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

Phasics's page

Goblin Squad Member. 3,035 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 1 alias.


RSS

1 to 50 of 3,035 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Neal Litherland wrote:
Phasics wrote:
To me Brawler seems a much better starting point, all the fun none of the restrictions, and martial versatility gives you options when dirty trick isn't going to cut it.
This is a fair point, but the Brawler still isn't going to get more than 1 dirty trick opportunity a round. The methods that let you get in multiple shots, thus debilitating an opponent, are class abilities and not feats.

Fair point though if you really want to just Debilitate an opponent then just take a gander at Vexing Dodger it takes Dirty Tricks to a new level with upgrading sickened to nauseated as in "All your standard action Belong to Us"

plus its targeted unlike a stinking cloud so your friends can pile on


Jodokai wrote:
Phasics wrote:
How is this thread still going ? .....
Really? This is the thread that amazes you? Haven't been on the boards long I guess. There are still arguments going on that the devs have already given an answer to. This is mild by comparison to most arguments.

Yeah still pretty new only been here since 2008


How is this thread still going ? .....


To me Brawler seems a much better starting point, all the fun none of the restrictions, and martial versatility gives you options when dirty trick isn't going to cut it.


So general consensus seems to be forget touch attacks and maybe instead look at thing that happen if a creature touches you or is next to you.

something similar to fire shield or Fire Trail

I'm kinda thinking of it as a poor mans swarm, if you can get on a creature and have a passive damage output for anything sharing your space.


Bob Bob Bob wrote:
Do you auto-succeed at touch attacks in a grapple? If so then this works. If not then this doesn't. I personally believe that you're required to make a touch attack in order to hit someone with a touch spell but the "accidental discharge" rules are poorly written enough that either is a possibility.

The ability specifically says your not grappling


Should not have clicked into thread ....nope....should not have have clicked....


Channel spell through your feet not going to miss then ;)

Better yet goblin plus fire trail and leave flame trails all over the thing you climbing, one could make a very good argument for the amount of damage done with this ;)


LoneKnave wrote:
Nope, perfectly serious

Ah because clearly the rogue had too many unquie abilities at their disposal.


LoneKnave wrote:
Trapfinding is equal to a trait. Not that big of a price.

Are you kidding ?


1) yes wish becomes a save or die spell against the vampire
2) twilight vampires need to be destroyed on general principal so it becomes a save or die spell
3) you wish to die ? Sure, wish becomes a save or die spell
4) cross dressing vampire ? You don't need a wish for that, be out n proud !


1 person marked this as a favorite.

you know what infinite wishes will get you ?

An empty table that used to be filled with people you role played with ;)


Call me crazy but, if your successfully climbing another creature with vexing dodger and thereby touching the creature, does that not then mean any touch attack you might perform Auto hits ?

Seems like you could land many cheeky antics this way

But why oh why did they make the price trapfinding :(


10 point begs to be played with an NPC class for the full effect :D

You could acutally have quite a fun campagin focusing on character development with so little to worry about mechaincally. Long as the GM knows what he's doing its fine. GM can even go nuts with magic items to suppliment everyone since your so weak, which could be fun too.


Nope just shoot more arrows and you'll hit somthing


No where near as good as the "Spear and MAGIC HELMET!" combo


I'm somewhat sold on the idea that a Rogue can use existing skills to do things no other class can especially if the option open up the further down Rogue you go. It would create a real reason to stick with Rogue and get something you cant find anywhere else.

and following the same logic for Rogue "faking it" the enhanced skills would allow them to start copying other classes similar to how UMD lets them copy casters.


Round 2, begin!


Just having a little look over this thing and in some respects it seems superior to the summoner synthesist.

Now unless I'm completely mistaken this ability is ONLY granting the evolutions the same as if a summoner was able to cast Evolution Surge on something other than his Eidolon.

i.e. we're not calling up an eidolon we're just making the animal companion "Hulk Out".

It also means when the companion dies or is removed for whatever reason the Hunter is now the one doing the "Hulk Out" but he's not getting some eidolon shell he's just evolving his own flesh.

plus its a swift action so extremely helpful for not wasting my actions buffing once combat has started.

So you can have the evolutions without the shell meaning you can keep wearing your armor and gear unless of course your changing size or shape with extra arms and legs and then things might get a little tight under that breastplate if your not careful with your choices.

