|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
There's usually time to drink an extract at the beginning of a fight. You can also take the infusion discovery and give out extracts to party members. The Shield extract is especially useful for melee-types, as a +4 shield bonus is more than most shields can give them.
Some extracts last minutes or even longer, which is long enough to take them in anticipation of a fight, or have them last over more than one fight. Your mutagen also lasts a good long time.
Extra bombs will help at low levels. Some races have an alternate FCB that lets you get extra bombs as well. Gnomes, for example, are a good match for alchemist -- while they don't get a bonus to intelligence, they do have the pyromaniac racial trait that lets you get higher-level bombs a bit faster, and the FCB of 1/2 additional bomb per level.
Well, again, did they SAY that or is that something you've inferred?
Wait, wait, wait... you're complaining about the gunslinger being underpowered?
Pistols can be reloaded as a free action from level 1 with rapid reload and alchemical cartridges. Double-barreled pistols and muskets also allow multiple shots without reloading. You get Dex-to-damage at level 5, and by then you'll probably be hitting almost everything you fire at. Damage reduction can be easily dealt with by packing bullets made of particular metals, or the Clustered Shots feat or deadly shot deed.
The most common complaint about gunslingers is that they are too powerful, not vice-versa.
If your die consistently rolls low, replace it. Many game-store dice are not properly weighted, simply due to poor manufacturing standards. While rolling low and missing an attack you would have hit without power attack is frustrating, a genuinely fair die will result in power attack producing significantly higher average damage output over time. Keep in mind that a run of bad luck, or a bad roll at a crucial time, doesn't invalidate the overall statistical benefit of power attack.
If an Arcanist gives up her first level arcane exploit to an archetype does she count as having the class feature for Extra Exploit?
Oglaf is awesome. Lots of other webcomics have really great celebration of sexual diversity, often treating it as completely normal. Just earlier today I noticed that a recent OotS strip implied that Haley is bisexual and has dated women in the past:
A flesh golem type thing made from a female body attacks her and a friend.
Friend: "Old girlfriend?"
Haley: "Nah, I had much better taste in girls than that!"
I've never noticed any indication of this previously (maybe I just didn't see it, it's been a while since I read the archives of that strip) and as far as I can tell she's been dating Elan since the beginning of the story.
Now, since apparently the site is not safe for things other than work (like common decency and respect for trans people and so forth) I retract the request for a link. No reason to drive up their google ranking.
A dex-based kapenia dancer magus can be pretty awesome. Like the Kensai, it gets weapon focus in a one-handed slashing weapon right away so you can make that dex-to-damage with Slashing Grace at first level.
Unlike the Kensai, it retains spell recall.
The scarf has the trip and disarm properties making it attractive to use to trip while delivering a spell such as frostbite. It doesn't have a large crit range, which makes it better to use for debuffing, which disarming and tripping go right along with.
If you get the trait that lets you use intelligence with UMD, you can pretty reliably use a wand of mage armor. If your GM lets you add the spell to your spell list, even better. Mage armor + shield + Int and Dex to AC means you'll be really hard to hit, and when you can use mirror image and blur and so forth it'll be even harder.
If her sister was a LE worshipper of Asmodeus but not a cleric, inquisitor, or antipaladin, then they could maintain a cordial, if not necessarily intimate, familial relationship. It would be like a fundamentalist Christian whose sister still gives lip service to Christianity but spends a lot of time with wiccans and atheists and is adopting a value system based on those rather than that of fundamentalist christianity. They still care about each other, but in order to interact they have to engage in a system of mutually suspended belief: the lapsed christian sister pretends to still believe in fundamentalist christianity (i.e. asmodeanism), and the fundie sister pretends to believe her.
If the LE sister is a cleric, inquisitor, or most especially an antipaladin, she is breaking the tenets of her god if she doesn't either make an ultimatum to her sister along the lines of "I love you, but if you don't abandon your heretical ways and toe the asmodean line, you're out of the family, and I'll give you just one chance to leave Cheliax now", or just report her to the church authority and allow the tender mercies (ha!) of the asmodean hierarchy take care of things going forward. Refraining from actions along these lines would very likely cause the antipaladin to fall (rise?) and might cause the cleric or inquisitor to lose access to spells.
