Pathfinder Design Team's page

No FAQ Required: This is not a rules FAQ for any Pathfinder RPG product, but rather a question about our publishing practices on pick-ups. When a new book comes out in the RPG line, chances are at this point that there have been Player Companions, Campaign Settings, or other products on a related topic at some time in the past, but these products have smaller print runs than RPG line products. At product launch meetings, staff members including the developers of these previous products suggest other books to reference for pick-ups. A pick-up essentially means that a rules element begs for a broader audience, rather than asking a freelancer to produce something new but almost identical without regard to the essential foundation built from the design and development work on the previous lines. That said, a pick-up is not a reprint: those pick-ups receive multiple additional development passes just like the new material for the book, refining them beyond their original version. Sometimes these development passes won’t yield any change, and sometimes they lead to substantial changes.

The fully refined version will be Paizo's default version for adventures, NPC compilations, and the like moving forward, since it benefited from two development cycles and is available on the PRD, but as always feel free to use the version that your group prefers, or make your own variant. In Pathfinder Society, always check the Additional Resources page to see what versions are legal and the Campaign Clarifications page for the Pathfinder Society team’s updates on how to use those options in the Pathfinder Society campaign.

Answered in FAQ!

Mirror Image and Miss Chance: If I have a miss chance and a mirror image, how do I combine them?

Miss chances generally only apply when an attack hits. For most miss chances, such as blur, there’s no need to roll them if an attack would hit a mirror image because a hit and a miss by 5 or less would both pop the image. The only exception to this rule is blink and similar effects, which already have some other exceptions from normal miss chances due to moving you to another plane (for instance, unlike other miss chances, blink protects you from targeted effects). The 50% chance to be on the Ethereal Plane protects both the caster and the images.

Answered in FAQ.

Spirit Guide Oracle: What happens if a spirit guide oracle gains the arcane enlightenment hex, which adds spells “to the list of shaman spells she can prepare?”

An oracle doesn’t prepare spells, so that particular hex isn’t useful for her.

Answered in FAQ.

Negative Levels: On page 562, it says that you get a save to remove temporary negative levels each day, but the universal monster rule for energy drain, as well as nearly every mention of temporary negative levels I can find, say that after 24 hours, the temporary negative levels become permanent if I fail my save. Which one is right?
The rule on page 562 is the general rule, but almost every specific rule in the game functions differently, and specific overrides general. Incidentally, the universal monster rule for energy drain doesn’t explicitly say that the negative levels are considered temporary before they become permanent (it just says “negative levels”), and we want to make it clear that they are temporary negative levels at that time (and thus that you can remove them more inexpensively withrestoration). The only text directly in error is the reminder text at the end of enervation which claims that becoming permanent after 24 hours is the general rule.

The FAQ has received an official adjustment. The answer now reads:

First add up the total cost of the base item, including any special material. Then multiply by any multiplier for the size and unusual shape from Table 6-8. After that, add any additional cost for masterwork, if that isn't already part of the special material. Finally, apply any multiplier for discounts such as the 1/3 cost multiplier for crafting the item. For example, a chain shirt costs 100 gp and a mithral chain shirt costs 1,100 gp after the +1,000 gp cost for mithral. If you were applying the 1/3 cost multiplier for crafting the item using the Craft skill, the cost multiplier from Table 6-8 based on size and body type, or both, you would apply those multipliers to the full 1,100 gp cost for the mithral chain shirt. This means a mithral chain shirt built for a rune giant costs 8,800 gp and a mithral chain shirt built for the tarrasque costs 35,200 gp. On the other hand, a Large masterwork cold iron greatsword costs 500 gp (50 gp for a greatsword, doubled for cold iron, doubled again for a Large weapon, then adding masterwork last because cold iron isn't always masterwork).

The FAQ has received an official adjustment, both in this thread and on the FAQ page. The answer now reads

First add up the total cost of the base item, including any special material. Then multiply by any multiplier for the size and unusual shape from Table 6-8. After that, add any additional cost for masterwork, if that isn't already part of the special material. Finally, apply any multiplier for discounts such as the 1/3 cost multiplier for crafting the item. For example, a chain shirt costs 100 gp and a mithral chain shirt costs 1,100 gp after the +1,000 gp cost for mithral. If you were applying the 1/3 cost multiplier for crafting the item using the Craft skill, the cost multiplier from Table 6-8 based on size and body type, or both, you would apply those multipliers to the full 1,100 gp cost for the mithral chain shirt. This means a mithral chain shirt built for a rune giant costs 8,800 gp and a mithral chain shirt built for the tarrasque costs 35,200 gp. On the other hand, a Large masterwork cold iron greatsword costs 500 gp (50 gp for a greatsword, doubled for cold iron, doubled again for a Large weapon, then adding masterwork last because cold iron isn't always masterwork).

Answered in FAQ.

Cost Multipliers for Items: When an item has a cost multiplier, for instance for its size, unusual shape, or composition, does that apply before or after additional costs such as for making the item masterwork or using a special material?First add up the total cost of the base item, including any special material. Then multiply by any multiplier for the size and unusual shape from Table 6-8. After that, add any additional cost for masterwork, if that isn't already part of the special material. Finally, apply any multiplier for discounts such as the 1/3 cost multiplier for crafting the item. For example, a chain shirt costs 100 gp and a mithral chain shirt costs 1,100 gp after the +1,000 gp cost for mithral. If you were applying the 1/3 cost multiplier for crafting the item using the Craft skill, the cost multiplier from Table 6-8 based on size and body type, or both, you would apply those multipliers to the full 1,100 gp cost for the mithral chain shirt. This means a mithral chain shirt built for a rune giant costs 8,800 gp and a mithral chain shirt built for the tarrasque costs 35,200 gp. On the other hand, a Large masterwork cold iron greatsword costs 550 gp (50 gp for a greatsword, doubled for cold iron, doubled again for a Large weapon, then adding masterwork last because cold iron isn't always masterwork).

Answered in FAQ!

Temporary Hit Points: When determining my current hit point total for effects like power word kill, do I include my temporary hit points?

Yes, add your temporary hit points together with your remaining normal hit points to determine your hit point total for the purpose of effects that have differing effects based on your current hit point total.

Answered in FAQ!

Mythic Form of the Dragon: Mythic form of the dragon says that it increases my breath weapon damage to 10d6, but 10d6 isn’t actually an increase for form of the dragon II or III. Does that mean the mythic version reduces my damage?

No, instead mythic form of the dragon should increase your breath weapon damage by 2d8. This will be reflected in the next errata.

Gaining a higher bonus that does not itself bypass DR (like greater magic weapon or transferral from a ranged weapon to its ammunition) does not remove the ability to bypass DR via the original bonus.

Answered in FAQ.