But still this is basically swift customized polymorphing for a martial weapon prof , medium armor character , 3/4BAB sure but (Ex) ability score increases which can stack with enchantments.

Seems like a pretty fun deal and dare I say the Summoner Synthesist concept done right ?


Straight Primal Hunter Companion

when you companion dies you inherit all the evolutions, either way you either have an amazing companion or your fairly amazing yourself. its like being a summoner syntheist but without the stigma or baggage ;)

plus its a nice little revenge on the GM for killing your companion to turn around and evo huge form multiattack his BBEG to death out of spite :)


7 people marked this as a favorite.

Oh there's plenty of interest in Homebrew there's just little interest in "your" homebrew.

and no that not a "your" directed at you, it directed at everyone.

for the most part unless your going to benefit or use somthing most people could care less about it. hence commenting on homebrew you'll probably never be able to use yourself is probably a waste of time for most people.

plus there's only so many times you can say "that will break your game" before you get bored and move on.

unfortunately home brew forums are up against human nature and are losing


1 person marked this as a favorite.

whether or not the Rogue is currently under powered or overpowered is irrelevant for the purposes of this discussion.

The question as it stands is this.
If you could change one thing about the Rogue what would it be.

Highly subjective sure, but I'm interested in hearing what people would do.

For myself personally these would be my top 3 single changes keeping in mind you can only make one change you can certainly suggest more than one.

1.) Rogue has a full BAB

or

2.) Rogue levels can count as levels from another other class you multiclass in for the purposes of effective level on abilities. (Can only apply to one other class)

or

3.) Rogue talents include one talent (that can be taken once) that can pick one feature/ability from every other class e.g. discovery, hex, revelation, rage etc

Or perhaps your one of those people who wouldn't change anything about the Rogue in which case by all means let us hear your Rogue Love ;)


Still going eh?

I think they may have got the point ;)


Undone wrote:
Phasics wrote:
Undone wrote:
Phasics wrote:
this reminds me of another thread about differing interpretations ;)
There's only 1 attack. Janni rush either doesn't work at all or it works.
THIS reminds me of another thread about differing interpretations ;)
And it turns out they all did work until they "FAQ'ed" It in effect errataing it since there are many clear examples of stats stacking. They still refuse to correct the antipaladin and graveknight they put out in a book within DAYS of the "FAQ" which was really errata.

THIS REMINDS me of another thread about differing interpretations ;)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

1st

Kingdom building starts from the ground up its never too soon to start. its actually provides a great reason as to why the pc are working together and why they might want to help townsfolk and the like. That early loyalty won will pay dividends down the track.


Undone wrote:
Phasics wrote:
this reminds me of another thread about differing interpretations ;)
There's only 1 attack. Janni rush either doesn't work at all or it works.

THIS reminds me of another thread about differing interpretations ;)


this reminds me of another thread about differing interpretations ;)


Doesn't stack from my reading

Pummeling charge modifies the charge action
Janni Style modifies the charge action

in general when two abilities try and modify the same action they don't stack you need to choose.

not a great example but in the same vein that vital strike and spring attack don't stack even though it seems like they should.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ascalaphus wrote:
Phasics wrote:
Ascalaphus wrote:


Swashbuckler Weapons: swashbucklers train with precision weaponry. All light piercing melee weapons and one-handed piercing melee weapons are considered swashbuckler weapons.
...
[some ability:]When a swashbuckler does [something] with a light or one-handed piercing swashbuckler weapon, [something] happens

That would actually reduce the amount of legalese while also making it clearer.

That's nice

think you could come up with that on the back of editing 35'000 words with a deadline in sight and another 50'000 words to go ?

I think by now it's well-established that the Advanced Class Guide Adventure Path won't be remembered as the best-edited book Paizo ever rushed to GenCon.

To make money

pay staff
and you know generate new content for people to pick apart on their forums ;)

maybe even make a profit like a business or something ;)


Ascalaphus wrote:


Swashbuckler Weapons: swashbucklers train with precision weaponry. All light piercing melee weapons and one-handed piercing melee weapons are considered swashbuckler weapons.
...
[some ability:]When a swashbuckler does [something] with a light or one-handed piercing swashbuckler weapon, [something] happens

That would actually reduce the amount of legalese while also making it clearer.

That's nice

think you could come up with that on the back of editing 35'000 words with a deadline in sight and another 50'000 words to go ?


