|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
I'm trying to make a Wild Empathy focused character in PFS. I know that numerical bonuses to Diplomacy like skill ranks don't apply to Wild Empathy, but what about non-numerical modifiers?
Wild Empathy states "This ability functions just like a Diplomacy check made to improve the attitude of a person." If you have an ability that changes how Diplomacy checks made to improve the attitude of a person works, do those also apply to Wild Empathy?
Take the alternate racial trait Silver Tongued:
"Humans with this trait gain a +2 bonus on Diplomacy and Bluff checks. In addition, when they use Diplomacy to shift a creature's attitude, they can shift up to three steps up rather than just two."
The +2 bonus won't apply to Wild Empathy, because it doesn't get included in the Druid level + CHA calculation. But what about the second part? Since Wild Empathy "functions just like a Diplomacy check made to improve the attitude of a person", would the ability to shift a creature's attitude by 3 steps apply to Wild Empathy?
It's not apples to oranges, it's apple cobbler to apple pie. I can't tell you the pie is a cobbler, but I can say that given some apples, I think we should make a cobbler instead of a pie.
I wish that undercasting was like Summon Monster, because at least with Summon Monster you get choices. Do I summon a Giant Frog or a Small Elemental... or take a gamble and hope for 3 Dogs? With undercasting there are no choices. I don't like Cure X Wounds because it has the same problem as undercasting, but at least that's only a single line of spells and not an entire magic system.
The way I see it undercasting doesn't give psychic casters two or three spells for the price of one at all. They get one spell with a slightly modified power level. If twisting could be considered just another form of metamagic, then what is undercasting but another form of Empower Spell?
That system adds complexity without doing stuff we can't already do, so if we're going to add complexity why not at least make it different? Alternatively we could just remove undercasting entirely and give psychic casters a couple new spells like a true Vancian caster should. I would be happier with than than the current system.
As far as the Occult to 3.5 comparisons, those are going to continue to happen because the Occult Magic DOES have a relations to 3.5 Psionics. Ego Whip? Mind Thrust? Intellect Fortress? Those are all 3.5 Psionic Powers. They essentially do the same things that they did in 3.5, so of course they are going to be compared.
I was really excited to see Paizo's take on psychic magic, but I'm disappointed with the current implementation. It just feels rather... stilted, like they tried to cram the 3.5 PP system into the Vancian Magic system, and the result is not pretty.
While I love the PP system, Dreamscarred Press has cornered that market, so I see why Paizo didn't go that route. However, psychic magic feels like it's fighting against itself in it's current state, and I think this is because it's trying to be too many different things at once. Instead of being tied down to the past, I want to focus on ways we could make Psychic Magic into something new, cool, and distinctly Pathfinder.
Undercasting feels like it's trying to fill the same role that Augmentation did for PP, but since you can't split a higher level spell slot into multiple lower ones there's no reason to undercast a spell when you have higher level slots available unless you KNOW you're fighting a weaker foe. Against true threats, there's no reason to even consider not using your highest tier spell, since the high-level ones are always straight upgrades.
Compare this to say, Burning Hands v.s. Scorching Ray v.s. Fireball, which not only have varying damage but also have varying utility; which one you want to use can be heavily influenced by how enemies are positioned. With undercast spells, this isn't the case; the next level is always just a better version.
One possibility I think it would work better is if instead of having spells that just get bigger numbers as they level, these new occult classes learned ways to 'twist' their spells to better suit their needs. You could never quite know what to expect when fighting an occult caster; this would help add to that eerie, strange feeling that the occult is supposed to give. I think the Alchemist Admixtures are a good example of this; the Alchemist is still throwing bombs, but the exact effect it has been shifted to produce strange results.
Another option would be to use a system like Monk Ki or the Magus Arcana Pool for enhancing these spells. If instead of having Ego Whip I, Ego Whip II, Ego Whip III, etc., the Psychic just had Ego Whip with the ability to boost their spells up to higher strength by spending Ki or some similar resource, you would get the benefits of having multiple power levels without the weird dissonance that undercasting produces in a Vancian magic system. Players are also already familar with this kind of system, which is another bonus. It also opens the door for more possibilities like this in the future... I don't know about you, but I would totally play a Ki-based full caster.
There's a handful of buff spells (Sun Metal, Magic Weapon, Weapon of Awe, etc) which all are [Target: Weapon touched]. Obviously these work when cast on a mundane melee weapon, but what about a Spiritual Weapon?