You won't be able to focus on boosting save DCs with an eldritch Knight, so Enchantment and Necromancy aren't worth it for you. Those are the logical opposition schools for a melee spellcaster. The handful of useful buffs available to you through Necromancy, e.g. False Life, can be handled by scroll or wand. Being able to boost your stats with Transmutation, to shift about with Conjuration (teleport), or to change the damage type of an evocation spell to a different energy type that your opponent isn't immune to with Evocation (admixture) are also well worth it.
You should spoiler things like that, for future reference.
The boon doesn't say it gives you access to that prestige class, so it doesn't. Things do what they say they do and do not do what they do not say they do. If the PFS leadership decides the boon should allow you to take the class from Core, I'm sure they will update it. (Very unlikely, IMO.)
If snap shot specifically said that it lets you use a bow-and-arrow attack as a melee attack, then it would benefit from flanking. Since it doesn't, and it would have been very easy for it to have been written that way, and there has been ample opportunity for a FAQ or errata since then to have been issued, we should consider it to be settled, until such time as a FAQ or errata is in fact issued. An archer with snap shot threatens, and therefore an ally across from her making a melee attack will gain a flanking bonus, but the archer herself will not as only melee attacks gain a flanking bonus.
Should be in rules forum. It depends on whether the creature is using a natural weapon that is not associated with the limbs it is using to fire the crossbow, or whether it removed one of its hands from the crossbow as a free action after firing before the end of its turn. If the answer to either of these is yes, then it can take an AoO with that natural weapon out of its turn.
I won't hold my breath. Liberals are falling all over this pope because he's said a few vaguely not-horrific things about gay people and seems to actually care about the poor (which doesn't get him any bonus points because caring about poor people is the minimum necessary criteria to be even a little bit convincing that you're even trying to live up to the anti-wealth agenda set forth in the gospels).
He's still a reactionary, patriarchal, hypocritical, sex-phobic, misogynist a#+$$*%. He's just a little less overt about it compared to previous popes, and somehow progressives are fighting over who gets to bake him the most cookies for not being quite as far away from basic human decency as Ratzinger.
Well, I wasn't arguing that the two extremes implied that reasonableness was somewhere in the middle. I was simply stating that I feel that the middle route taken by the PFS leadership seems reasonable. It is certainly possible to disagree.
Any time a signficantly-used feat, class, or option is banned or otherwise nerfed, these kind of difficult decisions need to be made. Invariably there are people who argue in favor of letting anyone who might have even thought of taking that option in the future do a full rebuild, while there are also people who argue that even thinking about using that option was bad and those who did so should feel bad, and anyone using the now-illegal option should at minimum be forced to rebuild into a legal character and be glad they're not being forced to retire the character.
So, reasonableness lies somewhere in between, and generally the PFS leadership has been pretty good at finding a way of threading the needle.
No one ever decided they were inappropriate for broad play. They decided to retire open access to those races so they could open up others while still only having a limited number of open race options.
Really, if I had been playing, say, a tiefling for a couple years and had just gotten the character into a higher tier or seeker or about to run Eyes of the Ten and suddenly got told, "Nope! No more character for you. You have to start over from scratch," that would be the last time I played PFS.
You said like banning synthesists, but no one playing a synthesist had to start over from scratch with a new character. Synthesists were able to be rebuilt, in many cases from the ground up, true, but still retaining the character level they were at before the ban.
Do you really hate aasimars and tieflings so much that you'd destroy all the time someone put into playing one as a punitive measure to make sure no one who liked to play such characters ever darkened the doorway of your FLGS again? (Ok, exaggerating a bit, but really - what's with the attitude?)
They should have forced full rebuilds of all now illegal characters just like they should have forced the retirements of all now illegal races when they changed that back in August. They are being kind to keep the player base happy and sacrificing game balance instead.
You'd force someone who has been playing a tiefling or aasimar for two years and gotten it to, say, 7th level or something to retire immediately with no warning?
Wow, I'm glad you're not my GM.
