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

Peet's page

Pathfinder Society Member. 580 posts. No reviews. 1 list. No wishlists. 3 Pathfinder Society characters.


RSS

1 to 50 of 580 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Alanya wrote:

Any alignment can join any faction; it's the faction goal that matters! I would also vote against Osirion, as this character seems to want to do what's good and right, which fits Silver Crusade. But take a look at the faction goals and decide what best aligns with your character's interest. Keep in mind though that some of the factions are changing for season 6!

faction letters

Thanks, Alanya.

The thing about Silver Crusade is that the character has strong opinions about undead, but other than that is mostly indifferent to good and evil. He probably would support the Mendevian crusades for the same reason he opposes undead; the worldwound is "unnatural" and poses a threat not just to mortal beings but to the natural order itself.

But he doesn't really care about ordinary people being killed or enslaved; in his mind Pharasma will gather them all eventually. He is not especially interested in helping those who can't help themselves, at least not without reward. So Silver Crusade feels a little weird for me.

Peet


Actually, I think Axe Beak is now legal anyways, isn't it?


Trust me, I read that section quite carefully before making that last post.

Darksol the Painbringer wrote:
That kind of thinking right there breaks the game. If TWF is not an action, why don't I TWF every round since it doesn't take any action to do?

Because TWF is a feat, not an action. TWF is not a verb and is not something you can "do." The feat merely modifies the attack bonuses and penalties when using two weapons to attack. You do not need TWF to use two weapons to attack.

If by TWF you only mean attacking with two weapons, this is a bit different, but nevertheless attacking with two weapons is merely one way to perform a Full-Attack. It is not its own type of action.

Peet


taldanrebel2187 wrote:
I suspect if this gets FAQ'd, they'll go with A. Otherwise you could cast the spell at an absurdly dangerous location and power-game it.

If you were able to lure someone onto the demiplane first then this would allow you to use it offensively. I think you are right in that regard though as I don't think ejecting someone from a demiplane is normally supposed to put the ejected person in danger.

taldanrebel2187 wrote:
C gives the caster far too much power (and let's face it, Conjuration Wizards are not lacking in power by this level).

I definitely agree here; if it could be used this way then create demiplane would obviate the need for a greater teleport spell.


If I were playing a paladin I suspect I would decline to eat the flesh of a sentient being, even if this would likely mean my death.

In the circumstance where I had the consent of the being in question, who was not dying by my own hand, I might... but I would still feel that I would need to atone afterwards.

If the situation were grave enough, and I expected that many would die as a result of my inaction, I might, but I would expect to lose my paladin powers for it and be forced to continue on as an ordinary fighter type until I could arrange an atonement. The loss of my powers would not dissuade me from my quest, but would inform my actions afterwards.


Two-weapon fighting does require two hands. However, TWF is not an action.

Full-attack is an action. Full attack does not require you to use two hands, or even one hand. You simply need to be able to make two or more attacks.

The grappled condition does not specify that you are being held by the arm, or that one of your arms is not able to be used. You can grapple creatures that do not have arms. Creatures without arms can grapple you as long as they have something that can grab you (many creatures grapple with their tail, for example).


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I must take action because someone is WRONG on the internet!


Orthodox Banjoist wrote:

@Daniel Thrace: First of all i'm not choosing instead of Friend who plays the summoner, so i think the choice on "how to make his Eidolon" is right to him.

If i need an Eidolon has a trap finder, i surely play a summoner then :).

Depending on what level you are, your summoner can use his lower level spell slots for summon monster I which lasts much longer than for other casters. He doesn't need his eidolon for that, and it does cost some resources to heal it, so I wouldn't use the eidolon to spring traps.

Orthodox Banjoist wrote:
So my party lack in Arcane Magic? We never noticed that...never had problems.

Well, the summoner is almost a full arcane caster, but with a narrower spell list. As to whether you need an arcane caster, it depends on your level. At low level a party full of fighters will do pretty well; you just need a bit of healing. What level are you, BTW?

But with a Paladin, a Calavier, a Ranger, a Cleric, and an Eidolon in the party, you probably don't want to play a front-line fighter character; the front line is probably pretty crowded already. If you did play a rogue you probably would want to play a ranged archer type. A full arcane caster though can also stand in the back and be pretty effective.

Peet


The thing about using water is that even if the water conducts perfectly most of the electricity will be absorbed by the ground, with very little actually jumping to people standing in the puddle.

It is creative though, so I would say that this allows one to make an attack against a target standing in a 5' square with the puddle in it under these conditions:

1. You have to touch the puddle with the hand that you gestured with to cast. Since you are bending over this action provokes AoOs unless you are already prone. Note that you could drop prone as a free action to deal with this issue.

2. You do not need to roll to hit, but since this has essentially become a single-square area effect, the target gets a reflex save for half damage.

