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

Nipin's page

Pathfinder Society Member. 281 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 2 Pathfinder Society characters.


1 to 50 of 281 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>

Dragon Disciple gets +2 that is "gained as if through level advancement."

EDIT: Also, mythic rules grant stat increases for leveling (+2 at every even tier for a total of +10 possible) and for one of the universal path abilties available at 3rd tier (+2 to one stat).

EDIT 2: So, I see the following available:

40 TOTAL (20th level w/o mythic tiers):

18 base ability
+2 racial (human, elf, half-elf, half-orc, and others I'm sure)
+5 level
+6 enhancement (headband typically)
+5 inherent (wish or tome)
+2 profane (questionable deal with least you'll die with a smile?)
+2 dragon disciple

52 TOTAL (20th level with 10 mythic tiers):

<same as above>
+10 mythic tiers
+2 universal path ability


You could also incorporate the Scrollmaster Wizard archetype which allows you to use scrolls as a short sword with an enhancement bonus of 1/2 the level of the spell on the scroll (0 and 1st level scrolls count as masterwork).


The lich has several options.

  • Use her melee touch attack once per round to heal herself for 1d8 +1/2 HD negative energy.
  • Use UMD to activate a wand or scroll of inflict wounds.
  • Purchase (or murder-steal) a potion of inflict wounds.
  • Hire, Dominate, or use Leadership to get a divine caster cohort who can heal her.
  • Use limited wish or wish.
  • Summon an outsider who can cast inflict wounds (or other negative energy damage spells).
  • Plane shift to a plane with the negative-dominant energy trait.

There are surely other methods, but these are probably the most common routes. The melee touch attack should cover most needs. Consumables or limited wish or even wish should cover more dire circumstance. If the lich is planning to do any serious campaigning for evil then she will likely find an evil or neutral divine caster who can use negative energy to heal her. Alternatively, she could just set up a contingency that plane shift's her to the plane of negative energy and chill in the constant healing until she is ready to go back to campaigning for her own evil ends.


The damage is probably competitive. Rogue with twf is getting two hits at 1d6+str+1d6(sneak) with a -2 att. A barbarian with a greatsword is getting 2d6+1.5xstr+3(power attack) with a -1 to att. It is also worth noting your rogue probably has a +1-2 str bonus and the barbarian is going to have a +5-6 str bonus (when raging). Thus your rogue gets on average 16-18 dmg per full attack and the barbarian gets on average 17-19 dmg per full attack. The barbarian also does not need to flank, can move and still get his 1 attack per round, has an attack bonus higher than your rogue (higher modifier from his ranging str and power attack is -1 vs -2 for twf), and he will deal more damage on an AOO. A fighter is getting the same damage as the barbarian minus the 2 points of raging str. A ranger is the same as a fighter with regards to dmg, at this level, except against his favored enemy when he is closer to the barbarian.

The rogue has competitive damage at this level, but will soon get eclipsed by most classes and their damage is reliant on a situational ability (sneak attack) that requires strategic movement to get in place as well as requiring cooperative allies.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Rylar wrote:
I like the idea of a force mage. Not sure what class I would go with, but at low levels toppling magic missile is my signature spell.

I suggest Human Evocation Wizard. I also made a quick list of spells which have force effects.

List of Force Spells:
cantrip - scoop
1st - magic missile, shield, floating disk, mage armor, shock shield
2nd - cushioning bands, admonishing ray
3rd - ablative barrier, force anchor, battering blast, chain of perdition, force punch, tiny hut, twilight knife
4th - resilient sphere
5th - interposing hand, wall of force
6th - symbol of sealing, forceful hand, leashed shackles
7th - forcecage, grasping hand, mage's sword
8th - clenched fist, telekinetic sphere
9th - mage's excellent enclosure, crushing hand

*Bolded spells are choices I suggest.

If you want to be particularly blasty then being an orc bloodline varisian tatoo sorcerer(choose evocation) would also strongly benefit you. You could also add crossblooded with draconic or elemental to up one particular element. You would also want the standard feats and traits that any blaster would want. Switching from standard evocation to admixture also gives you a lot of versatility. There is really not going to be much variety among blasters.

I am also fond of the fighter 1/wizard 5/eldritch knight. I prefer to select scorching ray as my weapon of choice and put all fighter feats toward rays (weapon focus(ray), etc.). However, the rogue 3/wizard 3/arcane trickster will out damage the eldritch knight, and you could use one level of assassin to gain entry to arcane trickster a level early.


The Double Crossbow gets to at best 2 bolts per round fired as the same action. This might be nice for a Vital Strike build, but is otherwise very lackluster for the feat investment.

Perhaps a unique magic crossbow which can be used as a swift action to split a bolt into two bolts on the next attack. The two bolts are treated as though fired separately during the same action. The crossbow would need to have a pretty significant cost associated to warrant the ability (along the lines of adding the speed weapon quality). The weapon would make mid to high level crossbowman on par with longbow wielders and slightly behind composite-longbow wielders.


I think a Human Urban Ranger with the archery combat style (better feat options than crossbow style imo) follower of Abadar (favored weapon is light crossbow) would be a fun character and competent combatant.

STR 12 (12 base)
DEX 16 (14 base +2 racial)
CON 14 (14 base)
INT 14 (13 base + 1 level)
WIS 13 (13 base)
CHA 12 (12 base)

1: Point Blank Shot
1: Precise Shot
2: Rapid Reload
3: Rapid Shot
5: Deadly Aim
6: Improved Precise Shot
7: Clustered Shots
9: Weapon Focus(light crossbow)
10: Point Blank Master

By 5th level, the difference between the crossbow and the composite longbow is STR bonus to damage and rapid reload instead of manyshot. While this makes the crossbow strictly inferior in damage potential, the crossbowman is slightly less MAD by needing only DEX instead of DEX and STR. You also have the option to fire one-handed which the longbow wielder lacks. All in all, if you want the best damage potential it is the composite longbow (gaining a boost to all dmg rolls and an effective extra attack worth of dmg from manyshot), but the crossbow is a viable ranged weapon (munchkins need not apply).

I think the crossbow could be fixed by houseruling manyshot to work for crossbows as well. For those who are stuck to a strictly realistic world (with magic and dragons of course) then add a new type of crossbow which can be fitted with two bolts. The new crossbow would require special training to use in this manner (i.e., manyshot). This would significantly reduce the difference in damage potential between the weapon types. The major difference between the weapons would be the 1-2 feats depending on which crossbow and how you get reduced load time.

I am also in favor of ruling that all bows and crossbows add the user's DEX bonus to damage. Composite bows would replace DEX with STR making them a good choice for switch hitters and as a backup ranged weapon for STR-based classes. I would also be fine with banning Clustered Shots, but now I'm getting off topic.


Summon the creature using a line of effect which extends above the wall.

I am fine with using the raw that the hole must be at least 1 square foot, and the wall of force must be continuous and unbroken. However, you could still leave a hole in the roof of your dome. The hole would just need to be larger than I had expected.


Wall of Force is a wall with no roof. As such, the line of effect merely extends over the wall and to the target (like an archer would shoot over the wall). If the caster is making a dome, then the caster simply needs to leave a small opening (1-2 inches is more than enough) in the dome for creating line of effect. Since spells are magically guided it really doesn't matter where the hole is located.


