Martiln's page

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Nefreet wrote:

Driver 325 yards wrote:

These two stack. Further, you can simply cast enlarge person while you are holding the bow and then cast gravity bow reight afterwards. They will stack because the are not stacking size effects. Gravity bow is not a size effect.

It's not an issue of "stacking", it's that these two spells just do not work together.

If a medium-sized creature is enlarged, and shoots a bow, his bow deals medium-sized damage. Add in Gravity Bow, and you'll only deal large-sized damage. If you want huge-sized damage, you're going to have to go by the example I gave, which is carrying around a large-sized bow to begin with.

No, I disagree that your example is the only option, setting aside the apparent goofy rule for enlarge and reduce person.

A person could simply carry around arrows that are already large size arrows in his efficient quiver. When he enlarges himself, he has to make sure that the efficient quiver is not on his person. After enlarging his bow is large. So now when he shoots large arrows from this bow the attacks do large bow damage (getting around the goofing enlarge person rule). If this same person then cast gravity bow he will be doing huge damage with a large size bow and large sized arrows.

That's how I've interpreted it. It's a nice way to boost your damage prior to combat(if you've got the jump on your enemies), but terrible in combat, because it takes too many actions to pull off that by the time you're ready to go, you could have already shot your bow several times.

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

Only 9 people pushed the FAQ button? I was hoping for more than that, so I'll bump again.

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

CountMRVHS wrote:

So, does this weapon really offer anything another polearm with reach doesn't?

The ability to switch back and forth between reach and non-reach seems only slightly advantageous, in a few situations. To me, that's not the selling point of the Dorn-Dergar.

TWF makes the Dorn-Dergar a decent choice (for dwarves), since you can wield it in one hand with the proper feat. It's good, but is it the best? Well, that's pretty subjective and situational.

Here's a situation where the Dorn-Dergar out-shines everything else (in my opinion):

The Giant Killer in RotR
-Dwarf, has bonuses against giants
-Takes Ranger for FE:Giants
-Dual-wields Dorn-Dergars with appropriate feats (though it's -2 to TWF since not light)
-Dorn-Dergars have reach, useful against giants
-casts Lead Blades, big damage
-Gets the Twin Thunders feat line
-Becomes a Skyseeker!

Just my opinion, but in a campaign with a lot of giants like RotR, this guy is much scarier (and more flavorful) than the Dwarven fighter with a glaive.

So, if your question is about why a character may choose this weapon, hopefully I've provided a convincing common example from a popular AP. Should you choose this weapon for your specific plans in a general campaign? Well, I think that the posters in this thread have done a great job of analyzing the pros/cons of Dorn-Dergars in general situations, so hopefully you can make a very informed decision.

I think if you're going that route, the two-handed weapon combat style is a better choice, since ancestral weapon only affects 1 weapon at a time, and TWF with 2 dorn dergars means you're taking a -4 penalty to each attack.

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Ah jeez, this whole time I was under the impression whirlwind attack was a special full round action, not a full-attack. This changes certain tactics I've been using quite a bit.

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

1 person marked this as a favorite.

... Way to take the "high road" there after committing to it so much already.

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Yeesh, I have a hard time processing the idea of making a 3/4ths BAB class into a pure caster. It's like trying to turn a Fighter into a Skill Monkey to me. However the 1 good idea I've seen is a cleric that makes liberal use of Sacred Summons and nothing but buff/battlefield control spells. It can be done, but you'll always be behind a pure arcane caster in terms of raw power, cleric spells just don't have the oomph to compete.

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yea I know how the ring works. I was trying to make an analogy based on a common explination I hear in PFS.

SRD wrote:

Guarded Life (Ex)

Benefit: While raging, if the barbarian is reduced below 0 hit points, 1 hit point of lethal damage per barbarian level is converted to nonlethal damage. If the barbarian is at negative hit points due to lethal damage, she immediately stabilizes.

Alright, let's try using the SRD definition. WHen at 0 or below, any time you would take hitpoint damage convert your barbarian level in damage to nonlethal damage. For Greater Guarded Life, it's twice this. That means twice your level in damage is converted to nonlethal damage. And of course your DR is doubled vs lethal damage. Once converted, it is no longer apart of the same attack, because this is a rule that is not unless it says it is, much like a spell ends after you cast it unless it says it doesn't. This is crucial, as it allows your DR to apply to the remaining lethal damage.

Pay close attention to the wording here. notice how it says reduced below 0 hit points. now watch me re-word it to fit your theory:

Benefit: While raging and at or below 0 hit points etc...
You take the damage first, then if it is enough to reduce you below 0 hit points, you start converting. Don't put the Wagon before the Horse.

