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

Rudy2's page

Pathfinder Society Member. 1,114 posts (1,166 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 4 Pathfinder Society characters. 1 alias.


RSS

1 to 50 of 1,114 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

I'm not going to do the disservice of pretending I'm not pleased on some level, if only for the headaches it will save in disagreement, but it is a shame that such an (eventually) constructive discussion essentially came to naught. I was even starting to warm up to the 1 check/use version, and Drake's "magical method acting".


Honestly, if you have Lingering Performance, I think the Headband of Fortune's Favor is overkill, and not worth giving up the slot that could boost your charisma.


BigNorseWolf wrote:
Bigdaddyjug wrote:
It also has the cost of a round of bardic performance every time you use it.
Thats like steroids costing a buck 50. Its not a signifigant limitation to its use.

No, it's not.

But, I do think the limitation of one skill check per use is significant.

The ability is constrained when it comes to monster identification. If you don't know the combat is coming, first of all, you're spending a standard action to start the ability, that you could be doing something else, if you want to identify anything. Even if you do know it's coming, and have the ability active, you're only going to identify one thing if you're fighting multiple types of monsters, or identify one spell effect, per combat.

It isn't a significant limitation on out of combat knowledge checks, but it's something, and it means that other knowledge gurus can still shine on identification.

It also means that if there are a bunch of potions, or whatnot, the Bard can't identify the lot of them via Spellcraft without burning through a lot of rounds, which can start to add up at that point.

As said, I still wouldn't allow it in my games, but it is something.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bigdaddyjug wrote:
Yeah, I'm going to keep the archetype. I just wish the aasimar FCB worked on Archaeologist's Luck.

Who says it doesn't? Archaeologist's Luck says in its own text that it functions exactly like Bardic Performance for things that enhance bardic performances.


I still don't like the ability, and won't allow it in home games, but I've made peace with the fact that, if limited to one check per use, it is powerful, but not ridiculously unbalanced.


I don't have a GM, either. I'm building a character which I will possibly use in the future. Regardless, though, I would never ask a GM to let me use an ability in a way I wouldn't allow my own players to use it.


=D Those were my thoughts, and the gnome *does* have it as a racial spell.

That being said, it's not that often that you'd want to use the ability on an animal.


First, I'm doing this for a character I'm building, not as a GM, so this is about self-limiting.

That being said, I don't think the idea that you could use this on a creature that can't understand you is plausible, and the ability is powerful enough without that. Given its potency, I'd rather interpret on the side of limitation, so I'm just going to treat it as working on creatures that can understand what you are saying to them.


Yeah, I'm almost done with the Iroran Paladin. I just followed the format for other archetypes; looked at the Sensei, for example, to see how to add class skills.

Only things I still have to do are figure out how to add in the Confident Defense AC bonus (probably by looking at Duelist Canny Defense ability), and see if I can get it to calculate the proper Unarmed Strike damage for the Iroran Paladin, but I'm not terribly concerned about that.


Woot! There's also the righteous thrill of helping the open source against the extortionist monopoly. =D

Seriously, I wonder if HeroLab has some sort of monopoly agreement with paizo; clearly they must be paying paizo something since they are profiting off of open gaming license stuff. It's suspicious that there are no other for-pay options.


Alright, I consider the guide to be in a more-or-less "complete" form. I haven't done the spells section, which I may or may not get around to at some point. That's far from critical.

I'll continue to update it with any good suggestions added to this thread, though! Perhaps add more build ideas to it as they come to me; that sort of thing.

If anyone is interested in adding to it in a major way, send me a message, and I'll consider giving you edit access to it. I don't want to open it up to general public editing, though.


The fact that you can't install it on more than one machine, which I didn't know before now, is the final nail in the coffin. I regularly use three different machines. I can now confidently say I will never buy it.

The other two I was going to try don't work for me, because I don't have Microsoft office at the moment.