3. The spell's base damage will be halved as much of the electricity dissipated harmlessly into the ground.

These may seem overly restrictive, but hey, the spell isn't supposed to work this way.


Captain Zoom wrote:
I don't think anyone mentioned another good choice: Seeker Archetype Sorceror. Full arcane caster which your group doesn't have.

I vote this. A very good point that the party does not yet have a wizard or sorcerer. For seeker you should pick a bloodline that has good bloodline spells and arcana but don't worry about bloodline powers because you lose most of those.

Note though that the sorcerer has low skill ranks, and you need certain ones as a sorcerer. You might want the Sage bloodline so you can use INT instead.

BTW the summoner already has a trapfinding ability called summon monster I. What you need is someone to disable them.

Note that you could also just take a trait that grants disable device in class. Dispel magic should deal with magical traps.

Peet


Arachnofiend wrote:

There's a way around that, actually...

It's a much bigger investment feat-wise but it's certainly an interesting idea to me, especially since you get a performance check when you start raging.

I'm pretty sure Performance feats are not legal for PFS.

Peet

Edit: Yep, 'fraid so:

Additonal Resources wrote:
Feats: The following feats are not allowed in Pathfinder Society Organized Play: Expert Driver, Field Repair, Master Combat Performer, Master Siege Engineer, Performance Weapon Master, Performing Combatant, Secret Stash Deed, Siege Commander, Siege Engineer, Siege Gunner, Skilled Driver,, and all performance feats. (emphasis mine)

http://paizo.com/pathfinderSociety/about/additionalResources


The table for average monster stats can also be found here:
http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/monsters/monsterCreation.html

However, it is worth noting that a "typical" encounter in most games is probably APL+1 or +2. An encounter that has a CR equal to APL is probably one you can roll over pretty easily. Also remember that a party with more than 4 players has a higher APL. So you should probably optimize for enemies one or two CR points above your level.

Peet


For the record, you need concealment to make a stealth check. Your using the wand of obscuring mist grants the concealment you need for stealth. Then you roll stealth. If you succeed then your opponent cannot see you and will be denied his dex bonus if you attack.

So obscuring mist does help with that, by providing an environment where you can use your stealth skill. Of course, so do smoke pellets.

Blur is probably a better investment if you are looking for concealment but it is more expensive.


Give the swarm a will save to disbelieve the created swarmsuit. Problem solved! :P


There seems to be some confusion here. It requires no hands at all to make a full-attack action.

Example 1: You are being attacked by a Death Dog. The dog has two heads and two bite attacks. In order to use both bite attacks in one round it must make a full-attack action. Neither attack requires any hands, and it has no hands anyway.

Example 2: A character with a sword and shield has a base attack bonus of +6. He may therefore make 2 iterative attacks on his turn with his sword if he uses a full-attack action. This only requires the use of the hand that is holding the sword.

The only thing that is required in the text of the Full-Attack rule is the ability to make more than one attack in a round. It doesn't matter how you get those attacks.

PRD wrote:

Full Attack

If you get more than one attack per round because your base attack bonus is high enough (see Base Attack Bonus in Classes), because you fight with two weapons or a double weapon, or for some special reason, you must use a full-round action to get your additional attacks. You do not need to specify the targets of your attacks ahead of time. You can see how the earlier attacks turn out before assigning the later ones.


Diego Rossi wrote:

I think that most of the Astral plane is less active than western North Dakota or the Gobi desert. It is a infinite plane with very few residents.

It is only in some specific location of interest that you have a good chance of meeting someone/something.
On the other hand a permanent demiplane will stay there for a long time so, sooner or later, it will be discovered. Adding some or a lot of defenses to it isn't a bad idea.

It's worth noting that generally the point on the Astral Plane that the demiplane will be located will normally be close to the interface point between the Astral and the Material Plane. I assume that the interface point is fairly broad, allowing for an Astral traveller to emerge on the Material where he wishes, but you will be close to the surface of an inhabited world so there will be more astral traffic in the area than in most of the Astral plane.

Melvin the Mediocre wrote:
I think I recall way back in AD&D that you could use the ethereal plane to basically teleport on the material plane because your movement on that plane correlated to a vastly greater distance on the material plane. Does anybody know if things still work that way? Because if they do, I could just pop onto the ethereal plane before creating mine and get the effect I want by ejecting my buddies to the ethereal plane.

I don't see anything about that in the Gamemastery Guide. The Ethereal seems to have the same dimensions as the material plane, and there are no special rules I can see for movement.

It occurs to me that one trick would be to use the Ethereal as a starting point but use a location very, very far from the surface of a world. Ethereal travellers would normally stay near a world, I would think, though strictly speaking there is no impediment to them wandering off into space; it would just take a long time to get anywhere.