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

TWF is tough on a vivisectionist since they don't get many things to add to it, but it is doable. have you considered the Feral Mutagen Discovery? When using a mutagen, you grow a bite and 2 claws. that's 3 attacks at level 5 at your full attack and damage bonus. compare that to the 2 attacks you get from TWF which are at your full attack bonus-2, and your off-hand attack only does /strength bonus on damage rolls. an amulet of mighty fists+1 is technically cheaper than 2 +1 weapons, and it applies to all of your natural attacks. As for your other discovery, infusion is a nice way to share your extracts with party members. I'd personally stat the character as follows:
Strength: 16(10pts)
Dexterity: 14(5pts)
Constitution: 14(3pts)+1 at 4th
Intelligence: 14(5pts)
Wisdom: 11(1pt)
Cha: 7(-4pts)
More strength means more to hit and damage, your dex takes a minor hit, you get more HP, and intelligence can be raised later so you can use your highest level extracts. You mentioned being the face? I'd not bother, alchemists don't have any social skills as class skills, but if traits were allowed, I'd say take bully and the intimidating prowess feat, at least then you can scare the bejeezus out of NPCs for information, and demoralize your enemies, but you probably have better things to do with your combat time, like preparing to unload the sneak attacks. What else do you need help with?

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

So Guarded Life instead gives you non-lethal damage, which knocks you out anyways, but you're auto-stabilized when brought below negative hp? That latter half replicates exactly what diehard already does, in fact it's worse to take the non-lethal, because with diehard, you already have the choice to fight on or fall unconscious and be stable, but with guarded life, you're unconscious no matter what you do.

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

You should read the rules for Feinting in Combat before asking this:

Feinting is a standard action. To feint, make a Bluff skill check. The DC of this check is equal to 10 + your opponent's base attack bonus + your opponent's Wisdom modifier. If your opponent is trained in Sense Motive, the DC is instead equal to 10 + your opponent's Sense Motive bonus, if higher. If successful, the next melee attack you make against the target does not allow him to use his Dexterity bonus to AC (if any). This attack must be made on or before your next turn.

I know that Greater Feint treats them as flat footed until the beginning of your next turn, but the intent of Feinting is that you get to take advantage of them falling for your bluff, not anyone else.

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

maybe Wish. Polymorph any Object can't even do that, and it's an 8th level spell for wizards.

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

BBT, the men in white coats will be along for you shortly. Do try to stay calm until they arrive. :)

- Gauss

To the Funny Farm, where life is beautiful all the time...

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Bumping for relevance.

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

There are two contrary faqs. One says that Racial Heritage counts for taking racial archetypes. The other says that Half-Elves and Half-Orcs don't qualify for the parent race archetypes. But this also flies in the face of the rules for Humanoids listed in the ARG that says a racial subtype qualifies you for any race-based prerequisite so the half-breed FAQ is the odd-man out because the reason it cites, racial archetypes not counting as an "effect" is both directly contradicted by the pre-existing FAQ on Racial Heritage (which hasn't been retracted) and the ARG which allows it not based on the "effects" term but the "prerequisite" term which can't be so easily dismissed.

You should press the FAQ button on my thread about that issue, as I'm trying to raise awareness of and eliminate the contradiction.

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I don't think elementals and demons sweat.

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

13 people marked this as FAQ candidate.

It has come to my attention that there is a flaw in the way the rules for racial archetypes are supposed to work, according to the FAQs responses for both the Racial Heritage feat, and certain "Half-Races" Selecting Racial Archetypes of their parent races:

FAQ 1: Racial Heritage

FAQ 2: Racial Archetypes

which according to FAQ 1, implies that racial archetypes are an effect related to race, even though in FAQ 2 it clearly states that racial archetypes do not count as an "effect". So the question remains; which of these 2 are supposed to be true? please hit the FAQ button on this thread if you'd also like this answered. I know I do.

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Actually, Scion of Humanity does allow you to be targeted by various "person" spells, like Enlarge Person.

It also opens up Human racial archetypes, feats, traits and such.

With the Racial Heritage feat, you can also count as a third race, like Orc, and then take levels in Orc racial archetypes, like Scarred Witch Doctor.

I could have sworn the FAQ said that unless you are specifically the race that has the racial archetype, you can't select it, like only elves being ancient lorekeepers, and only dwarves being Foehammers?

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Ah, that's what I was missing. Well then, never mind lol.