For a blaster, I would recommend tattooed sorcerer, crossblooded draconic/orc or draconic/elemental bloodline, and the following feats.

Human 1 - Spell Focus
1 - Spell Specialization
Tatooed Sorcerer 1 - Varisian Tatoo
3 - Greater Spell Focus
5 - Elemental Spell
7 - Empower Spell
bloodline 7 - Improved Initiative
9 - Spell Penetration
11 - Quicken Spell
13 - Greater Spell Penetration
bloodline 13 - Still Spell
15 - Spell Perfection

Spells to use with spell specialization
1st - Burning Hands
2nd - Scorching Ray
3rd - Fireball/Lightning Bolt
4th - Fireball/Lightning Bolt
5th - Cone of Cold
6th - Chain Lightning
7th+ - go crazy!

I also really enjoy the various hand spells (interposing hand etc). Which are fairly high level spells, but very fun and classic evocation.

EDIT: Also, don't forget to really plunder the evocation spell list. There are some gems in there like telekinetic charge which are really great spells and not just direct-damage. The illusion line is great, but you would want your feats will vary if you really want to rely on those illusions (they kinda suck if your opponent notices the illusion part).


I have run some high level games and a campaign with 6 players (not both at same time).

For higher level games, I try to make sure that I am very familiar with the monster's abilities. Playing the monster to its strength can often be the difference between challenging and trivial. You can also stagger the flood of enemies allowing the players to pick off a few before the next set. This reduces the number of active combatants at any given time and keeps the party engaged (challenged).

For a group of 6, I found that the biggest difference was the amount of damage that the group produced. I increased the HP of every creature by 50-100% and things leveled out a bit. With an extra 2 characters hitting the enemies they were just dying too quickly.

In general, I expect combats to last 3-4 rounds. I have had a combat that lasted 30+ rounds (it was intended to last the entire session and ended a major portion of a campaign) and combats which lasted one PC's action. Typically, the goal is to catch the party off guard and/or not let them prepare. A pre-buffed party initiating combat will typically win swiftly (i.e., one round give or take a surprise round).


1 person marked this as a favorite.


"Tiamat is not worshiped on Golarion. All dragons live in fear of her, and none willingly name her."


Prestige classes based around the sorcerer bloodlines like Dragon Disciple is in PFRPG (as opposed to the 3.5 version which was based on becoming a half-dragon through class levels).

I have started making several homebrew options built on a few of the bloodline options I find more personally interesting. Most of these classes focus on providing full caster level in addition to unique abilities.


I don't see why a ray being a sacred weapon is an issue. Best case, you have a higher die roll on a cantrip. This would be a concern if the warpriest was able to stack other damage bonuses on the ray. The best ray builds I have been able seen are still along the lines of expected damage from a similar level fighter (at best) and typically require using non-cantrip spells to be comparable. These builds require levels in casting classes and prestige classes to get the bonus dmg. Thus the warpriest levels get slacked off and the sacred weapon damage boost makes little difference if any. The spell must have a die less than the warpriest sacred weapon die to get any benefit. There are very few ray spells which benefit would from this ability, and those that do are going to fall short on damage comparably without picking up other damage bonuses.

A 20th level warpriest choosing to cast a 2d8 dmg cantrip is not really a concern. Similarly, a 1st level warpriest choosing to cast a 1d6 dmg cantrip is not an issue.


Save or Die effects I use extremely sparingly and only at high enough level resurrection is possible. Once spells like breath of life come online this is acceptable for me, but only occasionally.

It is never ok to use a single spell which could potentially kill more than 2 players outright (e.g., circle of death).

Also, anti-magic field, mage's dysjunction, wish, and similar spells that can remove the players equipment and/or abilities en masse even temporarily are not acceptable. This problem is exacerbated at higher levels. Consider a 20th level fighter who enters an antimagic field and loses all magic enhancements to armor and weapons, ring, amulet, headband, belt, cloak, boots, and any ioun stones. This could result in a -5 att/dmg, -18 ac, -5 all saves, and losing many other bonuses such as various armor and weapon abilities. The single casting has just destroyed the fighter and meanwhile the opposing side may have giants, dragons, or any other of a long list of magic free creatures that can walk over and rip the fighter to shreds. A spellcaster loses nearly all spells; non-spellcasting classes lose access to SU abilities and SLAs (e.g., totem rage powers). These abilities can end encounters just as easily as save or die, but the players get to watch their carefully crafted characters get ripped apart.

Shenanigans that can take a character out of the campaign exist and are sometimes mentioned as great tactics for PCs. One odd example is plane shift on a fighter to a random location on a random plane. The party is so unlikely to find him that you would essentially need divine intervention to reasonably explain it. The character has basically been targeted by a save or die effect which removes any chance of resurrection.

Finally, I am ok with mind control effects, but long term control effects should be something the players are aware of as a possibility and given time to prepare defenses against. As an example, I ran Castle Ravenloft recently and made it plain that he could control people and the players were aware of the general setting before starting the game. At no point was I concerned about using his mind controlling ability and probably should have made more use of it in key situations.

In summary, I think the biggest concern here is to make sure whatever you use the players feel that they had a chance to win and weren't reliant on a single roll of the dice to determine win/loss or blindsided by uncounterable abilities/effects. Dice add variability to the game and help keep players engaged, but seeing a Paladin with a will save higher than the DC of a death spell fail due to rolling a 1 is possible but not acceptable (imo). The DM is there to make the game fun as much as enforce rules. The toughest issue I have faced as a DM is making encounters that feel like the players could have died at any point, but not actually ending the campaign.

Typically, an ability which is a single roll or no roll (e.g., anti-magic field) to determine the outcome of the encounter (and especially campaign ending) even for one or two characters should be used sparingly or not at all. If the players have been given ample opportunity to prepare to defend against a tactic (e.g., the vampire ruling these lands is known to be able to control others minds) then the tactic is reasonable even if the players fail to prepare. Not wearing armor to fight an ogre doesn't make fighting ogres unreasonable.


Typically, when you level many of your stats will change. Skills, HP, BAB, saves, stats (str, dex, con, etc.), and spells are the most common to change, but many stats will be altered and some will cascade to others (e.g., BAB affects cmb, cmd, and weapon attack bonuses). This is good though as it typically represents your character becoming more powerful. Higher BAB means it is easier to hit and harder to be targeted by combat maneuvers of opponents (e.g., trip).

I have not read the beginners box, but it is intended to give you an initial taste of how the game plays and may omit things for sake of simplicity. If you have completed these and are looking for further rules relating to building characters and running games, then I recommend picking up the Core RuleBook(CRB) and the Bestiary 1.

As for where to go from here...everywhere, anywhere, or nowhere. The core assumption of the game is that the DM sets up a world and players tell the story through their actions. The DM may setup a nefarious villain who intends to conquer the tristate area, but it is up to the players to impact the world and tell their story. Will they defeat the foe, join him, convince him to join them!?! The rules simply present a basis for adjudicating interactions in the world. For example, when you try to hit the enemy roll an attack and compare to their AC to determine if you hit. Who you are trying to hit, why you want to hit them, where you are while hitting them, and what happens next is all determined by the people playing the game, which includes the DM!