The only problem with that is that if you ejected creatures off your demiplane and they appeared in the Ethereal next to your demiplane, then your demiplane is probably the only place they can reach without teleportation. So unwanted visitors would keep coming back.


If you were hoping to get more hit points out of your prestige class you could take toughness instead, which would give you an extra HP for ALL your levels, not just the PRC ones.

So as a GM I'd probably allow it. For PFS though the answer would be no.


I'm pretty sure this was Faq'ed since it was written when the only divine casters were prepared.

Edit - Here it is:
FAQ: http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fm#v5748eaic9qx6

So yes, sorcerer/oracle theurges can indeed use combined spells to cast sorc spells with oracle slots and vice/versa. FYI though the later spell level gain that oracles and sorcerers have makes this a tough class to work with, even with early entry.


Spook205 wrote:
Peet wrote:
The last thing I would want would be to come back to my demiplane only to find that it had been taken over by hundreds of Xill.

Man...you didn't live through 2e Planescape did you?

A repeated thing was xill, nathari, githyanki, or any of a host of other planar monsters deciding to claim jump on wizards' demiplanes. Some species made a point of raiding demiplanes, like plane jumping pirates or second story men.

I never played planescape, but am well aware that there are lots of dangerous guys on the astral plane. I did play 1st ed., and remember the xill and githyanki from then.

As to the ethereal plane, I'm less familiar with those, but the ethereal plane is also co-existent with the material plane, so there is probably a fair bit of traffic there.

Putting your demiplane on the astral would be a little weird because if you cast astral projection to get there you would leave a body behind on the material plane, which is less than ideal.

It's an interesting question about ethereal beings going on to your demiplane from the ethereal. To other things on the ethereal plane they are solid, so I suspect that a being the enters the demiplane via the ethereal would be solid on the demiplane.

So what kind of "security" would you put on your demiplane? I think a teleport trap would definitely be in order. What else?

Peet


No, what you want is DD/Bloodrager!


Ravingdork wrote:

You can travel to your created demiplanes with repeated castings of the spell.

From lesser create demiplane: When you finish casting the spell, you may bring yourself and up to seven other creatures to the plane automatically by joining hands in a circle.

It looks like doing so may also extend the duration of a non-permanent demiplane as well.

I believe that this is the intent of the spell.

However, as Seebs and Kayerloth pointed out above, under RAW casting a create demiplane spell on the material plane creates a brand new demiplane, and does not permit travel to an existing demiplane. You can use any of the create demiplane spells to expand (or modify) an existing demiplane, but only while you are in said demiplane.

I'm pretty sure I'd allow this as a GM though.

I have a sorcerer in a campaign who when he reaches a high enough level plans to create his own demiplane. However, I am not going to assume this will work without going to my GM.

Diego Rossi wrote:
Peet wrote:


As I pointed out though, you can`t use plane shift either without a forked rod attuned to that demiplane. Where do you get one? How can you make one? Strictly speaking, you can`t. So plane shift won`t work without the GM hand-waving that requirement. False Focus, Blood Money, and Eschew Materials all allow you to ignore requirements for material components, but not for foci.

Normally how do you know how to attune a rod? Research.

I think you are the maximum expert on the plane you have created, so yes, you can attune a rod to it.

Yes, but this is exactly what I mean by "GM hand-waving." No RAW mechanics are included in-game to represent it.

Normally you just buy the correct type of rod. In 3.5 there were listings about exactly what type of tuning fork you needed for each plane. Obviously Paizo cannot reprint that material though. Presumably a Knowledge:Planes check would allow you to know what fork works with what plane.

Diego Rossi wrote:
PRD wrote:
The plane cannot be dispelled, but a creature on the plane can destroy it by using limited wish, mage's disjunction, miracle, or wish and making a successful dispel check.

I have some serious doubt on the ability of a single spell to affect a whole demiplane if it was made with multiple spells.

Mage disjuction for sure wouldn't cover all of it. It is a single 40' burst, so it would affect 4 or 5 casting of lesser create demiplane but it will not even cover all the volume of a single casting of the other versions of the spell.
What happen if the central section of a multi casting demiplane isn't maintained make very clear that the plane is made of separated sections.

For the record you can make your demiplane have the impeded magic trait towards abjuration, or towards spells that attempt to dispel it (through the modifications allowed by create demiplane, greater). That only forces a concentration check (DC 29 for disjunction) though so it might not be enough to protect it.

I myself am more worried about the ramifications of the plane being adjacent to the astral or ethereal plane. The fact that going to either of these planes allows you to then move to the demiplane means that your demiplane is somehow "adjacent" to the other plane, and thus astral or ethereal beings (whichever is appropriate) can move from that plane onto your demiplane.

The last thing I would want would be to come back to my demiplane only to find that it had been taken over by hundreds of Xill.

