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

Mathwei ap Niall's page

Goblin Squad Member. FullStarFullStar Pathfinder Society GM. 2,425 posts (2,435 including aliases). 3 reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 6 Pathfinder Society characters.


RSS

1 to 50 of 2,425 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Cheliax **

David_Bross wrote:

Monstrification giving Monstrous Physique 3 times a scenario when they can cast the spell themselves isn't a big deal. Likely they could have cast it twice themselves, so I doubt it'll be a huge change from where they were at.

Given you can't ready a charge, you also couldn't use contingent action on this. 125 gold a scroll does seem cheap however for this relatively powerful action economy cheat, although a 3min/level duration means you'd have to have some foresight. You could have a readied action to move to an enemy if it looks hostile, which would get you adjacent to one for your full round.

The ring doesn't state that it gives you the ability to use spell completion/trigger items as natural spell and wild speech do.

Don't forget you can recharge the Staff by burning a few extracts of enlarge person. By the time an alchemist can afford this item the will have 1st level slots and Boro Beads to burn to make sure they can always use this power whenever they want.

As for the ring, theres nothing stating you lose the ability to use spell trigger/completion items when polymorphed either. The only restrictions are

polymorph wrote:
While in such a form, you cannot cast any spells that require material components (unless you have the Eschew Materials or Natural Spell feat), and can only cast spells with somatic or verbal components if the form you choose has the capability to make such movements or speak, such as a dragon.

Being able to speak, move and manipulate items is all that's called for to cast a spell no matter the form. A Sorceror with this ring can cast any spell they want with at most a +1 level adjustment (if the spell had a somatic component) by taking Still spell or using any of the free ways of getting a metamagic feat.

Finally, Contingent Action. Remember all with the rules for charge since the recipient of this spell is restricted to a standard action by the rules of the spell instead of a Full action they CAN charge while under the effects of this spell.
Remember, this Contingent action happens outside of the targets turn so they can only take the readied action the spell provides. And per the rules for charge since they can only take that standard action partial charging is legal here.
And since contingency effects are immediate they can easily occur before initiative is rolled. Every important fight will begin with the melee in melee range with the opponent before initiative is even rolled.

Cheliax **

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Just looking over the ACG and putting together a list of items or spells to be on the lookout for from the ACG. Hoping to get a gist of what to expect once these things start showing up in the game.

First thing that I expect to be an issue is the Ring of Elequence.
Giving every caster in the game access to slightly watered down Natural Spell feat for 3500GP is bad enough but giving every Familiar and Animal Companion the ability to speak and understand 4 languages (no matter it's Int) is really going to cause problems.
(Yes I know that most AC's don't have access to the ring slot normally but there are way to many ways to get around that issue long enough to get this item working for them)

Next is the Monstrification Staff is going to be on every melee alchemists list as soon as possible. 12,000GP seems like a lot but having access to a pretty much at-will Monstrous Physique spell at will with all the goodies that brings is pretty brutal. (There are enough forms out there with massive natural attacks and movements to make this an uber item).

As for Spells the Contingent action spells are going to be a problem. I fully expect every party melee'er to run around with half a dozen scrolls of Contingent action of charge X (where x is whatever name/creature type they expect to encounter). Since the target is limited to a standard action that falls under charge exception rule so it should work, otherwise it'll be a simple move.

charge wrote:
If you are able to take only a standard action on your turn, you can still charge, but you are only allowed to move up to your speed (instead of up to double your speed) and you cannot draw a weapon unless you possess the Quick Draw feat. You can't use this option unless you are restricted to taking only a standard action on your turn.

Relatively free Pounce for everyone now at 150GP a pop but technically superior then normal pounce since it gives you an extra attack since you charge and attack off turn then full attack when your turn starts.

These are just the ones that jump out at me but I'm sure more of them are out there.
Do you all see any that will cause GM headaches?

Cheliax

LoneKnave wrote:
Artanthos wrote:

With the Advent of the ACG, the magus is able to take swashbuckler deeds as arcana, powered by his arcane pool. The prereq is an arcana that gives a preset list of useful deeds. After that, each arcana invested allows any 1 deed. The only restriction is meeting the level requirement for the deed.

Examples

  • Precise Strike: add magus level as precision damage while using a one-handed piercing melee weapon and have at least 1 point in arcane pool. (Dervish Dance allows scimitar to qualify.) (3rd level)
  • Evasive: gain evasion + uncanny dodge as long as you have at least 1 point in arcane pool (11th level)
  • Deadly Stab: save or die vs critical hit. DC 10 + 1/2 level + Dex mod. Costs 1 arcane (19th level)

Plenty of other abilities, but I thought these were noteworthy. The first two since they cost neither actions nor arcane pool expenditure.

Wow, these are ridiculous. I'm having to think pretty long and hard just why would I ever play a swash with this available.

Everything we are reading about this book is ridiculous. I'm just going to have to ban the whole book at this point.

Cheliax **

@John
Quick one for you, how are the chronicle sheets for Emerald Spire coming along?
We were hoping to run those at a convention this weekend and that is getting close.

Cheliax

Simon Legrande wrote:
Brom the Obnoxiously Awesome wrote:
ACG is coming!!! What will you do?
Keep waiting for the official release of 5e.

Cancel my subscription to Paizo products and operate under the belief that they stopped publishing new material after December 2013.

It's been a bad year for balance and this is just really the eject button for purchases.

Cheliax

DrakeRoberts wrote:
Mathwei ap Niall wrote:
Quote:
Such creatures attack with their weapons normally but treat all of their available natural attacks as secondary attacks during that attack, regardless of the attack’s original type.

I'm not entirely sure of the context of the quote you gave, but based on what I bolded, I think that perhaps you don't get the -5. The move action to maintain the grapple and the standard action attack with the weapon are not part of the same attack or full-attack action.

This is more comparable to attacking with a weapon on your turn and then taking an AoO with the natural attack. The -5, it would seem, is not maintained.

This actually makes some sense too... If whether or not you made the weapon attack (or made a second maintaining-grapple attempt) depended on the success of the initial move-action maintain, how would you know ahead of time whether or not to take the -5?

Nope, you are looking for loopholes that the devs hae already closed. Here's a Dev posting on exactly how this works focused on the hair power:

SKR explaining Natural attacks

The normal rule for secondary attacks is if the attack is your only type of attack in the round, it's treated as a primary attack.[/quote wrote:


Now since all combat maneuvers are treated as an attack roll, any round (which includes your AoO's as well) that you use any weapon other then your natural attack all natural attacks becom secondary and suffer those penalties.

The DEV's have been very specific on this kind of tactic.

Cheliax

DrakeRoberts wrote:

Are you using an iterative attack when you take a standard attack action? The maintain is an entirely separate move action, not part of a full attack action with the weapon?

Also, they only get full attacks against you if they have a weapon sized for use in a grapple.

Finally, while I agree that the circumstances are less than ideal, if the OP wants to do it... there's a way at least. Perhaps it'd be better to use just as a response to triggered AoOs. Then the witch would Grab on the opponent's turn and maintain/attack on their turn. If the opponent had already used their standard action, they couldn't attempt an escape or counter attack.

Doesn't matter if it's a separate action any time you use a natural attack in the same round as a manufactured weapon it becomes a secondary attack with all those penalties.

Quote:
Such creatures attack with their weapons normally but treat all of their available natural attacks as secondary attacks during that attack, regardless of the attack’s original type.

