|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
scary harpy wrote:
Which is true, but irrelevant since the class has as much in common with a warlock as any other short list spellcasting class.
I like the class a lot, but of course it's power is extremely dependent on the number of metamagic feats allowed in the campaign. You already explicitly exclude Dazing Spell, but this might not be the only problematic metamagic feat.
Just following the written rules, I would say you are right that you could not utilize the feat, since you have no uses of the channel energy class ability.
I would say that it is a bit of an oversight that the undead lord archetype does not make sure that your cleric still has the channel energy ability.
Fantastic work Meepo, already copying and adopting these for our own online campaign.
I have a few question concerning the Hexenmeister. As far as I understand he gradually trades 1st to 6th levels spells to gain 6 witch hexes in the end. I assume that they are still on his spelllist and he can use spell trigger and spell-completion items of these spells?
First thing, I don't think that you can take both the Separist and the Undead Lord archetypes since both of them modify the same class ability "domains" from the cleric.
Concering your questions, the skeleton template mentions that the skeleton keeps all weapon proficiencies, so you have no problems as long as you animate something that was proficient with bows/other ranged weapons before.
Nowhere in the description of these feats does it say that you can take them more than once.
The Onset value is optional and normally not used for poisons but for other afflictions like disease. If you look at other poisons in the SRD, you will see that a usual poison would have something like:
Quasit Poison : injury: save Fort DC 13; frequency 1/round for 6 rounds; Effect 1d2 Dex damage. Cure 2 consecutive save.
This is more potent than 3.5 poison, since multiple hits with this poison will increase the DC and duration quite a bit and you take 1d2 Dex damage every round for 6 rounds or until he saves twice (in two consecutive rounds).
Taking the quasit from above as an example, if your second level wizard is ambushed by a quasit and he gets two lucky hits with his claws, the wizard would (on the start of his turn) have to make a DC 15 Fort save to resist the poison and would have to do it for another 9 rounds or until he succeeds twice in a row, which is not that easy for a second level wizard.
It should be noted that the Pathfinder Familiar entry lists the same thing (the one I quoted before, was from 3.5 for comparison):
It states that a wizard may target his familiar with spells that normally are reserved for personal use (1st sentence) AND that a wizard may target his familiar with spells normally not allowed due to type restrictions (2nd sentence). In contrast to earlier editions the second sentence does not reference the first one in any way, thus applies to all spells not only those with target "You".The Summoner is a bit more restrictive in the sense that he is only allowed to do this with summoner spells, while a wizard could do it with all spells he can cast from any class he might have.
Lachlan Rocksoul wrote:
But it also says:"A summoner may cast spells on his eidolon even if the spells normally do not affect creatures of the eidolon’s type (outsider). Spells cast in this way must come from the summoner spell list."
Thus it is allowed.
The Share Spell entry for the summoner states:
Thus a summoner may cast spells on his eidolon that normally do not affect him. This is different to the wording of the share spell ability in 3.5 (in the familiar entry, which now has the same share spell entry as the eidolon):
Here a wizard would only have been able to use spells on his familiar that are reserved for humanoids if he either uses the spell on himself and the familiar stays within 5ft. or the spell had target "You". Thus he could have enlarged himself and his familiar, but they would have to stay within 5ft. of each other.
I think that is a good suggestion, just letting the archetype add a weapon group consisting of falcata and buckler at 5th level. Then one should probably just ignore the part about having to wield a falcata and buckler at the same time to get the bonus.
I have a question/problem concerning the Rondelero Duelist archetype from the Inner Sea Primer.
The ability Strong Swing essentially gives you a bonus on attack and damage with falcata and buckler that is equivalent to a normal fighter's highest weapon training bonus. But it only replaces Weapon Training I and, in contrast to other archetypes that do the same or a similar thing (like the two-weapon warrior), it does not replace the weapon training II-IV with any other abilities.
Could such a character also choose a weapon training category that is applicable to the falcata and get a bonus of up to +7 (+4 from strong arm and +3 from weapon training II-IV)?
just before christmas I usually do a special christmas adventure with my group. Usually this includes my group playing as evil fey/undead or similar creatures. Sadly I didn't have enough time this year to prepare anything and thus I would like to ask if someone knows a module/adventure that could be converted to something like that. Of course an adventure for an evil group would be best, but basically any adventure including a lot of "cute" opponents/allies to butcher will do.
