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

Protoman's page

Goblin Squad Member. FullStarFullStar Pathfinder Society GM. 1,693 posts (1,705 including aliases). 1 review. No lists. No wishlists. 10 Pathfinder Society characters.


RSS

1 to 50 of 1,693 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Races? If human, please list ethnicity if you know if it.


Go Brawler. Take advantage of Martial Flexibility.

Party has ranged character? Like an OP archer or gunslinger? Usually weak CMD, disarm them and maybe smack them for additional humbling experience. Also Deflect Arrows work great too.

Trip them if given the chance.

Pummeling Charge as an opening move.

Dedicated Adversary feat to really lay the hurt.

But the most important thing? Have underlings. 4 on 1 action economy is severe disadvantage for the NPC.


Quote:
Do I add a weapon enhancement/special abilites on an Amulet of Mighty Fist w/ Kinetic Fist to the roll?

Yes. You're making an unarmed strike (or natural attack) and would apply modifiers as normal. Kinetic Fist merely provides extra damage.

Quote:

If I'm level 1 using Kinetic Fist (with a physical blast) is the damage...

1d3+1d6+1?
or is it just
1d3+1d6?

1d3+1d6.

Kinetic fist just says to add d6's and that the extra damage "doesn't apply any modifiers to your kinetic blast's damage, such as your Constitution modifier," that includes the +1's per d6 that comes with physical blasts.

Quote:
Do I add Strength to Kinetic Fist? (I know I don't add Con)

You'd add whatever modifier you'd use for your unarmed attacks/natural attacks (relevant for agile AoMF or unchained rogue level dipping). You then apply the d6's granted by kinetic fist.

So: 1d3 (or whatever your normal unarmed/natural weapon dice after feats, class features, and/or magic items) + Strength or Dexterity modifier (whatever you get to use with unarmed/natural attacks) + Xd6 (X = number of kinetic blast dice / 3, minumum of 1).

Quote:
Can I not normally Sunder w/ Kinetic Fist/Blade/Whip?

You're totally able to sunder/disarm/trip with kinetic whip/blade (source). Those maneuvers are attack actions and can be used with any melee weapon. For kinetic fist, it'll entirely be dependent on if you can do it with unarmed/natural attack. Unless something specifically disallows it, by default you can. For trip and disarm, there's no damage involved. For sunder, remember to halve the energy damage against hardness.

Quote:
Since the blast is 'added' damage, would only my unarmed be multiplied w/ K. Fist?

The PRD has this to say about critical hits when dealing with extra damage: "Exception: Precision damage (such as from a rogue's sneak attack class feature) and additional damage dice from special weapon abilities (such as flaming) are not multiplied when you score a critical hit."

Since the kinetic fist extra damage isn't precision nor a "special weapon ability", I'd say it gets multiplied.

Quote:

Kinetic Proficiency

Prerequisite: Devastating infusion, kinetic blade, or kinetic fist; Weapon Focus (kinetic blast)
Benefit: You may use devastating infusion, dual blades, kinetic blade, kinetic fist, or kinetic whip as part of a coup de grace, disarm, sunder, or trip attempt.
Normal: You may only use these blasts as part of an attack action, full attack, or charge.

I never looked at the KoP stuff so will have to go on guesswork.

Can only assume devastating infusion can be used at ranged for those maneuver options? Melee devastating infusion and blade/whip/ and kinetic fist (which are just unarmed or natural attacks) could already be used for disarm/sunder/trip attempts because they're attack actions.
Coup de grace is normally a full-round action and the blade/whip/devastating infusions only work on an "attack action, a charge action, or a full-attack action" so the feat will allow those options for CDG. Kinetic fist could already be done with CDG because it's an unarmed/natural attack.

The feat is weird because it looks only marginally useful since it's redundant with the melee options for the maneuvers. Only useful for CDG, and requires Weapon Focus (blast) which doesn't apply to kinetic fist.

Quote:
Apologies for all the questions, I could just be overthinking this.

No that's ok. Not a lot of people use kinetic fist because it's seen as really weak in comparison to kinetic blade/whip so not a lot of these questions came up.

Just remember that one doesn't get the second d6 for kinetic fist until kineticist level 11 when they blast for 6d6.