Also the only restriction on weapons while grappling is it can't require 2 hands to use. ANY 1 handed weapon can be used to full attack while grappling and there's nothing preventing a target from dropping their 2hder and pulling a 1hder out and full attacking with that.

Cheliax

Iron Giant wrote:
Mathwei ap Niall wrote:


and don't forget you can only brew up to ONE potion per day. No more than that, ever.
While the alchemist can only brew a single potion a day, there are a few tricks to produce more. If he has a tumor familiar with the valet archetype it appears as though the combined efforts can result in two a day (if someone see's a reason why not, let me know). Additionally, he can use the dilution alchemist discovery to produce one more.

Dilution will allow you to get around the 1 per day kinda (it lets you make 2 of the same potion once per day) but unfortunately the familiar is a no-go option due to the exact same faq entry.

Quote:
No. When creating potions, the crafter must prepare and expend the spell used by the potion as part of its creation

since the familiar is the crafter it would need to prepare and expend the spell but since the familiar can't prepare the spell/extract it fails to fulfil the requirements of the FAQ.

And before you bring up the familiar spell metamagic, remember alchemists aren't spellcasters so don't qualify to take the feat.

Cheliax

veneficus83 wrote:

see i do not understand why you would say formulae and not just extracts then, i did not know about the PFS rules about substituting brew potion for more bombs, i will look into that if this es the actual rule

also the 1 potion per day thing counteracts what the brew potion feat says "Brewing a potion takes 2 hours if its base price is 250 gp or less"

You really need to read the magic item creation rules. It doesn't matter how long it takes, you are limited to 1 per day.

magic item creation rules, pg. 549 wrote:
Regardless of the time needed for construction, a caster can create no more than one magic item per day.

Cheliax

DrakeRoberts wrote:

Um.. greater grapple? That lets maintenance be a move action, leaving a standard action to stab with a dagger or shortsword or other weapon of choice (including 2-handed weapons)

So:

Turn 1) Attack with hair. Grapple, giving target (but not yourself) grappled condition. If opponent is not adjacent to you, grappling them pulls them adjacent.

Opponent's Turn 1) Attacks you. Or tries to escape with escape artist/CMB vs your CMD. Lets assume they fail.

Turn 2) Move action (thanks to greater grapple) to maintain the grapple. The maintenance check is made at +5 since they did not escape. If you succeed on maintaining the grapple you can deal damage (via constrict) while Pinning the opponent (you do not do your normal hair damage, just the constrict damage here... if you weren't pinning you would have done 2x your normal damage essentially). Pinning denies dexterity, so you can use your standard action to attack with the weapon you have in hand. This attack would get sneak attack damage added to it.

The real question here is if you get a -5 (basically nulling the +5 you get) at Turn 2 to maintain the grapple since you're using a weapon and a natural attack in the same turn. My gut says 'no' because I think that only applies to full attacks, but I don't have time to research those rules at the moment, so I could be wrong there.

Don't forget you are playing a witch and Greater Grapple has a Bab +6 requirement. That means you can't do this until 13th level (11th if you only do the 2 level dip and the rest rogue) and since you are a poor BAB class your CMB is going to be low and your AC/HP's even lower.

Until you actually Pin the target they will be tearing you apart with their full attacks (or easily breaking your grapple since you only use your Int bonus as Str when making the initiate/maintain action. When they try to break your grapple it goes against your normal CMD (which is going to be a much easier check).

And Finally, ANY time you use a natural attack at the same time you use an iterative attack your hair becomes a secondary attack with all the penalties associated with it.

Good luck.

Cheliax

Don't forget the +3 for being 30' away. The DC is 15-18 depending on how close to the door the target is when the PC notices.

Cheliax

Daniel Thrace wrote:

I assume you are not playing in PFS, if you are Brew Potion is substituted out for Extra Bombs per the Additional Resources. If your potion making is falling flat, I would suggest asking the DM if you could substitute that for it.

I also agree with most posters that the rules indicate that you must prepare the extract then convert it into the potion, using one of your extract slots up in the process.

and don't forget you can only brew up to ONE potion per day. No more than that, ever.

Cheliax

David Haller wrote:

The Nehmain from "Tomb of the Iron Medusa" - con drain with no save is broken and nasty.

One of the toughest monsters I've run as a GM - the party fled it four times, and finally went all the way back to Absalom just to stock up on stuff specifically to fight it. It was "just a tomb guardian", but became the de facto BBEG.

(basic issue is it's under-CRed)

Yeah, she's a monster to fight but she's not the worst thing in there, that honor goes to the ghost you meet early.

28D6 20 ft' range touch attacks that move you up to a thousand feet from your healer. Add on top of that a flat 50% miss chance to hit him and if you DO manage to connect he only takes 50% of that damage. Plus perfect flight and can walk through walls, ugh.
THAT is a nasty fight.

Cheliax

NobodysHome wrote:
Quote:
...huge amount of discussion totally ignored...

Going back to the OP's question/statement, a great rule of thumb is, "Perform your most common full-round action on yourself. If the result is that you are disabled or dead, you do too much damage."

Can your barbarian withstand a full-round attack from himself while raging?
Can your wizard make the obscene Will save to prevent himself from being disabled for the combat?

It's silly, but a great measurement of a gaming system is, "How long would it take you to defeat yourself?"

I know that our particular group would take several rounds to defeat themselves, while I've seen barbarian builds that would utterly destroy themselves in a single round.

So if your build is such that, with a completely average roll on every die, you single-round yourself, then you're doing "too much damage".

Wildly enough this does seem like a valid metric.

If as a player "you don't want me to build critters to do this to you then don't build pc's that do it to me" seems a great basis for a co-op game.

Cheliax

Because he CAN brew any formulae he knows, he just has to prepare it as an extract first.

Cheliax

Your interpretation is incorrect. Per the FAQ update:

Quote:

Brew Potion: Can a character with this feat create a potion of any spell he knows simply by adding +5 to the DC, even without preparing it?

No. When creating potions, the crafter must prepare and expend the spell used by the potion as part of its creation. This is an exception to the normal rules that allow a caster to skip one of the prerequisites for crafting an item by adding +5 to the DC.

Update: Page 549, in the Magic Item Creation rules, in the second paragraph, change the last sentence to read as follows.

In addition, you cannot create potions, scrolls, staves, wands, or any other spell-trigger or spell-completion magic item without meeting its prerequisites.

posted July 2011

Yes, brew potion is now a sub-optimal crafting feat and not really worth investing in.

Cheliax

Scavion wrote:
Diego Rossi wrote:


On the other hand the martials would do way less damage (the static bonuses are way more relevant than the weapon damage dice) and increasing the number of enemies as a way to balance the martials and spellcaster strengths would be even less of a option.

Currently the martial punching a hole in the line of mooks defending the beeg, downing 2 or 3 enemies in one round is feasible, especially if they have already been weakened by a friend. If we give them a single powerful attack they would be capable to kill only 1 enemy during their round.

That would be what stuff like Cleave/Great Cleave and Vital Strike should have been useful for. Single attacks could have been built to be not an inferior option to full attacks ala mythic vital strike.

And currently, no not even due to the simplest of tactics and the constraints of the full attack paradigm. You move up to the line of mooks and now you only have one attack. Next round the mooks could easily readjust positioning and still deny you your full attack or the ability to kill any more than one of them.