Magic Ranged Weapons and Ammunition: When a ranged weapon shares its enhancement bonus with its ammunition, does this count as “true” enhancement bonus or more like a temporary bonus like greater magic weapon? In other words, does the shared enhancement bonus allow the arrow to bypass damage reduction as if it was cold iron, silver, adamantine, and aligned?

No, other than the ways indicated in the Core Rulebook (if the ranged weapon is at least +1, they count as magic, and if the ranged weapon is aligned they count as that alignment as well) the enhancement bonus granted to ammunition from the ranged weapon doesn’t help them overcome the other types of damage reduction. Archers and other such characters can buy various sorts of ammunition or ammunition with a high enhancement bonus to overcome the various types of damage reduction.

Answered in FAQ.

Natural 20 and Natural 1: On attack rolls and saving throws, a natural 20 is an automatic success and a natural 1 is an automatic failure. But should I treat them differently than other results when deciding if a roll succeeded or failed by 5 or more, when comparing two opposed attack rolls to see which is a higher result, or other similar situations?

No, unless a specific rule tells you otherwise, treat a natural 20 or natural 1 result on an attack roll or saving throw the same as any other result when comparing the total result to other numbers. For example, if a fighter rolls a natural 1 for a total of 31 against the wizard’s AC of 33, the attack misses by 5 or less and destroys one of the wizard’s mirror images.

Answered in FAQ!

Magus, Kensai: Many of the kensai’s abilities refer to “his chosen weapon.” Is that the “single martial or exotic melee weapon of his choice” from the Weapon and Armor Proficiency ability? If it isn’t, how do I decide what his chosen weapon actually is?

The chosen weapon does indeed refer to the single martial or exotic melee weapon he chose.

Answered in FAQ!

Unsworn Shaman: The unsworn shaman’s minor spirit ability tells you exactly when you gain hexes, but it doesn’t technically say you don’t gain the other hexes from the class progression. Pre-errata, it replaced the hex class feature entirely, which unambiguously removed them. How many hexes does the unsworn shaman receive?

Unsworn shaman still only receives the hexes from minor spirit and does not gain hexes at any other levels. The change from ‘replaces’ to ‘alters’ fixes a problem where the unsworn shaman used to have hexes while simultaneously removing the hex class feature, but the way the minor spirit ability alters the hex class feature is that it changes when you gain hexes to the listed levels.

Answered in FAQ!

When I use Perception as a move action to search for traps or other secrets, how wide of an area can I search? The Core Rulebook doesn’t say, and Pathfinder Unchained mentions a 10 by 10 area, but it’s part of an optional consolidated skills subsystem.

As per Ultimate Intrigue, there are two ways Perception checks happen in the game. The first way is automatic and reactive. Certain stimuli automatically call for a Perception check, such as a creature using Stealth (which calls for an opposed Perception check), or the sounds of combat or talking in the distance. The flip side is when a player actively calls for a Perception check because her PC is intentionally searching for something (this is the relevant type of Perception used to find traps, unless you have the trap spotter rogue talent, which makes it reactive). This always takes at least a move action, but often takes significantly longer.

The core rules don’t specify what area a PC can actively search, but for a given Perception check it should be no larger than a 10-foot-by-10-foot area, and often a smaller space if that area is cluttered. For instance, in an intrigue-based game, it is fairly common to look through a filing cabinet full of files. Though the cabinet itself might fill only a 5-foot-by-5-foot area, the number of files present could cause a search to take a particularly long time.

This doesn’t necessarily mean that the GM or player needs to roll a Perception check for every 10 foot by 10 foot area, however. It’s much smoother to have the GM roll several secret Perception checks for each searching character and then apply each roll only when the PC is searching an area that actually has something to find.

FAQed!

Throwing Shield: The throwing shield says that it has special straps “that allow you to unclasp and throw it as a free action.” It seems likely that “unclasp and throw” means “unclasp in order to throw” but it could also mean “unclasp and additionally throw” which could give a character any number of extra attacks. Which interpretation is correct?

Throwing shield’s wording means you can unclasp as a free action in order to throw it. The wording will be updated to disambiguate in the next errata.

FAQed!

Haste: Haste says a hasted creature can make an additional attack during a full attack with a natural or manufactured weapon, but what about other sorts of attacks like unarmed strikes?

Unarmed strikes and other attacks that work via full attacks (such as mystic bolts, kinetic blade, and flame blade) all allow an extra attack with haste. However, single attacks such as incorporeal touch attacks or melee touch spells delivered round by round after holding the charge do not.

Touch Spells: In the Magic and Combat chapters, it says that I can touch a single ally as a standard action or up to six allies as a full-round action and that I can combine delivering a touch spell with a natural attack or unarmed strike. But what if I just want to deliver the touch spell to an enemy? It just says I can do it “round after round.”
Making a touch attack against an enemy by touching it, beyond the free action to do so as part of casting the spell, is a standard action. It can’t be used with a full attack.

Hello all!

Question:Does the Shield Master feat remove penalties imposed by feats like Power Attack, or Conditions like Sickened?

Due to the threads
Here
Here
Here
And Here
I feel as if this is a question asked frequently enough that it might deserve an FAQ.

The basic arguments go like this

RAW:The feat says you take no attack roll penalties.

RAI:The intent of the feat seems to be that it only applies to TWFing.

Shield Master wrote:

Shield Master (Combat)

[i]Your mastery of the shield allows you to fight with it without hindrance.[i]

Prerequisites: Improved Shield Bash, Shield Proficiency, Shield Slam, Two-Weapon Fighting, base attack bonus +11.

Benefit: You do not suffer any penalties on attack rolls made with a shield while you are wielding another weapon. Add your shield's enhancement bonus to attacks and damage rolls made with the shield as if it was a weapon enhancement bonus.

Answered in FAQ!

Shield Master: When Shield Master says “You do not suffer any penalties on attack rolls made with a shield while you are wielding another weapon” it seems like in context it means you don’t take the penalty for Two-Weapon Fighting, but it just says “any penalties” so it isn’t clear. Which penalties does the feat let a character ignore?

Shield Master allows a character to ignore the Two-Weapon Fighting penalties on attack rolls with a shield while wielding another weapon, but not any other penalties.

Answered in FAQ!

Dim Light: When an ability requires a character to be near shadows or an area of dim light (like the shadowdancer’s shadow jump or hide in plain sight), how does that interact with low-light vision, darkvision, and the like?

While it’s true that most creatures in the game have low-light vision or darkvision, when the rules talk about being in or near an objective light level (for example “in an area of dim light”), they always refer to the state of light and darkness from the perspective of normal vision, like a human. The exceptions, effects that depend on an observing creature’s perspective, such as the heavens shaman’s enveloping darkness ability, call this out with text indicating that the ability alters or depends on that creature’s perspective, rather than the overall light level.

Answered in FAQ!