Peet


seebs wrote:
I don't think create demiplane lets you travel to an existing plane. Yes, sorcerers will need scrolls or something else. But then, it would be a really bad idea for a sorcerer to spend a known-spells slot on something so rarely-used. That's why you get things like the mnemonic vestment.

As I pointed out though, you can`t use plane shift either without a forked rod attuned to that demiplane. Where do you get one? How can you make one? Strictly speaking, you can`t. So plane shift won`t work without the GM hand-waving that requirement. False Focus, Blood Money, and Eschew Materials all allow you to ignore requirements for material components, but not for foci.


Kayerloth wrote:
Peet has an interesting point to about the ability to cast Create Demiplane and add to the area of the first (and using it to travel to the demiplane in the process). Though I will point out by RAW you can only add to the existing Demiplane if you are already within the demiplane when you cast additional versions of Create Demiplane.

Yeah, the thing is, if you are a sorcerer who can cast create demiplane but not plane shift then you could not revisit a demiplane you had created unless a casting of create demiplane also allowed you to travel to your own demiplane that you had already created.

Ironically, plane shift requires as a focus a forked rod attuned to the destination plane. No mechanics are given for attuning a rod to the demiplane you have created, so how can you obtain such a rod?

What worries me about the spell is that astral travelers or ethereal beings can enter your demiplane directly. The spell calls out Astral Projection and Etherealness as effects that allow you to access a demiplane. If I was building my own demiplane I would definitely want a defensive outer layer of the demiplane, or perhaps I would nest one demiplane within another.


Thanks for the thoughts, guys. I don't know a lot about Osirion but it sounds like they may be actually pro-undead, sort of. Silver Crusade is the only other one that makes sense for this guy. He has a "higher purpose."

I am not sure if I want him to be N or NG though. Pharasma is true neutral and I'd prefer him to be too, does this pose any problem with the Silver Crusade? He would consider it to be a "holy mission" to put the spirits of the dead to rest, and would be willing to help others on the grounds that they will owe him favours afterwards, but I'm not sure he is about going out to help the living so much as putting down the restless dead.


Nefreet wrote:

As you can see from HERE, HERE, HERE, and HERE, and in many other threads, this is most certainly a Frequently Asked Question.

Let's not bog down this thread with it.

For the record the Official answer to that question is in the third link, This One. Post #97 and 98. You use the normal non-mithril weight to calculate the price for a mithril item.

Peet


I came up with an idea for a character for PFS and I'm not sure which faction I should put him in.

Essentially he is a Rogue (Knife Master/Scout) who is dedicated to Pharasma. He will not be taking cleric levels; he is just religiously devout. Alignment will either be N or NG. Still working on a name.

He is a striking-looking halfling with dusky skin. His skin is marked with tribal tattoos that mark him as a Shoanti, even though he is clearly a halfling rather than a human. His hair is matted and braided, and hanging from many of the braids are small bits of animal bone; similar tribal fetishes adorn his clothing. His face is painted white and a spiral mark of Pharasma is drawn on his left cheek. He wears leather armor and festooned about his body are a plethora of daggers.

The idea is that he was an orphaned halfling child living somewhere in Varisia; doesn't matter especially where but probably not in a major city (though Riddleport is a possibility). At a young age a group of Shoanti led by an oracle of bones sought him out. The oracle explained that he was the reincarnation of an important Shoanti and that he must return with them to Shoanti lands to learn their ways.

The Shoanti were of the Skoan-Quah (Skull Clan) and raised the halfling child, teaching him their ways. They taught him of their sacred duty to protect the Shaonti burial grounds from desecration and despoiling, and raised him in the faith of Pharasma.

Though he grew up as a Shoanti, the warriors of the clan did not truly accept him; he was considered to weak and small to be of value in battle. He learned to assist other warriors rather than to seek glory himself. Always feeling like an outsider, he left the Skoan-Quah as an adult and sought out his purpose in life.

Where his background goes from there kind of depends on which faction I put him in... I envision him as either in the Silver Crusade or Osirion. Silver Crusade as they are typically against the raising of the dead and so is he; he would know that pathfinders often find themselves in tombs full of restless dead and he would seek to put such spirits to rest.

On the other hand there is a lot of stuff to do with the undead and necromancy in Osirion, and he might find himself drawn there. However, I am not sure about Osirion since it seems they might be more accepting of the animation of the dead and he is opposed to that.

So what do you guys think? Silver Crusade or Osirion?

Peet


Aberrant, Protean, or Starsoul sorcerer all kind of fit.

A wizard with the Shadowcaster archetype kind of works. You could have the character look human but the experience with the tome has turned him into a Fetchling.

A cleric with the Dark Tapestry subdomain is probably closest to what you want except that you probably don't want to play a cleric.


Is this for an evil game? Are evil classes allowed?

If so, antipaladin might work.

If you want to grab people and then bite them, monk might be the way to go.