Yup, Cleave and it's ilk would become significantly more useful. We'd also get away from the hyper-inflation of opponent HP's necessary to make things survive the 2-300pt burst damage that the game has grown into these days.

Best thing is it would put casters and martials back to the same action efficiency. Move and cast vs. move and attack, simple and elegant so of course it's never going to happen.

Cheliax

LoneKnave wrote:
Mathwei ap Niall wrote:


Well you obviously haven't read this thread.
Whoever said get close and feint? You feint from 30+ feet away and then do a move action (depends on what all is going on).
Magus can't attack but can cast mirror image and move in preparing to attack putting him in melee range.
Bad guys turn he attempts to disarm IF he has improved disarm he makes a CM check vs 10 + Kensais BAB + 0 (no dex allowed) + 0 (tanked str on this dex based build). Kensai is disarmed and since he had no weapons in hand (but did have imroved unarmed strike) he is now wielding the kensai's weapon.
(If we don't have improved disarm then he 5' back and uses a reach weapon, no AoO, same result except weapon is now on the ground behind the bad guy)

Disarming is a maneuver that is made in place of an attack action, it has 1 in *number of images* chance to succeed.

If the henchman isn't even close to the magus he has no reason to even care about him. He can bladed dash right past him (or at him). This is besides the fact that you have to be in melee to feint unless you are an Archer Fighter, or something similar.

Also, this henchman apparently has at least 3-4 feats, and this all hinges on the Kensai not having a backup weapon, or sense motive (which, considering this is a high INT class is entirely reasonable). It's absolutely ludicrous and you can pull it off maybe once until the player wisens up and grabs a backup weapon.

A). Mirror Image isn't that hard to defeat, just close your eyes. Moves it back to a 50/50 chance to succeed and completely ignores the mirror image spell.

B. Feint DOES NOT BEING IN REQUIRE MELEE RANGE, I have no idea where this assumption keeps coming from.
C). I've already shown the build on this mook and it's about as legal as can be. It's everyone else who is making assumptions on what the Kensai has. We've also already shown how poor a defense Sense Motive actually is for Kensai against a feint build.
Try Again.

Cheliax

Diego Rossi wrote:
Gnomezrule wrote:

Good lord combat is slow enough.

I think the high damage is part of balancing marshals with magics as has been said.

A fight will last a very small number of rounds. Resolving what happen in a round is time consuming. That has its drawback.

The small number of round remove the option to use more complicated tactics or non swift in combat buffs. The slow resolution of a character action push the GM toward encounters with a small number of powerful enemies and that make the martial ability to continue to make attack as long as they have hp mostly irrelevant and advantage single massive attacks either with save or die spells or as the ability to deal large number of hp in a single attack for martial.

Changing that will require big changes to the mechanic of the game.

The one change I so wished had actually made it into the game was the idea to remove iterative attacks. Instead of making multiple attacks per round when your BaB hit the right level you would just add your weapon dice to the roll again.

1st level your long sword did 1D8+x but at 6th it would do 2D8+x. Made it SOOOO much easier to balance around and made vital strike, charge, power attack, etc. so much more valuable.
Plus balancing the HP's around that kind of damage output actually made evocation spells useful without needing massive amounts of feats, class dips.

Oh Well.

Cheliax

pellinore wrote:
Mathwei ap Niall wrote:

Well you obviously haven't read this thread.

Whoever said get close and feint? You feint from 30+ feet away and then do a move action (depends on what all is going on).
Magus can't attack but can cast mirror image and move in preparing to attack putting him in melee range.
Bad guys turn he attempts to disarm IF he has improved disarm he makes a CM check vs 10 + Kensais BAB + 0 (no dex allowed) + 0 (tanked str on this dex based build). Kensai is disarmed and since he had no weapons in hand (but did have imroved unarmed strike) he is now wielding the kensai's weapon.
(If we don't have improved disarm then he 5' back and uses a reach weapon, no AoO, same result except weapon is now on the ground behind the bad guy)
Magus casts (defensively) Shocking Grasp, 5d6 (average 17) damage drops the 1st level mook and Magus re-arms as a move action (weapon is in same square thanks to weapon cord). GG mook.

Mook disarms kensai and then runs away. Chase him.

Cheliax

LoneKnave wrote:

Okay, you win initiative, go close, feint, Magus fails his sense motive.

He uses spell combat, casts blur or mirror image, then full attacks you.

Your turn, you try to disarm. You miraculously succeed (despite having a about a 1 in 5 chance at most).

He spellcombats, casts mage hand, recovers his weapon, and full attacks you.

EDIT: do note that when you tried to disarm, you provoked an AoO as well.
EDIT II: Mage hand actually needs a move action I think, my bad. I remember some spell that zaps the weapon to your hand, I'll dig around for it.

Well you obviously haven't read this thread.

Whoever said get close and feint? You feint from 30+ feet away and then do a move action (depends on what all is going on).
Magus can't attack but can cast mirror image and move in preparing to attack putting him in melee range.
Bad guys turn he attempts to disarm IF he has improved disarm he makes a CM check vs 10 + Kensais BAB + 0 (no dex allowed) + 0 (tanked str on this dex based build). Kensai is disarmed and since he had no weapons in hand (but did have imroved unarmed strike) he is now wielding the kensai's weapon.
(If we don't have improved disarm then he 5' back and uses a reach weapon, no AoO, same result except weapon is now on the ground behind the bad guy)

@ARTANTHOS, I specifically did not say pick up, I said manipulate. If you are not Wielding, Holding or retrieving the object from storage then you are Manipulating it.
Now if you are going to quote a rule quote ALL of it

Quote:

This action also applies to weapon-like objects carried in easy reach.

If your weapon or weapon-like object is stored in a pack or otherwise out of easy reach, treat this action as retrieving a stored item.

A weapon dangling from a 2 foot cord is not being carried in easy reach. Pulling that back in provokes an attack.

As for accusing me of using multiple henchmen I call foul on that. I have used exactly 1 npc to shut down this kensai, yes he's a mook and built exactly like a mook (I even posted his first level abilities). YOU are the one pulling things out of the air and making assumptions not in evidence. Try again.

Cheliax

Thaago wrote:
Mathwei ap Niall wrote:

...

@thaago, We aren't talking about a magus here, we're talking about a Kensai. That archetype makes enough significant changes to the base class that it really is a different beast.
As for your "options" to avoid this you are now spending significant resources to cover up the glaring weakness built into the archetype. This has been the point of this examination of the Kensai from the beginning. It has such glaring weaknesses that can be exploted by any opponent in the game with little to no cost on their part. If they did invest even a little to improve this tactic the Kensai is in extreme trouble.
Heck a first level human fighter minion who's been built as a melee support can (improved Feint, Skill Focus: Bluff, improved unarmed strike, fast talker) can easily take away 80% of 7th level Kensai with no problem. Get it up to 6th level and he...

But this 'glaring weakness' is actually a very, very specific weakness to one thing which hardly ever comes up. Meanwhile, touch AC vs regular AC is a tremendous [i]benefit[i] against enemy spellcasters, gunslingers, etc - there are lots of nasty touch attacks. The 'major expenditure of resources' is one feat (blind-fight) that also has other benefits and a spell (mirror image) that the Kensai had better have up anyways for dealing with creatures that actually do damage.

The 1st level against 7th and 6th against 14th examples are silly. Even if they can lower just 1 of the Kensai's defenses for 1 round (armor class from dex and int) the rest (armor from enhancement, deflection, and natural, concealment from mirror image come to mind) are still around. And the Kensai's offensive output is still way too high for those examples to survive a single round, even if they go first.