Reflex Saves: If I’m paralyzed, held, dying, or otherwise completely immobilized or insensate, can I still attempt a Reflex save?

Yes, you can still attempt a Reflex save, but since your Dexterity is set to 0, you’ll have to replace your Dexterity bonus with a –5 penalty, so you’re not likely to succeed. If you do succeed, it might be due to the power of your <i>cloak of resistance</i>, a good angle for cover, or even luck. Either way, follow the rules of the spell for a successful Reflex save, even if this would change your space, like <i>create pit</i>. However, you lose evasion in these circumstances. If you are under the influence of a rare effect that causes you to be immobilized or insensate and allows ongoing Reflex saves to escape the effect, as an exception to the rule, you can use your full Dexterity bonus (instead of a –5 penalty) for the purpose of attempting those ongoing saves only, since your full Dexterity is at work within the confines of the spell, trying to break free.

Answered in FAQ.

Adamantine: Adamantine says it bypasses hardness less than 20, but hardness says adamantine bypasses hardness of 20 or less. Which one should I use?

Use “less than 20” from the adamantine entry. Adamantine, which has 20 hardness, is strong enough to stand against adamantine (this is also why adamantine armor provides DR/— rather than DR/adamantine).

If the attacks are not simultaneous they also only benefit once?

For example if I cast a spell that lets me make a ranged attack each round as a standard action, do I get the benefits from point blank shot only on the first attack?

That would be a case where you measure it by uses, since it allows multiple uses. To create an example where it's easier to draw the distinction, consider a spell called scorching ray artillery that let you fire off three scorching rays each round for 1 round per level as a standard action each round. In that case, you would add the damage each time you used it, but still only to one of the three rays each time.

...special abilities that deal damage on a successful attack roll apply them on hit point damage only, and only once per casting or use...This doesn’t apply on area effects with the rare potential for extraneous attack rolls, like fireball.

Answered in FAQ

Weapon Attacks and Special Abilities: Many places in the rules use the term “ranged weapon attacks” and similar terms, but how does this apply to spells, spell-like abilities, supernatural abilities, and extraordinary abilities (heretoafter called special abilities) that require ranged attacks but might not necessarily seem like weapons?

In general, special abilities that require attack rolls benefit and suffer from all modifiers affecting attack rolls even if those modifiers mention weapon attack rolls (such as the penalty for firing into melee, the bonus on attack rolls from Point-Blank Shot and inspire courage, and the like), unless the spell specifically calls out that it doesn’t apply them (for instance spiritual weapon calls out that it isn’t affected by feats and combat actions, but it would still have to deal with cover, and firing into melee if ranged).
When it comes to modifiers that affect weapon damage rolls, or simply “damage rolls” (such as the bonus on damage rolls from Point-Blank Shot, inspire courage, and smite evil), special abilities that deal damage on a successful attack roll apply them on hit point damage only, and only once per casting or use, rather than once per attack. For instance, if a spell or special ability launched a dozen different ranged attacks simultaneously, only one (of the user’s choice) would receive bonus damage. This doesn’t apply on area effects with the rare potential for extraneous attack rolls, like fireball. However, there is a category of abilities that deserve a special note: Abilities like Arcane Strike that specifically enhance a character’s weapon or weapons themselves never apply to special abilities (with the exception of special abilities like the warlock’s mystic bolts that specifically call out that Arcane Strike applies).

In the same vein as abilities like Arcane Strike that affect a character’s weapons, abilities that say “with a weapon,” “with a melee weapon,” and “with a ranged weapon” almost never work with special abilities because such wording is almost always used as shorthand for “manufactured weapon,” “manufactured melee weapon,” and “manufactured ranged weapon.” The exception is abilities that deal damage when a creature touches or hits you in melee (for instance, the occultis’s energy ward focus power), which should also deal damage when a creature makes a melee touch attack against you but rarely call them out directly.

Certain special abilities (for instance rays, kinetic blasts, and mystic bolts) can specifically be selected with feats like Weapon Focus and Improved Critical. They still aren’t considered a type of weapon for other rules; they are not part of any weapon group and don’t qualify for the effects of fighter weapon training, warpriest sacred weapon, magus arcane pool, paladin divine bond, or any other such ability.

Abilities that modify the action usage of ranged weapon attacks or require their own special action almost never work with special abilities, since special abilities require their own actions. For instance, Pinpoint Targeting wouldn’t work with scorching ray or the soundstriker’s weird words because each of them requires its own action to activate and thus can’t be part of the feat’s specific standard action. Rare exceptions include mystic bolts and kinetic blade, which can specifically be used as part of other actions.

Answered in FAQ

Bloodrager Bloodlines: Can a bloodrager use abilities that require sorcerer levels and relate to sorcerer bloodlines like robe of arcane heritage?

No. Some hybrid classes, like the brawler, have a class feature allowing them to use items related to their parent class, but the bloodrager doesn’t.

Answered in FAQ!

Bodyguard: The Bodyguard feat says that I can spend one of my attacks of opportunity to use aid another to increase the AC of an adjacent ally, but it doesn’t say one way or the other whether this removes other restrictions on aid another? Particularly, do I need to threaten the attacking enemy? Also, has that enemy provoked an attack of opportunity from me?

You still need to fulfill all requirements of aid another, including threatening the attacking enemy. Bodyguard uses up one of your attacks of opportunity for the round, but the enemy hasn’t provoked an attack of opportunity from you, nor are you making one (which is relevant for abilities like Paired Opportunist).

Answered in FAQ:

Psychic Bloodline Sorcerer: Psychic bloodline’s bloodline arcana changes the psychic bloodline’s spells from arcane spells to psychic spells. Clearly this means that a psychic bloodline sorcerer qualifies for abilities that require the “ability to cast psychic spells” and not abilities that require “the ability to cast arcane spells”, but what about abilities that require an “arcane spellcasting class” like the half-elf’s arcane training, where you might be selecting the class before you even took levels in sorcerer and chose the psychic bloodline? Does this apply generally to abilities that change my spellcasting between arcane, divine, and psychic?

This particular combination leads to a complex interaction; at the time of the half elf ability, the term “arcane spellcasting class” was unambiguous because archetypes were new and we were still years away from any archetypes or bloodlines that changed which type of spells a character casts. Essentially, a half-elf with the arcane training ability that chooses sorcerer is choosing “the arcane spellcasting class sorcerer”. If she then takes levels in psychic bloodline sorcerer, she isn’t taking levels in her favored class. The ability would still have a small effect, though, in that since she had no levels in her favored class, she would still count as a 1st-level “arcane spellcasting sorcerer” and be able to activate arcane scrolls accordingly (whereas normally she would need Use Magic Device to use arcane or divine scrolls even if they were on her spell list).