Honestly I'm not really sure how to make a bite attack especially dangerous, though I believe if it is your only attack then you get 1.5 x STR as a damage bonus. I suppose you could apply all kinds of other stuff like weapon focus, power attack, etc. though it would be kind of like optimizing for a club-wielder as your attack will have a base 1d6 damage and no crit modifier. You also will never get to bite more than once per round no matter what your BAB is.

Dhampir is the one vampiric-themed race but they don't seem too great for me, and tiefling may work better. If you want to go tiefling I recommend picking up Blood of Fiends for more tiefling options.

Peet


Sir Thugsalot wrote:

..... Therefore, the best ones are those which you'll use constantly, or which grant the ability to do things you normally couldn't.

It's hard to imagine what feats will possibly be used more often by a paladin than Fey Foundling and Greater Mercy, which together make LoH over twice as powerful at 3rd level (average of 14.5 healing versus 7, equivalent to CMW from a 6th-level cleric).

While I don't think the math is right here (I get 3.5 - i.e. 1d6 - average healing without either feat and 11 average - i.e. 2d6+4 - with both of those feats - am I doing something wrong? Thugsalot, your numbers look like a 4th level paladin to me) This is a very good view of things. I hate to put off taking power attack but the two-feat combo basically triples the self-healing you can do at 3rd level.

This compensates for not using a shield if you are two-handing it.

Remember also that the elven favoured class bonus grants a bonus to your lay on hands. Maybe it's overkill, I'm not sure. But even as a half-elf you can use it.

Peet


Brom the Obnoxiously Awesome wrote:


The problem is that I would really like to utilize the Flame mystery, but there are very few fire spells available to Oracles/Clerics. Ergo: Sorcerer, for their large amount elemental spells I can turn into fire spells. A lot of you have concern for that, but don't worry. I can choose not turn them into fire spells, so I will have lots of kinds of elemental spells at my disposal.

For the record, Brom, you don't really need a lot of different fire spells. You get burning hands early, then, once you get to 6th level the flame mystery gives you fireball for free and that is basically what you should cast over and over from then on.

Sounds boring? Nope... what you do then is use metamagic feats to change the spell when you need to.

For example, Intensified Spell is a really important one for this kind of build. Elemental Spell will let you swap to another energy type when you need to deal with something immune to fire.

You can use feats for these things or you can buy metamagic rods. Basically every metamagic feat you have is like a different version of the spell. As an oracle you can decide whenever you want to use these options. That is one of the cool things about spontaneous casters.

So I would encourage you to just go straight oracle, since as a blaster you can mostly get by with just the one spell and play around with it using metamagic.

Peet

PS: If you go this route you don't need magical knack and can go with Magical Lineage (fireball) or (burning hands) instead.

Traits

Also keep your INT at 13 so you can get the Spell Specialization Feat.

PPS - if you take the elemental sorcerer bloodline, I would use an element OTHER than fire, so that you can take the fire element and turn it into something else, since you will for sure be getting burning hands and fireball from your oracle mystery.


I think that the create demiplane spells are not intended to allow you to move from one place to another on the material plane, so I think anyone ejected would either:

A: be returned to the same place they were before they plane shifted to the demiplane, or
B: a random location based on the above as a destination

I believe a create demiplane spell can be used in place of a plane shift to move to a demiplane the caster has made and back again. You can move back simply by ejecting yourself! Even if the spell doesn't allow you to move there specifically, you can cast the spell to add extra space to the old demiplane and teleport yourself there as part of it.

Brcausre of this I would say that the spell probably shouldn't allow you to move back and forth on the material plane.

Peet


Keep in mind that a skinwalker is not the same thing as a werebear.

I would ask your GM about doing this.


Are you determined to go with elf? Or have you considered half-elf?

Half-elf will make your Ability Score issues go a bit easier. you can use Ancestral Arms to get proficiency in Curve Blade.

With a half-elf, this stat array is possible:

Str 16 (+2 racial)
Dex 14
Con 12
Int 10
Wis 8
Cha 16

Which is slightly better than what you had as a pure elf.

Peet


Petty Alchemy wrote:
The gnome trait specifically extends beyond spells, Peet.

Ah, so you are right! My bad. Magical Knack will not apply though, which means at level 2 if you dip into sorcerer then your revelations will function as level 2, not 3.

Petty Alchemy wrote:
I'd advise against multiclassing. If you want to cast sorc spells you won't be able to take advantage of wearing armor like Oracles get to, which will keep you safe as your low level fire spells have rather close range.

I do have to second this. While there are some caster builds that exploit a single level of sorcerer for some bloodline arcana effects (usually a crossblooded sorcerer of some kind, like draconic/orc), it is usually preferable to get as much out of your primary casting class as possible. Each level you gain is also a building block for the next available level.