Their glaring weakness is that their defense AND offense can be taken from them extremely easy. You can feint, or turn off the lights or grease them or do anything that costs them their Dex bonus. THAT guts their passive defensive abilities and has always been the flaw with Dex builds, the Kensai is just double penalized since it costs him his Int bonus as well. Add to that he is restricted from having any armor as a backup and it's much more dangerous. Also as 3/4 BAB class with (usually) a low strnegth score it makes him particularly vulnerable to Combat Maneuvers. Though under-utilized they are a frighteningly effective tactic as the many Tetori Monks and Lore Warden Fighters have shown.

Covering all the ways that their dex can be taken from them costs significant resources which no longer needing to purchase actual armor doesn't quite cover.

The second issue is their dependence on a single weapon. ALL of their offensive class abilities rely on 1 singular weapon, once that is taken away 95% of their archetype abilities go with it. A backup weapon can help protect against this but that simply raises the cost of playing this class even higher.

As for the 1st vs. 7th level if you're not going to address the actual comment and choose to be flippant instead that's your choice, doesn't take away the truth of it.

Cheliax

Artanthos wrote:
Mathwei ap Niall wrote:


No, we simply don't care if he does. When he goes to recover that weapon he provokes an AoO letting his attacker(s) beat him down or sunder the weapon cord (or just attack it it has 0 hardness and hp's) or do any other CM on him they want.
Weapon cords don't solve the problem, in some ways they actually make it worse.

Your forgoing dealing damage to accomplish something the kensai can undo in one round, in addition hitting you. (cast a spell, free touch attack, 5' step, recover weapon)

How do you recon equipping your sword when using a weapon cord provokes an attack of opportunity?

Draw of Sheathe a Weapon wrote:

Drawing a weapon so that you can use it in combat, or putting it away so that you have a free hand, requires a move action. This action also applies to weapon-like objects carried in easy reach, such as wands. If your weapon or weapon-like object is stored in a pack or otherwise out of easy reach, treat this action as retrieving a stored item.

Emphasis mine. The whole point of a weapon cord: your weapon is in easy reach, you don't have to bend down to pick it up, which would provoke.

when the weapon cord was a swift action you could argue that you could recover it without provoking but once it was moved to a move action you know look at the move action faq now.

Under the Move action faq
Quote:

Can you pick up or manipulate an object in a square within your reach? Does this provoke an AOO? Does it provoke even if the foe can reach the object, but not your space?

The rules are a little hazy here, but to put it simply, you can affect objects and creatures within your reach. When picking up or manipulating objects, you generally provoke an attack of opportunity, but only against foes that can reach your space.

You are now manipulating an object that you aren't holding or wielding so by this FAQ you now provoke an AoO getting that weapon back.

As for forgoing damage, that's kind of the point of neutralizing a target. the only damage that matters is the last point, before that damage does nothing. I'd much rather a henchmen of mine spend his actions keeping the crit machine caster locked down then wail ineffectually for their measly 1D6+x.
Just like PC's would prefer the Bard to buff first or the cleric to heal when needed a minion who can spend a standard action denying a PC their full round action is a good trade for me. Heck if he just trades his Standard action for a PCs is a net win for the bad guys.

Cheliax

MrTsFloatinghead wrote:
Bacondale wrote:
MrTsFloatinghead wrote:
Mathwei ap Niall wrote:

share spells wrote:
The summoner may cast a spell with a target of “you” on his eidolon
enlarge person wrote:
Target one humanoid creature
Quote:

Share Spells (Ex)

The summoner may cast a spell with a target of “you” on his eidolon (as a spell with a range of touch) instead of on himself.
It's the second line that allows Enlarge Person on an Eidolon.

But a target of "you" is not a target of "one humanoid creature".

Spells that target "you" are personal range spells.

So? The first line is a benefit, not a restriction. The intent of the ability is clearly not to limit Summoners to ONLY casting personal range spells on their Eidolons.

Moreover, given that I'm not sure there ARE any spells that have both a range of "personal" and a "type" restriction on the Summoner's list (or any list, for that matter), it seems like your interpretation would render the second line meaningless.

It actually is a restriction and a benefit. Share spells is there so a caster can use their personal range spells to benefit their bonded companion. It's not there to bypass the built in restrictions of every spell in the game.

Expeditious retreat, Alter Self & Fire Shield are self only spells but share spells lets your companion benefit from them too. That's the purpose of the share spells ability not what you are trying to do.

edit: share Spells doesn't mean that you can only cast those spells on your companion, it's there so you can cast all your normal buff spells on your companion (like any other creature) AND also put your self buff spells on them too.

Cheliax

pellinore wrote:
Mathwei ap Niall wrote:

No, we simply don't care if he does. When he goes to recover that weapon he provokes an AoO letting his attacker(s) beat him down or sunder the weapon cord (or just attack it it has 0 hardness and hp's) or do any other CM on him they want.

Weapon cords don't solve the problem, in some ways they actually make it worse.
Not sure how the theoretical magus is any worse off with a weapon cord? At the very least it makes it possible to 5' step and rearm and still have a standard to do...something. And are we really going to be spending additional actions on sundering the cord? How many resources in terms of feats and actions are we going to spend to possibly neutralize this one guy? What's the rest of the party doing while all the bad guys are playing keep-away with Elric?

He's worse off because he is now provoking an AoO and depending on what the opponent can do with that AoO against an unarmed opponent.

And as I said this is not a tactic that destroys a Kensai, I said it neutralizes him. Until he gets his chosen weapon back he drops to being an inferior wizard with a much weaker spell list.

@thaago, We aren't talking about a magus here, we're talking about a Kensai. That archetype makes enough significant changes to the base class that it really is a different beast.
As for your "options" to avoid this you are now spending significant resources to cover up the glaring weakness built into the archetype. This has been the point of this examination of the Kensai from the beginning. It has such glaring weaknesses that can be exploted by any opponent in the game with little to no cost on their part. If they did invest even a little to improve this tactic the Kensai is in extreme trouble.
Heck a first level human fighter minion who's been built as a melee support can (improved Feint, Skill Focus: Bluff, improved unarmed strike, fast talker) can easily take away 80% of 7th level Kensai with no problem. Get it up to 6th level and he can actually destroy a 14th level kensai even faster. Give him any 2 helpers and the kensai is dead in 1 round.

This is all I'm saying to everyone thinking about blaying a Kensai. It has great offensive powers and deceptively great defensive abilities but it has a weakness. A great big glaring weakness that it will require a major expenditure in resources to overcome.
Before you decide to play this class make sure you are comfortable paying the price to cover those weaknesses.

Cheliax

Kranchan wrote:
So I know I can use enlarge person via share spell on my eidolon but can I buy a scroll of permanency to then make it permanent? Would this effect stay when unsummoned and then resummoned? I'm wondering because the wording says you only summon an aspect of the creature.

Uhmm, no you can't do any of this.

share spells does not allow you to cast enlarge person on your eidolon, that's an invalid spell.

share spells wrote:
The summoner may cast a spell with a target of “you” on his eidolon
enlarge person wrote:
Target one humanoid creature

You can never cast enlarge paerson on a eidolon.

Cheliax

No, why should it?
Nothing in either ability in any way says anything about reducing it further then to a move.