These are all my opinions and experiences feel free to tell me that I am wrong (we are on the internet after all).


As Mondoglimmer said, most sources of DR don't stack in the normal sense of the term. For example, if a character had DR 10/magic from one source and DR 10/adamantine from another source, the net result would be DR 10 magic and adamantine/ So, instead of reducing damage twice by ten for a total of 20 DR it only reduces dmg by ten total and requires the opponent to overcome both types to overcome the DR. In a sense it is simpler this way, but DR is typically limited to < 20 which is negligible at higher levels. DR can be great for lower levels(when dmg per hit is small), but is very difficult to get at lower levels.


Check out called shots.

Specifically, "Stacking: Unless otherwise stated, penalties for multiple called shots do not stack, even if they are to different areas of the body. Ability damage and drain caused by called shots always stacks." Many called shots inflict ability damage on a crit and a reasonable penalty on a normal hit.


I would choose shapechange for best option. The versatility is simply amazing. Time stop, gate, and shade are all great choices as well.

However, the spell I have been thinking about lately is crushing hand. Just a fun spell. It may end up being the first 9th level spell I pick up for my current character when we get to that point(Wrath of the Righteous campaign).


Pathfinder Player Companion: Inner Sea Primer.

d20pfsrd link

FYI, the d20pfsrd entry for any item includes a reference at the bottom of the page(typically bottom) indicating the source book.


Marthkus wrote:
Wildshape and polymorph are very tame now compared to 3.5

The rant was more about how annoying it can be in practice (altering a significant portion of character sheet depending on shape and spell/ability) as opposed to a commentary on balance issues.


My group has houseruled the crafting rules to cut down of time to craft and number of feats required. Here is the post I made in the "What are your houserules" thread. The "Time to craft mundane items" spoiler is the relevant portion for this discussion.

The houserule significant reduces the time to craft mundane and magical items. We like the idea of crafting, but prefer not to be limited by having to devote large quantities of time (or feats) towards it. We tend to play at 7+ and taking a week or more to craft a sword or piece of armor would be a ridiculous waste of time. Also, the amount of progress is determined by your rank (and modified by any increase to the target DC) and is not determined by the roll other than to determine success. Someone with 5 ranks makes things faster than someone with 1 rank. Increasing the DC gives you a percentage of the your base progress; additively increasing your total progress.


ryric wrote:
I would say the intent is to avoid having a double of the same bloodline.

I agree with that intent; but the wording is, at best, unclear.


I was looking at the Eldritch Heritage feat a little closer over the past few days and noticed an odd bit of wording.

"This bloodline cannot be a bloodline you already have."

The rules text as written would imply that you could later gain the full bloodline and have two sources granting the same bloodline power. However, the intent seems to be that you either have the feat or the bloodline. Is this wording intended to allow someone to later gain the full bloodline (from either sorcerer levels, dragon disciple, or other future sources)? or Is it intended to prevent having both concurrently and is just worded poorly?


Vivianne Laflamme wrote:
HeHateMe wrote:
Wild Shape may not be that powerful,
No, it's pretty powerful.

anti-polymorph/wildshape rant:
It is also pretty annoying to use. "And for my action this turn I have decided to rebuild my character as <insert random creature here>". This issue is not limited to the druid, but is made most obvious playing a druid who has nearly endless options when polymorphing and as expected to polymorph regularly. Anytime I play a character who can polymorph, I have to build the character both with and without the polymorph bonuses to avoid dragging gameplay to a screeching halt. This become very non-trivial for the Druid due to massive number of options (a transmutation specialist with a large set of available polymorphs has the same issue). I love how Pathfinder simplified polymorph, but it is still a clunky system for those who use many different forms.

The above rant is the primary reason why druids do not rank higher on the list for me. I would love to play such a versatile character, but the enormous number of options is both the reason I want to play one and the reason I don't actually play one. I love the idea of the caster taking advantageous forms mixed with his spellcasting (e.g., The Sword in the Stone wizard battle). As such my preferred character is going to be either sorcerer or wizard (preparing spells is less bookkeeping then rebuilding my character) until the arcanist gets an official release and similar levels of support (which is promised to come in the ACG).


wintersrage wrote:
with the transformation spell i will be attacking with a base attack equal to my level.

With 5 levels of dragon disciple, you will have just gained 4th level spells. It will be another 5 levels before you are able to cast transformation. Dragon disciple will reduce your spellcasting significantly due to the missed levels. At your level, you have access to monstrous physique II, elemental body I, beast shape II, and vermin shape I. If you want to use a weapon it would be best to go with monstrous physique II, but you will only have proficiency with simple weapons.

Typically, melee focused Dragon Disciples take levels of a full BAB class (barbarian is a good 1 level dip and paladin/ranger are great 2 level dips) and focus more on melee and not on using spells. A Dragon Disciple also benefits from relying on natural attacks due to the form of the dragon ability granting multiple natural attacks and the fact you can end up with 3 attacks at full BAB and 2+ at BAB-5. If you want to stick with the casting focus, then I would lean more heavily on natural attacks (from your claws power or from transmutation spells). This will require an Amulet of Mighty Fists at some point.


wintersrage wrote:
i forgot to mention he is going to be melee based.

Are you going to be using Armor or a weapon?


Wiggz wrote:
Ogadim wrote:
As a general rule, I don't think you can say that +1 hit ~= +2 damage. I would say that it depends on which is scaling up faster for your character between your current hit percentage against your average enemy versus your current damage output. If your (current% + hit%)/current% - 1 > (currentDamage + damage)/currentDamage - current% then the +hit will give your more average damage. If the inequality is the other way around, +damage will win out.


But again, if one is looking for a hard and fast general rule of thumb, I say it has to be taken into account that your foe isn't a single wall of limitless hit points - much more often its a group of numerous foes all with a very limited supply... and every time you kill a foe, unless you hit the number exactly right, you lose whatever benefit the bonus damage provided.

The advantage of dealing 2d6+12 damage against a foe instead of 2d6+10 when all of your foes only have 12 hit points is no advantage at all whereas a bonus to hit is never wasted.

By the same token, if you manage to exceed your foes AC by an amount equal to or greater than the bonus to hit that was traded for dmg then you have effectively lost dmg (i.e., you would have hit without the bonus to hit and the dmg would have been more beneficial). For example, a fighter with +8 BAB (power attack at -3 att and +6 dmg) beats his targets AC by 3 and he did not power attack. In this situation the fighter could have traded the hit bonus for more dmg.