As far as PCGen, yeah, I'm already looking into trying to code the Iroran Paladin archetype for PCGen; I found the yahoo groups, and realized it's not dead. I haven't coded Java for a long time, but it doesn't seem to require too much expertise, just patience.


Yeah, HeroLab is just not an option. I know myself, and I know that once I started using it, I would buy most of the supplements, which I am simply not going to do. I do not participate in anything with micro-transactions for the same reason. If there was a single, high, upfront cost that guaranteed access to all materials, I would consider it. As it is, no.

Thank you Moondragon & Tony Harding; I will try both those options.


The Ragi wrote:
Rudy2 wrote:

Finally got tired of creating characters by hand. I'm aware of HeroLab, of course, but I'm not willing to drop $100+ (the amount needed to get "access" to a full-ish set of material)

Free is ideal, of course, but I AM willing to pay 20-30 bucks for a "complete" system. Up to $50 if it's really good.

I'm about to give this a try; don't know if others have experience with it.

Any recommendations within these parameters are greatly appreciated.

I used PCGen myself, its pretty good.

Only found bugs on the Psionics stuff so far.

http://pcgen.sourceforge.net/03_get_pcgen.php

I just took a look at that, but it doesn't have Inner Sea Combat as an option, or any of the newer things. Development seems to have dead-halted a year ago, sadly.


Lucio wrote:

Honestly, I've not found a better application than Hero Lab and haven't needed to buy anything more than the Core book and the class books (APG, UC and UM)

Yeah it's a bit more expensive but it's so much easier than the others that I've used

The very first character I want to create would require Inner Sea Combat (for Iroran Paladin) and Gnomes of Golarian (for Bewildering Koan). The latter I could probably just put in manually, I suppose. There is on option for that, yes?

Bottom line is, I know that once I started using it, I would easily end up buying $200 worth of supplements based on micro-transaction psychology. It's a powerful, but insidious business practice.


In PFS you are only allowed to receive mechanical benefits from one god, but I don't believe there is any such statement for Pathfinder in general. I imagine that many GM's might enforce such a thing, regardless.


A swift action can only be taken on your turn. So, generally, no.

Now, if you were aware that combat was about to start, you may be able to use the ability before you "jumped in" to combat, depending on the wording.

What ability are you talking about?


The black raven wrote:
You can use Bluff to feint a creature. AFAIK it is neither language-dependent nor mind-affecting.

True; but feinting does not involve words.


Finally got tired of creating characters by hand. I'm aware of HeroLab, of course, but I'm not willing to drop $100+ (the amount needed to get "access" to a full-ish set of material)

Free is ideal, of course, but I AM willing to pay 20-30 bucks for a "complete" system. Up to $50 if it's really good.

I'm about to give this a try; don't know if others have experience with it.

Any recommendations within these parameters are greatly appreciated.


It's not accurate that mind-affecting only applies to spells; the Antagonize feat, for example, is mind-affecting. That being said:

Lakesidefantasy wrote:
If a mindless creature cannot even attempt the skill check then it cannot be effected--same goes for a creature that cannot understand your language.
Landon Winkler wrote:
If you'd let a PC mislead a target with Bluff, I'd allow them to Bewildering Koan the same target.

I think these both seem like good standards to use and, I believe, amount to the same thing.

Thanks for the input!


So, I have a build I'm tinkering with, which involves being able to shut down opponents through the use of Antagonize (feat) and Bewildering Koan.

Here's the highlights of the build at level 7:

Build Outline:

Gnome
Academician, Gift of Tongues alternate racial features.