Cheliax

pellinore wrote:
Mathwei ap Niall wrote:

Second, you don't attack the Kensai after the feint, you Disarm him. Everything about the Kensai is specifically built around using one SPECIFIC weapon, once that's taken away it loses the lions share of it's power. Remember all the fighter combat feats it has only work with the chosen weapon, his canny defense only works when wielding his chosen weapon. Literally every offensive ability the archetype has stops working if you take his specific weapon away.

At that point he becomes a wizard in melee range, a few more hit points and a better bab but a much easier target to kill. In general the best defense against a Kensai is to simply have someone take his weapon and run away, he's completely hosed without it.
And are we to assume the magus in question is too cheap to spring for a weapon cord? Spending two rounds to feint then disarm when the magus can use a move action to rearm seems...not such a great option.

No, we simply don't care if he does. When he goes to recover that weapon he provokes an AoO letting his attacker(s) beat him down or sunder the weapon cord (or just attack it it has 0 hardness and hp's) or do any other CM on him they want.

Weapon cords don't solve the problem, in some ways they actually make it worse.

Cheliax

Threeshades wrote:

I am currently looking at one of my players, a synthesist summoner, routinely stealing the show in combat.

He currently has an AC of well above 30, and a flat damage bonus of +32 including feats but not dice. With improved critical he's got a crit range of 15-20/x2 putting that at a juicy 64 damage even before the dice are factored in.

I will post the exact build later because I dont have his character sheet here. But for now suffice it to say he has a large bipedal eidolon wielding a huge katana and also having a bite attack. If space allows he uses a wand of enlarge person for just a little more damage and extra reach.

And I wonder if these stats are still within a normal range for a 12th level character, considering he also has spellcasting at his disposal it seems a bit much to me, but then again ,there is no other dedicated melee character in the party to compare him to and this is pretty much the first time i've had a group long enough to get to this level.

As I said, I will post the exact build when i have his character sheet because i also find it difficult to follow how he got to the numbers i posted, mostly cncerning damage (i know eidolons can have ridiculous AC especially if their shield ally ability instead permanently applies to themselves)

Well the first thing that jumps out is the wand of enlarge person doesn't work. An eidolon is an outsider and enlarge person only works on humanoids.

Also
Quote:
He counts as both his original type and as an outsider for any effect related to type, whichever is worse for the synthesist.

So take a closer look at what buffs he's using and see which ones this comment here makes illegal.

Other than that Summoners are broken and Synthesists are broken on top of broken, but you knew that when they brought the class to you.

Cheliax

Important thing to remember when working with builds of this sort is how iterative and natural attacks interact.
The moment you grab that whip your hair attack suddenly becomes a secondary natural attack so a -5 to all attack rolls (and Combat Maneuvers are all attack rolls) and only half strength (or int for this archetype) to damage. Mixing the two is usually not recommended.

The real question is which do you want to focus on, the hair or the whip?
Once you have that answer then the build advice can come.

Cheliax

Thaago wrote:
Mathwei ap Niall wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Mathwei ap Niall wrote:

Just because your GM doesn't use the options that the game has put out there doesn't make the weakness any less glaring.

Also Feints aren't a build, it's a standard action that requires no investment to use, any combatant can do it at will. The feats and skill points are there simply to make it more efficient.
ANY opponent that a Kensai meets who thinks about it for 2 seconds can destroy that Kensai with no problem if they take these actions, the only difference is the one who doesn't invest in this feat needs 2 rounds to do it instead of one. That's it..

The Feint can be countered by anyone trained in Sense Motive. Further more for a serious combat the Kensai is probably whipping up spells like Mirror Image and/or Displacement as part of his defense.

Plus if the character isn't built for feinting, he's spending his standard action to bluff and he's hoping he'll survive into the next round where he can actually make use of that vulnerability, in the meantime doing NO damage at all. If he repeats this process, he'll be spending half his rounds doing no damage while the kensai destroys him.

First off yes it's a standard action to feint but that's not really an issue and there is more of value then just doing damage every round. As for the kensai destroying him that's also highly unlikely as well.

You apparently think that you need to be in melee range to feint. You don't. You simply feint the target whenever you see them from 30+ feet away then move, next round you neutralize the Kensai.
Or the round after that or 20 minutes later, doesn't matter since there is no time limit on when you have to make that attack.

As for sense motive being a valid defense that's hilarious. Remember the DC for feint against someone trained in sense motive is 10 + Sense Motive BONUS. Since A Kensai is already a pretty MAD class with a poor wisdom Score who doesn't have sense motive as a class skill if they

...

Yes, Feint is a bluff check but it's NOT a lie and those modifiers are only used when trying to lie so they aren't used when feinting. Also ALL if your ideas on making that feint roll harder are not in the rules. It doesn't matter how far away you are from the target or how many times you've already feinted them or even if you actual have a weapon or are a threat. The feint check has no limitations at all on its use against this target.

Second, you don't attack the Kensai after the feint, you Disarm him. Everything about the Kensai is specifically built around using one SPECIFIC weapon, once that's taken away it loses the lions share of it's power. Remember all the fighter combat feats it has only work with the chosen weapon, his canny defense only works when wielding his chosen weapon. Literally every offensive ability the archetype has stops working if you take his specific weapon away.
At that point he becomes a wizard in melee range, a few more hit points and a better bab but a much easier target to kill. In general the best defense against a Kensai is to simply have someone take his weapon and run away, he's completely hosed without it.

Also for those recommending using a bladebound kensai so they can teleport the blade back into his hands after being disarmed don't ferget the restrictions on that power.
A. it's a standard action spell-like ability which is usually going to happen in melee range (free AoO)
B. It uses the teleport spell as it's base so it falls under the standard restrictions of the teleport spell, mostly this one.

Quote:
Only objects held or in use (attended) by another person receive saving throws and Spell Resistance.

If the black blade is held by an enemy they can make a save to keep the blade from going anywhere.

If a bladebound Kensai is disarmed and the target holds the blade you may not actually get it back.

Cheliax **

Bob Jonquet wrote:
ZomB wrote:
You are in the PFS section of the boards

I am well aware where I am. What does this have to do with the topic?

wraithstrike wrote:
It is not being a jerk. It is following the rules. Someone not wanting to ignore the same rules you do, does not make them a jerk or a bad person.

Its not MY rules, its what it says in the CRB. The point is that the spell detect evil clearly provides the option for a non-evil aligned target to ping as evil if their intentions are imminently evil. A paladin's smite evil ability does not specify an alignment requirement, only that the target "be" evil. It would seem illogical to say a creature is manifesting an evil aura under the rules of evil as defined by the detect spell, but not be susceptible to a smite attack. Of course it is up to the GM to decide if the target's intentions would be considered evil. Once that ruling has been made, the game mechanics covering evil seem to be clear.

It is certainly within the GM's perogative not to have a creature ping based solely on its intentions, but it would be poor form, to do it and then screw anyone who used that information to cast a spell or performs an action based on the result.

As far as spellcrafting an SLA with no components, the skill says you have to be able to clearly see the spell being cast, not the spell components. Since a SLA, even one with no components, still provokes an attack of opportunity it stands to reason there is some indication the action is occurring, otherwise, there would be no AoO. Therefore, there has to be something occurring that would allow the spellcraft check.

Relevant text from the CRB...

"CRB, Page 106, under Spellcraft wrote:
"Identifying a spell as it is being cast requires no action, but you must be able to clearly see the spell as it is being cast, and this incurs the same penalties as a Perception skill check due to distance, poor conditions, and other factors."
Note it says nothing about spell components, just a reference...

