 2,000gp (Bonus squared x 2,000 gp) and it has multiple different abilities (Multiply lower item cost by 1.5) then you have to decide what the "lower item cost" is. Which one are you suggesting is the "lower item cost"? The Deflection bonus or the one time ability?

We know what the Dev's think because they priced the item at 5,000gp. But what do YOU think?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yeah... I mostly think that the crit part of Jingasa should probably never have existed at all. I can understand why they wanted to errata it. But the rules change doesn't fit crunch or fluff. I mean, it was meant to be fortunate which translates to granting a Luck bonus. Deflection isn't "fortunate". Luck is.

As for pricing, per this table a luck bonus is Bonus squared x 2,500 gp. So, 5k. As far as that once ever ability... it isn't worth much. In the current incarnation they value it at 1,000gp which I feel is high. I would say it would be worth closer to 500gp. I personally value it at far less especially because you cannot upgrade a Jingasa to a +2 version like you can a Ring of Protection.


You know I read over that line like 3 times and missed "weapon" each time?... Wow.


Can one have a weapon made out of two special materials? As an example:
Can I have a Cold Iron and Wyroot Longspear with the spear head being made out of Cold Iron and the haft being made out of Wyroot?

What about a Mithrial bladed Bardiche with a Darkwood haft?

Living Steel and Whipwood Ranseur?

Darkwood and Cold Iron Tetsubo?

If this is allowed then do you pay the full price for both materials?


Yeah, I am coming up short too. Its too bad. I feel like changing the price and limiting the crit ability would have been a fine way to nerf it. However, removing a player's ability to obtain a luck bonus to AC at all... that is the most extreme change in my mind.


So... now that Jingasa is gone... *sigh*

To be fair it likely was too cheap. But it is a completely different item now. I don't want to spend a bunch of time complaining about the change as it will do no good. In an effort to look forward constructively my most current concern is where to get a luck bonus to AC from now?

1 to 50 of 2,715 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2016 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.