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Man, as soon as I saw that, I was all over it for my chakram throwing fighter. I suddenly imagined the appearance of him throwing giant cordless yo-yos at the enemies, and had to have it.

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Uhh...Spell Perfection only lets you apply 1 metamagic feat without affecting its level or casting time. You don't get to add 3 for free, you pick 1, and the other metamagic feats modify the spell level and casting time accordingly.

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Can Rods be stored in Wrist Sheathes?

Not likely, unless you can convince your GM that the rod in question is only a foot in length, but most rods are 2-3 feet. too big for a wrist sheath.

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Theoretically, penalties to attack would be offset by opponents being constantly denied their dex bonus against me, but it's also a concern.

That holds true if they're enemies with a high dex score, otherwise against opponents with low dex and high natural armor, you might be screwed. now if you plan on throwing something besides shuriken, like chakram, or daggers, or even starknives*gasp), I would suggest making yourself a mighty hurling blinkback belt and the quick draw feat, so you can make thrown weapon attack rolls with your Strength instead of dex, and have them immediately be ready to throw again after the attack is resolved.

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Didn't think of wands. Don't usually use them in combat if I'm a weapon toting Oracle though.

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Protoman wrote:

Close Range (Ex)

Benefit: The magus can deliver ray spells that feature a ranged touch attack as melee touch spells. He can use a ranged touch attack spell that targets more than one creature (such as scorching ray), but he makes only one melee touch attack to deliver one of these ranged touch effects; additional ranged touch attacks from that spell are wasted and have no effect. These spells can be used with the spellstrike class feature.

Snowball isn't a ray spell.

I'd be careful with being nitpicky on what spells are and are not rays for the purposes of qualifying for Close Range. For instance, Ray of Frost and Acid Splash are identical cantrips except for two details; one does frost and one does acid damage, and due to the description one qualifies as a ray for Close Range and one doesn't. Scorching Ray and Acid Arrow is another example of this.

Near as I can tell the main difference between "ray" and "ranged touch attack with spell" is fluff - For instance acid spells are almost never rays but instead mechanically identical "blobs".

Personally I rule all ranged touch spells as "rays" for the purposes of Close Range, while reserving the right to rule out specific spells that clearly are not meant to work.

Edit: Finally, if in doubt you could consider some other cases for comparison. The Myrmidarch gets a variant of spellstrike called Ranged Spell Strike. The language there specifically says that Spellstrike is not limited to rays, but instead "a single missile, ray, or effect accompanies the attack."

It isn't fluff, ray spells are a specific type of spell, just like longswords are a specific type of weapon. not all ranged touch attack spells are ray spells, not all melee attacks are longsword attacks. There's no getting around it, you can't use close range arcana to spell strike with snowball, as it is not a ray spell.

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I hope you're not planning on using TWF and rapid shot together, that's some nasty penalties to attack. However, Weapon Focus(Shuriken) is always good, and you should work your way up to improved precise shot, because enemies having (soft)cover and/or concealment can also ruin your day.

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

2) If you release your 'shield' you lose its AC bonus, not sure where the question is on this.

releasing your grip is a free action. re-gripping it is a free action. let go, use free hand for somatic components, finish casting spell, re-grip, retain shield bonus to AC. or is there something I'm missing?

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Why not use guided hand and less str so that i can be a proper caster too a bit less AC but full casting ability ,better attack bonus, will saves and perception... also i think erastil gives free bow prof. (gods and magic page 15)

something like:
STR 10
DEX 14
CON 12
INT 12
WIS 18(+2 human included)
CHA 11

Guided Hand only benefits attack rolls, not damage rolls, and having such a low dex can hurt you later on if you want the really good and necessary archery feats like manyshot and improved precise shot. the low strength also means you want be getting a lot of bonus damage to your arrows, and trying to play clerics as pure casters doesn't usually work. There's a reason why they have 3/4ths BAB, and not 1/2.

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

how much help are you looking for? Do you want me to stat out a level 1 build for you? want a character idea/background for the AP? Both?

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

blackbloodtroll wrote:

Okay, this player has never played an Oracle.

Which Curse would be both best for the build, and easy to deal with?

Haunted does nothing wrist sheaths can't fix and gives very nice spells in return.

Tongues never penalizes you, it penalizes your group--each other player needs to spend 1 rank in linguistics to learn the language you're forced to speak. Ok, so there's a minor penalty in that you can't use Language-Dependent spells effectively (like Murderous Command, for example), but that's kind of it. Though, admittedly, you get almost no power from it.