This is what your looking for Sir

"Unlike other afflictions, multiple doses of the same poison “stack,” meaning that successive doses combine to increase the poison's DC and duration."

By inference stacking only applies to Poisons and since disease are an affliction they do not stack.

so once your infected that's it, single infection with requirements to roll the unmodified saves as listed in the disease effect line.


Neo2151 wrote:

I wholeheartedly disagree. I think it's a huge leap in logic to suggest that grammatically correct phrasing in a rule book will turn it into unreadable legal jargon.

Paizo is a *publishing company.* There is literally no excuse not to get clear and correct grammar in their products.

As to the general argument of, "It is always up to the GM and players to decide how the rules work," well of course that's true. But educated decisions on homebrew rules can't be made without the correct interpretation of the original, printed rule. (ie: How do I know if I want to change a rule if I can't be sure how the rule actually works?)
And with such arguments, you must be careful. It's easy to go far enough down this particular rabbit hole to get to, "Well then why even buy the rules at all if it's up to me to figure it all out anyway?" That way madness lies. ;)

Clear and Correct by whose standards ? I can guarantee and American English major, an oxford English professor , and an Australian exchange student are all going to have different opinion about what is grammatically correct and acceptable. Grammar isn't a universal constant because language is mutable.

As to correct rule interpretations have you not seen JJ post his opinion on the forums about how a rule works only to be later contradicted by the person who wrote the rule.

The only way you can know for sure if you are interpreting a rule correctly is if the author of that rule was sitting next to you every time it came into contention to confirm that is how he or she intended it to be run.

You think what your asking is simple or easy, its just not.


Neo2151 wrote:

Quote:
Errata not needed in this case, minor grammatical issues like this are the whole reason we play with a GM who can discuss with the group and make the decision.
Not picking on this poster, but this is never a good argument. Sometimes, it's the GM asking the rules question. Why do we always assume it's a player?

I my advice assumes nothing, it doesn't matter who is asking the question the advice stands. It is up to the GM and players to decide how they are going to play this game.

Do you really want to see a 1800 page rule book that reads like a legal document ? Because that is exactly what your asking for. The sheer volume of words required to create statements that are beyond reasonable ambiguity is immense. Solicitors make entire careers out of reinterpreting unambiguous statements to make them say something completely different.

anyone looking for absolute rules are doomed to fail, there are no absolutes in language . Absolutes are the prevue of mathematics. If you want absolute rules then you'd need to write your entire rulebook using nothing but mathematical equations. Soon as you introduce language you introduce ambiguity.

Want an example ? having just read this I can guarantee your brain won't interpret it in the way I intended you to interpret it. Would using more words to explain it help ? no, in fact they would probably just make the problem worse ;)


Stealthy Alchemist Mad Bomber with fast bombs and a range or discoveries to pickup all the good bomb versions.

If you really want to put the hurt on them Mindchemist for crazy damage bombs with insane DC's .

Tactics are strike and fade at the worst possible moments for the PC's i.e. when there dealing with an encounter out pops the mad bomber to unleash a lot of pain in a very short space of time only to disappear before they can really do much to stop him.

help turn encounters they're finding too easy into real challenges.

load him up with magic gear to make quick escapes very easy.

One thing to keep in mind is you are running 6 players who collectively bring 6 standard actions a round to the table, if you are throwing less than the equivalent of that back at them then that would be why they are having an easy time.

Maybe the best solution for an antagnoist is not one NPC but 2 or 3 who are deigned to work extremely well in tandem. Just remember anything the player can do you can do better.


i think the key word here is "plus"

As in they both happen together the same way a 1d6 plus grab attack still allows the grab even if DR negated the damage.


Kashakunaki wrote:

Grammatically speaking it absolutely is incorrect and unclear. The community has just mostly agreed upon that interpretation, and that was not what I recommended it read. Something like "light piercing melee and one-handed piercing melee weapons" would clear everything up.

You're saying two is the correct interpretation with no evidence to support it. I don't doubt that that was the intention of the ability, but as it is it isn't clear. There absolutely is need for an errata. If about 20% of the community is unclear on it then it has been poorly done and those that are convinced in their beliefs, like yourself, have no hard evidence to support yourselves.

Errata not needed in this case, minor gramatical issues like this are the whole reason we play with a GM who can discuss with the group and make the decision.

Even rules which are very clear and well defined can and will be disputed by people's own interpretation, hence the need for a GM.