However, these arguments rely on specific outcomes. The statistical analyses works based on average case to determine what is superior. This guarantees the highest rate of return in the largest number of cases. Many people prefer to boost to hit over dmg especially in 3/4 and 1/2 BAB classes to get that sense of consistency, and some prefer to go with the X4 crit weapons and boost dmg as much as possible to have those "epic" hits. These are all valid ways to play. The "+1 att = +2 dmg" rule of thumb is just meant is a basic means to quickly evaluate two options (and is pretty close to accurate in the average case).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rachel Carter wrote:
Nipin wrote:
How about having an intelligent item with a proclivity (word of the day) toward chaos as the end boss. The item has taken control of past contestants who now enact its will. This leads to a series of combats as you have to take out each of the items wielders to finally take control of the item yourself. With each successfully defeated wielder (which does not require death just that you wrest them from the control of the item), the item teleports itself to the next wielder. I would have the final wielder be a fallen paladin who has fallen due to the chaotic (not evil) influence of the item. This means a group who wants epic and diverse combats can get them and a group who wants more noncombat solutions can get them. The final battle is more a battle for redemption than a battle to the death. I would make the paladin much higher level than the group, but have him regain control occasionally giving the group the chance to see his true nature and to decide if they should grant him a merciful death or try to free him from the item.
cool idea, how do you make an intelligent item? how does it change the weilder?

Here is a sample intelligent item (roughly put together). Which has the power to dominate at will as well as an exceedingly high ego (meaning a difficult will save to control the item). This is nearly an artifact level item, but a lesser item wouldn't fit the bill (imo). I wouldn't be too concerned of the party using the item since it can gain control over the wielder which makes this as much of a liability as an asset.

The item has a special purpose which is "defeat all", I interpret this to be that the item is seeking to dominate other to further its cause of spreading chaos.

Weapon of Chaos:

Weapon of Chaos
Cost: 198,600gp
Ego: 30
Base Item: +2 Anarchic Longsword (32,300gp base price, +4 ego)
Intelligent Item Modifiers:
  • Intelligent item (+500 gp)
  • Senses (120 ft.) (+1,000 gp )
  • Blindsense (+5,000 gp, +1 ego)
  • Telepathy (+1,000 gp and +1 ego)
  • 20 int/wis/cha (+24,000gp and +15 ego)
  • Item can change into one other form (shortspear) of the same size (+10,000 gp, +2 ego)
  • Item can cast 1st level spell (charm monster) 3/day (+1,200 gp, +1 ego)
  • Item can cast 4th level spell 3/day (dimension door) (+33,600 gp, +2 ego)

special purpose: defeat all, item attempts to gain control of all others and use them to generate chaos (+2 ego)
special purpose power: item can use 5th level spell (dominate person) at will (+90,000 gp and +2 ego)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

How about having an intelligent item with a proclivity (word of the day) toward chaos as the end boss. The item has taken control of past contestants who now enact its will. This leads to a series of combats as you have to take out each of the items wielders to finally take control of the item yourself. With each successfully defeated wielder (which does not require death just that you wrest them from the control of the item), the item teleports itself to the next wielder. I would have the final wielder be a fallen paladin who has fallen due to the chaotic (not evil) influence of the item. This means a group who wants epic and diverse combats can get them and a group who wants more noncombat solutions can get them. The final battle is more a battle for redemption than a battle to the death. I would make the paladin much higher level than the group, but have him regain control occasionally giving the group the chance to see his true nature and to decide if they should grant him a merciful death or try to free him from the item.

Sorry that ended up a bit long winded. The basic idea is the BBEG is a chaotic intelligent item which is simply controlling random participants to further the chaos of his realm (the maze) and the maze has now become a twisted path where the very laws of our reality may even be beginning to breakdown (this becomes more true nearer to the heart of the maze).


Lemmy wrote:
Nipin wrote:
I liked when this thread was about high level math and not high level spellcasting.
To be fair, spell casting is the main reason high level math breaks down...

I disagree, the math breaks down due to scaling of modifiers outpacing the growth of typical target values (DC, AC, etc.) which make it non-trivial to challenge high level players without either guaranteeing failure for some of the group or guaranteeing success for others. In many cases this is not an issue (e.g., only your scout needs to be able to sneak past the sentry), but in common cases it causes concerns (e.g., everyone needs to be able to hit the dragon). This is the commonly held belief. Certain buffing spells do impact this issue, but the discussion has gone off-topic and is now focused on the narrative impact of spellcasters (which also significantly impacts high level play, but was not the original topic of discussion).


I liked when this thread was about high level math and not high level spellcasting.


I think the solution here is to recognize that "secondary" has an implied affect on attack bonus and str bonus for natural attacks. Making something a "secondary" natural attack grants -5 to attack and half str bonus to dmg. However, by invoking "secondary" instead of stating the attack penalty and str bonus change directly it avoids stacking the attack penalty if the weapon was already a secondary attack. Meaning that a wing attack would not end up at a -10 bonus when used in combination with a manufactured weapon.

The design intent seems to, pretty clearly, be that natural weapons have a -5 attack penalty and half str bonus to dmg when used with manufactured weapons. The wording of the rules seems to be aimed at avoiding over-penalizing secondary natural attacks.


Has there been any mention regarding whether the new classes will be receiving any Mythic support?


If you want to make the familiar available why not make it available through the arcane bloodline as well. You could forbid the bonded item if desired (though I don't feel it is an overpowered choice). I just want reiterate how poor of a choice Hand of the Apprentice is for a 1/2 BAB class and it relies on STR for dmg.

I would like to see an exploit which changes a single target spell with an ongoing effect (and possibly also harmless) to a communal version. So, you could convert mount to communal mount by expending points.

Also, could we get some way to attain immortality similar to the Wizard Arcane Discovery?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

So, I have noticed that there is almost no reason to have any measurable CHA for the arcanist. Certain blast exploits and the bloodline power are the only abilities I see which key off of CHA. I doubt many will bother with getting enough CHA to bother with the blast exploits which are CHA based saves. I feel the Arcanist needs more reason for CHA or to just swap the saves to INT.


Proton891 wrote:

Okay, Studied Combat and Studied Strike aren't nerfs, they're two sledgehammers to the kneecaps! The investigator ability to participate in combat (let alone contribute) has been completely crippled. Yes, Studied Strike and Studied Combat are more thematic then Sneak Attack, but at least Sneak Attack doesn't just stop working after one decent hit.

For comparison at 20th:

Studied Combat: +10 to attack for at most (assuming 36 INT from 18 starting, 2 racial, 6 enhancement, 5 inherent, and 5 from level up) six rounds. Requires a standard action to set up (move with talent, swift with talent and inspiration point). Only useable once per enemy per day. Only one enemy at a time.

Studied Strike: One attack at +9d6. Requires and immediately ends Studied Combat.

Versus Sneak Attack: +6d6 per attack (at most 6 attacks with dual wield) whenever flanking or enemy is denied DEX to AC.

I know that the investigator has tons of utility. But so do the alchemist and rouge; and at least both of them can do something to help the party when the bad guys decide that diplomacy/bluff/intimidate/etc. isn't going to stop them from attacking.

Everyone has agreed the Investigator needs a combat buff. Most do not want sneak attack. Some want more damage potential from Studied Combat/Strike (not bigger damage, but more damage overall), and some (including myself) want more debuff focus than damage focus.

I would suggest changing Studied Combat to be more like favored target and then allow the Investigator to spend points to add debuffs to a studied opponent (spend points instead of ending studied combat). This trades the sneak attack (and some other dmg abilities since I would expect more debuffs as the Investigator levels) which more thematically fit the slayer/rogue for debuffing the current target by taking advantage of weaknesses others overlook.