Thanks in advance for any suggestions.
Hi everyone, I have a druid in my group who is able to wildshape into a stegosaurus. Since they are usually on a ship we ruled that a standard stegosaurus would weigh too much for the normal deck to support.
Would you allow the druid to cast airwalk and just make himself light enough for the deck to support, but not actually fly, since he would not be fast enough to catch up with the ship in that case.
The Mighty Grognard wrote:
Its one of the arcanas the Magus may choose from, thus official.
You could also just take Improved Unarmed Strike and Two-Weapon Fighting (or one level of monk) and make attacks with both hands. Especially if you cast a touch spell that allows for multiple touches, then you can add the spell effect to each of your unarmed strikes (although you have to hit the normal AC of course).
Electric Monk wrote:
Well Quasit and Leopard are both CR2 so i'd go with 7th level. However, for myself, i wouldn't allow a Medium creature as a familier even with the feat. I'd try to stear the player towards an alternative like an arctic fox or similar.
I think level 7 looks good. I wouldn't worry about a medium creature as a familiar. A small character can gain a small sized familiar with improved familiar, thus it should be no problem for a medium character to gain a medium sized familiar.
I was hoping to find a feat to allow it to benefit from the Augment Elemental feat. Do creatures with elemental subtypes count as elementals in general (for example, to take extra from a ranger with favored enemy), or is it by only a creatures base type that it can be considered an elemental?
Since the elemental type does not exist in Pathfinder (it's just a subtype of outsider now), there is no favored enemy elemental. If you look at the ranger in Pathfinder, there isn't even a favored enemy outsider (elemental).
I would say that gain a "+4 natural armor bonus" like in the dragon shape spells is not a bonus in the usual sense, but it replaces your usual natural armor bonus.
Why the mutagen gives you a natual armor bonus instead of an increase to your natural armor is not clear to me and doesn't really make sense.
The Nimble Advanced Mutagen is a bit oddly worded since it states that you get a natural armor bonus, which would not even stack with the one from the mutagen itself, but replace it. It should probably be an increase to natural armor as in the case of the mutagen itself.
That seams resounable, I will put it at 46.000gp to make sure that my players will want to keep it. Thanks
Since I don't want to make completely new stats, I thought I ask the community for suggestions. What would be good stat substitutes for Lashunta (both the female and male variety) from the planet Castrovel?
In other words what creatures (from any 3.5 book, WotC or 3rd party) would be good substitutes for these with some minor adjustments to pathfinder.
I would like some help with the pricing of this item. Since it is an item that the PCs will find in my game, the question is more, what would be a fair price for them to sell it, if they don't want it.
Blade of Sands
That depends on the feel of the campaign.
In our current main campaign, which should reach lvl 25 in the end (with some self made epic levels for pathfinder) we use 25 point buys (together with 3 traits per character, maximized 1st HD and Con-Score instead of Con-Bonus as Bonus hitpoints for the 1st level). In the same campaign we have some additional character doing side quests and stuff that ties into the whole campaign which use 20 point buys (and the standard 2 traits) which will probably only be played until around level 16.
If we play a campaign which is not meant to change the face of the game world we also use the standard 15 point buy and the usual rules for bonus hitpoints.
But the same rules also apply to NPCs, so you can have NPCs with point buys from 5 up to 35 (which is reserved for the case if the DM ever needs a Demi-God or something similar) and they use the same rules for traits and bonus hit points (as well as other stuff) as the player characters.
You advance the dragon to the number of hit dice you need, in your case 8d12 and then just calculate all saves by using the rules for good saves. Thus your base saves are +6 for all three, plus ability modifiers and other bonuses.
You can, you just need to apply both penalties. What is not possible is to use Combat Expertise and Total Defense, since you need to attack to use Combat Expertise, but fighting defensively is possible.