Bob, I agree with most of what you wrote but have to disagree with your first statement on the detecting as evil meaning they are smiteable.

Remember detect evil specifically states

Quote:
Animals, traps, poisons, and other potential perils are not evil, and as such this spell does not detect them. Creatures with actively evil intents count as evil creatures for the purpose of this spell.

It clearly states the target is only evil for the purpose of the detect evil spell specifically.

It may be an unpleasant action by the GM but it is rife with literary elements where the bad guy tricks the paladin into violating his ethics or falling with stunts just like this.
The paladin who runs around smiting anything that detects as evil but isn't doing evil is supposed to fail.

Cheliax

LazarX wrote:
Mathwei ap Niall wrote:

Just because your GM doesn't use the options that the game has put out there doesn't make the weakness any less glaring.

Also Feints aren't a build, it's a standard action that requires no investment to use, any combatant can do it at will. The feats and skill points are there simply to make it more efficient.
ANY opponent that a Kensai meets who thinks about it for 2 seconds can destroy that Kensai with no problem if they take these actions, the only difference is the one who doesn't invest in this feat needs 2 rounds to do it instead of one. That's it..

The Feint can be countered by anyone trained in Sense Motive. Further more for a serious combat the Kensai is probably whipping up spells like Mirror Image and/or Displacement as part of his defense.

Plus if the character isn't built for feinting, he's spending his standard action to bluff and he's hoping he'll survive into the next round where he can actually make use of that vulnerability, in the meantime doing NO damage at all. If he repeats this process, he'll be spending half his rounds doing no damage while the kensai destroys him.

First off yes it's a standard action to feint but that's not really an issue and there is more of value then just doing damage every round. As for the kensai destroying him that's also highly unlikely as well.

You apparently think that you need to be in melee range to feint. You don't. You simply feint the target whenever you see them from 30+ feet away then move, next round you neutralize the Kensai.
Or the round after that or 20 minutes later, doesn't matter since there is no time limit on when you have to make that attack.

As for sense motive being a valid defense that's hilarious. Remember the DC for feint against someone trained in sense motive is 10 + Sense Motive BONUS. Since A Kensai is already a pretty MAD class with a poor wisdom Score who doesn't have sense motive as a class skill if they put a rank in it every level that would basically increase the DC for the feinter by 2 points at most. It's next to useless as a defense against anyone who wants to strip the Kensai of their defenses.
Try again.

@ARTANTHOS, In PFS there are actually more than one occasion in a PFS scenario where you have an NPC with improved and greater feint as an opponent.

Cheliax

Don't go into Power Dome A wrote:
Mathwei ap Niall wrote:
Dave Justus wrote:

The Kensai might have poor strength, but he is adding his int to CMD (as a dodge bonus) so he isn't all that vulnerable to disarm.

Having the ability to see in the dark and see invisible are good plans for a Kensai though (and I'd argue that while Kensai might be slightly more screwed when they can't see, pretty much any character is screwed enough by not being able to see that the difference is neglible).

Which is why we said to use Bluff. A simple bluff (feint) strips the Kensai of his dex & his Int dropping his CMD against a disarm to 10+bab+str and as a 3/4 bab class with the tanked Strength most Kensai have it's pretty much an automatic disarm (or trip, or bullrush or literally any combat maneuver you want). With every realistic combat maneuver build taking improved feint it's always a sad day for Kensai's.

For a 2 feat investment (improved feint & Greater Feint) a Kensai is effectively a sitting duck for the entire opposing team.

No, with all the glaring weaknesses the Kensai archetype has it's at best a glass cannon with a huge crack in it and if you yell boo at it it shatters.

This argument only makes any sense assuming PvP or something. I've been playing 3.x since the day it launched, across dozens of campaigns, and I've never been feinted once. Basically the DM has to build a Kensai killing NPC for any of this to make any sense.

Which entry in which Bestiary or Codex has these two feats? Even if there are any it's an incredibly niche case. You can put forward any character and we could hash out the perfect NPC to kill it, but that's never going to happen in actual play. Realistically there are a lot of builds that will simply OHKO any magus (or any character) if he loses initiative. But again, never going to happen in actual play.

Just because your GM doesn't use the options that the game has put out there doesn't make the weakness any less glaring.

Also Feints aren't a build, it's a standard action that requires no investment to use, any combatant can do it at will. The feats and skill points are there simply to make it more efficient.
ANY opponent that a Kensai meets who thinks about it for 2 seconds can destroy that Kensai with no problem if they take these actions, the only difference is the one who doesn't invest in this feat needs 2 rounds to do it instead of one. That's it.

Oh and several of the published material out there has opponents using Feint as their written tactic, it's not that rare.

Cheliax

Dave Black wrote:

Ok, two more questions and I will leave off the whole witch-hair thing.

If I had a Kensai/White haired witch combination could I give the hair the Dancing weapon property via the magus's arcane pool?

and

The witch's hair can grow out to 20ft at higher levels. If the witch had combat reflex's could she make attacks of opportunity anywhere within her extended reach? Also, could she use the trip ability if the attack succeeds?

Trip (Ex): At 4th level, a white-haired witch who successfully strikes a foe with her hair can attempt a combat maneuver check to trip the creature as a swift action*.

Technically yes and yes.

Cheliax

A.

The black blade is immune to the specific effects of the broken condition but it is not immune to being destroyed. And since the Rust monster's rust ability specifically says that the second hit destroys the item and doesn't require it to have the broken condition for this to work the item is destroyed.
Your DM was correct.

Here's the FAQ entry written for this type of scenario.

FAQ wrote:


Magus, Black Blade: Can a black blade be sundered?

Yes.
The weapon's immunity the broken condition if it has at least 1 point in its arcane pool only prevents the specific effects of the broken condition. A black blade can still take damage--or even be destroyed--if it has at least 1 point in its arcane pool, it just won't take the additional penalties from the broken condition.

The name of a class feature (in this case, "unbreakable") is flavor text, not rules text.

Cheliax

Dave Justus wrote:

The Kensai might have poor strength, but he is adding his int to CMD (as a dodge bonus) so he isn't all that vulnerable to disarm.

Having the ability to see in the dark and see invisible are good plans for a Kensai though (and I'd argue that while Kensai might be slightly more screwed when they can't see, pretty much any character is screwed enough by not being able to see that the difference is neglible).

Which is why we said to use Bluff. A simple bluff (feint) strips the Kensai of his dex & his Int dropping his CMD against a disarm to 10+bab+str and as a 3/4 bab class with the tanked Strength most Kensai have it's pretty much an automatic disarm (or trip, or bullrush or literally any combat maneuver you want). With every realistic combat maneuver build taking improved feint it's always a sad day for Kensai's.

For a 2 feat investment (improved feint & Greater Feint) a Kensai is effectively a sitting duck for the entire opposing team.

No, with all the glaring weaknesses the Kensai archetype has it's at best a glass cannon with a huge crack in it and if you yell boo at it it shatters.

Cheliax

Zilfrel Findadur wrote:
Matt2VK wrote:

I believe you need to use a magus arcana to get mage armor as I think it's not on the magus spell list.