I would like to request another alternative ability for the Arcane Bloodline or allowing Arcane Bond. I just don't see Hand of the Apprentice as a fitting selection. Wielding a weapon does not seem to fit the class. Also, throwing a weapon once with 1/2 BAB even adding the Arcanist's INT modifier is one step away from wasting a turn. At higher levels this ability will be completely forgotten and isn't particularly useful at low levels.

I am fine with not wanting to grant the Arcane Bond feature, but that feature is already available as a feat to any class. Removing the arcane bond feature from the bloodline only adds a bit more work to get the feature (Skill Focus and Eldritch Heritage). I would rather see the class gain this feature than some random replacement which is going to add word count and complicate the description for little gain.


The black raven wrote:
Cheapy wrote:

Way I see it, this would polarize the class in two builds :

- The "eater of magic", CHA-based and focussed pretty much exclusively on exploits, maybe even to the point of dumping INT

- The "scholar of magic", INT-based and focussed on spells. Which actually feels like a lesser Wizard with some interesting side abilities (the exploits)

Not saying that this would be a bad thing per se, but I feel that it would be better for the class to inherently allow a continuum of CHA/INT mixes rather than focus on the extremes.

Come to think of it, I feel that this polarization is the main obstacle the class should avoid.

I think this if fine. There will also be a group which plays somewhere in the middle where the balance of exploits and magic makes sense for them. Slightly lower DCs don't matter for many spells and exploits can be used to bump DC in a pinch. A mix of the two creates a more versatile character who can use strong exploits like dispelling and make good use of spells (need more per day and reasonable DCs) with the bonus of being good at CHA and INT based skills (knowledge, diplomacy, linguistics, use magic device, etc.).


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I would like to see the Rage ability lose some STR scaling and instead add benefits while casting or benefits to encourage casting. Being able to cast as a swift action under certain circumstances (e.g., once per round when scoring a critical hit while raging) jumps out as a nice replacement for the boring STR bonus type boosts to Rage. Could also allow the Bloodrager to spend at least a standard action to add certain metamagic feats for free without increasing cast time (Intensify, Heighten, Silent, Still) or at a reduced cost (Maximize, Empowered), but requiring the Bloodrager to have the appropriate feat. The Bloodrager should feel distinct in how it uses its rage ability. Adding some incentive or bonus to a limited spell list would be a nice move toward being a caster rather than a barbarian who can also cast.


I also wanted to say something about Spell Tinkerer causing an exponential increase in duration. It is my understanding that multiplicative effects (typically) multiply the base value and not the result of a previously multiplied value. So, a X2 and a X2 becomes a X3 as opposed to the expected X4. For example, I apply spell tinkerer to get 150% duration and then apply spell tinkerer again to get 200% duration. This may require a rewrite to be more clear, but that is my understanding of how it should be adjudicated (RAI if you will). I would alter the description to something like "adds 50% of the base duration of the spell to the time remaining". This means you could use this to extend some spells' durations forever given enough points (especially hour/lvl spells which can be a nice boon). However, you won't make a minute/lvl spell last indefinitely even at 20th level, and it would take an excessive amount of points and a reasonably high level to make a 10 minute/lvl spell last indefinitely (which is not typically worth the points it would cost).


I feel a nice balance between INT and CHA would work for this class. I would have INT as the spellcasting stat and then push CHA as THE stat for Exploits. I also feel this class is running the risk of being the no-resources caster for the first few levels (which is particularly worrisome for new players who tend to blow their resources too fast playing lowbie casters). I would like to suggest two changes to the class. The first addresses increasing the need for CHA and gives the Arcanist a few more resources at early levels. The second addresses the lackluster blast exploits which provides a good option to fill the early levels for the Arcanist.

I feel (as others have mentioned before) the starting number of AP for a day is too low especially at low levels. I would change the starting value for the day to CHA + 1/5 lvls (minimum of 1 AP). This increases the need for CHA (making it a non-dump stat if you want usable amounts of AP) and gives decent 3-4 AP at 1st level with a potential max of 5 for someone who dumps other stats for CHA (18 base with +2 racial). At later levels, the reduced scaling brings the amount of AP back in line with the previous values. I will present some sample progressions for starting amount of AP per day for the current progression(1+1/2 lvl), then three versions using my proposed progression(CHA+1/5 lvl); a CHA focused build, a balanced INT/CHA build, and an INT focused build.

current progression:

01 - 01
02 - 02
03 - 02
04 - 03
05 - 03
06 - 04
07 - 04
08 - 05
09 - 05
10 - 06
11 - 06
12 - 07
13 - 07
14 - 08
15 - 08
16 - 09
17 - 09
18 - 10
19 - 10
20 - 11

CHA+1/5 lvl progression assuming CHA focus:

01 - 03 20 cha, but capped at 3x lvl
02 - 05
03 - 05
04 - 06 (add headband +2 and 1 lvl bonus) 23 cha
05 - 07
06 - 07
07 - 07
08 - 09 (increase headband to +4 and add 1 lvl bonus) 26 cha
09 - 09
10 - 10
11 - 11 (increase headband to +6) 28 cha
12 - 11 (add +1 cha) 29 cha
13 - 11
14 - 11
15 - 12
16 - 13 (add +1 cha) 30 cha
17 - 13
18 - 13
19 - 13
20 - 14

CHA+1/5 lvl progression assuming balanced INT/CHA:

01 - 03 16 INT/CHA
02 - 03
03 - 03
04 - 03 (add headband +2 INT and +1 lvl bonus to cha)18 INT/17 CHA
05 - 04
06 - 04
07 - 05 (increase headband to +2 INT/CHA) 18 INT/19 CHA
08 - 06 (add +1 lvl bonus to CHA) 18 INT/20 CHA
09 - 06
10 - 07
11 - 08 (increase headband to +4 INT/CHA) 20 INT/22 CHA
12 - 08 (add +1 lvl bonus to INT) 21 INT/22 CHA
13 - 08
14 - 09 (increase headband to +6 INT/CHA) 22 INT/24 CHA
15 - 10
16 - 11 (add +1 lvl bonus to INT) 24 INT/24 CHA
17 - 11
18 - 11
19 - 11
20 - 12

CHA+1/5 lvl progression assuming INT focus:

01 - 01 20 INT/ 13CHA
02 - 01
03 - 01
04 - 01 (add headband +2 INT and +1 lvl bonus to INT)23 INT/13 CHA
05 - 02
06 - 02
07 - 02
08 - 02 (increase headband to +4 INT and add +1 lvl bonus to INT) 26 INT/13 CHA
09 - 02
10 - 03
11 - 03 (increase headband to +6 INT) 28 INT/13 CHA
12 - 03 (add +1 lvl bonus to INT) 29 INT/13 CHA
13 - 03
14 - 06 (increase headband to +6 INT/CHA) 29 INT/ 19CHA
15 - 07
16 - 07 (add +1 lvl bonus to INT) 30 INT/19 CHA
17 - 07
18 - 07
19 - 07
20 - 09 (add +1 lvl bonus to CHA) 24 INT/20 CHA

NOTE: I am not listing the number of spells per day here as that would make this long post a nightmare to read in depth. I can go back and add this analysis later if requested.