So what if a group is playing with a swashbuckler who uses a light bludgeoning weapon, as long as the GM and group have no problem with it who cares, even if it gets errated the same group would just house rule it there way.

errata is pointless if it so bloated by tiny inconsequential updates that it's impossible to find rulings on what your looking for.


Specific rule trumps general rule, it's the basis for the entire rules system.


Yes it still applies because it says "creatures hit by" not "creatures damaged by"


kestral287 wrote:
Phasics wrote:
While the DC might be low the frequency of saves will mitigate it somewhat plus there's always ability focus and a 14CHA to bump that DC by 4. a simple headband or cloak can bump your CHA up another 1-2pts. forcing 2 saves a round every round they going to roll low eventually. Plus there's a 1 dip way to work in a Evil Eye Hex Strike for another -2 to saves before your claws hit. At 7th I could get a DC16 which aint terrible.

Your frequency of saves is exactly the same as the Swashbuckler or Bard or Daring Champion using this setup, save that their DC will be higher.

Ability Focus is a monster feat. Good luck with that.

DC16-- probably 14-- at 7th level is pretty mediocre. Quick skimming of the Bestiary showed a lot of Fort saves around 9-11, though I don't have a full spreadsheet for that one. But figure 9 as the common one, you have just better than a 50/50 shot of paralyzing the target if you hit them with both claws, and you can use your claws for five rounds per day. Hex Strike improves it... but that makes me question why you're not cutting out the middleman and just building a Hex Strike-Slumber build. Doesn't work with a Brawler, but it's pretty straightforward to build on the whole-- and I've still yet to see a reason why you want to be a Brawler for Ghoulish Claws instead of a class with a Cha worth noting.

How are you attacking with 2 claws and using a weapon with Swashbuckler or Bard or Daring Champion ?

Hex strike evil eye still has effect on failed save , slumber does not

also as far as monster feats go if monster feats are out then Ghoul bloodline is out too since its out of the monster codex ;)


Well two things, if you want to hit stuff with spells the Bloodrager will fill that role nicely and since you were multiclassing spells already the lower spell levels arn't going to bother you.

As far as making an Arcanist more survivable once spells run out
brown fur transmuter save your last spell for polymorphing into somthing

or if you want somting completel left field

Play a Goblin and take the Roll with It which is quite possible the most amazing feat for a caster.
someone sneak around to attack you bu instead of taking damage you roll away after the first hit.


swifthunter420 wrote:
i have a question can a brawler with claw attacks take feral combat training and exchange unarmed strikes for Just claws and bite? i know extra feat tax for bite

A Very strict reading of the rules says no purely because Feral combat was published before Brawler existed so only has a special exception for Monk

however if you extrapolate that brawler is a hybrid of monk and the brawler flurry is based of monk's flurry you could probably convince a GM that is an appropriate feat.

Oddly enough if your playing a brawler you can just use martial flexibility to grab weapon focus and feral combat training as they are both combat feats for 1 minute during combat and see if your GM lets it stand.

For Feral combat training you can make all the flurry of blows attacks using a single natural weapon.

Errata even cover that if the natural attack has an effect e.g. poison you can apply the poison on each flurry hit.


Figured

I guess if your playing with the Massive damage rules then pummeling style could be a half way measure.

Although just carrying around a x4 or x5 crit weapon for just such an occasion with quick draw would probably be better


Brawler brings unarmed damage scaling like a monk and doesn't require hands to make unarmed strikes

While the claws take up the hand slots the feet knees and head are still free to do unarmed damage with.

Using another class that requires a hand to hold weapons your taking away one or both hand slots for claws.

While the DC might be low the frequency of saves will mitigate it somewhat plus there's always ability focus and a 14CHA to bump that DC by 4. a simple headband or cloak can bump your CHA up another 1-2pts. forcing 2 saves a round every round they going to roll low eventually. Plus there's a 1 dip way to work in a Evil Eye Hex Strike for another -2 to saves before your claws hit. At 7th I could get a DC16 which aint terrible.

Yes certain monsters with huge fort saves or outright immunity are no dice but this isn't a one trick pony, brawler with martial versatility can do many other things.

hell just off the top of my head, swift action feat Death of Glory against big critters with big fort saves to dish out some pain. and chew their immediate action if they want to hit back. swift action feat Improved Sunder to break that amazing weapon/armor on the big bad.


I'm fairly sure RAW this doesn't work simply for the face they are both full round actions but I thought I'd just put it out there.