Weapon Focus (unarmed) or (a particular natural weapon) is used for kinetic fist instead of "Weapon Focus (kinetic blast)" because you're modifying another weapon, not using a kinetic blast in another form (like a normal form infusion).


N. Jolly wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
this post might be a good thing to put as a note in the guide.

Agreed.

Question here; in the talents section, does everyone think that the level/element/burn/etc lines are needed, or do you think I could just put the name of the talent, and leave it at that? It would help to clear out space, but at the same time, I don't want to remove lines that are helpful for people.

I vote keep it. With picking talents from expanded element (-4 class levels) or with Extra Wild Talent (-2 spell levels), keeping it clear what level is each talent is a big help.


Hey Mark, is searing flesh intended to have any benefit to invest burn in from levels 1-3? The accepting burn part lacks the "(minimum of 1 fire damage)" text the normal progression of searing flesh does.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

If brawling armor is gonna be +3, it should at least get rid of the light armor restriction. Before it was already annoyingly inefficient for a high strength/low dexterity character to have survivable AC with brawling armor (even with +1 brawling elven chain). But at least it was still cheap enough to buy other items to help make up for it. Now it's just "Egads! I can't afford that AND AC 25 by level 7!"


Mark, while I like the kineticist's burning infusion, especially for its bonus to attack, DCs, and caster level checks against the on-fire target, I find myself hesitant to use it at times due to still not fully understanding how exactly the target puts it out:

I assume the "Reflex negates" is to avoid getting set on fire to begin with. But if already on fire from burning infusion, does the target:

1) Start suffering taking the 1d6 on-fire damage immediately once they fail the initial saving throw? Or on its next turn like with alchemist's fire?

2) What's the actions to put out the fire? Is it a full round action (like with immolation bombs, explosive bombs, and alchemist's fire)? Is it like the like the Environment Catch on Fire rules where I think it's a free Reflex save at beginning of target's turn (if they fail, more damage) and during their turn they can get another saving throw if "rolling on the ground or smothering the fire with cloaks or the like permits the character another save with a +4 bonus" (I assume full-round action for that too)?

3) What's the DC to put out the fire? Is it like the Environment Catch on Fire rules of a flat DC 15 Reflex save to put out fires on clothing and equipment or does one use the initial saving throw DC of 10 + half kineticist level + Con modifier?

As of late I've been doing target starts takes on-fire damage on their subsequent turns (like with alchemist fire, but where it actually sticks around) and full-round action to put it out using the initial Reflex DC because I felt that DC 15 Reflex of the Environment rules was rather low and for equipment rather than actual person on fire and the actual DC used is the "avoiding set on fire DC to begin with" in general. But I'd like to be sure on the procedures and difficulties so as to not be unfairly penalizing my burning infusion victims.


Excellent! With the new errata from UE and selling back some items for full price, I can afford this ioun stone a lot sooner than anticipated!

Thanks for the input!

**

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Fate's Favored trait is still awesome with the lucky horseshoe for luck bonus to saving throws, even if it doesn't help as much with AC with the jingasa nerf.

**

Thomas Graham wrote:
Serisan wrote:
Thomas Graham wrote:
Okay what is up with the Jingasa? Either I haven't got the update PDF yet or I'm not reading it right.. whats the differencE?

It's worthless.

Luck -> Deflection
One time only for the crit/SA nullification.

Ever? Or daily/

Ever.

**

Jordan Agudelo wrote:
Is the Jingasa of the Fortunate Soldier, just getting banned or altered?

Altered to +1 deflection bonus and the negation of 1 critical/sneak attack is now only one time use ever.

**

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm sad that brawling armor is crazy expensive yet still limited to light armor only.


Chess Pwn wrote:

yes. At +3 the weapons counts for cold iron and silver.

At +4 it also counts as alignment.
at +5 it also counts as adamantine.

These all stack. So at +5 you count as a cold iron, silver, good, evil, lawful, chaotic, adamantine weapon.

+4 is adamantine, +5 is alignment


Imbicatus wrote:
Gisher wrote:
Matt2VK wrote:

Some Specific mithril armor counts as one step lighter then if the armor was made from mithril.

Example: Chainmail is Medium Armor

Elven Chain is treated, in all ways, like light armor, including
when determining proficiency.