Peet


FYI though Magical Knack cannot raise your caster level above your actual level, the Lava Gnome ability that boosts fire spells can.

So check with your GM but I would rule as a GM that Magical Knack would give +1 CL and the Racial ability would also give +1 CL, to a total of 3 levels for fire spells. So you could burning hands for 3d4.

Note though that the oracle mystery revelations are not spells. So neither magical knack nor the gnome racial ability improve those.

Peet


One thing you could do is ask the GM if there is any type of character he thinks would be good before the campaign begins. You might end up with something that is particularly suited to the challenges of the campaign this way.

As an example, I am running RotRL right now and we are near the end of burnt offerings. We have a group of four players, but the first three games one of the players couldn't make it (and had not made a character yet). I created a GMPC to fill the void and it was a pretty straight forward half-orc fighter. Most of the characters were poorly optimized so I didn't do anything fancy with him, just a straight-up tough guy. But I gave him Keen Scent as a feat, anticipating the slog against Erylium, the 2nd level BBEG with invisibility at-will.

I had decided to use the PFS rule that you could change your character details at any time before you played at 2nd level, to give people a chance to get a feel for Pathfinder (they were mostly 3.5 players).

As a result the player ended up switching feats around to make a more complex build, got rid of the Keen Scent and went for a sword and board fighter. But the loss of the Ken Scent feat basically turned that fight into a grind and one of the characters ended up dying.

So be aware that your GM may in fact throw you a bone once in a while if you let him.

Peet


Overall I agree that someone who took the trouble to put ranks in a knowledge skill should derive some tangible benefit for doing so.

I think what I am going to be doing for the RotRL game I am running is make some notes ahead of time about what a knowledge check might produce. I had not known about the common/uncommon/rare rule and I think that actually gives a better spread for things. A lot of the monsters in RotRL are pretty common.

A little off-topic, but how tough would it be to identify a sinspawn? Are they ever encountered outside of places with access to a runewell? If not then I imagine they would be pretty obscure. So far I have avoided telling the characters what they are even called as I am holding back the details of the Runelords' relationship to the seven deadly sins (so far they have only heard about the seven virtues of rule), and letting them know the name of the creature will spoil the reveal. They are pretty early on, close to the end of Burnt Offerings.

Peet


SCPRedMage wrote:
Also, andreww already addressed it, but as to Heighten: you can Heighten a spell by multiple spell levels. You only apply the metamagic feat once, so it's not a "Heightened heightened heightened continual flame", as the OP stated, but a "heightened (fifth level) continual flame". This particular use of Heighten Spell is actually one of the commonly recommended uses in PFS, as it makes continual flame work in the area of a deeper darkness, which means it'll have a chance to prevent the supernatural darkness effect.

This is a perfectly legit way of getting rid of deeper darkness. But you are not allowed to just buy items with metamagic built in:

Paizo FAQ wrote:

Can I buy a magic item or spellcasting services with a metamagic feat applied, such as a scroll of maximized fireball, a wand of empowered shocking grasp, or employ the services of a wizard to cast extended mass bull's strength?

Generally, no. Magic items or spellcasting services must be purchased as listed in the Core Rulebook, including wands and scrolls. You may not apply metamagic feats when purchasing magic items or spellcasting services. The only exception is when the item or service is specifically listed as a reward on a Chronicle sheet.

From Paizo FAQ


This has come up in my campaign and I'm hoping for some feedback.

1. First of all, I have an Oracle in my game and I am not sure when they refresh spells: is it after 8 hours of rest (like other spontaneous casters)? Or is it at a specific time of day (as clerics)?

I couldn't find anything official here; I am inclined to say after resting since oracle powers are "innate" rather than coming necessarily from a divine source.

2. Also, there are specific times per day abilities my party has (i.e. lay on hands, channel energy, and bloodline powers). I am guessing that these powers refresh using the same system as recovering spells? Does this mean that a lay on hands used in the 8 hours before getting spells is lost for the next day?

Thanks for your help,
Peet


Let's look at some options:

Triaxian race bonuses:
-2 Strength
+2 Con
+2 Wis
1 Bonus Feat
+2 to perception
Low-Light Vision
Seasoned

Full Paladin Healer Build

Str: 18 (-2 racial, +4 belt)
Dex: 10
Con: 16 (+2 racial)
Int: 10
Wis: 10 (+2 racial)
Cha: 20 (+3 level, +2 Ioun stone)

Paladin 12 (Hospitaler/Warrior of the Holy Light)

Traits: Exalted of the Society (+1 channel/day), Dangerously Curious

Probably put favoured class bonus into skills, unless your GM allows a cool favoured class bonus. Use UMD to gain access to paladin spells via scrolls, wands, etc.