This is the first time to our knowledge of this principle being necessary, but it would apply in other situations that switch your type of magic and even beyond that, such as if an alternate racial trait restricted your favored class bonus to “a single class that grants proficiency in heavy armor” and you picked fighter but then took levels in fighter with an archetype that traded out proficiency in heavy armor, your chosen archetype of fighter would not be your favored class.

Also, you could use this principle in reverse. If the half-elf ability requested you to choose a psychic spellcasting class instead of arcane, you could pick sorcerer expecting to take the psychic bloodline, but the racial trait in that case wouldn’t do anything until you had actually taken levels in sorcerer with the psychic bloodline, since sorcerer isn’t normally psychic without the psychic bloodline.

Also, as to the other example, Improved Familiars, we have a separate ruling, which we're giving early because it's related and we didn't address Improved Familiar in the first FAQ:

Improved Familiars: There are various ways for characters other than arcane spellcasters to gain familiars at this point, and some of those options even grant Improved Familiar as a bonus feat, but technically each Improved Familiar option requires a certain arcane spellcaster level to take it. Does that mean that non-arcane characters with Improved Familiar have a dead feature? How does it work? If it does work, can I take an Improved Familiar as some kind of variant familiar or a temporary familiar like the occultist’s soulbound puppet?

The Improved Familiar description was written back when only arcane spellcasters could have familiars, and it wasn’t sufficiently future-proofed. To that end, you can always substitute your effective wizard level for the purpose of determining your familiar’s abilities for “arcane spellcaster level” to determine the available improved familiars for your character. In general, you can take Improved Familiars for class-granted variant familiars like a shaman’s spirit animal, with a few exceptions: First, temporary familiars like the occultist’s soulbound puppet can’t become Improved Familiars from the Improved Familiar feat, and those class features don’t qualify you to take the Improved Familiar feat. Second, tumor familiars, as lumps of flesh in the shape of animals, can’t become Improved Familiars. In other cases, treat Improved Familiar as if it was an archetype to see if it stacks with other familiar options: since the two things it alters from a regular familiar are that it removes the ability to speak with animals of its kind and it prevents changing the creature type for non-animals, you couldn’t make a familiar that changes the creature type of non-animals or alters or removes speak with animals of its kind an Improved Familiar.

And with that, our next FAQ Friday won't be until after GenCon!

Thanks for those klarifications. They do clear up a lot, but...

Pathfinder Design Team wrote:

...but it is otherwise similar to using a spiked shield (for instance, the damage doesn’t stack with the bashing ability...

In which way do they not stack? Does a klar with bashing deal the same damage as a small shield with bashing? Or since the klar counts as benefitting from one size increase from its shield spikes would it still deal damage as one remaining size larger with the bashing enchant?

It otherwise counts as a light shield, so it would be a light shield two size categories larger (specifically, 1d6 damage for a Medium light shield).

Answered in FAQ.

Klars: A traditional klar “counts as a light wooden shield with shield spikes”, and a metal klar “counts as a light steel shield with shield spikes”. What exactly does this mean? Particularly, a klar is a one-handed weapon that deals damage like a heavy spiked shield, and it deals slashing damage instead of piercing damage, so where do the differences end?

A klar counts as a light shield for the purpose of using it as a shield (for instance, it grants a +1 shield bonus to AC, has a –1 armor check penalty, and has a 5% arcane spell failure chance). For the purpose of using it as a weapon, it is a one-handed weapon that deals 1d6 slashing damage, but it is otherwise similar to using a spiked shield (for instance, the damage doesn’t stack with the bashing ability, you lose the shield bonus to AC when attacking with the klar unless you have Improved Shield Bash, and so on). As a side note, anywhere that lists klars as counting as shields with “armor spikes” is a typo that will be handled in the next errata.

I'm creating this thread to prevent further derail of the havoker witch thread. Feel free to discuss positive and negative energy here, as well as the lack of a direct definition of what they are and how they work. It's also fine to FAQ this post if you'd like to see these definitions directly stated in a FAQ (things like "positive energy healing effects don't heal undead, even if the individual effect doesn't mention undead at all" which right now is inferable but not directly stated).

Here's your answer, you rapscallion!

Positive and Negative Energy: These two terms show up in a variety of abilities, but they have no definition outside those abilities, and the abilities aren’t always consistent. How do positive and negative energy work?

Positive and negative energy are two damage types, though despite their name, they are usually not included on the list of energy types you can choose with spells like resist energy or feats like Elemental Spell. You’ll sometimes come across both the phrasing “deals X damage; this is a negative energy effect” and the phrasing “deals X negative energy damage”; these two are functionally equivalent.

Positive energy often heals living creatures, though not always (for instance channeled positive energy to harm undead or the life blast spell). It often harms undead creatures, though not always (for instance channeled positive energy to heal living creatures). Individual effects will tell you whether they heal living (if they mention healing without specifying what they heal, they always mean only living creatures), harm undead, or both. Positive energy never heals or harms creatures or objects that are neither living nor undead (such as constructs), and it never directly damages the living or heals undead, barring some special effect that explicitly changes this like a dhampir’s negative energy affinity. These rules extend to the fast healing from positive-energy attuned planes as well (though overhealing on a major positive-energy attuned plane can be dangerous as well); only living creatures gain fast healing on such a plane.

Negative energy works just as described above for positive energy, reversing living creatures and undead in all cases (it often heals undead, it often harms living creatures, if it mentions damage without specifying what it damages, it always means only living creatures, and so on).

No FAQ Required: As per this FAQ on effective size increases, two effective size increases do not stack. Shield spikes and bashing both grant effective size increases, so they do not stack. The extraneous mention of armor spikes in Ultimate Equipment’s spiked shield entry is in error, and it should be reflected in the next errata.

Answered in FAQ.

Barbarian Increased Damage Reduction: The increased damage reduction rage power says it increases the “barbarian’s damage reduction”, but does that refer to the barbarian class feature “damage reduction” or to any damage reduction the barbarian might possess. In particular, the invulnerable rager archetype trades away the barbarian’s damage reduction class feature for a new ability called invulnerability that gives a slightly different form of damage reduction, so would the rage power work with that?

The rage power refers to the class feature damage reduction, meaning that it doesn’t help invulnerable ragers’ invulnerability class feature. The suggestion for the archetype to take that rage power in the suggested rage powers is in error and will be removed in the next errata.

Answered in FAQ!

Reach increases and size increases: The description of Large or larger creatures with reach weapons says that they can strike up to double their natural reach but can’t strike at their natural reach or less. Do I calculate this doubling before or after effects that alter my reach like Lunge or longarm?

Double the base reach for a creature of your size first, then add in all the other abilities afterwards. So for instance, an ogre with the longarm spell wielding a longspear and using the Lunge feat would be able to attack creatures that were 15, 20, 25, or 30 feet away but not creatures that were 0, 5, or 10 feet away.

Answered in FAQ!