That is a really interesting point. I guess you could have Brawling Elven Chainmail.
If you GM allows it sure. But Elven Chain is a specific magic armor, and as such can't be upgraded normally.

But it's not magical though. It's a specific item with special properties but it doesn't have any magical enhancements on it so it can get some later.

Well that's how I'd rule it for home games.

Thankfully PFS is also cool with it so I don't have to worry about table variation there.

**

That's awesome!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

This sounds fun!


If you wanna disguise how well you move or be unnoticed using abilities or feats granted by the vigilante identity, that's what disguise checks are for and said as such in the Vigilante Talents section:

Quote:
If the vigilante uses any of these talents while in his social identity, he must succeed at a Disguise check against the Perception checks of all onlookers (without the +20 circumstance bonus from seamless guise) or the onlookers will realize that he is more than his social identity appears to be and perhaps discover the social and vigilante identities are one and the same.

Fist of the Avenger: attack in a cowardly slap fight, but it seems comically effective.

Signature Weapon: make it look like a lucky shot.

Lethal Grace: "Oh look, that monster must have been more weakened than we initially thought if the courtesan killed it smacking it with a fan."

Armor skin: you can make it look like the armor is impeding you more than it actually is.

And yea, if your vigilante talents make you super effective in combat and you don't want to have a social identity known to be good at combat, maybe don't use optimal conditions/actions for social identity to be good at combat? You don't see Clark Kent/Bruce Wayne/Peter Parker/Sir Percy Blakeney/Don Diego de la Vega throwing themselves into every fist fight they run into. They aid another for allies or proper authorities in subtle or overt ways or if they gotta do it more directly they make it look like flukes or a lucky hit with an improvised weapon.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Scott Wilhelm wrote:
Protoman wrote:
If you're doing PFS, go with the more conservative approach where it doesn't stack for now til it ever gets clarified to the naysayer's satisfaction. That way even if there's table variation, no one's gonna fault you for going with the smaller damage dice.

You can never be safe from naysayers. There are always naysayers looking for things to say "nay" to.

You can't let small minded people cluck and tsk and make you think it can't be done.

Don't let anyone stop you from bringing your own brand of awesome to the table. Make sure legally, it's technically correct, the best kind of correct, and take your place as a paying customer who is obeying the rules. Pathfinder Society GMs are supposed to go by RAW, never their personal notions about what the designers meant to say. If you can show your interpretation is legal, they are supposed to allow it, even if they don't like it. PFSGMs are referees, not defenders of the faith. Paizo publishing and your local gaming store won't make money if they allow their paying customers to get bullied away from the game.

Don't ruin other people's fun with obnoxious arguments at the table, but you do have the right to have fun with your own sense of creative play with the rules as written.

"Illegitimi non carborundum!"
--my granddaddy

If there's a discrepancy on how a rule is interpreted in a PFS game between GM and player and it could be argued for either way, you go with the GM's ruling for the rest of the game. That way the game can actually move on and everyone involved can hope to finish the scenario in the allotted time. The rules debate can continue outside the game. The more conservative route is to just keep the game going because everyone's fun is more important than just one person's fun. If one's interpretation of the rules for a particular build is gonna cause constant headaches for everyone to enforce that interpretation to use that build, then that just ain't worth it.


NobodysHome wrote:
So the notion that natural weapon = melee weapon is not supported anywhere in the PRD. Note that Protoman's post only proves that a natural weapon is a melee attack, not necessarily a melee weapon.
PRD - Equipment with the WEAPONS section wrote:
Simple, Martial, and Exotic Weapons: Anybody but a druid, monk, or wizard is proficient with all simple weapons. Barbarians, fighters, paladins, and rangers are proficient with all simple and all martial weapons. Characters of other classes are proficient with an assortment of simple weapons and possibly some martial or even exotic weapons. All characters are proficient with unarmed strikes and any natural weapons possessed by their race. A character who uses a weapon with which he is not proficient takes a –4 penalty on attack rolls.

Natural Weapons are listed as a weapon one gets proficiency with. It's a weapon.


The Beardinator wrote:
So, to clarify for my own edification, DO bludgeoning weapons take a -1 to damage if they are Alchemically Silvered?

If it ONLY does bludgeoning, then it's fine.

If it does bludgeoning AND piercing like the morningstar does, then the -1 damage penalty applies since you're still doing a piercing attack.