Paladin 4 (Iroran Paladin, Oath Against Fiends) / Cleric of Irori (Separatist) 1 / Bard (Vanilla) 2
Str 10 Dex 14 Con 14 Int 12 Wis 12 Cha 18 (20 pt.)
Traits: Magical Knack (Bard), ???
Feats: Antagonize, Bewildering Koan, Deific Obedience (Irori), Skill Focus (Perform [Comedy])

*Strong AC due to Iroran Paladin
*Between dips and Divine Grace, saves are really good, which is ideal for Antagonize.
*Uses Versatile Performance (Comedy) to boost both Bluff and Intimidate.
*Cleric dip is primarily to get an additional 3+CHA ki per day, through use of the Bronze Gong. Additionally grants +10 speed via Travel domain, and retrying knowledge checks via Knowledge [Memory] domain.
*Rocks knowledge checks with minimal skill investment, though that can be sacrificed if there is a good reason
*Proceeding from level 7 will likely be straight Bard levels.
*Not sure whether to have a bow, or a finessable weapon as backup.
*Weaker on CMD; may have to watch out for that.

-------------

There's two problems with it I'm looking to remedy, if possible.

One, he's rather lackluster before level 5 (when he gets Bewildering Koan). He can inspire courage and Antagonize people, but still nothing amazing.

Two, beyond using Inspire Courage and a limited bardic spell selection, he's somewhat of a lump against mindless things. Bewildering Koan is not mind-affecting explicitly, but it's pretty clear it at least won't work on things that have no minds at all.

Any suggestions as to how to shore up these weaknesses are greatly appreciated.


text

By RAW, this is neither, but it seems a bit silly to say so. It seems pretty apparent that the creature would need to understand the question you are asking them, and thus it should at least be language-dependent.

Mind-affecting I'm much less sure about. Would this affect a vampire, for example, who is immune to mind-affecting things, but not mindless. I lean toward yes, but am uncertain.


Okay, so I'm looking for brainstorming ideas regarding a halfling whip user (not necessarily using a whip from level 1, though) who I'm going to make tiny via 'reduce person' (for the purposes of this, assume a permanent item of reduce person, priced via the rules at 4,000gp, is permitted, so that's not a factor in the long run).

20 pt buy: Str 10 Con 14 Dex 18 Int 8 Wis 8 Cha 17 (after racial)
4th level point into charisma, rest into dexterity.

I'm thinking starting with a level in Swashbuckler, for the finesse and pizzazz, or whatever they're calling it. Probably get up to at least 3 levels in Swashbuckler for the precise strike.

Going to make use of the Iroran Paladin for four levels, to get +4 to AC, +CHA to all saves, bunch of ki, 2/day +2 insight bonus to most things against one foe, and a bit of lay on hands.

Further thinking of getting four levels into Bard (Archaeologist) to get Uncanny Dodge, whip proficiency, 'heroism', a bonus feat, and of course Archaeologist's Luck. Plus it's thematic.

For damage, going to make use of the Risky Striker feat, and of course aim to get an agile weapon ASAP, in addition to the precise strike damage from swashbuckler.

Feats I'm Considering:

Weapon Focus (Whip)
Whip Mastery
Improved Whip Mastery
Risky Striker
Slashing Grace
----------

So...

I'm basically looking for ideas if there is anything obvious I'm missing. I'm willing to change anything I've said so far, except the fact that he is size tiny, and he is using a melee weapon. I think whip is the only way to make that work well, due to the fact that he can have 10 foot reach with it, but I could be wrong.


Thanks for all of that! I looked around myself, and while you're correct, graystone, that Weapon Versatility is unclear whether it would work for what I want, the Slashing Grace feat from the ACG itself will definitely work. That feat takes any one-handed slashing weapon, and lets you treat it as a one-handed piercing weapon for all feats and class abilities. It won't actually do piercing damage, but that's no big deal.

Now to build this sucker. Roll for damage? Who does that? =D


I'm considering making a dex-based halfling using Risky Striker feat, and a whip, ultimately making use of 'reduce person' to become tiny on a regular basis, around the same time he has the Whip Mastery and Improved Whip Mastery feats.

First, how long of a reach does a tiny creature using a whip have? James Jacobs says 10 feet, which I will go with if there is nothing more official.