This spell has [Effect: Magic weapon of force]. The question is, does this qualify for the [Target: Weapon touched] of the earlier spells?
My cleric just hit 9th, and looking at spells I found Lesser Astral Projection:
And looking at the full one:
Does this mean that, after paying 1,000 gp for the material component, I can cast this spell once to project myself... then return to the material plane as a projection, allowing me to adventure as normal and do normal people things, only if I die I will re-awaken wherever my real body is(admittedly with 2 negative levels)?
If so, that seems like it functions almost as a 'save point'... sure, it's 3k/'death', but it's a lot cheaper than the 8k/death you would pay normally to have someone raise you, and you don't have to worry about death effects/disintegration as much.
I just found this spell Blood Crow Strike, which sounds cool but I can't actually figure out how it works.
Based on the spell block, this looks like a spell that you hit an enemy creature with:
Yet the spell description itself sounds much more like a buff spell you would cast on an ally:
To complicate matters further, this is a 4th-level Cleric spell, which means you must be at least 7th level to cast it. However, the example given uses a 14th-level Monk, and I don't believe characters can go up to 21st level.
This further reinforces the idea that this would be a buff spell that you cast on an allied Monk, but since the duration is instantaneous I don't have any idea how this would work, unless you are permanently imbuing them with the power to make ranged Unarmed Strikes, which seems... incorrect.
I'm looking at Shatter Resolve specifically. It says that when creatures fail a save versus your channel, creatures become shaken for a number of rounds. Due to the way that fear effects work, subsequent channels would stack this effect, making creatures frightened and then panicked.
But what if you don't want them to run away? What if you only want them to remain shaken? Can you simply not use your feat?
I've hit the limit, and often. You can't actually start a scenario with any undead, but Command Undead's HD limit is equal to your own HD; it's quite often where I hit that limit with a single channel. Just last session we fought against an undead creature with 11 HD, who was thus completely immune to my Command Undead.
Animate Dead is a bit more lenient, with a limit of twice your caster level, and I haven't hit the limit on that one(they're separate pools). That costs gold though, so I use it less often than Command, which is free.
EDIT: For the rest, my defenses are pretty strong already. Now that you mention it though, my biggest weakness is versus Constructs, which I'm almost ineffectual against; do you know of anything that would help there?
I have a level 10 Cleric of Urgathoa in PFS, with about 20,000 gold and no idea what to spend it on other than generic +stat, +AC, and +Save items. Currently I have the following:
Headband of Charisma +4
While I'm open on any suggestions for what to buy, ideally I would like to increase one(or more) of the following:
Unfortunately, I don't have enough fame for a +6 headband, can't buy a headband of wisdom because I need my charisma one(though I suppose I could get an ioun stone), and I don't know of anything that would increase my effective HD for channeling.
So... any ideas?
After seeing some fantastic examples of 3D terrain for various scenarios, I decided that I would like to try my hand at building my own 3D terrain. However, since this will likely be a large investment of time and money I want to make sure that the scenario I build it for is relatively uncommon, so that I can run it for a large number of groups(both locally and at cons).
The scenario I was thinking about was Haunting of Hinojai, but since it's an older scenario I have no idea what % of PFS players have played it. Does anyone have some numbers I could reference?
Is it possible to use PP in order to purchase expensive spell components? I'm looking at Stoneskin, and I would like to use 2 PP to buy a giant jar of granite dust(worth 750gp) which I could then use to cast the spell 3 times. I'm not sure how this fits into the rules legality though.
On the one hand, this could be considered purchasing a single item(the jar of dust) with multiple uses, not unlike buying a scroll with duplicate spells, wand with multiple charges, or a bottle of sovereign glue.
On the other hand, it could be considered 3 separate items(3 separate spell components), which just happen to be the same type of item that is stuffed into a single container.
I was working on prepping for a session I will be running this weekend where I was going to have the party ambushed by a group of monstrous humanoids. After looking at the statblock for Gnolls, Hobgoblins and Bugbears though, I noticed a... discrepancy.
The stats for all 3 of these monsters are very, very similar. Similar HP, similar attack, similar damage... but not similar CR. Hobgoblins are CR 1/2, Gnolls are CR 1 and Bugbears are CR 2.
What am I missing that is supposed to make a Bugbear as challenging as 3 Hobgoblins? I think a hobgoblin would stand a good chance 1v1 with a bugbear, so one of these monsters must be mis-CRed.