It's not intended for a kineticist to replace a basic utility wild talent for a utility wild talent.

Basic utility wild talent should be seen more as "basic utility wild talent" rather than "basic utility wild talent" where basic utility is seen as its own category of wild talent, much like with simple blast and defense wild talent are their own categories. Those types aren't meant to be replaced at certain levels like regular utility or infusion wild talents.

Basic utility wild talents are introduced and mentioned in the Elemental Focus (Su) class feature and Expanded Element (Su) which doesn't have a replacement text that the Wild Talent and Infusions class features does. Basic utility wild talents are set features when picking an elemental focus or expanded element and go hand in hand with the element's simple blast talent.


If you're doing PFS, go with the more conservative approach where it doesn't stack for now til it ever gets clarified to the naysayer's satisfaction. That way even if there's table variation, no one's gonna fault you for going with the smaller damage dice.

**

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Someone in my lodge write notes on the back of his previous chronicle sheet.

I suggest maybe writing in a journal, jotting notes down on laptop/tablet (if using Hero Lab that's what the journal tab is for, not just for keeping track of money) during scenario and you can fill in extra details on chronicle later.


I already have to do that with Blinded Blade Style or when playing a kineticist, what's one more confusing character? :D


After several beatdowns suffered by these incorporeal pests recently in PFS, I was doing some reading to hopefully protect myself further than simply relying on force effects like mage armor and magic missile and ghost touch weapons.

All ghosts get Corrupting Touch which has been the bane of my characters' health as of late:

PRD - Ghost Entry wrote:
Corrupting Touch (Su): All ghosts gain this incorporeal touch attack. By passing part of its incorporeal body through a foe's body as a standard action, the ghost inflicts a number of d6s equal to its CR in damage. This damage is not negative energy—it manifests in the form of physical wounds and aches from supernatural aging. Creatures immune to magical aging are immune to this damage, but otherwise the damage bypasses all forms of damage reduction. A Fortitude save halves the damage inflicted.

Looking up magic items to help I ran across this nifty gem I'd usually overlook because of limited usefulness:

Seeker of Secrets wrote:

Nacreous Gray Sphere (normal)

Aura moderate abjuration; CL 12th
Slot none; Price 10,000 gp; Weight —
Description
This stone protects you from ability score penalties from aging and you cannot be magically aged. Any penalties you have already incurred remain in place. Bonuses still accrue, and you still die of old age when your time is up. If you lose the stone or its abilities are negated in some way, all age and penalties apply immediately.
Resonance
Miss chance against incorporeal creatures decreases to 25%.

While higher CR ghosts got other toys I'd have to get around but the damage of the corrupting touch is worth addressing now. However, before I fork over the extra 10k GP for one or two of my PFS characters, would wanna double-check with folks on the forums to make sure I'm not missing anything that such an item wouldn't make a regular humanoid character immune to a ghost's corrupting touch ability.

Everything look ok?

**

Ah ok, never had a chance to look beyond the vigilante stuff in that book yet. Good to know!

**

John Compton wrote:
As a note, it has come to my attention that the variant leadership feats on pages 132–135 are currently denoted as legal due to an oversight on my part. When I am compiling the next update, I'll remove these. Be advised that these are not intended to be legal feats in the organized play campaign.

From what source is this?


nennafir wrote:

Question (Sorry if this has already been asked): When using metakinesis to get empower spell, does this also multiply bonuses from things like point blank shot or the bonus damage from elemental overflow?

Thanks!

Yes. Multiply all the bonuses to the dice also.


James Risner wrote:
Imbicatus wrote:
A gauntlet is not an unarmed strike. It is an unarmed attack. There is a difference.

+1

You always needed weapon focus gauntlet to gain the +1 to it's unarmed attack.

That whole conversation between Herolab and Paizo and Mark seems to conflate unarmed strikes and unarmed attacks.

A gauntlet is an unarmed attack that provides a benefit if you attack with an unarmed strike. If you attack just with the gauntlet, you only gain the unarmed attack. So a +1 gauntlet using an amulet of mighty fists allows you to make it's unarmed attack with two overlapping +1 to attack and damage or make a +1 (only from AoMF) unarmed strike dealing lethal damage.

That's a lot of word judo I can't follow in the best of times.