Second, what does the base damage of a whip scale to for tiny? A small whip is 1d2. Is there anything less than 1d2? Does it just become "1"?

Third, anyone know of any way to deal piercing damage with a whip? I ask because of a potential Swashbuckler involvement in the build. If not, I'll do without Swashbuckler.


Could a halfling under the effects of 'reduce person' (so that he is tiny) attack adjacent squares with a reach weapon? If so, that, in combination with the Risky Striker feat that was pointed out to me earlier, starts to make that build look *much* more interesting.


That makes sense, both from a reading and a balance perspective.


Equipment is more or less done, barring further input on it. To do list is now:

1) Finish section on Paladin Code/roleplaying; I started it, re-reading Irori's section in Inner Sea Gods to see if there is anything else of note.

2) Reorganize traits section to match the format of the other sections.

3) Add a spell-choice section, probably an appendix, so as to not overly crowd the main document.


wraithstrike wrote:
That is also how magical knack works also.

Huh. So, Magical Knack won't "stack" with an Orange Prism Ioun Stone? Serious question; I always assumed they would, but it makes sense that they may not.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Or, rather than try to tailor encounters to fit the RAW, you can exercise your right as a GM to make the rules be reasonable. One of the reasons it's a good thing that GMs are humans, not computers, is that they can make rulings in areas where things are wonky, or in dealing with situations where the rules were obviously not written to apply to.

Do you really think it is preferable that a GM be forced to alter a campaign based on what abilities a player has, as opposed to just saying "sorry, guys, but the rules were obviously not intended to work this way, so I'm going to say X". Narrative is more important than numerics, for goodness sake.

RAW only takes the form of chains when playing PFS, which is a bad thing about PFS, not a good thing. In a home game, you are Rule 0, and there is a good reason for that: the rules cannot foresee every possibility.


In terms of the actual question, I agree that the best thing to do is to treat the carrying as mounted combat. The barbarian can make a fully attack, and then be picked up, sure, but on his next turn he can't make a full attack.

Bear in mind that pathfinder uses turn based for simplicity, but these things are not really happening sequentially. If you picture an actual combat, it's not as though each person is pausing while others take their turns. The fact that the barbarian is spending part of his time being carried eats into some of the time he could be spending doing other things, like attacking, logically.

I realize that's not a "raw" argument, but it is a good place to start in explaining why you need to use rule 0 in this case.

In terms of something else...

[pedantry]It's "lieu", not "lu".[/pedantry]


Oh, I do want to ask, is your objection to the Abyssal Bloodline over the Celestial one a thematic one (which I can understand) or is there some deeper mechanical difference I'm overlooking?

If there is some reason I'm not seeing that makes the Abyssal bloodline dip a bad build, as opposed to it not being as good as a straight bloodrager, I definitely do want to know.


Obviously the bloodrager is a strong class, but it's not clear to me that the straight bloodrager would be an superior character overall. Defensively, in terms of both AC and saves, for example, he would be lagging by a lot. Without the monk version of Unarmed Strike, he would be unable to combine the claws with additional iterative attacks. He'd lack the ability to flip off fatigue with lay on hands, and many other things besides.

That being said, I haven't thought deeply about the effects of the Bloodrager spell list. It may be the case that the class itself far exceeds the Iroran Paladin; I don't know. I've certainly heard murmurings of its potency. Such is power creep.

When I'm including a dip option in the guide, though, I'm not making the claim that the Iroran Paladin with a dip is superior to the class being dipped (though in many cases, I think that may be true). Rather, I'm just saying "here's a viable direction in which you can take this character". The reason the bloodrager is on there in the first place is because Uncanny Dodge benefits the Iroran Paladin a lot. (EDIT: Actually, I think you are the one that pointed that out to me :) )


Akerlof wrote:
Pageant of the Peacock does what it says: You can make Int and Int-based checks using a Bluff check instead.