According to the bestiary:Bite = B/P/S
Claw = B/S
Gore = P
Hoof/Tentacle/Wing = B
Pincers/Tail Slap = B
Slam = B
Sting = P
Talon = S
In addition it states:
So its probably up to the DM to decide whether a specific creature's bite really does all three types of damage or just one.
golden pony wrote:
I think in Pathfinder a fighter 7 is not CR 7 anymore, but CR 6, but otherwise I would add the +1 natural AC and thoughness to warrant a full CR increase of +1. I would also give it the full orc ferocity, not just the one from half-orcs.
But You should probably decide this on a one by one basis, since this will not warrant a CR increase for all base classes, basically only for melee/ranged combat oriented ones. If you ever allow it as a PC race, it can be ok for some classes, severely underpowered for others and severely overpowered for some others.
what weapon is it? unless there's a one handed reach weapon I'm not aware of or specific monster rules that allow it, he shouldn't be able to wield it (all of the reach weapons I'm familiar with are two handed weapons)
Since Pathfinder is so proud on its backward compatibility, an enlarged half-giant (SRD Psionic) would be able to do it.
Going back to the question, the rules only mention that a reach weapon usually doubles your natural reach. So officially the huge weapon would still just double the reach. This is consistent with a large creature having a 5 ft. reach using a large reach weapon and also only gaining a 10ft. reach in all.
This is not the official rule, the PRD mentions below that this phrase is not taken from the rules, the rules say:
I have a similar high strength monk in my group. He is 5th level as well with a strength of 20 and Improved Grapple. This gives him a CMB of +12 and a CMD of 29 (10 + 12 (CMB) + 1 (Dex) + 3 (Wis) + 1 (Dodge) + 1 (deflection) + 1 (monk AC)).
It never really poses any problems, his AC is lower than that of other monks, even with mage armor (from the group's summoner, who has an ample supply for himself, his eidolon, the monk, the group's sorcerer, and the group's wizard). In addition he had to sacrifice hit points via a lower Con score to gain the high Strength and respectable Wis scores. So just hit him hard and he will be in trouble.
Did I miss something about vicious, why would the player drop when doing a lot of damage to a monster? He would still just take 1d6 points of damage (lethal or non-lethal), perhaps 2d6 or 3d6 if your DM decides that the backlash damage from vicious is also multiplied.
We once had a spell in one of our campaign, that one could use as a "good"-aligned version of animate dead. I don't exactly remember which level it was, I think it was a 4th level cleric spell. I also do not recall the exact costs of the spell or any additional limitations.
You used it on a corpse and summon the spirit of a fallen hero/champion of your diety (cleric only spell) to animate the corpse. Thus they were subject to dismissal and similar spells and if you released one of them the spirit vanished in contrast to undead that just become free-willed.
The template roughly worked in the following way (Pathfinderized):
For the matter of controlling they followed all the rules of the animate dead spell and counted against the same limit of creatures you could control (so no additional minions for evil clerics).
Since they could be more powerful than fast zombies, there probably were some additional limitations for the spell (like a higher cost), but I don't remember those.
josh hill 935 wrote:
You take the -2 on cmb, since it qualifies as a special version of an attack (the same as a bardic performance would improve it). But to take Imp. Trip you will also need Combat Expertise.
I am mainly using this as a DM, for Orc Hunters and similar NPCs against my Players. Since they will usually already have favored enemy/allies chosen such that they are effective against my Players, the additional stuff, like a second (full level) animal companion are very effective. I tried an orc spellless ranger with two boars as animal companions (I know, with standard Pathfinder rules, thats not allowed, since the boar is not on the list, but whatever) both at full level (one via the corresponding feat, the other via the ranger talent) and it was very powerful. In addition, not needing to keep track of spells for non-important NPCs helps to better concentrate on the real spellcasters you are running as a DM.
This item should not be confused with the wand rifle from "Entombed with the Pharoahs", since it should act in a totally different way.
I am starting my Golarion campaign in the more sci-fi influenced parts of the world and wanted to have the following item, for which I could need some help with the pricing. Thanks for any comments.
Once loaded you can activate it as a standard action and it fires one ot more magical missiles, each activation drains one charge. You need to make a ranged touch attack for each of these missiles and they deal 1d4 points of damage. The missiles are a force effect. The range is 25 ft. plus 5ft./2 caster levels and you may fire each missile at different targets, if they are all within 30 ft.
For each two caster level above 1st you may fire one additional missile. For each spell level above 1st you may also fire one additional missile.