If you do pick up a level of Devish Dancer, you can grab yourself some Darkleaf Leather armor. It's +2 AC, 0% spell failure chance, and has a very high DEX modifier.

no..read the darkleaf material again, the minimum spell failure is 5%

the best armor is a Haramaki or the silken ceremonial armor. 1 AC, legitimate 0% spell failure chance, and there is no limit in the DEX.

And don't pay attention to Dervish haters, dumping Str is the best as a Kensai. the best thing of the kensai is that it makes the dervish build viable.

any build where the strongest part of the class can be defeated by a simple darkness or invisibility spell is not something I consider very good. Heck a simple bluff check removes almost all of the Kensai's defensive ability.

To OP, anything that removes the Dex bonus also removes the int bonus from AC and with the lack of actual armor the Kensai becomes as hard to hit as any other mage. Throw on that a Disarm combat maneuver and the kensai loses all of it's fighter feats as well. And since the Kensai tanked his Strength he is extremely vulnerable to all combat maneuvers.
All of this can be taken from him in 1 round by any halfway decent martial build and almost every caster build.

But it's a game, play what you want.

Cheliax

Robert Young wrote:
The spell storing spell doesn't crit because it doesn't require its own attack roll, it hits automatically, therefore it cannot roll a crit. It is triggered after something else has occurred, and is its own free action without an attack roll.

Incorrect. If the weapon crits the effect from spellstoring crits as well. This has been discussed repeatedly.

Cheliax

Dave Black wrote:

H,mmm interesting thanks for the reply's.

Mathwei: You mention " if you can get sneak attack damage off of the Constrict power of the WHW"

What are your thoughts on that?

If you had improved feint how would that work (assuming some rogue/witch mix) with regard to the constrict ability and sneak attack (if at all)

Is it simply a matter that hair and swords don't mix ;)

I refuse to open that can of worms with constrict and sneak attack. That way leads to madness and faq requests.

As for improved feint you still run into the same problem. I Feint costs you a move action preventing you from full attacking so you'd still be unable to get all your sneak attacks off that round. You'd get 1 SA but eh..

Cheliax **

Imbicatus wrote:

Snooze witch can only hit one character per round one time per scenario. If you make your save nothing happens, if you fail, another person can spend a standard to wake you. Or if they can't get to you, that can even hit you with an alchemist fire for one point of damage that will auto-wake you.

It's not an immediate CDG like it is for most npcs.

I'd much rather have a slumber witch as an opponent than most of the fights I've been in.

Split Hex + Wand of Slumber (familiar). 1 round half (or more) of the party is knocked out.

I only mention it because I've watched players do exactly this.

I so wish the BBEG were allowed to simply use one of the many ways of inflicting bleed damage on themselves. 1 point of damage a round for freedom from most mind control tactics these murderhobos throw out.

Cheliax

Zilfrel Findadur wrote:

Action economy eh, yes i was thinking about a homebrew to give dual initiative to a solo encounter.

raising defenses is definitely something i have failed, because humanoids tend to suck on innate defenses, but i will probably do it next time.

The thing is this, i wanted to create a 4 guardians of the elements theme, in which the 4 NPCs are the main enemies of the players, and they need to be solo encounters and be epic.

i was also thinking about Gestalt. but still don't know what CR should i give to a Gestalt character.

i had this in mind for the 4 characters of the elements.

Draconic Knight of Fire.
Samurai of the Wind.
Warlock of Ice
Monk of Earth (Thinking about a Synthesist/monk :P)

Dual initiative is cheezy and I've hated it since they put the Mythic rules out.

Now that you have stated what you WANT to do lets see how we can make that happen rather then tell you not to do it like most of the comments here.
First I'm going to tell you to do something that everyone here rails against. You should look to MMO raid encounters for how to make this happen. Since it focuses on single big bad encounters against multiple PC's and has devoted millions on getting it right.

First, the terrain is always on the BBEG side since the PC's have to come to him.
Your Knight of Fire encounter? Put him at the foot of an active volcano with a field of lava burst fields. He's immune to it but the PC's have to constantly keep moving and burning resources to handle the hazard. (Hint: Reset energy fire doesn't really protect you from lava)

Second, these guys are TOUGH but not hard to hit. They usually rely on two of three different survival mechanics which translate great to your goal.
A). Enormous HP pool, simple, straightforward and avoids frustration from the miss fest that high AC/miss chance encounters cause.
B). Recharge method, they have a mcguffin/ability that lets them rapidly undo damage/status effects that the PC's need to stop. Whether it's draining the life from an opponent or victim or super healing or body swap ability it's something that lets them go from almost defeated to full strength.
C). Achilles Heel, these guys can only be actually killed in a very specific way otherwise they just keep going.

Third, divided attention. The BBEG finds away for a significant portion of the party to focus on something other than beating in the boss. Usually dropping an effect on someone that must be dealt with right now or it gets really bad. Like a bomb effect on that guy so he explodes, or a magic portal summoning in reinforcements, or even an escape tunnel that must be closed or he gets away. Anything that requires the party to split it's attention.

For your idea let me throw a few possibilities out there to get you thinking in another way.
Fire Knight. He's attempting to set off a massive volcano near a major town by channeling the power of multiple elder Fire elementals via a powerful ritual into it and the PC's are trying to stop him. He's already gotten the volcano started and is in the middle of a field of magma geysers bursting from the ground. He's immune to it (fire resistance and evasion for the explosion AoE) and extremely tough (250+HP's) but the ritual is keeping him from really defending himself (low AC from not moving around much).
The party has to deal with constant magma explosions (keeps them moving) while splitting their attention between beating down the BBEG and breaking the connection between the fire elementals (who are imprisoned by the ritual so are non-combatants).
Their research or Wizard lets them know killing the BBEG before undoing the ritual releases a dozen enraged elder fire elementals to rampage across the town.
It's still just a fight between the PC's and the Big Bad but requires them to do more then just dogpile on the boss. Give the final fights a hook and everyone gets to contribute and your fights get more interesting.

Cheliax

It's not about ruling or making exceptions, it's about using the humanoid intelligently with proper tactics.
They should be taking advantage of all the advantages having a brain and thumbs allows them.
Terrain, lighting conditions, combat maneuvers, positioning etc. should all be taking into account when running a solo humanoid encounter.

A single humanoid standing out in wide open field at noon is an easy challenge for any group, but take that exact same opponent and put him up on a narrow ledge crouched behind a statue and he becomes an order of magnitude more difficult for any party.

Look beyond the targets stats and use better tactics and tricks. Mostly things that keep him out of full attack position and they are usually fine (until the real save or suck abilities kick in from the casters).

Cheliax

1 person marked this as a favorite.

So much confusion and incorrect information here.

First, to answer your original you CAN pin the target with your hair but you won't be able to sneak attack them. Pinned is just a grappled condition so you would still need to use your standard action each round to maintain the grapple. This will prevent you from taking the attack action to sneak attack the target.
Now if you are asking if you can get sneak attack damage off of the Constrict power of the WHW that's a different question.

Second, the rules of sneak attack don't care whether the target is pinned or grappled, it only cares if the target is flanked or denied their dex bonus. As long as those either of those conditions are met you can get your sneak attack off.

Finally, please ignore the incorrect information on natural attacks and grappling provided by absolutegrndzer0, it's all wrong.

Natural attacks and iterative attacks interact poorly and with the grab rules for the WHW makes it even more complicated. Trying to use your hair and iteratives together would go like this.

A). Declare full attack with hair and iterative strikes.