Do not choose Powerful or Deadly sneak, unless your GM houserules them to work differently. They are less than worthless -- they actually reduce your average damage per round, considering the penalty to attack, and the pidling amount of additional damage they do, especially with the Slayer's reduced sneak attack progression compared to a rogue.
Consider: at level 9, a Slayer does 3d6 sneak attack damage. Powerful sneak has a 1/216 chance of adding 3 damage, a 1/36 chance of adding 2 damage, and a 1/6 chance of adding 1 damage. Does that sound like it's worth a -2 to attack? Clearly not. That's an average of 0.23 points of damage per successful sneak attack. At the same level, a -3 to attack with power attack or piranha strike gets you a +6 to damage. Go with that instead, since a slayer has the BAB and bonuses to make up for the attack penalty.
Since you apparently want to be sneaky and feinty, and want to be a half-elf, the skill-focus feat could be in Stealth or Bluff (probably Bluff, as Charisma is generally a dump stat for slayers, and you still need at least 13 Int for the Feint feats). Too bad the feint feats aren't part of the ranger combat styles, except for special deity-specific ones in Inner Sea Combat (which I think may be associated with evil deities).
^ Also a good option. I always forget about the dual-bladed sword.
Basically, though, you want to make sure Weapon Focus (whatever) applies to both your attacks.
Honestly shortswords are good enough, and they have an advantage in that they're cheap and easily found. I've seen a strength-based ranger with TWF feats from the class bonus feats absolutely destroy encounters with two shortswords.
I personally prefer the direction Girl Genius has gone with this. Both Gil and Tarvek love Agatha. Both respect each other's abilities and see each other as friends, although they also recognize that they are rivals both romantically and politically. Given that the world is going to hell in a handbasket, all three have come to an unspoken agreement that they put their love triangle aside for now and work to save Europa from being utterly destroyed by Mad Science.
2. Yes, but I think that the shillelagh effect no longer functions while the staff is an invalid target. If the sillelagh duration is longer than the GMW, it resumes functioning after that spell expires. Not certain of this, though. It might be that the enhancement bonuses just don't stack.
3. Yes. I think the above situation, where the shillelagh effect is negated while the target is invalid, would apply after the duration of supression expires.
Here's a thing: Not all cliffs and walls and such are equally difficult the whole way up. Assuming that this is so is something that we abstract away in order to make the game easier, and it's a good idea if your game isn't about climbing. If you want to make your game, in part, about climbing, you could map out a route or multiple routes on a cliff to allow decisions about how to get up a cliff and what risks to take, and have some parts that are easier, and some that are harder.
The example I was using was, specifically, a 5th level character with a +18 in climb trying to ascend a DC 20 wall. Said character is a really really good climber. Better than the vast majority of 5th level characters. Very likely, the only 5th level characters who are better, are those who have dedicated themselves wholeheartedly to being good at climbing and very little else (i.e. Skill focus and Athletic feats and things like that).
However, that character, even though he is almost as good as he could be at climbing, can't climb that wall with anything resembling reliability.
As someone upthread noted, a 300ft DC20 climb with a +18 in climb results in a 12% chance of making it to the top. That doesn't make sense. What makes even less sense is that if that character works hard and gets just a little bit better at climbing, just about 6% better than he is currently -- he makes that climb 100% of the time.
Now, you can argue that this happens when he gets to a +10 modifier if you allow take 10, and that's true, except that a +10 climber isn't the best climber in the world except for a select few. He's a good, competent climber, who if he applies himself can get up a climb without a whole lot of trouble. He also can make a reasonable judgement about whether he can climb a particular wall or not, and if it's difficult, he'll stop, or slow down, or use some equipment.
Speaking as a player, if I had focused on being good at climbing to the point where I had a +18 at level 5, and you made me roll rather than take 10 all the way up a cliff, and the character fell and died halfway up, I'd be hellaciously pissed off. One of the primary things I made my character to be able to do, and you used the law of averages to make it nearly impossible.
Avoron: I was quoting Quintain. He's arguing that there should be a 1-in-20 chance of failure even for a character who's practically the peak of what real-life humans are capable of in regards to wall-climbing.
People are able to do some pretty extraordinary things. Those things wouldn't happen if they had a 1-in-20 chance to fall every time they moved 7.5 feet.