I expect actual play would push CHA early and then INT around 8-9. This gives a good bit of CHA early for more AP and then focuses on bringing INT up once the better AP gaining exploits come online. This would also end up looking similar to the balanced progression with a little bit more AP in the early levels at the cost of bonus spells/day and spell DCs. If someone wanted to push CHA to the exclusion of INT they would end up with a +1-2 mod on INT until very late game which will hurt the already low spells per day and make any spell with a DC not worth casting in most cases.

I would also suggest (again as many others before have) that the blast exploits should not have the damage reduced if the save is succeeded. The blast exploits should all have similar damage (force should be lower than the others) something like 2d4+1/2 lvls (1d6+1/2 lvls for force). Then the greater versions should all add some interesting effect(daze, entangle, set on fire, topple, etc.) OR damage (2d4+1/2 lvl becomes 2d6+1/2 lvl) and have a save for the new effect. If the greater version increases dmg then the save should decrease dmg, otherwise the save only affects the effect.

PS - I will probably comment on some of the other Exploits later, but this was what has been on my mind. Also, I am trying to hang around and see what happens with the full writeup when the next pdf appears. There has already been a lot of discussion about the big exploits (counterspelling and vampiring magic items).


Matt2VK wrote:
In the Paizo Blog: Playtest Thoughts: Week 1 there are a number of changes being looked at for the different classes. Any idea on when these changes will go up for play testing?

This is what I have been wondering. I would love to see a full writeup for the Arcanist. I'd like to playtest the class, but will likely miss the end of the playtest before our group finishes the current game (which I am DMing) and can try out the new rules. I'll atleast get to build one over the weekend and post my results after piecing together an actual character.


I was reading over the Archetype request thread and started wondering about something.

Given your choice of any one feature from one of the new classes, which feature would you be most willing to trade for something else in an archetype?

I don't want to know what you would trade it to get (the archetype thread would be the place for that). I just want to know the feature you would most willingly give up. Feel free to include any explanation of why you would give up the particular feature.


rainsinger wrote:

Here's what I would like to see (taking into account the weekly update put out that hasn't been made completely official yet).

Arcanist: If the make all the noted changes, I like the direction it is going.

Bloodrager: This needs a lot of help, IMO. The changes that they have mentioned may fix parts of this, but I think it needs a clearly defined role... right now it just feels like an alternate version of the magus, but without the awesomeness that is spell combat and spellstrike. Honestly, I think we could just do without this combo altogether.

Brawler: Even the initial version of this, after playing around with it, I have found to be actually amazing. The versatility of this setup is amazing. The only issue I see is the restrictions on weapons, though that's getting a bit better with the proposed changes (though, opening up a can of worms here - this class with shields as a close weapon could get really ugly).

Hunter: I actually think this is probably the most well balanced of all the acg stuff so far. I do agree with the weekly that the companion should play in a little heavier, but I think that simply having more teamwork feats to choose from would help that quite a bit. It might also work though if they had an innate ability to buff their pets?

Investigator: Someone mentioned simply making the inspiration work for just about everything - I like this. Ditch sneak attack and allow inspiration to be used as a damage bonus also, and maybe play with the dice a bit more, instead of having to take a discovery to up it, maybe every ~4 levels, they gain either a bigger die or the ability to use more than one die per turn, etc. L4 = 2 Dice per turn max, L8 = D8's, etc.

Shaman: Please, please, please... make the entire class have the companion familiar setup. This will make the class both desired and unique for that aspect. Make this class feel like the companion familiar is the core of the class as opposed to a "nice addition" and all will be well with the world. :P

Skald: Honestly, this should...

It seems like you are suggesting changes to the base class. This thread is concerned with suggesting archetypes for these classes. Perhaps I am misreading your post.


Joyd wrote:

I was thinking

- Some kind of "suckerpunch" archetype that dumps flurry for bonuses against flat-footed opponents (maybe just a diminished sneak attack progression, maybe something fancier). Maybe also good at attacks of opportunity.

- Something inspired by the Dungeoncrasher ACF from 3.5 that gives you bonuses for slamming people into walls and stuff. Maybe trade flurry for this. Mechanical support for suplexing people though a table, please.

- If we're allowed to get a little silly, maybe a thematic masked wrestler/pro wrestler archetype. Ideally it would trade away flurry for some cool showmanship and secret identity stuff (for the former concept). Maybe play up specific combat maneuvers or combinations of combat maneuvers as your "signature move". Pick Dirty Trick and you can be a heel/rudo!

- Something that lets you trade away something - let's say, for the sake of argument, that that's flurry - in exchange for just being a total boss at one specific combat style (like, the style feats). Sort of like MoMS, but focused especially on one. I'm honestly not sure how you'd pull this off exactly, other than giving early access, which MoMS already does; it seems too complicated for an archetype to define special additional benefits for every style.

- An "old guy with a stick" archetype that gives you some tricks with a quarterstaff. Old guy status optional. (This might make more sense as a monk thing.) Just spitballing, but maybe dump flurry for these benefits.

- The guy who gets you cornered and beats the tar out of you. This is pretty close to the default class, but maybe you could give it some minor bonuses to intimidate or reposition or something. Would probably lose, I dunno, some of the bonus feats or something for this.

I just want to point out that you seem overly willing to dump the flurry feature from the brawler class. Perhaps, you should ask for a better feature which you are less willing to trade. I know I would love to go back in time and ask for the Bravery feature of the standard fighter to be something else. I find myself almost glad when I see an archetype that dumps Bravery for something else, but agonize over whether any replacement for Weapon Training is worth losing Weapon Training.


After reading over the rules and a bit of the back and forth in this thread, I feel the class overall is almost what I have wanted for a long time. The idea of having prepared slots and casting spontaneously from those slots is something I have definitely wanted. However, the blood focus ability with its interplay between schools and bloodlines and the school supremacy both fall a bit short. Both are bland and blood focus feels like a wrapper on top of bloodline powers with additional drawbacks.

I would have preferred the class to have the spell-casting as written with a mixture of bloodline and school which is neither bloodline or school. I feel characters using this class should have a mixture of trained ability and natural ability with individuals ranging along the spectrum somewhat. The following suggestions attempt to bring the class closer to this focus with some more unique mechanics in mind.

I suggest adding a new ability which mechanically defines the range between more trained ability and more natural ability as a list of choices based on bloodline (representing natural ability) and school (representing trained ability). Training and Talent: Choose a school and a bloodline. Based on these choices you gain a selection of school-themed or bloodline-themed abilities at every 3-4 levels. Each bloodline and school get a short list of abilities available with some abilities requiring a minimum level.

I would alter blood focus to give a bonus (with a per day limit) when casting spells from either bloodline bonus spell list or your chosen school. The bonus should be something along the lines of +1 CL/DC or spontaneously apply meta-magic without increasing cast time. I would probably also rename blood focus to something which keeps the theme of trained/natural ability (e.g., Practiced Talent).

School Supremacy should either be a unique abilty for each bloodline/school mix OR we should have a mastery at 19th and 20th level to split between bloodline and school (this is similar to fighters armor mastery and weapon mastery). The static supremacy is boring.