Same. If no FAQ momentum happens from this thread, I hope someone with better experience than I could phrase the overall unarmed = gauntlet issue question better for a FAQ in a different thread.


Imbicatus wrote:
Well, if you can't enchant a gauntlet, Shield Gauntlet Master really sucks.

Agreed. Unless going spiked gauntlet. But I'd rather use regular gauntlet to benefit from Vigilante's Fist of the avenger.

swoosh wrote:
Wow. Huge nerf to gauntlets here. And once again a significant game change buried in arbitrary threads on the forums.

That Hero Labs post wasn't even buried in the Paizo forums (or even Hero Lab's forums that I could find anyways), I had to recently send a bug report/email asking for a house-rule option to click off (unarmed strike = gauntlets) rule Hero Lab has already been using since the 12.2 update. The newest version where it's applying Quain Martial Artist's +1 trait damage to unarmed strikes to also apply to gauntlets finally spurred me on to finally report/ask about it. They responded back with an email about their initial query to Paizo and I was floored by it since they haven't made such a concrete response with all the previous FAQ requests about it before.


4 people marked this as FAQ candidate.

Apparently Paizo responded to Hero Lab's question on the matter and I've been asked Mark about it here and here.

To summarize:

Hero Labs wrote:

1) Could you clarify how gauntlets should interact with feats and class abilities? Currently we aren't allowing it to be selected independantly of unarmed strike, and treating it as unarmed strike for SOME effects (weapon focus: unarmed strike also provides gauntlets an attack bonus, but monk increased damage does not increase gauntlet damage).

Should any effect that targets unarmed strike (like monk unarmed strike damage) affect gauntlets as well? Can gauntlets be selected as an independant weapon at all? What about the other direction (if you can select weapon focus: gauntlet, should it's attack bonus apply to unarmed strikes)?
At issue is the Weapon of the Chosen line of feats, which require weapon focus in the your deities favored weapon, in conjunction with choosing Ng the Hooded as your deity (who has the gauntlet as his favored weapon). Since gauntlets can't be chosen for weapon focus, there is currently no way to legally satisfy the pre-req in HL.
And just for completeness sake, are the various other "like unarmed strike" weapons (brass knuckles, cestus, locked gauntlet, spiked gauntlet, rope gauntlet) also subject to this ruling, or are they different? If so, how?

Paizo Response: Gauntlet is actually an unarmed attack, not a separate weapon, so it can’t be enchanted (it uses amulet of mighty fists instead) and it uses all the unarmed strike stuff. All the others are separate weapons and work like manufactured weapons.

Mark explained that:

Mark Seifter wrote:
Basically Herolab asked our Licensing Coordinator who asked me, so I asked Jason, and he said that gauntlets are basically just a way to do lethal damage with your unarmed strikes, not an actual weapon (basically an inexpensive modifier for unarmed strikes that's in the unarmed strike category) and can't be enhanced on its own, whereas all those other weapons are listed separately as weapons, including spiked gauntlet.

So I asked:

Protoman wrote:

Ok so to clarify:

1) There's no Weapon Focus (gauntlet) option, but one uses Weapon Focus (unarmed) instead? And this applies for all the other weapon specific feats/options out there. If so I guess Shield Gauntlet Style is gonna need an errata/clarification.
2) Amulet of mighty fists would apply to gauntlets, but what about brawling armor, since it just states +2 to unarmed attack and damage rolls? What about monk's robes on a non-monk, would that be 1d8 gauntlet damage?

3) Do monk's finally get a nice thing? Can monks (and brawlers without close weapon mastery) equip gauntlets of special materials and benefit from their increased unarmed damage dice?

4) If it can't be enhanced and relies on amulet of mighty fists instead, I guess that it'll explain why I can't find any +X gauntlets easily (just wondrous item gauntlets) and makes sure monks still can't have cheap unarmed strike enhancements.

5) Since gauntlets are probably gonna see a big increase in functionality I better ask this now: would medium and heavy armors (except breastplates) made from special materials like mithral or adamantine grant free special material gauntlets that come with the armor, or are they regular steel varieties and gotta pay separately for them to be special material weapons?

There might be more questions down the line when I or others think of more since this is the first time any designer/developer give such a concrete position on gauntlets as unarmed strikes equivalent.

A FAQ would definitely help!