Beyond the explicit question about trained/untrained, I'm not making an argument about what it says it does; those threads have come and gone, and I'm done with it.

I'm merely making a *factual* observation that there there is a great deal of disagreement on how it works, and that the OP should be aware of that when designing a character. Regardless of the arguments on here, any given GM could have a wildly different interpretation, and that's something a player should keep in mind.


Looks nice! I checked, and you didn't mention Bewildering Koan; I thought I'd point it out in case it's an oversight. It's the one thing that makes a gnome ninja quite viable, as it can be ridiculously powerful if used well.


My thoughts are that, no, it doesn't negate the penalty of Reckless Rage. That may be a penalty that you take when power attacking, but it's not "Power Attack's penalty".

EDIT: That being said, I don't think it's a huge thing to let it.


Ok, I think I've incorporated all of the input so far, except for stuff on the paladin code, as well as updated the credits section. If I left you out, I promise it wasn't intentional! Just let me know.

I re-oriented the guide a bit, to lessen the implication that the three primary builds I highlight are the only way to use the class effectively. It's become clear over the course of this thread that that view is very limiting.

Next on my agenda are

1) Short note on managing swift actions in the "other build considerations" section.

2) Add a section on the Paladin code, near the end. Maybe an "Appendix"

3) Revamp the equipment section.

As always, input on any aspect of the guide, or this PrC in general, is very welcome.


If I'm reading that correctly, though, they get a saving throw immediately upon being exposed, and if successful, it negates the poison, meaning it will not count for increasing DCs. It does mean that if they fail one save, things will quickly snowball.

And once it takes two saves to cure, then it becomes really brutal, since even if they make the first save, the poison is still around, meaning that the DC starts increasing.

Definitely work a look; not to my taste thematically, but I've added it to the guide, thanks.


I mean, I'm only sort of halfheartedly arguing here, because I don't really want to win this argument, but I do need to point out that you're not making a knowledge check.


I'm pretty ignorant on poisons, since they are generally not very good. If you hit multiple times in a round with that poison, would it actually increase the DC for successive hits, or just make them make more saves?


Dose this analysis of a Swashbuckler Dip seem correct? I haven't seen the class in action at all, so I'm uncertain.

Swashbuckler:
Swashbuckler Dip (1) - I’m not confident this is a great dip, though I think it’s much better if you’re trying to do a dex-based attack build (in general sub-optimal for this archetype) due to the free Finesse, but there are a few interesting things I want to point out.

First is that the Hamatulatsu Strike feat will allow your unarmed strike to qualify for the Swashbuckler special abilities.

Second is that you can flurry with a cestus or siangham, both piercing, until you want to switch to Unarmed Strikes and Hamatulatsu.

Third is that Dodging Panache is an amazing way to potentially block full attacks (besides the first attack) made against yourself, and your AC is majorly boosted against that first attack. Alternately, you can use this to close in to enemies. The other uses of “panache” are hum-drum, but this one is the major reason you would consider this dip at all. In any case, I would not do more than one level, unless you’re actually going for a primarily swashbuckler build with Paladin dip.

Also, here's what I said about the Bloodrager

Bloodrager:
This is somewhat in flux, because the class is still in playtest. Note that, for now, there is no alignment restriction on the class, unlike Barbarian. If that changes, this may become non-viable.

I’m not so huge a fan of this possibility for flavor reasons (Bloodraging Iroran Paladin?), but there are some viable combos. You’ll likely want to take two levels if you go this route, since the second level gets you Uncanny Dodge, which is very good for the Iroran Paladin. The build otherwise gets you rage, fast movement, and a rage bloodline. Make sure to take “fatigue” as one of your mercies for lay on hands.

Two bloodlines in particular deserve a mention. First, the Celestial bloodline is nice. It mitigates the flavor issues somewhat, as you can view it as a “righteous fury” type thing. Treating your attacks as “good” aligned is a nice boon, and the extra 1d6 per attack to evil outsiders is somewhat situational, but very useful.