As a final note, I would also be in favor of limiting selection to the basic schools and bloodlines, ignoring subschools and wild bloodlines. The subschools represent more focused trained ability and the wild bloodlines represent stronger or more defined natural ability. Would probably also be good to limit support to just CRB bloodlines and schools.

These changes all emphasize a mixture of natural ability and trained ability. If the Arcanist is going to attain its own identity, the class should distance itself from the actual mechanics of bloodlines and schools. The spell-casting is a unique blend of wizard and sorcerer and the class should definitely mention bloodline and school, but the class needs its own unique mechanics which are not simply a wrapper on top of the existing mechanics.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I have never been a huge fan of the crafting rules, and in my latest campaign this particular issue finally reached a head for me. The main concerns for my group are (1) the amount of time required to craft breaks the flow of the game and (2) the number of feats is excessive especially if one character wants to be a "party crafter". These issues were magnified by the lack of available magic item shops appropriate for the needs of the group. In addition, one of the members was more than willing to be a crafter for the group, but was not willing to trade all of his feats in order to meet the various needs of an active adventuring group over an extended period. The nature of the campaign allowed for some minor downtime for crafting, but spending a month or more every level to meet simple needs like weapons and armor was simply not going to work. To address these issues, I created two new feats that consolidate the standard crafting feats and rewrote the rules for determining the amount of time to craft items (both magical and mundane). I did not alter the pricing of magic (or mundane) items, but an option is presented in the closing notes concerning price and availability of crafted items.

A brief summary of the changes.

  • Consolidate Craft Wondrous Item, Craft Magic Arms and Armor, Forge Ring, and Craft Rod into Craft Magic Item. Also, expanded the availability of crafting feats by eliminating the need for Master Craftsman (craft and profession skills are incorporated directly into the new feat).
  • Consolidate Scribe Scroll, Brew Potion, Craft Wand, and Craft Staff into Craft Magic-Use Item. Must have a minimum Caster level to craft scrolls, potions, wands, and staves.
  • Alter the time to craft magic items. The new time is determined per hour and scales with your Craft Level. Crafting level is either caster level or ranks in craft or profession skill.
  • Alter the time to craft mundane items. The new time is determined per hour and scales with your ranks in the craft or profession skill.

Craft Magic Item:
Prerequisite: Caster Level 3rd or 3 ranks in an appropriate craft or profession skill
Benefits: You gain the ability to craft an increasing variety of magical items as you increase your crafting level. Your crafting level is determined as the higher of either your Caster level or the number of ranks in an appropriate craft or profession skill. Each crafting ability has its own Minimum Crafting Level as noted in the specific crafting ability description. You may only use Caster level or an appropriate skill (as noted in the crafting ability description) to meet a Minimum Crafting Level.

Craft Wondrous Item
Minimum Crafting Level: 3
Appropriate Skill: Craft or profession skill is based on the specific item and arbitrated by GM.
Description: You can create a wide variety of magic wondrous items. To create a wondrous item, you must use up raw materials costing half of its base price. You can also mend a broken wondrous item if it is one that you could make. Doing so costs half the raw materials and half the time it would take to craft that item.

Craft Magic Arms and Armor
Minimum Crafting Level: 5
Appropriate Skill: Craft or Profession(armor) (for armor), Craft or Profession(bows) (for magic bows and arrows), or Craft or Profession(weapons) (for all other weapons)
Description: You can create magic weapons, armor, or shields. To enhance a weapon, suit of armor, or shield, you must use up raw materials costing half of this total price. The weapon, armor, or shield to be enhanced must be a masterwork item that you provide. The weapon, armor, or shield's cost is not included in the above cost. You can also mend a broken magic weapon, suit of armor, or shield if it is one that you could make. Doing so costs half the raw materials and half the time it would take to craft that item in the first place.

Forge Ring
Minimum Crafting Level: 7
Appropriate Skill: Craft or Profession(jewelry)
Description: You can create magic rings. To craft a ring, you must use up raw materials costing half of the base price. You can also mend a broken ring if it is one that you could make. Doing so costs half the raw materials and half the time it would take to forge that ring in the first place.

Craft Rod
Minimum Crafting Level: 9
Appropriate Skill: Craft or Profession(jewelry), Craft or Profession(sculptures), or Craft or Profession(weapons) (if the rod is to be a club, quarterstaff, or other rod-like weapon)
Description: You can create magic rods. To craft a rod, you must use up raw materials costing half of its base price.

Craft Magic-Use Item:
Prerequisite: Caster Level 1st
Benefits: You gain the ability to craft an increasing variety of magical items as you increase your Crafting level. Your Crafting level is equal to your Caster level. Each crafting ability has its own Minimum Crafting Level as noted in the specific crafting ability description. When crafting an item using this feat, the crafter must be able to cast or have another character cast any required spells. The crafter may not ignore any required spells when crafting using this feat.

Scribe Scroll
Minimum Crafting Level: 1
Description: You can create a scroll of any spell that you know. To scribe a scroll, you must use up raw materials costing half of this base price

Brew Potion
Minimum Crafting Level: 3
Description: You can create a potion of any 3rd-level or lower spell that you know and that targets one or more creatures or objects. When you create a potion, you set the caster level, which must be sufficient to cast the spell in question and no higher than your own level. To brew a potion, you must use up raw materials costing one half this base price. When you create a potion, you make any choices that you would normally make when casting the spell.

Craft Wand
Minimum Crafting Level: 5
Description: You can create a wand of any 4th-level or lower spell that you know. To craft a wand, you must use up raw materials costing half of this base price. A newly created wand has 50 charges.

Craft Staff
Minimum Crafting Level: 11
Description: You can create any staff whose prerequisites you meet. To craft a staff, you must use up raw materials costing half of its base price. A newly created staff has 10 charges.

Time to Craft Magic Items:

When crafting a magic item, the crafter makes a maximum progress of 125 gp, plus an additional 125 gp per crafting level above the minimum crafting level, per hour. The crafter must provide an amount of materials equal to the progress made during the crafting process before making the check for the crafting process. Once the materials are provided, the crafter makes a single check using an appropriate craft or profession skill. Casters which have a caster level equal to or higher than the minimum crafting level for an item may use spellcraft in place of an appropriate craft skill.

If the crafter fails on the check to craft an item, the crafter regains half of the materials spent at the beginning of the crafting process losing the other half of the materials in the failed process. No progress is made on a failed check.

The progress earned for each hour must applied to a single item. Once a crafter has made enough progress toward an item to equal the cost of the item, the item is complete.

If desired, the crafter may make a single check to determine success or failure for an item. The result of the single check is applied on all checks for the entire period of crafting the item.
A crafter may work up 16 hours per day. Treat working beyond 8 hours as working a separate day at half the normal amount of propress. A crafter must spend a minimum of one hour crafting.

If a crafter has spent any time during the current day adventuring then the crafter may only spend 8 hours crafting and only makes half the normal amount of progress. Adventuring includes unexpected dangers (e.g., an ambush while traveling) as well as expected dangers (e.g., assaulting an enemy stronghold).