Dragon Totem Resilience: Dragon totem resilience says that I get energy resistance equal to twice my barbarian DR, but then it says “This DR increases by 2 for each dragon totem rage power she possesses”. From the context, it seems like it meant that the energy resistance increases. Which one is right?

It should say that the energy resistance increases by 2 for each dragon totem rage power. This will be reflected in the next errata

A FAQ page now exists for Ultimate Intrigue, and like with Occult Adventures, we launched it with several entries, including suggestions from this thread. Thanks guys!

Answered in FAQ!

Greater Feint: Greater Feint says the target is denied its Dexterity bonus to AC until the beginning of my next turn in addition to against my next attack. Is that just against my attacks, which probably won’t be more than just my next attack until my next turn, or is it against my allies as well?

Greater Feint makes the target lose its Dexterity bonus against all melee attacks by anyone until the start of your next turn, not just you. Unless a feint ability specifically mentions ranged attacks (like the Ranged Feint feat), it always denies Dexterity bonus against melee attacks.

Answered in FAQ!

Skald: The skald class says “If the skald has rage powers from another source, he (but not his allies) can use those rage powers during an inspired rage,” what exactly does it mean by “another source”?

Another source means any source other than the rage powers gained at 3rd level and every 3 levels thereafter. A few examples of other sources are rage powers gained from multiclassing in barbarian, rage powers gained from Extra Rage Power, and rage powers gained from a magic item.

Answered in FAQ.

Trample: The Trample Universal Monster Rule indicates that the monster is moving around as part of the trample, but it never says how far it can move. How far can a trampling creature move?

A trampling creature can move up to twice its land speed as part of the trample.

It seems ambiguous to me. At first glance, the answer appears to be yes, since the class ability says that extracts are drunk like potions. Drinking a potion provokes. However, unlike drinking a potion, an alchemist can get an extract out and drink it in one standard action, or if he has the infusion discovery, can get it out and use it on an ally as a standard action. I've determined this by reading the various threads on the subject that a search of this forum has turned up.

From what I can see, there's been a lot of assuming that extracts share the property of potions that drinking them provokes. And I would assume this is the case for a non-alchemist drinking an extract, since they don't have the class feature Alchemy in which alchemists get to draw and drink extracts as a single standard action.

Yet, it seems unclear. Does anyone have a firm indication that it does provoke, other than the inference that it's like a potion and provokes because drinking a potion does?

No FAQ required. Drinking extracts provokes attacks of opportunity just like drinking a potion.

Posting here since it was the most recent of many threads on this topic:

Answered in FAQ.

Oracle Bones Mystery: What exactly does the raise the dead revelation mean when it says you can summon a skeleton or zombie to serve you? Do I need a corpse? If not, can I just summon whatever I want, like a tarrasque fast zombie?

The raise the dead doesn’t require a corpse; you summon the creature (rising up out of the earth is a potential visual for this effect). You summon the base creature from the Bestiary in either case (human skeleton or human zombie) aside from the modifications from the revelation (adding extra HD, fast or bloody, and the advanced template). At the GM’s discretion, an oracle with a noticeably different body or bone structure might summon skeletons and zombies with this ability that look cosmetically more similar to the oracle than to a human, but this doesn’t affect their game mechanics.

Answered in FAQ

Abilities that work “as a spell”: How do I calculate the DC of an ability that says it works as or like a particular spell?

Some abilities that work as a spell tell you what their DC is, like the bard’s fascinate performance. An ability that doesn’t tell you anything about its DC has a DC of 10 + the spell level + the key spellcasting ability score of the class that granted it (or Charisma otherwise). In the case of a spell with multiple spell levels, use the spell level from the class that granted the ability if that class has the spell on its spell list, and otherwise use the spell level that’s most appropriate (usually sorcerer/wizard for an arcane ability, cleric for a divine ability, and psychic for a psychic ability).

Please click FAQ on this post.

Can a Rogue gain Sneak Attack damage dice using a Ranged Longbow attack while in flanking position with an ally?

Quote:

When making a melee attack, you get a +2 flanking bonus if your opponent is threatened by another enemy character or creature on its opposite border or opposite corner.

When in doubt about whether two characters flank an opponent in the middle, trace an imaginary line between the two attackers' centers. If the line passes through opposite borders of the opponent's space (including corners of those borders), then the opponent is flanked.

No FAQ Required: As per the Gang Up FAQ "flanking specifically refers to melee attacks," so no, the rogue can't do so. As an aside, though it isn't the question asked here, someone threatening with a ranged weapon can provide a flank to an ally who is using a melee weapon.

Answered in FAQ!

Tiny and smaller creatures: In the section on Tiny and smaller creatures, it says that entering a creature’s space provokes an attack of opportunity, but typically 5-foot steps don’t provoke an attack of opportunity. If a Tiny or smaller creature took a 5-foot step into a creature’s space, would it provoke an attack of opportunity?

Yes. Even with a 5-foot step, a Tiny or smaller creature entering a creature’s space provokes an attack of opportunity (unless it is using a more specific ability to avoid the attack of opportunity such as the Monkey Shine feat). This doesn’t mean that a Tiny or smaller creature entering a creature’s space and moving out of a threatened square with a move action provokes two attacks of opportunity from that creature, for the same reason that moving out of multiple of a creature’s threatened squares in the same move action doesn’t provoke two attacks of opportunity.

FAQed!

Dead Shot: When it says you make the number of attack rolls based on your base attack bonus, would that also include extra attacks from things like haste or Rapid Shot?

No, dead shot only includes attacks from base attack bonus (so two attack rolls at 7th, three at 11th, four at 16th). Dead shot is meant more of a backup option for particular situations (such as shooting against something with high hardness or avoiding misfires).

FAQed!

Nauseated and Actions: Does the nauseated condition really mean what it says when it says “The only action such a character can take is a single move action per turn” or does it just mean I can’t take a standard action?

The nauseated condition really means what it says. You are limited to one move action per round, and not any other actions. Compare to the staggered condition, which says “A staggered creature may take a single move action or standard action each round (but not both, nor can he take full-round actions). A staggered creature can still take free, swift, and immediate actions.”

Answered in FAQ!

Flight and Magical Flight: Can a paralyzed or stunned creature keep flying with magical flight? Does a creature with magical flight not apply bonuses or penalties to Fly checks because it doesn’t have a “natural” fly speed? Does flying make a creature immune to being flat-footed?