Mark suggests:

Mark Seifter wrote:

I'd say you should make a FAQ request for it; I bet it'll see clicks!

I'm not confident about (3) because on the surface it sort of makes sense, but they can't be enhanced, which also includes they can't be mwk, and some materials count as mwk. It would seem that (1), (2), and (4) might be the case given the premise, and (5) depends on (3) to even be a question, but if applicable, it would likely cost more in the same way that presumably the shield spikes on a wooden shield aren't wood and get materials and magic separately.

I'd like it clarified because I really don't know if one could even do Weapon Focus (gauntlet) for Shield Gauntlet Style right now or not.

**

For the starting/ending location, why not just write it down on your own like you would with purchases? I'm sure lots of folks already do so for the Grand Lodge faction journal cards.


Have you checked out the Research rules in Ultimate Intrigue? Sounds like it could be a big help.

The PFS scenario Library of the Lion would be a great example of something you'd want.
Ancient's Anguish scenario is a high level example of stuff you can throw at party members as they try to find the right text.


The intention of kineticist burn is that nothing alleviates the nonlethal damage the kineticist takes when accepting burn. If there's a pre-existing item that sounds like it would, it shouldn't. The text "Nonlethal damage from burn can't be reduced or redirected" serves as specific over general unless something comes along in the future that SPECIFICALLY says "this ignores the no nonlethal damage reduction rule of kineticist's burn".

**

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Well that sucks, man. The rogue player (no pun intended) was absolutely in the wrong with the dick move and it's even more dick move that you aren't really being supported by the more immediate local PFS players in the area.

I hope future games bring you a better class of players to adventure with.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
PRD - Combat wrote:
Natural Attacks: Attacks made with natural weapons, such as claws and bites, are melee attacks that can be made against any creature within your reach (usually 5 feet). These attacks are made using your full attack bonus and deal an amount of damage that depends on their type (plus your Strength modifier, as normal). You do not receive additional natural attacks for a high base attack bonus. Instead, you receive additional attack rolls for multiple limb and body parts capable of making the attack (as noted by the race or ability that grants the attacks). If you possess only one natural attack (such as a bite—two claw attacks do not qualify), you add 1–1/2 times your Strength bonus on damage rolls made with that attack.
PRD - Equipment wrote:
Simple, Martial, and Exotic Weapons: Anybody but a druid, monk, or wizard is proficient with all simple weapons. Barbarians, fighters, paladins, and rangers are proficient with all simple and all martial weapons. Characters of other classes are proficient with an assortment of simple weapons and possibly some martial or even exotic weapons. All characters are proficient with unarmed strikes and any natural weapons possessed by their race. A character who uses a weapon with which he is not proficient takes a –4 penalty on attack rolls.

"Natural attacks"/"natural weapons" are weapons and can be used to coup the grace.


Elemental Grip only works on things that have subtype that matches your elements which in your case is Earth then Air at level 7, which hardly seems all that useful at that particular level unless you expect to find lots of earth and air elementals. I'm not even sure which giants besides fire and frost giants that even have elemental subtypes. Though probably would be useful for lots of other monsters in an mountainous region, but tremorsense seems like a good choice too.

Shift Earth at level 8 would have loads of utility if one's imaginative. You're in a mountainous terrain for most of Giantslayer I believe so plenty of opportunities for "earth or unworked stone". DEFINITELY better than waiting til level 18 for it.


What race are you thinking of? If willing to do human, getting Precise Shot at level 1 is gonna make you a happy camper.

Metamagic spell-like ability feats don't apply to kinetic blasts since the blasts spell levels are always half your caster level, can't get a lower one to be empowered to a higher level one. Instead one uses Metakinesis. Though there's a new feat in the Magic Tactics Toolbox (Expanded Metakinesis I think) that allows one to use a metamagic spell feat to be applied to a blast for 1 burn which can be reduced with gather power.

Level 8, pick up a higher level talent from earth or air and at 9 use Extra Wild Talent feat to get Air Cushion instead.

Level 11 can be used for another Extra Wild Talent for Wings of Air if you'd want that sooner. Bullseye Shot isn't so useful since you're better off using your move action to gather power for burn reduction. Then you can get Ride the Blast a lot earlier at level 12 (it's too fun and useful to wait til level 16).

**

Don't you get a different boon if the documents get revealed?