Blackened is sweet for a fire blaster, but if he wants to be a weapon fighter, it's not the best path. I did get clarification in the past from a developer, though, that the penalty to weapon attacks was meant to only apply to manufactured weapons, so natural weapons and spells were unaffected.

Legalistic is pretty much not a penalty at all unless you wanted to make an especially dishonest character, and it provides a decent, if rare, bonus.

Haunted doesn't affect weapons, unless said weapon is in your backpack.

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I have abandoned the concept. Getting it to work well with the system loses a lot of the original flavor for me (like playing a bard instead of a rogue to be good at skills taste bad).

If I am playing a bard, it is not because I want to be a skill monkey.

I think you're using the term "Skill Monkey" way too literally, focusing only on the "Skill" part of Skill Monkey:

Skill Monkey: I. Person or persons in a group who provide minimal roles in combat but have an abundance of talents and abilities, which keep them useful to the party.
Talents and abilities. Not skills. Skills are a major part of that, but bards have lots of the a fore mentioned talents and abilities that can help them in both combat and non-combat situations, while still retaining a large number of skills as well. They get buffs, debuffs, healing, major skill versatility, combat applicability, and spells to top it all off. they are in many definitions of the phrase, a Skill Monkey. Rogues get sneak attack, a large number of skills similar to the Bard, and Rogue Talents. They are significantly less of a skill monkey than the bard, but what they do get, they tend to focus on more than the bard with his many abilities. In reality, Rogues are specialists, Bards are Generalists.

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

High Charisma is needed for get those bonus spells per day, though. If you really wanted to be as good as possible at casting and being the face of the party, max out your charisma. High Int would be good for high Knowledge rolls, Wisdom for noticing things the rest of the group misses.

Basically, focus on the mentals, with Dex as your only real concern for physical stats.

Bonus spells per day are overrated unless you're a primary caster. Bards aren't primary casters, they're support characters with spells attached. That being said, if you want more spells per day, rings of wizardry are way more useful to a bard than starting with a 20 Charisma.

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Allow me to direct you to this guide, which helped me make my first bard, and made them my all-time favorite class to play.

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

That could possibly be an exceptional case; an unarmed attack that procs a grapple opportunity. Another case would be, say, the feat that allows you to use a whip to grapple. I'd say in that case, any attack bonuses to the whip would also apply to the grapple (if it isn't already explicitly stated).

It doesn't explicitly say it does, since the feat tree is also viable while going the strength route, but if you're finessing with the whip, and you have all 3 whip mastery feats, then using your dex to grapple with the whip should work. That's how it's ruled at my table, anyways.

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Just what is your definition of Skill Monkey, then?

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Also going to point out that I almost never had to worry about dealing damage myself to be effective. I only ever used a whip or a net as weapons, and the only attack rolls I used were for combat maneuvers to trip, disarm or grapple.

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I would really like to see a class or archetype that revolves around using skills in combat to be effective.

You're gonna have to be specific as to which skills you're referring, because the bard I was talking about uses most of his skills in combat...to know about his enemies, he uses his knowledge, to make use of wands and such, he uses UMD. to see the fight coming beforehand, he uses perception to not be caught unawares. to not get smacked when he needs to get away from someone, he uses acrobatics. To fluster his enemies, he uses either Diplomacy or Intimidate to Antagonize them, or just to make them shaken. He also uses ride to control his phantom steed, Stealth to hide while blurred if he really needs to, and perform if for some reason he has to distract, countersong or fascinate. none of the bards skills really go to waste, and almost all of them are used in combat.

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Dhampirs can not be healed by cure spells. But yea, infernal healing looks good.

You're half-correct. Dhampirs can't be healed by spells that use positive energy, but infernal healing doesn't do that, it gives the target Fast Healing. Fast Healing =/= positive energy.

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Well apparently I am asking for something that doesn't exist. Rogues are the only skill monkey because both rogues and skills suck. Everyone else has better things they could be doing. Skills flesh out a character, but can't define him unless he just sucks at everything else. I tried skillmonkey in 3.5 and ran into the same problems as what everyone else has pointed out. Lord Twig came the closest to a viable skill monkey rogue, but even then its use is relative to the lack of skills in the rest of the party.

System mechanics are against this concept a good DM and campaign can mitigate that, but that is situational. I role-play and roll-play when I make a character. If a character isn't likely to function well, I either refine the concept or pick something else. Hence, the point of this whole thread to preemptively see if this could work.