B). Natural attack with hair at Bab+strength bonus -5 to hit (penalty for mixing natural and iterative attacks, applies ONLY to nat attacks).
If you hit the target you deal 1D3 + half your int mod in damage and make a free action combat maneuver check (also at -5) to grapple the target. If this succeeds the target gains the grappled condition.

C. You now get to make your iterative attacks against the targets AC -2 (grappled applies a -4 to dex which equals a -2 to AC). You do NOT get your sneak attack since the target is not denied his Dex bonus they only have a penalty to it.
End your turn.

D). Target gets to act and since he's not tied up he can either try to break/reverse the grapple, cast a spell/power or full attack you with a 1 handed weapon (he can't use a 2-hander since the grappled condition denies that option). end turn

E. Your turn, you now try to maintain the grapple (a standard action) and if the target didn't break it last round you get a +5 on your attempt to grapple. You also are no longer taking the -5 penalty to attack rolls since you are no longer mixing nat and iterative attacks.
Since the grapple maintain is a standard action you don't get any other standard actions this round (like attacking) but you can choose to pin the target.

F. Jumping ahead to after you've pinned the target you still need to maintain the grapple so you still can't get your sneak attack from your iterative attacks (you don't have the actions left to actually attack with them).

Cheliax

AbsolutGrndZer0 wrote:
Kazaan wrote:
Partially. Spell Combat still requires the free hand, even if the spell has no somatic components.

Okay, now see read this...

http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2r2ld?Card-Caster-Magus-questions

The question the first person poses, Spell Combat requires you to have a melee weapon in your main hand and nothing in your off-hand. It is unchanged by Card Caster. Then you use Harrowing Spellstrike... but if you can't draw your ranged weapon, that means you can use Spell Combat OR Harrowing Spellstrike in a round, but you cannot use BOTH in the same round?

That is correct but it's far worse then that. Remember that it is only spell combat that allows a magus to make a full attack with a spell so anytime a card caster decides to deliver a spell through a card they are limited to only a single attack that round.

Overall this is actually a worse archetype then the myrmidarch since it doesn't even give you half the advantages that archetype does.

Cheliax

GM Arkwright wrote:
The new Card Caster archetype seems compatible with the Hexcrafter; what's your opinion on it?

The card caster is a terrible archetype for the same reason that the Myrmidarch is terrible, it doesn't have any synergy with the default magus abilities.

Remember, it only modifies how spellstrike and Arcane Pool work so it's not compatible with spellcombat. This means you can never use your harrow deck in the same round you cast a spell.
Anytime you want to use your Harrowed Spellstrike ability you have to wait until the round after you cast a spell to make your attack.

This archetype is even worse then the myrmidarch in many ways to be honest. It treats your harrow deck as AMMUNITION meaning it's destroyed when it hits the target and requires you to burn your swift action every round you want to use your cards. You will never be able to use an arcana on any turn you actually want to attack with your signature ability.

Honestly, if you want to play gambit then you really need to look at the witch archetype Cartomancer, since they can actually cast a spell and attack with the card in that same round. The Card caster cannot.

Cheliax

nategar05 wrote:

That's what I was thinking. I was just trying to do everything and it wasn't working. Half of the reason I was trying so hard to fit in Moonlight Stalker was for flavor reasons.

I was considering switching my Str and Dex, but I want a good Dex to help me get through the early levels before I get good defensive stuffs. Especially since I'm not planning on playing high enough level to get heavy armor anyway.

Is there any other good option for Wayang after 5th level besides Shocking Grasp? FWIW I was planning on my 4th trait to get me Perception as a class skill.

I can't take Additional Traits and Extra Arcana at 5th, since one of them must be a Combat feat or Metamagic. I'm leaning toward a relatively low cost metamagic like Extend, Empower, or Piercing. Merciful would come in handy, but flavor says no for me. Either that or Weapon Finesse if I keep my Dex as high as it is and then boost it, which I'm strongly considering since my end-game armor will likely be a Mithril Breastplate and I'm not sure how keen my character will be on shapechanging.

Speaking of that, is there a reason that Merciful Spell is missing from the Enforcer build? No room for it? No need for it since Frostbite alone is enough?

Absolutely my 7th level feat will likely be Extra Arcana for either Spell Blending, Spell Shield, Prehensile Hair, or Evil Eye. Or something else. Or Intensify Spell if I stick with Shocking Grasp.

There are 10,000 different ways to build a character so the only thing that matters is what you want the character to do.

The best defense is a good offense.

Now to address your questions.
1. Wayang is a valid choice for any spell you intend to use with a metamagic feat. Once you narrow down what metamagic you want to take it lets you know what spells will be most effective with it.
2. We don't use merciful because the build is designed around frostbite which doesn't need it.

Cheliax

If you are building it as more Witch (debuffer) then Magus (Direct Damage) then why are you burning feats on moonlight stalker? Those are strictly for offensive damage dealing.

If you want to be a heavy debuffer with some realistic damage dealing potential then drop the moonlight stalker line and replace blindfight with additional traits to get int to intimidate.
Then swap your Dex and Str (without dervish dance the high dex is kind of wasted) and swap out Combat Expertise for either Extra Hex:Prehensile Hair or improved Trip. This will allow you to spend one of those attacks to do a combat manoeuvre for more debuff goodness on top of your regular attacks.

Wisdom determines your will save & Sense Motive/Perception score and it's usually not a good idea to dump that but go for it if you want.

Dazing is a HEAVY metamagic with it's +3 spell level change so you can't use it before 7th level (with Wayang, 10th without it) and it consumes all of your high level spell slots. Usually not worth it at that point.

Cheliax

Ross Byers wrote:
Mathwei ap Niall wrote:

Intangible doesn't mean it can't attack, it doesn't actually mean ANYTHING since it's not a game term. If they had said incorporeal it would make a difference but since there is no Intangible condition it has no effect.

It isn't a game term. It's a word. In English. It means 'cannot be touched' or 'insubstantial'.

Right, just like incorporeal but those critters still get to do damage.

Cheliax

Tels wrote:

When you succeed on a will save against the image, you know it's not there and is not real.

So if objects are affected as if they succeeded on their will save, then objects are affected as if it wasn't there.

Are you reading this at all or what?

That actually isn't true. All disbelieving does is reveals that this is an illusion, it doesn't do anything else.

Quote:
A successful saving throw against an illusion reveals it to be false, but a figment or phantasm remains as a translucent outline.

Heck, unless it's a figment or phantasm it doesn't even make the illusion disappear for you.

Intangible doesn't mean it can't attack, it doesn't actually mean ANYTHING since it's not a game term. If they had said incorporeal it would make a difference but since there is no Intangible condition it has no effect.

Now since the spell is specifically calling out that the image CAN affect objects (yes it is as if they made the save but since the save doesn't mean the object can't be touched it just makes all the saves against the image) AND every other quasi-real shadow spell in the game can inflict damage on living things (show me any instance in the game where quasi-real doesn't do damage) and there is nothing written in the spell to counteract the stated rule that shadow spells do damage why should this spell be different?

It's a shadow spell shaped to look like a sword wielding monster who then proceeds to stick a quasi-real sword through someones mid-section, they should take damage. 7th level spells are no joke and break all the rules of reality within the confines of the spell.

edit: Simulacrum is a better written spell I'll admit but is exactly the same strength as this one, just trades flexibility for power.
With that said these two spells are from the same school, same level and roughly same intent. Why would anyone expect them to be so vastly different in power?

1 to 50 of 2,425 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.