Since whips are traditionally made out of leather, are these any special materials you can use to make them? It seems like whipwood is the only one which seems like it could work, but even then that's almost a houserule since whipwood is in fact a type of wood, and whips aren't generally made from wood.
I've got a Fetchling character with 3 levels of GM credit on it that I never actually built in PFS, and I think it's about time to do so. After much deliberation I'm sure that I want to go into the Shadowdancer PRC, but I'm not sure how I want to get there, so I would like some opinions from you guys.
My background story is going to be that I was an enforcer for the Onyx Alliance, then while on a mission in the Shadow Plane found the banished fae Count Ralnac. The Count caused me character to embrace freedom and reject the slave-trading Alliance, so he joined one of the Alliance's rivals - the Pathfinder Society.
Right now, the options I have considered are:
1) Monk -> Fighter -> Shadowdancer
This takes care of most of the feat requirements for Shadowdancer, allowing me to spend my other feats on more useful combat abilities. I had considered going for the Moonlight Stalker feat chain as it works well with the Fetchling's Shadow Blending, and I think this is the only way I would actually have enough feats to do it.
2) Ninja -> Shadowdancer
This has more of a focus on stealth, and as long as I'm picking up Dodge/Mobility being able to benefit from Sneak Attack when flanking could be nice. Pressure points synergies moderately well with the shadow's strength drain attack, too.
3) Summoner -> Shadowdancer
Sadly the Shadow Caller archetype isn't allowed in PFS, but I could still use my eidolon as a flank-buddy up until I get my shadow, then focus on buffing/support spells while my shadow melees. Here I would be directly contributing less, but have more versatility.
What do you guys think? Anything I haven't considered?
I have a Maneuver Master Monk in PFS with the Moonlight Stalker feat chain, and I regularly make use of Feinting in order to deny opponents their DEX versus my attack. However, I was recently told that Feint isn't actually a combat maneuver since it doesn't use CMB/CMD, and thus I can't use it with Maneuver Master.
Is this correct? It seems utterly bizarre to me, but a cursory reading of the rules doesn't find anything to contradict this...
Cleric's two main stats are WIS and CHA. WIS is used for spellcasting, and is most commonly the 'primary' stat for clerics, while CHA is used for channeling energy and is most commonly the 'secondary' stat.
How you will want to allocate your stats will depend on what kind of cleric you want to be. A couple suggestions:
'Vanilla' Party Support Cleric:
Melee Crusader-Style Cleric:
Hmm... okay, so question. If you have a Myrmidarch Magus who uses his Ranged Spellstrike through a scatter weapon such as a Dragon Pistol, what happens? Does the spell affect all targets in the cone(Such as the Holy Gun's Smiting Shot?), or does it only affect one target(chosen before or after the attack rolls?) or something else entirely?
It would be good if you tell us what the other encounters are so we can see what you are aiming for.
Evocation - Puzzle-Room with a constant elemental storm(Bolts of fire, ice, lightning and acid flying everywhere).Necromancy - Wight with 2 Ghoul servants.
Transmutation - Terrified rat, polymorphed & buffed with magic into something more fearsome.
Conjuration - Bound outsider the PCs can either fight or negotiate with.
Illusion - Series or trapped hallways.
Abjuration - Variety of magical sigils, glyphs and wards.
I'm running a campaign where the PCs are currently in Nex and will be entering a tower devoted to magical research. I'm planning on having eight rooms, one for each school of magic, with an appropriately-themed encounter inside of it. I've got one for the most of the schools, but I'm having trouble coming up with one for Divination and Enchantment rooms. The party is currently level 5.
Sean K Reynolds wrote:
Huh. Is that why I've been having so much trouble painting my Bones? Good to know. I'll have to do that in the future...
Robert A Matthews wrote:
At earlier levels yes, but later on the prices shift dramatically.
To scribe a 4th level scroll such as D. Door, it costs 240gp.
You can scribe 3 4th-level spells for the price of 1 4th-level scroll.
Sidney Kuhn wrote:
Stars are completely pointless in my opinion. They're a small image that shows up in a restricted part of the forums(I spend far more time in Advice than in the PFS forums) and don't really differentiate anything other than 'this guy has been around longer'.
Andrew Christian wrote:
Hmm. I definitely see your point here. Maybe allowing re-run credit isn't the best way to solve the GM problem. At the same time, when you're planning on having three tables on Friday night and enough players show up for four, someone who was not prepared will need to step up and run. Maybe that GM was planning on playing that night, but because he saw the need to sacrificed his slot and brought out an old scenario the newbies hadn't yet played.