Your concept might work if the campaign is primarily an urban adventure, but as far as most pathfinder adventures go, you're gonna be fighting things that aren't as easy to overcome as the challenges humanoids are going to offer you. especially if you're playing a stealthy character. Lots of monsters can perceive you without having to roll perception checks against your stealth checks. It's a great idea, one that works really well in an all humanoid setting...but monsters are a very dangerous foe, and were I playing the same character as you, I'd be afraid to leave the city without the assistance of some very brave(and expendable) meatbags. I mean Fighters. Same thing, really.

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I used to think Bards weren't skill monkeys either...until I played 1 with a 14 intelligence and ended up having 19 skills.
To break that down for you:
-4 of my skills were: Ride, Perception, Stealth and Use Magic Device(I Maxed all of these).
-3 of my skills were Perform: Comedy, Dance, and Oratory. Each of these performs however, were versatile performances, so because of comedy, I had Bluff and Intimidate, because of Dance, I had Acrobatics and Fly, and because of Oratory, I had Diplomacy and Sense motive. So for maxing out 3 skills, I actually maxed out 9 skills.
- 6 of my skills went into the knowledge: Arcana, Dungeoneering, Local, Nature, Planes and Religion. I technically only had these skills at 5 ranks each, but because of Bardic Knowledge, the bonuses amounted to max ranks(since half my bad level adds to knowledge skills, putting 1 rank every other level in a knowledge skill roughly equals max ranks).
To summarize, I had a know-it-all character who had every social skill covered(I let the fighter "handle" the animals, since I didn't know how to talk to the beasts), could sneak into and out of almost any situation with ease, could use magic items no problem-o, and could find and avoid traps if needed. The only thing I couldn't do was disable said traps, but that's something a headband of INT can easily fix.
So how's your Rogue with its 13 skills looking now?

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

It should work, since none of the abilities are being replaced by both archetypes.

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

There's a Paizo blog post about Combat Maneuvers and Weapons.

That Blog also mentions that the GM is free to rule that in certain circumstances, a weapon can be added to a combat maneuver when it normally wouldn't, like using a Sap with Dirty Trick to hit a sensitive spot. What about using a fist that has the grab special ability(AKA Tetori Monks)? wouldn't that be a circumstance specific enough?

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Depends. Do you have the Improved Two Weapon Fighting feat? If yes, you get 4, if no, 3.

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Fair enough. then to answer your "intentional" question, the druid is my favorite, because of wild shape and a free animal companion, plus spellcasting, which is icing on the cake.

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Hey, I answered honestly, there's no need to be a jerk about it. If you have a problem with my post, then kindly ignore it, but please don't come at me with petty insults.

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

so what, your GM just took your spellbook from you and...what, destroyed it? I highly doubt that. There's probably an in-game reason for it, and it should be your mission to retrieve it. if that's not the case, and your spellbook is gone forever, then it sounds like your GM just pulled a dick move, and you should talk to him about it.

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

the question was which class stands alone "without the need of feats" and why. Fighters don't really need feats, but having so many of them is a really nice boon. now if the question was "which melee class aside from the fighter stands alone and why?" I'd have answered differently.

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I typically ask myself the question, "Would it serve the story at this point for a PC to die?"

Most often, the answer is no. Once in a while...yes.

** spoiler omitted **

I probably wouldn't have low level mooks killing your PC's, unless they are being really stupid against the enemy, but if they choose to confront a BBEG that hits hard without some healing...the story should play out to make the BEST story.

How did he use his spell before the pc finished his charge? doesn't sound legal.

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The fighter, because of all the feats they get.

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Martiln wrote:

Most Wizards that I play take many precautions to ensure no one but myself can get access to it. If you didn't, then you weren't planning things out that well, and maybe Wizard isn't for you(Planning things out is kind of what Wizards do).

started as slave on boat stripped and tied to the mast....

Stripped and tied to the mast, huh? Were any other party members in the same situation as you? were they fairing any better?

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Magus with Dex and scimitar have better AC than fighters right from the begining ( with shield spell), and once they can cast stuff like mirror image, displacement, etc... they are way beyond fighters in frontline tanking

Oh really? with 12 dex, a suit of banded mail and a heavy shield, a fighter can have 20 AC starting at level 1 all the time. Your best is 22 for 1 minute. with 13 dex I can even take dodge for 21 AC. If I was a halfling with 16 dex, a breastplate, a heavy shield and dodge, I now have a 23 AC. Also I don't NEED Int, so my Con can be higher than the magus'. combine that with my d10 hit die over your d8, and the ability to fight all the time, I think I have you beat as a frontline fighter. By the way, how's that scimitar+dex trick helping you at level 1 I wonder?