Feats:
1: Fey Foundling
Bonus: Extra Lay On Hands
3: Greater Mercy
5: Extra Channel
7: Selective Channel
9: Quick Channel
11: Ultimate Mercy (use 10 lay on hands to raise dead)

Gear:

+2 Adamantine Full Plate (provides DR 3/-) 20500 - you have no DEX so don't bother with mithral
+2 Heavy Shield 4020
+4 Rhoka sword 36325 - you can add holy with your divine bond ability. Get a weapon cord to keep it with you.
+1 ring of protection, 2000
+1 amulet of Natural Armor, 2000
Phylactery Of Positive Channeling 11000
Cloak of Resistance +2 4000
Pink and green Sphere Ioun Stone (Charisma +2) 8000
Cracked Magenta Prism Ioun Stone (+2 to any one skill) 800
Cracked Opalescent White Pyramid Ioun Stone (familiarity with Rhoka Sword) 1500
Belt of giant strength +4 16000
Bracers of the Merciful Knight (+4 levels for lay on hands) 15,600

Total cost of gear 121745 (the original gear was 121835 so I assume this is OK)

Channel 10 times per day @ 7d6 (+14 if used on self) DC 18
Lay on Hands 17 times per day @ 8d6 (as 16th level paladin due to bracers) (+16 if used on self) or 9d6 with no mercy (+18 if used on self)

AC: 27 - AC is lower than with your build but self-healing is huge and offsets it.
HP: (average) 106

Saves:
Fort: +18
Ref: +11
Will: +15

Attack: Rhoka Sword +20/+15/+10 1d8+8 damage (18-20, x2 crit)
With Smite Evil: +25/+20/+15 1d8+20 damage (18-20, x2 crit)
Divine Bond adds keen & holy 2x per day
Smite Evil adds +5 to hit and +12 damage 4/day
Smite damage multiplies on a crit so you want something that crits well. Rhoka Sword looks cool, but katana is functionally the same. Falcata doesn't crit as often but crits at x3. If you don't want to use any of these then your main weapon should be scimitar.

This build doesn't hit very hard in combat but heals on average 50 points to himself on a lay on hands and he can do that 17 times a day.

Variant: If you are happy with just the lay on hands healing (which is totally overboard), then switch to the Oath of Vengeance instead of Hospitaler and you can use 2 lay on hands to gain an extra smite evil, but lose channeling. That frees up three feats which you can trade for power attack, furious focus, and vital strike (or maybe weapon focus). You also get rid of the phylactery and the +2 CHA Ioun stone and get a +4 CHA headband instead of those which saves you about 3000 gold. This gives you an extra lay on hands, improves saves by +1, and adds +1 to hit for smite evil. That makes your standard action attack do:
Rhoka Sword +20 2d8+16 damage (18-20, x2 crit) or with smite:
+26 2d8+28 damage (18-20, x2 crit). The improved Critical feat also works and replaces keen from divine bond.

Peet


GentleGiant wrote:
Alternatively you could look into playing an Oradin, a Paladin/Oracle healer.

I agree that as a multiclass, oracle/paladin is more efficient than cleric/paladin for the reason that they share the same casting stat (CHA) so you don't need to drop points into WIS. Oracles also get 4+INT skill ranks which I think is what you wanted with the cloistered cleric archetype, yes?

I am not sure that an oracle of life makes as good a healer as a cleric with the healing domain. Channels are only CHA+1 per day (though your CHA can be higher). However, the life link ability combined with your lay on hands ability does mean that you can heal your friends at range (slowly) by healing yourself.

Peet


A paladin can spend 2 lay on hands attempts to channel energy as a cleric of the same level. So the paladin could channel 4/day instead of laying on hands 8/day. The paladin channels energy as a cleric of the same level, so 3d6 (+2d6 phylactery) is 5d6.
Edit: Okay, the hospitaler archetype changes this, from 3d6 channel using 2 lay on hands to a 2d6 channel 6/day not using lay on hands. My point about the extra channel feat below still applies though.

The extra channel feat applies to your total number of channels, not to each class. You can choose which class uses them but it only gives you a total of two.

Note though that a cleric 12 could channel 8d6 10 times per day if you just took the extra lay on hands feat and switched it to another extra channel feat. That's 80d6 worth of channeling, as opposed to 8x5d6 + 4x5d6 6x4d6 for a total of 60d6 64d6 of channeling from muliclassing. Plus the cleric can spontaneously cast cure spells in place of prepared spells. The healing domain can empower all your cure spells for free at 6th level. And a 12th level cleric can cast breath of life and heal.

With a bonus to WIS, no bonus to CHA, and a penalty to STR, it's tough to make a decent paladin as a Triaxian, but clerics will be at least decent. So if you are just aiming for maximum healing ability, I would be inclined to go straight cleric with this race.

Edit: I'm also not sure why you are taking cloistered cleric with this build; it gets you a few more skills, but at the cost of spells, which also represent healing.