He did this because he couldn't bear to send those players home because there was a lack of GMs, but even though he would have done it regardless, wouldn't it be nice if he got to keep one of those chronicle sheets as a 'Thank You' for stepping up in a time of need?
Andrew Christian wrote:
At my lodge there is a shortage of GMs available. I would be willing to GM more, but I have a need to get a certain amount of credit in a limited timeframe, which actively disincentives me from GMing. In a system where GM availability is limited, is a system which further reduces this availability a good one?
Andrew Christian wrote:
Wouldn't allowing credit for rerunning scenarios actually help fix this very problem?
Lets say that you're GMing 9 times. If you run 9 different scenarios, all 9 scenarios are likely to go on a single character, giving you a 4th-level character you have never played. However, if you run 3 different scenarios 3 times, you will end up with 3 2nd-level characters that you have never played.
Re-run credit would actually push players to play their characters more than GM them, because they can't apply the same chronicle to a character twice.
Andrew Christian wrote:
This is true. There may be reasons we are yet unaware of which make allowing re-run credit a bad idea, but is it really worth it to shy away from a making a change which has clear, concise benefits of which we are aware, all because of a potential unknown?
Additionally, if we want to be cautious we can always roll out changes like this slowly. We certainly do not need unlimited GM credit. It would not be difficult to start off by only allowing 2 GM credits per scenario, just to see what impact it has on the game. If one of those potential unknowns does rear it's head and has a negative impact on the game, we can always roll back the changes.
I apologize if my OP came off this way, but I did not intend to ask for special dispensation. I did not have my immediate convenience in mind when I made the OP, and I certainly didn't suggest this change without considering the long-term ramifications of Organized Play. I love Pathfinder Society, and would never suggest a change I felt would harm PFS as a whole, even if it benefited me personally.
Rather, I believe that allowing GM credit for re-running scenarios would have a positive impact on the society as a whole for all players, as the benefits we could gain would outweigh the of downsides of this change.
Doug Miles wrote:
Ah, I wasn't aware. A cursory search turned up nothing.
Even reading through those threads, I still don't see any reason why credit shouldn't be given for running multiple times; rather, several reasons were put forward why re-running scenarios is a good idea, yet re-running scenarios is currently decentivized due to a lack of tangible progression when doing so.
As is, I have 5 characters, 4 of which are mid-to-high level. Would it really have a negative impact if 2 of them had a GM chronicle from Jester's Fraud rather than just 1?
Jester's Fraud and the Heresy of Man series are perhaps some of my favorite scenarios ever, even after running them over 4 months ago. A new group of PFS players has just reached the 5-9 tier at my local PFS lodge, and I was contemplating sharing these excellent scenarios with the new players, but actually found myself held back by the upcomming PaizoCon, as I have a level 5.2 character that I need to get to level 7.0 in a limited number of sessions in order to play in the 7-11 scenarios I want to at PaizoCon.
Granted, I understand why Paizo wants to incentivize GMs to run their new scenarios, but unfortunately my work has been really busy recently and I don't have time to run through and prep a brand-new scenario. Would it really hurt that much to give credit for running a scenario multiple times, as long as it was several months apart?
I'm not sure if it's really worth it to take the Blackened curse. Fireball, Burning Hands, and Wall of Fire are already on your spell list from the Flames mystery, so the only good spell you're getting from Blackened is Sphere of Flame...
Speaking of which, I don't think you can actually do that with Sphere of Flame. Because you get it from your Curse and not your Mystery, you won't get the metamagic reduction on it.
Dark Tapestry Oracle, or Battle Oracle.
Hmm... Oracle would be interesting. I don't really like Dark Tapestry since it's more alien/cthulhuesque than Shadow Plane, but Battle could work.
Now, in PFS, most players will have no way to deal with Darkness, other than getting rid of it.
And therin lies my problem. Most of the cool Fetchling abilities rely on being in a situation that would harm the rest of the party.
Shane LeRose wrote:
Is the Advanced Race Guide allowed in Society play? If so, then Summoner with the fetchling archetype that adds shadow beasties to your summons list. It's silly good and super thematic.
Alas, Shadow Caller is the only thing in the ARG that is banned for Fetchlings - otherwise I would be all over that.
It's been almost a year since last PaizoCon, where I won a boon for a Fetchling character in PFS. I still have yet to make a character for him, as I can't come up with any ideas which truly capitalize on a Fetchling's abilities.