The Abyssal bloodline has a particular combination that is potentially powerful. If you play as a tiefling, you can use the Claw or Maw alternate racial feature to grab a bite attack. The Abyssal bloodline will then give you two claw attacks. These can be combined with iterative Unarmed Strike attacks (though not Flurry of Blows, so don’t dip Sohei in this case). Further, since you will have three natural attacks, you can take the Multiattack feat, so that your bite/claw/claw is only at a -2, in addition to your full iterative unarmed strike. If you go this way, the Feral Combat Training is worth looking at to apply to your claws. While using your unarmed damage for claws is not much of a boost, the less obvious thing is that the Brawling enhancement you will be applying to your armor will then also benefit your claws.

Thematically, the abyssal bloodline is problematic, but you can imagine the tiefling turning to the discipline of Irori to combat the pernicious influence of his evil blood. You can consider dipping up to four levels for this build, and getting the 4th level enlarge person effect that occurs whenever you rage; this is one of the few ways you can get such an effect without being a humanoid. The main mechanical downside of this build, besides the loss of paladin advancement, is that you cannot combine it with a reach weapon for control, since you’ll need your hands free for claws.

Finally, for Eldritch Heritage, the four bloodlines I highlighted were Arcane, Draconic, Orc & Shadow. Any others that anyone thinks deserve special mention?


DrakeRoberts wrote:
Does a skill substituting for another require training in the original skill if said skill is 'trained only'?

Believe me, I have no desire to repeat that argument, but that particular question was a sub-question of our insanely long thread on PotP, and there was no consensus about it.

My argument is that no, you do not need to have ranks in the knowledge check, because you are not making a knowledge check, you are making a bluff check, and bluff checks do not require training. (The fact that James Jacobs confirmed that it actually a bluff check, and treated like one, is why I gave up that argument)

I think that requiring them to be trained in the knowledge has a good balance factor to it, but I don't think there is a solid argument for it.

And without re-opening the general argument myself, my advice to Melargo stands: the opinions on this ability are very varied, so don't make any assumptions about the opinion of your GM.


Hi Melargo,

I'm not currently aware of an ability there is less consensus on than Pageant of the Peacock. so... ask your GM. If in PFS, the safest thing to do is to assume it won't work the way you think it does.


Also, I'm stupid, and just realized that a Half-Elf qualifies for it (since he counts as an elf) if old enough. Also remembered that in PFS age doesn't matter, as you're below the maximum age.


You also need to be 100 years old. A half-orc is already dead, a human is 75% likely to be dead, and is venerable if not, and a half-elf is at least "old". Those ability modifiers are not favorable.

There seems to be disagreement about how long lived aasimar are. According to the Advanced Race guide, they are extremely long lived, so this would work for them in combination with Racial Heritage (Gnome). Others say they should not be that long lived for Golarion, so mileage may vary.

I will add a note about Racial Heritage (Gnome) to that one, though.


Yeah, in the guide I basically said "If you are going to be a Gnome ANYWAY, then this is a feat to consider".


Turned out to be not so "mini". And still growing. Whoda thought a single archetype could have so many possibilities.


Dang; realized that Breadth of Experience won't work for this build in most cases, because the race requirements are no good.


Imbicatus wrote:
The problem with Enlarge person is the one round casting time. That is a much larger hit to action economy in that you have a much larger chance of loosing the spell due to interruption, and it prevents you from moving or taking AoOs that round too.

Enlarge person would be a "right before combat" spell in this case. I honestly don't see either enlarge person, or true strike, as something that would be worth spending your turn casting during combat.


I'm in the process of updating the guide with a bunch of new stuff. I will add credits when I am finished, so please do not be put out if your name does not appear as of yet for people who gave new input.

1 to 50 of 1,114 << 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.