Example Scenario: Ezren is a 10th level caster with no ranks in craft. If Ezren wanted to craft a Ring of Counterspells the cost would be 2,000 gp, 4,000 gp price / 2. It would take Ezren 4 hours to craft, 2,000 gp / 500 gp/hr (125 gp base and an additional 375 gp for being 3 levels over the minimum crafting level). Ezren could spend another 4 hours in the same day he crafted the ring to gain 2,000 gp in progress toward another item or he could finish after only spending 4 hours crafting. If Ezren had also been attacked by bandits while traveling or explored a potentially dangerous cave previously that day then he would have needed 8 hours to craft the ring.

Time to Craft Mundane Items:

When crafting a mundane item, the crafter makes a maximum progress of 1 gp per rank in craft or profession skill per hour as determined by the following formula. The crafter must provide an amount of materials equal to the progress made during the crafting process before making the check for the crafting process. Once the materials are provided, the crafter makes a single check using the appropriate craft or profession skill.

If the crafter fails on the check to craft an item, the crafter regains half of the materials spent at the beginning of the crafting process losing the other half of the materials in the failed process. No progress is made on a failed check.

The progress earned for each hour must applied to a single item. Once a crafter has made enough progress toward an item to equal the cost of the item, the item is complete.

If desired, the crafter may make a single check to determine success or failure for an item. The result of the single check is applied on all checks for the entire period of crafting the item.

A crafter may choose to increase the difficulty of the craft or profession skill check in order to increase the amount of progress made per hour. For every +5 added to the DC of a crafting check, the crafter gains an additional 20% of the base progress. For example, if a character with 5 ranks in a craft skill decided to add +5 to the DC of creating an item and succeeded at the check the crafter would earn 60 gp toward the item.

A crafter may work up 16 hours per day. Treat working beyond 8 hours as working a separate day at half the normal amount of progress. A crafter must spend a minimum of one hour crafting.
If a crafter has spent any time during the current day adventuring then the crafter may only spend 8 hours crafting and only makes half the normal amount of progress.

Example Scenario: Valeros has 3 ranks in craft(weapons). If Valeros wanted to craft a Longsword the cost would be 5 gp, 15 gp price / 3. It would take Valeros 2 hours to craft, 5 gp / 3 gp/hr. Valeros could technically make an additional 1 gp of progress in the second hour of crafting, but it must be used toward crafting the same item. Since Valeros completed the item without needing the extra 1gp he can not use that potential progress. If Valeros had also been attacked by bandits while traveling or explored a potentially dangerous cave previously that day then he would have needed 4 hours to craft the sword (5 gp * 2 / 3 gp/hr).

Closing Notes
These rules are presented to provide an alternative which fits neatly on top of the existing rules. I was very careful to only change the rules concerning crafting time and availability of crafting feats. This leaves a few odd edge cases. For example, some classes gain the existing crafting feats as class abilities. If the new rules presented here are applied directly the class might end up gaining too much power as a result. I would rule that the class gains the feat, but only for the purposes of crafting the specific item granted by the class ability. This ruling maintains power balance of the base classes. I would suggest keeping other similar cases to be handled in this manner.

Applying these rules as presented here may increase the attractiveness of crafting items which may result in skewing wealth by level. One of the goals is to see many more players using the crafting rules to create interesting items, but I understand the game is balanced around a certain wealth of items. I intend to monitor the effects of the extra crafting in my game, but if you become concerned about the effect being too great then you can alter these rules to maintain wealth by level. You can have your players pay full price and double the amount of progress for a period when crafting. This would be 2 gp per rank in craft or profession skill per hour for mundane item crafting and 250 gp, plus an additional 250 gp per crafting level above the minimum crafting level, per hour for magic item crafting. This results in the same crafting time decrease without allowing players to get any item they want at half of market value.

Finally, there are a few crafting options which are not addressed here. These options should be incorporated into the feats listed here. Hopefully, the groups are clear enough to make it easy to choose which feat to incorporate these options. The crafting options are not altered in these rules and the aspects are based on corresponding aspect for the existing craft feats (e.g., minimum crafting level is based on the prerequisite caster level).


I have been using the teams and rooms rules available in the Downtime Organization Rules in my current campaign. Though some of the teams can be used in a variety of roles, I feel there are some areas which could use more teams to flesh out the relevant groups or perhaps more specific teams to fill a role.

Below are two examples based on an existing team (Craftspeople).


Earnings gp, Goods, Labor +2
Create 1 Goods, 1 Influence, 1 Labor;Time 0 days
Size 3 people
Upgrades To Craftspeople

Apprentice Craftspeople are training in a particular Craft or Profession skill and must work with an appropriate Craftspeople or Master Craftspeople. Apprentices exists for a wide variety of fields. Examples of fields with apprentices include alchemists, carpenters, leatherworkers, masons, and smiths. A typical apprentice carpenter is a 1st-level expert with 1 rank each in Climb, Craft (carpentry), Diplomacy, and Knowledge (engineering and local). Apprentice Craftspeople in other fields have a similar skill arrangement.


Earnings gp, Goods, Labor, Magic +4
Create 3 Goods, 4 Influence, 8 Labor, 4 Magic;Time 7 days
Size 3 people
Upgrades From Craftspeople
(; requires ; costs ; upgrades from CraftsPeople) 5th lvl expert gain MasterCraftsman feat and can craft magical implements using their chosen craft skill

Master Craftspeople are masters of a particular Craft or Profession skill and make a living using that skill. Examples of this team are alchemists, carpenters, leatherworkers, masons, and smiths. A typical master carpenter is a 7th-level expert with 7 ranks each in Climb, Craft (carpentry), Diplomacy, and Knowledge (engineering and local). Craftspeople in other fields have a similar skill arrangement. In addition, Master Craftspeople have gained the Master Craftsman feat for their craft or profession and either Craft Magic Arms and Armor or Craft Wondrous Item.

Any comments on my teams and/or any other areas which might need new teams are appreciated. I'd especially like to see other new teams and organizations.


ckdragons wrote:

Sorry for reviving a necro thread but it directly ties to what I have a question about.

The quarterstaff defense ability of the staff magus states it includes the bonuses from arcane pool. So if the staff ability grants magical bonuses to, wouldn't those stack if the magus is using his arcane pool to add special abilities to the staff (such as icy burst and shocking burst)?

Example, a 14th level staff magus is using a staff of fire (no other enchantments, CL 8). Staff would be considered +2 is used as a quarterstaff by quarterstaff defense. The magus uses his arcane pool (+4) to add flaming burst and shocking burst. This would effectively make the weapon a +6 weapon, "including bonuses from arcane pool". Quarterstaff defense adds +3 to this total after 13th level. So, the total shield bonus would be +9.

Am I reading this correct? If I am... WOW!


Quarterstaff Defense:
At 7th level, while wielding a quarterstaff, the staff magus gains a shield bonus to his Armor Class equal to the enhancement bonus of the quarterstaff, including any enhancement bonus on that staff from his arcane pool class feature. At 13th level, this bonus increases by +3.

No, only the enhancement bonus counts to AC. The flaming burst and shocking burst would not count to AC.

1 to 50 of 281 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email 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.