Example: If you load the thing with a 9th level spell wand with a caster level of 19, you could generate 18 magic missiles (1 + 9 (CL 19th) + 8 (spell level 9th)) each requiring a ranged touch attack and gaining a +4 bonus on the attack roll.
Lord Snow wrote:
My god, Tito Leati is seak. I'm now reading through City of Broken Idols... and I can see TPK's in just about evrey other page.
Its not that bad, some things look tough, but level 13 characters also have their tricks and abilities.
Lord Snow wrote:
1. If chief Achcauhtlis' (area 3) melee section of the stat block says what I think it does, than he can attack nine times during a single turn using a full attack action. nine times. am I sane, or am I wrong?
Since he can both attack with his weapons and use his claws and bite, he can attack 9 times, but unless he is able to attack a non-melee character it shouldn't be that bad. All his attacks are quite harmless, with an average damage of 90-95 damage if everything hits. A PC barbarian can dish out a lot more than that and most other melee characters will have an AC, that will not allow the chief to hit with all attacks. Of course there are some possibilities for carnage, if he hits a lightly armored secondary fighter, a druid for example, which is human and gets one or two crits, he might of course be able to kill him in the first round, but something like that is nearly always possible. But hey, a first level orc barbarian can basically do that to any 1st or second level character and we still use them against our players, don't we?
Lord Snow wrote:
I would say, as if used by Khala, the aspect only uses the demon as a focus, but they are still its own spell-like abilities.
I only looked briefly at them, but were there any big changes made to the Duskblade, Hexblade and Scout except for the skills?
Duskblade: d10 like the new ranger. Deciding if the Duskblade is on par with the core classes or not, is up to you. I had a game where a Duskblade was next to useless compared to the Barbarian in the group and another one, where it nearly seemed overpowered. To see if it balanced to the Pathfinder classes, would probably need some work.
Scout: For me, I got rid of the scout and converted a lot of its class abilities to rogue talents and made the alternative class feature skirmish, that just removes sneak attack and substitutes it for skirmish.
Hexblade: I would seriously increase the number of hexes they gain per day and perhaps add a number of bonus feats (there were some hex feats in Dragon mag. at some point). Since the paladins smite also got better, I would also improve the hexblades hex, since its quite parallel to the smite from its progression. Hexblades were pretty useless in 3.5 (even weaker than a paladin), unless you seriously boosted their hex curse. Perhaps also add some ability that is on par with lay on hands (not the flavor, just an ability with a similar power level) to make the class more equivalent to the new paladin.
Don't have anything to say for the other two, never used a Spirit Shaman and the Warmage is redundant in my opinion.
Dreaming Warforged wrote:
You are right, that you can deal sneak attack damage with any damaging spell that needs an attack roll (either ranged or normal), if the usual conditions for sneak attack are satisfied, i.e., the opponent is flanked or loosed his Dexterity modifier.
The ability of the arcane trickster lets him add his sneak attack damage to any spell when opponents are flat-footed. He could go into a room (being invisible or using Stealth) and drop a fireball on a crowd and all of them would also suffer sneak attack damage. This is normally forbidden, since sneak attack only works with stuff that uses attack rolls (you must aim after all).
Well, if Demon Lords can grant spells or not, is up to you to decide in your campaign. In my campaigns they can grant spells, but they are nearly on-par with gods concerning their power level, i.e., unkillable for anything but level 60+ characters, which don't appear in my campaign world.
If you prefer demon lords to be killable by lets say level 20-25 characters, then it is quite unrealistic that they can grant up to level 9 spells on their own.
Another solution would be that demon lords can manipulate who gets granted spells directly from the Abyss, which would solve the dilemma in the latter case.
John Maki wrote:
There is no spell with the name "Acid Dart" in Pathfinder. The ability you mention under conjuration school and earth domain does exactly what is listed. There is no duration, as it just does 1d6 + 1 per 2 caster levels acid damage, no save, and no spell resistance as it is a supernatural ability.
Ah, your are right, so that will pose no problem at all.
Oh, I just looked it up and it seems we are both wrong. Beast shape/elemental body/etc give you a natural armor bonus and not an enhancement bonus to natural armor, so they stack already.