Considering the Triaxian race bonuses, I'd be inclined to leave STR low and build a cleric of Sarenrae with the healing and fire domains, and then go dervish dance. But that's just me.

Peet


This is a weird spell, but it sounds like it creates the benefit of the spell for friends AND enemies, i.e. anyone within 60' of the symbol.

If this is for a home game, I would be inclined to rule as a GM that according to RAI "surface" refers to a wall, floor, or other part of an immobile structure, and the player couldn't just spam symbols unless they are leaving them behind. I'm pretty sure they aren't supposed to be portable.

Peet


If you wanted your animal companion to do something, and it was able to understand language, I as a GM would allow you to use Diplomacy instead of Handle Animal to get your AC to do what you want.

I would also be inclined to use the animal's intelligence score as a bonus for "pushing" the animal as it is easier for it to figure out what you mean.

Peet


I think Paizo had two reasons to keep undead as unilaterally evil.

1. As a family-oriented or kid-friendly game, they wanted to keep the raising of the dead in the evil "offside" region of play. I don't entirely agree but I can understand this justification.

2. They wanted a Paladin's smite evil ability to work on all undead. It's kind of a classic D&D trope so I basically agree here too.

Number two though could have been achieved through a more specific detail in the smite evil ability instead of a blanket alignment assignment. I personally think that a way to approach it would have been to make the magic evil rather than the being, and that smite evil works against creatures that are created through evil magic. Thus, a skeleton could be neutral in intent but evil in nature.

Peet


RJGrady wrote:
It is worth noting that Iceland didn't officially abandon paganism until the 10th century.

Lithuania didn`t abandon paganism until the late 14th century.

But of course, if you are using the Christian god as real and Christian theology as true, then the paganism of those periods is essentially a form of demon- or devil-worship.

Peet


While I might be convinced to bargain with a vampire in Golarion (depending on the character I was playing), if I encountered a Twilight-brand vampire I would try to kill it on sight.

Seriously, on Golarion necromantic magic taints almost everything it touches with evil. Ghosts are not necessarily evil, but then they are not normally created through necromancy.

If you are playing in your own campaign world this need not be the case. One could certainly make a case for unintelligent undead being neutral, just like vermin or animals.

You could also create a vampire that was not undead. As an example, a Yellow Musk Zombie is not an undead, but rather a plant. I could envision a process (a disease perhaps) that would turn a person into a creature that gained special abilities but required them to drink blood to survive. You would have to create a template for this, which would possibly change the person to a monstrous humanoid or aberration, but neither of those categories require the creature to be evil.


If you want a compelling fantasy setting that has a true medieval feel, monotheism is pretty much necessary. The middle ages in Europe was not an environment where you could simply "choose" your own religion. It's tricky to do but I've seen it done a number of times in Fantasy literature.

However, medieval Christian monotheism wasn't a perfect monotheism, in the sense that there was a wide "pantheon" of saints and angels who could be prayed to. This is still true of Catholics, though not Protestants. There were also alternate religious movements that were dubbed heretics by the official church.

However, Golarion is not even remotely a medieval setting. So since we are not trying to recreate the world of medieval Europe, we don`t have to replicate a monotheistic religion in Golarion, and in fact trying to do so would alter the canon material so drastically that in my mind you would be better off creating a whole new campaign world (stealing bits and pieces as you see fit, of course).

If you want to play a god with a theology like that of Christianity you should pick something like Sarenrae or perhaps Iomedae. Ragathiel is also good if you want to be more "wrathful."`

Peet


Torbyne wrote:
Rhoka is kind of a go to evil weapon for me. Tetsuba says something special too.

I second the Rhoka sword. Also the Urumi is an interesting one. Look over the list of monk weapons and performance weapons too.

If this is for a home game you can always take the mechanics of an existing weapon and "re-skin" it. Make it look weird but it still has the same stats as a similar "normal" weapon.


caps wrote:
Mr Kincaid wrote:
Warrior of the Holy Light loses the ability to cast spells. While paladins don't get many spells some of them are very powerful, which makes this a bad archetype.
Unless you (or your character), doesn't want to mess with spells. Although I would ask my DM to houserule that the Holy Light ability has a separate pool that can be supplemented with LoH, or just has unlimited usage. Losing spells AND having to burn LoH uses to use their replacement ability seems really steep.

It does make the class simpler, which in my mind is often good. Just as there is a spell-less ranger, there also should be a spell-less paladin. And while you do burn LoH to use the special power, you also get extra LoH to compensate. As an Oath of Vengeance paladin that means you can use the lay on hands in multiple ways, which seems good to me.

The "Holy Light" power is considerably better than most of the lower level paladin spells, and it scales (though admittedly not in ways I'd want it to). By the time you are high level you can always use UMD to use scrolls and wands of paladin spells.

Peet

1 to 50 of 580 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

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