No, any creature that loses all actions can’t take an action to attempt a Fly check to hover in place and thus automatically falls. That includes a paralyzed, stunned, or dazed creature. Magical flight doesn’t act any differently, even for paralysis, as it isn’t a purely mental action. A creature with 0 Dexterity can’t fly, and paralysis sets a creature’s Dexterity to 0. Despite the fact that the Fly skill mentions that bonuses and penalties from maneuverability apply to creatures with natural fly speeds, they apply for any fly speed. If they didn’t apply to creatures that gained flight artificially or through magic, then those maneuverabilities (like the listed good maneuverability for the fly spell) would have no game effect. Finally, the statement “You are not considered flat-footed while flying” means that flying (unlike balancing using Acrobatics or climbing) doesn’t automatically make you flat-footed or force you to lose your Dexterity bonus to AC; it doesn’t mean that flying makes you immune to being caught flat-footed.

Answered in FAQ!

Paladin’s Detect Evil: Does a paladin need to spend a standard action to activate detect evil before spending a move action to concentrate on a single creature or item?

No, the first sentence is discrete from the rest of the ability, and offers an alternative option for using detect evil. A paladin can use the move action on a single creature or item in lieu of the standard action to activate a normal detect evil.

Answered in FAQ.

"Does not stack with" and spells with effects other than bonuses: What does it mean if a spell tells me it doesn’t stack with another spell or "similar effects" if some of the effects aren't bonuses?

If you have two spells with effects other than bonuses and those spells or effects are called out not to stack, that means that the effects that apply to the same rules component or situation do not stack, so if they apply different non-bonus effects to the same rules component, the most recent spell takes precedent. For example, aspect of the falcon specifically doesn't stack with any other effect that expands the threat range of a weapon, such as Improved Critical or keen. This means that the part of aspect of the falcon that applies to criticals doesn't stack with those effects, but it doesn't prevent someone with Improved Critical from receiving the competence bonuses on attack rolls and Perception checks. If a character with Improved Critical (light crossbow) cast aspect of the falcon, his criticals would change from 17–20/x2 to 19–20/x3. Similarly, blessing of fervor does not stack with haste, which means that the increased speed, extra attack, and attack roll/AC/Reflex save bonuses wouldn't stack between the two spells, but if you had both spells active, you could still get those three benefits from haste while choosing to stand up as a swift action or apply metamagic to a low-level spell.

FAQed!

Pack Flanking: Is Pack Flanking a combat feat?

Yes, Pack Flanking should be a combat feat. This change will be reflected in the next errata.

Answered in FAQ! However, additionally, you guys made a really good case for the scimitar in this thread and the other, so we've adjusted the chart a bit from the one in the thread back in 2012.

There's no need to be this way when I'm clearly neutral on the subject and keeping my opinions out of it. If you were fishing for my opinion then fine, it's "The child is a part of the natural process of the creature's body until it tries to separate, AKA birth, and shapeshifting should just be dangerous near birth." This is something the DM also came up with independently, and what we are going with.

You know, I didn't express any personal opinion about you and your game until you said this-- I asked you directly, knowing your player's wishes in advance, what benefit you thought you were going to derive from taking the game in a very personal and potentially very hurtful direction instead. You've now confirmed that you're doing this anyway, using historically less-than-ideal attitudes towards pregnancy and childbirth as justification, and you're complaining that I'm being rude to you?

You are literally trying to explain to me how magical shapeshifting powers would "realistically" impact pregnancy to justify turning your game into an abortion simulator at the expense of your players' expressed wishes and concerns.

I still haven't expressed my personal opinion of you and your game, but at least now I am heavily implying it by comparison. If you think the shoe fits, I'm not going to stop you from lacing it up and wearing it to town.

Your player told you how she wants it to work-- can you honestly think of a single halfway decent reason that it should not work that way? Can you think of a single, solitary way that making it work any other way is going to make the game more fun for anyone sitting at the table?

Whoever wrote the rule you think you remember is obviously a tremendous a+@$%~@, and the biggest tragedy here is that you don't remember his name so you won't know not to take anything he says seriously in the future.

Just taking away touch AC with no other benefit is too much of a nerf.

What was it SKR said, about some weapons not being very good in the game because they're not very good in real life?

It's kinda like that, except actually realistic.

Honestly I'd like to see a menu list of options that are subbed out for standard abilities (That Paizo believes are equivalent exchanges) to allow a player to customize their base class so no two fighters, rogues, wizards, clerics etc. are the same.

Rogue Genius Games has done this for the majority of the CRB classes, plus the Cavalier and Witch, in the series Rogue Genius Guide to the Talented $CLASS and Rogue Genius Guide to More $CLASS Talents.

I miiiiight be laying it on a little too thick trying to convince them to finish the APG classes and tackle the ACG and Ultimate classes... and maybe Occult Adventures... and DSP psionics.

A Prestige Class that acts to support a multiclass character archetype by advancing (some of) the features of two classes simultaneously-- like Mystic Theurge.

As for Cleric, avoiding death forever kinda seems opposite their entire thing. How does one get powers from a god then work to avoid ever meeting that god?

"When She wants me, She always knows where to find me. Until then, I've got Her work to do."

Your multiclassing classes continue unaffected because they are "bought" with the 3 feats (each)... just like VMC continues through a prestige class.

Thank you. I know I came back at you a little too hot, and I really appreciate you responding in good faith.

The idea of the Prestige Class replacing the main class has merit... it bothers me on some level, but I'll have to think about it further.

So... I've always hated the way multiclassing works in D&D 3.X and Pathfinder. I've been trying to fix it, nearly consistently, for the past fifteen years and I've gotten into a lot of stupid and pointless arguments with people who don't think it needs to be fixed.

Luckily, I am now in possession of Tipsy Tabby Publishing's Overhauling Multiclassing rules, which use a much more elegant implementation of fixed-progression Gestalt than my own-- you may select one secondary class, you take multiclass feats (with ability prerequisites a la 5e) to upgrade your chassis, and when you're at least 5th level with at least 2 multiclassing feats, you can take the Cross-Training feat that gives you all of the class features of your secondary class at your character level -4.

This is leagues better than the original system, and likewise leagues better than anything I ever came up with.

But there are still four major problems that I think can be improved, and that I'd like to address.

1. Cost versus Benefit: Three feats for all of the class features of a secondary class just feels too good. Compare five feats for all of the "benefits" of Variant Multiclassing. Being multiclassed needs to detract something from the primary class, as well. (But my previous attempt to use Level Adjustment were awful.)
   
2. Low Level Characters: You don't get any of the class features of your secondary class until 5th level. Many games don't even last that long.
   
3. Triple-Class Characters: Not supported. This probably isn't much of a problem, because you can approximate most classic AD&D triples with the right Archetypes and Hybrids.
   
4. Prestige Classes: Not supported, and this is the reason I'm starting this thread.
   

Cost Versus Benefit

I think I've got this one licked, as long as I don't try to implement Triple-Class characters. Also, for the record, I am an idiot sandwich. Pathfinder already has a mechanism for encouraging characters to stay single-class: Favored Class Bonuses. Single-class characters get Favored Class Bonuses; the level they take a multiclass feat, they stop.