Pummling style results in one single devastating strike of pooled damage.

Coup de grace uses a single strike damage to calculate the fort save for death.

A + B = Very high fort save or Very Very Dead

Thoughts ?


Need a rules and logic check on this if you please

Now the Brawler flurry is very clear that it and natural attacks don't mix and that fine, not what is being used here.

Instead
At 7th level we pick up Eldrich Herritage Ghoul Sorcerer Bloodline granting us level 5 in Ghoulish Claws and a 1 round paralysis (Fort Save) .

Now we charge with our claws an hopefully paralyze something on a +9 claw attack keeping it right where we want it for next round

We now take our Iterative Unarmed attacks of +7/+2 and add in +2/+2 for our claws and go to town damaging and hopefully keeping the paralysis going so there is no escape or retribution.

A few level later we could pickup multiattack to reduce those -5 to -2 and around the same time Ghoulish Claws paralysis is now lasting 1d4+1 rounds.

Compared to a Brawler flurry your still losing 1-2 extra attacks at the top end and claws have pitiful damage but once the 1d4+1 rounds kick in you may not need to use the claws every round and since they are a free action to grow you can use them sparingly.

As an after thought Paralysed is also helpless so Coup De Grace could be viable.


Appreciate all the suggestions :)

as for party composition
battle cleric
sorcerer
summoner synth
slayer

ran across a spirit summoner archetype that gets both hexes and pit spells which could have legs.

though I may end up settling on a Shaman 2/Brawler X build and prolific use of hex strike and extra hex with pummeling strike. I may just grab a wand for pit spells and find a way to pump my UMD the low DC wont matter with high brawler CMB bypassing it. martial versatility to cover a ranged option when needed


AFter playing around ther may be a much better way using mostly brawler levels, pummeling strike and hex strike with only 2 shaman levels and prolific use of the extra hex feat.

For a pummeling strike with almost guaranteed hit each round to apply Hex strike evil eye, or 1 round misfortune or CHA rounds confusion or thought stealing brain drain. also hold just enough extra combat feats to stabilize the brawler side of things to hit and do some damage.

btw Accursed Hex dosen't work with the build, hex strike bypasses the save and accursed hex only triggers after a save has been made


What Large race is he playing ? I assume its a non-standard race in which case your already stretching the rules so the legal interpretation isn't that important as is the rule that makes sense for the table


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Say for some reason I decide multiclassing a brawler is a good idea.

But I never intend to take more than a handful of level so the brawlers flurry will never get to level 8.

Could I in theory take the improved two weapon fighting feat as a general feat choice to improve the Brawlers flurry to include an extra attack ? possibly by using martial flexibility to grab it temporarily instead of taking it as a feat ?

Or does this fall down because its a works like rather than having the TWF feat ?


I'll be the first to admit I have a problem with indecision when building a character but I just can't seem to break out of this little design loop.

It goes a little something like this, Reign of Winter Campaign
16,16,15,13,11,10 rolled stats

Nice stat array of course options up some options you wouldn't normally consider.

So I see Hex Strike and say that's be nice to do
I see Shaman and that can make use of Hex strike with decent BAB
I see a monk dip to ease the feat burden
The I see with the large number of monk attacks you could in theory land some solid hexes with multiple feat worth of Hex strike , hell the Lore Shaman can get a confusion for cha rounds with no save on a hit which would be likely with so many monk attacks.
then I see the more monk levels I take the longer before evil eye doubles to -4 and delays spell casting
Spell casting delays are bad because Lore shaman can pickup wiz spells.
Then I start seeing access to fun spell like create pit, acid pit, hungry pit
Then I'm looking at ways to push people into pits
Then I'm back to monk for CMB to do that
Then away again using spells to do the same job
Then I start looking at other ways to access pit spells with a 3/4BAB
I'm led to druid and cleric
Cleric Theologian gets me all the pits I want but no more Hex Strike
Druid gets me 1/day pits but wildshape and Huge to easy push things in
Then I'm really missing Hex Strike and we're back to the top again.

GAAAAAAGGGHHHH

So as it seems I'm doomed to not find a solution by myself I turn to you lovely folks not so much to solve this problem (although amazing if you could) but to perhaps suggest something else completely different and fun that I can pull off with that stat array of 16,16,15,13,11,10 in Reign of Winter .

Thanks in Advance

1 to 50 of 3,035 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2015 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.