Chess Pwn wrote:
Just note that accepting burn wont increase it until you're lv4.

Huh I didn't notice before that the accepting burn part lacks the "(minimum of 1 fire damage)" text the normal progression of searing flesh does. Well I vote for that to have errata or clarified by Mark or something to explain if burn really wouldn't do anything for it for 3 levels.


Combined or individually those rulings definitely nerd the talent, and all elemental defender talents. It's a good thing they're incorrect.

You can put more burn on it whenever you turn it on, just like any other of elemental defence talents, or even as a reaction to an attack when it's already on, so both are immediate action. And you're meant to be able to front-load your defensive talents so that kineticists can take advantage of elemental overflow right at the start of the day if they want to.

When you dismiss it and then restore it as immediate action, the burn was still invested into the talent and you haven't recovered from all your burn damage yet, that means searing flesh and the rest of the defensive talents are still increased in effectiveness.

**

As an FYI, while Hero Labs still shows the Armor Master's Handbook as available for PFS characters, it still puts up a notice for each AMH item (text is in red right at the top of info text) saying it's not added to the Additional Resources page yet.


Any creatures with scent would probably be freaking right out from the approaching mist.


It is a similar situation and you should be able to do it. No one in PFS would ever argue that a wizard prepped his spells the "in-game-day before a scenario starts" and it's no different if the during the "previous day" (not just in previous scenario) a kineticist took an extra burn to fill up his internal buffer.

There's no official word on it, so expect table variation, but most GMs are cool with it for the charging staff / prepping spells argument.


Derek Dalton wrote:
To answer your question, no. Read the class. The blasts state they are like a weapon not a spell. They have spell like abilities in talents and infusions but their base blast ability is addressed as a weapon rather then a spell. To me it reads like the charge action. By definition charge is supposed to be a full round action yet you can use it as a standard action. This is another example of poor editing on Pazio's part. Have read the class several times having played it as well and had another GM read it as well. He and I both concluded in our case Rapid Shot can be used with Simple Blast.

Rapid Shot doesn't work with a standard action SLA.

You and that GM have read it wrong. There may have been some editing issues, but if almost everyone is telling you one thing, maybe you should change direction in thinking of another.

Read this post. Even since the playtest in 2014 with ABSOLUTELY no change in the ability since then, Rapid Shot has never worked with kinetic blast. It wasn't until Occult Adventures came out with Elemental Annihilator did a kineticist even have that option but only with Flurry of Devastation infusion.


Squiggit wrote:
Imbicatus wrote:
A better comparison would be Gunslinger to Elemental Annihilator. I'm not a fan of the archetype because the lack of utility is murder, but they are great at putting out damage.
Ish. I started running the numbers and the EA doesn't actually compare that well, at least to the baseline kineticist. Looking at ranged attacks, the Annihilator mostly comes away with a minor to-hit advantage over someone just using a physical blast and its damage really starts to suffer in comparison. At levels 1-2 you've got +1 to hit. At levels 3-4 you're +1 to hit, but do 1d6+1 less damage. At 5 you're +3 to hit and lose 2d6+1 damage.

These numbers included Deadly Aim? It's more worthwhile for full-BAB Devastating Infusion using EA to pick up Deadly Aim over an average BAB kineticist.

Quote:
At 6 you get full attacks, but that full attack costs burn. So you need to start with zero or near-zero burn and even then with 16 con you're looking at 7 full attacks in a day. Meanwhile a baseline kineticist can max out their overflow and throw empowered simple blasts all day long. Even getting con to damage twice that doesn't keep up and at 7 the baseline kineticist gets another die step too.

At level 5 the EA has Infusion Specialization so Flurry of Devastation infusion wouldn't have to cost any burn if cool with only 120 ft (no extreme range in future) and not applying substance infusions til level 8 with infusion specialization 2.

**

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Quick draw to draw a stowed shield (one could still use it to bash without it equipped for AC bonus), still a move action to equip it.


Ah missed that part, thanks!
Hmm I wonder if I got room for it in current build. Spent quite a bit on Extra Wild Talent picking up secondary element talents and lower level talents I missed out on as I leveled.


Do you gotta lock in the metamagic feat choice the moment you pick up Expanded Metakinesis?

1 to 50 of 1,693 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2016 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.