Low-Level Characters

Just add a multiclass feat that grants the 1st-level features of the chosen class. This is your entry-level multiclass feat, overwritten by Cross-Training later.

Triple-Class Characters

I've got nothing, and I'm honestly half-convinced that I shouldn't even attempt this. On the other hand, I really want to.

Prestige Classes

This is a real sticking point because a lot of cool concepts in 3.X and PF are gated behind the Prestige Class system. Also, a lot of the later "multige" classes did unique things beyond just +1 spellcaster level/+1 spellcaster level that... should be available to multiclass characters in some capacity, but probably aren't worth a whole class with fixed progression.

And there's the rub: most Prestige Classes are obviously designed to replace the class features of the base class, not co-exist with them. +1 spellcaster level is only the most obvious example... but in a fixed progression game, it's meaningless. Easy enough to ignore, but suddenly a 5/10 casting PrC is the exact same as a 10/10 casting PrC.

I'm generally thinking that your first (and only) Prestige Class should just be "free": meet the prerequisites, choose it, and advance. Prestige Classes would not count against being single-classed for the purposes of FCBs. There's a part of me that wants to support having more than one Prestige Class, but I'm pretty sure that would lead to nothing but shenanigans and ruination.

So that's where I'm at. Any ideas?

First thought is Genies. Then Dragons.

Oooh: an alien/aberration-focused Druid and Shifter.

Fleshgrafts. Specifically fleshgrafts that are not limited to Evil characters and aren't saddled with ludicrous drawbacks.

A Fleshwarper archetype and/or Prestige Class... compatible with the alien/aberration Druid archetype mentioned above.

Martial archetypes for the recipients of fleshgrafts.

Campaign settings that weren't attached to Golarion, and weren't fantasy kitchen sinks. Golarion's fine... I just really would have liked to see what Paizo could have done with more focused themes.

... okay, and I'm going to go there: Chaotic. Good. Paladin. Archetype.

edit: And while we're going there, how about an explicitly Chaotic Monk archetype that doesn't give up all of their supernatural abilities?

So looking at something like Inevitable Strike compared to Truestrike I can definitely understand an argument on how good Psionics are.

Truestrike. +20 to your next attack as a standard action.

Inevitable Strike. +20 to your next attack as a standard action. Or +5 as a swift action. And either get +2 per powerpoint spent up to a maximum of +25.

It should be better. If you augment it up to +25, it's the equivalent of a 6th level spell.

Things I would like to have seen are unchained versions of every class and as someone mentioned above, the ability to swap out some class abilities for alternate ones for every class.

If you're open to 3pp, Rogue Genius Games does this brilliantly with the "Genius Guide to the Talented <$CLASS>" series.

FaerieGodfather wrote:

Definitely more support for racial options and nonstandard races.

You should check out the Book of Heroic Races: Advanced Compendium. It covers 12 non-core book races in solid detail. Plus it has a 4.5-Star rating from Endzeitgeist.

I tried man, I really did, but DTRPG says I can't buy another copy.

Definitely more support for racial options and nonstandard races.

Right now, the Druid is a better natural weapon user than the Shifter :S

They took a class whose primary focus is 9 level spellcasting, and who has an animal companion and shapeshifting as secondary abilities.

They took a class with Full BAB and shapeshifting as its primary focuses, with no spellcasting and no animal companion.

And they decided that what they needed to do to balance these classes was to nerf the shapeshifting abilities of the second class, the one for whom shapeshifting was, again, their primary focus.

God bless them. I love so much of their work, but their ideas about how classes that don't cast spells should compare to classes that do are just incomprhensible.

Sure, why not. Just remember that while these are only my opinions, they're still better than yours.

Liked: The artwork. Bloodlines and School Powers. The Witch class, the idea of the Shifter class. Archetypes. Racial Favored Class Bonuses. Literally all of Pathfinder Unchained. Second Darkness, Distant Worlds, People of the Stars. Dreamscarred Press and Rogue Genius Games.

Hated: exacerbating 3.5's caster supremacy, nerfing combat feats, refusing to include "multige" classes, the firearms rules and everything that touches them, SKR's attitude towards Monks, Gray Guards and Hellknights, people who defend Gray Guards and Hellknights, people who defend Gray Guards and Hellknights while whining that NG or CG Paladins will ruin the entire game as we know it, and the Psychic classes.

Wanted: More space stuff, more non-European stuff, more weird stuff, better multiclassing support, mostly just less stuff from my "Hated" list.

Will Miss: The artwork, mostly, and the familiar iconics. I'm going to miss the version of Pathfinder that I work with being the curent version with the most discussion about it.

Look, if you want your character to torture people... I'm just going to ask you to play a different character.

If you try to rationalize to me how torturing people is compatible with a Good alignment, I'm going to ask you to leave my house and never come back.

If your DM is comfortable allowing you to play this character, just be honest and write "Chaotic Evil" on your character sheet.

Since the (healing) subschool was inexplicably removed from it in 3e, my answer would be Necromancy. Add those spells back in... and it would be my favorite again.

It isn't that it's mostly Evil, it's just that it has relatively few spells I'd be interested in casting.

It literally does not matter that alignment/morality is supposedly objective in the in-game universe when it is not objectively defined by the rules and thus cannot be adjudicated objectively or consistently between games.

Morality is universal.

Player's opinions tend to project into the game. Deal with it.

It's not a matter of "tending to". As vaguely as the morality of alignment is defined in D&D/PF-- inescapably, I suspect-- it's simply impossible for the majority of alignment to not be defined by the moral opinions of the people enforcing the alignment rules.

The problem is that 100% of that authority is given to the Dungeon Master, with no explanation or guidance as to the fact that he's not morally infallible and that legitimate differences of opinion need to be respected.

How would you improve alignment in PF2e?

Alignments are metaphysical forces like the f~!%ing books say they're supposed to be: remove "Neutral" as an alignment. "Neutral Good" is just "Good", and "Neutral" is either "Balance" or "Unaligned".

Unless your class or creature type is explicitly about the balance of those metaphysical forces, you're not required to have an alignment and you probably don't. No spell or ability targets Unaligned.

Distinguish Primal from Divine. Most Primal casters are Unaligned. Adding a Balance requirement and a Code of Conduct is a Prestige Class option.

Any class that has an Alignment requirement has an Oath that clearly and objectively defines the behavior required of the class. Ideally, there are multiple Oaths per such class.

What areas of the game does alignment cause you concern?

The rules state that alignment is a system of objective morality, that they are explicitly not subject to individual interpretation, and are then so vague and inconsistent that they require subjective individual interpretation on the part of the DM.

If Alignment is going to be bright lines and sharp distinctions, then it needs to be clearly defined in the game rules.

If it's going to continue being murky, then it needs to be considerably more flexible and the rules need to assume that players and DMs will have good-faith disagreements over alignment issues-- that players should not be punished for.

* Necromancy and evil undead

* Evil spell descriptors

There's an in-universe explanation for why these things are Evil, and I generally accept it-- they're not morally wrong, they literally channel the power of Evil, leaving its residue behind in the caster.

Poison, on the other hand, has no such rationale... and the only book that tried to explain why poison was Evil also included special, extra painful holy poisons that were okay because they only worked... on the exact same enemies the PCs would have been poisoning anyway.

* CG and NG paladin-like classes

You know, bad as I want a CG Paladin variant, its absence is not a problem.

The problem is DMs and players disagreeing on what LG means because the rules don't acknowledge that they are subjective as f%!!.

If a class is supposed to have a Code of Conduct, the rules need to give it a Code of f$~#ing Conduct that spells out what offenses are and how severe offenses are, and doesn't rely on meaningless weaselwords like "legitimate authority".

Why is Lawful Good the hill to die on, rather than Human/part-Human?

In an uncharacteristic act of charity... I might point out that Lawful Good might be the hill to die on because it's the only hill left after everything you just pointed out.

"Tradition" only dates back to 2000 here. Anything before 2000 has no bearing on the One True Way.

I've been hearing that for the past ten years.

Ah, yes, the Druid is in the 4th Ed PHB 2, but I believe the Paladin and Ranger are in the PHB for every edition of D&D, I forget what the deal is in BECMI.

Paladin, Knight, and Avenger are name-level class options (basically Prestige Classes) for Fighters.

Druid is a name-level option for Clerics.

Bard was a Prestige Class in 1e AD&D, but there's no precedent in D&D I'm aware of.

Still, respect does not necessarily means "complete obedience". This is the sort of thing GMs and players talk at session-0.

What page of the CRB do the words "session 0" or "social contract" appear on? Asking for a friend.

These variants ARE NOT paladins, both lore and rules state that (and if they do not, it's also bad).

Look, if you want to argue that the Antipaladin isn't really a Paladin because its name is different, even though it gets its eerily similar powers the same way-- that's up to you, I guess.

But this exists.

Also, I hope I don't have to say it again: *Exceptions do not change the norm*! Paladin variants (although I don't particularly like them, for reasons I've already stated here) do not change the standard Paladin. Removing the alignment restriction on all Paladin-y options *is* changing the class!

I don't think I'm arguing with you, then.

I'm not trying to remove the "alignment restriction" on the Paladin. I'm trying to make them multiple choice, with several variations on Lawful Good and maybe two or three Neutral Good or Chaotic Good options.

But the existence of multiple "Evil Paladin" variants and "Good In Name Only" variants absolutely dilutes the Paladin class further than anything I'm proposing-- and paints all of your arguments that Paladins are special as hypocritical nonsense.

Why, exactly, is a Chaotic Good Paladin so much more offensive to the sensibilities of the traditionalists than a Chaotic Evil one?

It's not about the Paladin's power, it's about the Palaidn's powers.

What your character can do is who your character is. A character that doesn't have the Paladin's powers-- even if they have better powers-- is not a Paladin.

Like I said... I want to be able to smite evil on slavers and lay on hands their former property without Falling because the GM decides using lethal force before I am personally attacked is Evil or because disrupting legal trafficking in humanoid women and children is Chaotic.

I don't want to make the Paladin's Code less strict. I want to make it less arbitrary by giving it actual, objective definitions-- and then providing alternatives for different kinds of Good.

Don't you find it odd that there are more flavors of Evil "Paladin" than there are actual Paladins?

FaerieGodfather wrote:

I don't want it gone, I just want it off my neck.

It already is, slap N on the alignment portion of your character sheet.

Unless I am playing a Monk. Or a Shifter, and my DM decides I'm just a little too CG to keep advancing in my class.

It's just huge amounts of content that you don't notice if you run a game without alignment, but that you'd basically never be able to replicate if you tried to inject it on top of a game that lacks alignment completely.

This. I want alignment to still be a part of the game-- I want aligned Outsiders, and touched or tainted mortals, to have alignment subtypes and be affected by aligned magic.

I just want it to have very little effect on mortals who are not explicitly tied to the metaphysical forces alignment represents, and to be more clearly/consistently/thoroughly delineated for player characters who are supposed to be.

I don't want it gone, I just want it off my neck.

Bard: Expanded Repertoire.

Cleric: Warmage casting, with a narrow base list and expanded Domains. Advanced Learning.

Druid: Tone spellcasting, shapeshifting, and animal companion way down; allow Druids to choose one to function at the PF1 level.

Monk:I don't know what I want; I just know that I want it. Full martial and flexible mundane/magical powers are a good start.

Rogue: Make them a full-martial class, like Ranger or Paladin.

Paladin: Multiple Oaths with separate, strict but clear Codes of Conduct.

Ranger: Spell-less as a core option. Make it include the Shifter class as a core option.

Sorcerer: Different, narrower spell list than Wizard, but broader Bloodline spell lists.

Wizard: Arcanist casting. Spell Mastery grants Spells Known.

Witch: Make. It. Core. Arcanist casting plus Spell Mastery. Make eldritch blast and its modifications into Hexes.

Basically Zork with lots of other people. When WoW came out, all the cool kids left. :(

All the cool kids may be gone, but the scene's still clinging to life support. I am trying to develop my own MUD based on my Shroompunk setting... trying to design something that combines permadeath with PVP and makes it work.

HWalsh wrote:

Nah, Harry Dresden has always been Neutral Good with Lawful leanings. He is most certainly not, and never has been, Evil. Absolutely not Chaotic Evil.

** spoiler omitted **

Harry Dresden is hardcore Chaotic Good. Both before and after Book 12.

Several of his decisions in Changes were Evil. Eeeeevil. And he made them, damned well knowing they were.

Michael Carpenter would never have made those decisions, even to save his wife and his children.

But that's the difference between Regular Good and Exalted Good.

After everything he did, though, he's still going to put himself between innocent people and monsters bigger even than the one he's become. You dangle certain reasons in front of him, and like anybody, he will do the wrong thing... but he's still going to die doing the right thing.

"Creating undead, mindless or otherwise, requires channeling toxic spiritual energies-- literal Evil-- that corrupt the caster's soul and leave them spiritually less capable of feeling compassion."

Pathfinder isn't trying to do that though. They are emulating the fantasy. Which, in no way, insults the real world history of combat.

What alignment is Danny Rand? Sun Wukong?

The "Monks must be Lawful" doesn't have any roots in the source material. It is an artificial, arbitrary restriction that actually makes Pathfinder worse at the narrative concerns you're using to justify it.

I do like pallys being LG but I can live with some extensions like any good.

Yeah. I want multiple flavors of Paladin, but I want all of them to be Good. I just want the rules about how a Paladin is supposed to behave to be clearer and more consistent.