I can't really make a Darkness fighter because you can't rely on your allies having Darkvision in PFS, and if you forgo Shadow Blending/Darkvision then a Halfling is almost always better at stealth. I just don't know what else to do with him.
So using your example, after 4 hours the 9th-level spell vanishes if it hasn't yet been used, but the extra 6th, 7th and 8th level spells remain?
If so, would it be possible to purposefully extinguish the candle after memorizing spells, losing the 9th but keeping the 6/7/8 spells and only using up part of the candle?
I was looking over new magic items for my 8th-level Cleric and came across the Candle of Invocation. I had previously only noted the item for abusing broken Gate shannanigans, but the second ability of the candle actually intrigues me:
How exactly does this work? The item description isn't very clear, but it seems like this could either be very useful if you can start the day by burning it while prepping some higher level buffs up to 4 times, but it could also be almost worthless if it is a one-use item where the spells only function during a 4-hour window.
While Color Spray is certainly that revelation's schtick, I wouldn't say the rest is garbage. I played with one who made EXCELLENT use of the levitation and moon bridge powers.
As a cleric you won't have the raw power of any of the martial classes, so you will need to focus on buff spells; especially ones with a long duration or ones which affect the whole party. Prayer, Blessing of Fervor, Magic Vestments, and Greater Magic Weapon are all great choices.
I would highly recommend spending 3,000gp on a Metamagic Rod of Reach. With it, you can pull from pack(move) and cast(standard) to stick your whole party with any of the Communal spells(Protection from Evil, Resist Energy, etc.) in a single turn. This can be a lifesaver; when you suddenly find yourselves fighting a magma elemental, or when you get ambushed by a dominate-happy vampire, this can be the difference between victory and a TPK.
I do have to question why you have no shield. You could drop your Amulet of Natural Armor down to +1, then use the gold to buy a +2 Buckler, netting an extra 2 AC. You can still cast with a buckler on, and you can even wield your longspear with it on if you have to.
EDIT: One thing of note, one advantage of a cleric over a paladin is when you hit level 12 you will be able to stick a +3 bonus on your weapons and armor with Greater Magic Weapon and Vestments, respectively. These both last 1 hour/level, meaning a single casting will last you 12 hours. It's MUCH more efficient to cast these at the start of each day, and put the money you would spend on enchanting your weapons/armor into something else(Deliquescent Gloves are good for a damage boost).
I have a Cleric in PFS who is really good at bluffing(Trickery Domain), but terrible at forgery. I want to focus on shoring up this weakness. As I see it, the only real way to make believable forgeries is with the Linguistics skill. This is problematic for me, because as a Cleric who dumped INT, I start with an intrinsic penalty and don't have many points to put into it.
So, are there any other ways I can create believable documents, or ways to quickly boost my Linguistics check? Something like, I dunno, magical paper which makes people believe whatever is written on it?
always wondered why folks have dwarves use axes so much--for people associated with earth and stone as often as they are, wouldn't the pick or hammer be more fitting (which they get as well, dont get me wrong)?
Because axes are the most effective weapon when fighting against the Dwarves' ancient ancestral enemy, a fearsome creature with a tough skin and hardy flesh. Those towering behemoths can reach heights of over 300 feet, and the largest have a girth of 100 feet! Picks barely make a dent against these creatures, and hammers simply bounce right off; you need the strong, chopping motion of an axe to fell these terrible beasts. I am talking, of course, about the dreaded tree.
I would strongly disagree with the statement that 'always-on' feats are stronger than feats which you can activate, for the simple reason that feats you actively use give you options - options which can completely turn the tide of a battle.----------
With something like Lightning Reflexes, you have a 10% increased chance to make a reflex save, which is usually v.s. an AoE effect or breath weapon that does 1d8/level. In other words, at level 4 that feat will stop you from taking 10 damage a mere 10% of the time.
Thus, Lightning Reflexes will save the OP an average of 1 damage/round(10 damage x 10%), but only when fighting something that uses these attacks; against a melee grunt, the feat is worthless.
Thus, Power Attack will give the OP an extra 4 damage/round(6 damage X 90% - 15 damage X 10%). He can use this feat every round, or if fighting something with high AC, simply chose not to use it.
Assuming an average creature does 10 damage/attack(not unreasonable, since the OP can do 20 on average), a tripped enemy takes an extra 10 damage/round(10 damage X 5 party members X 20% hit bonus) and deals 2 less damage/round(10 damage * 20% miss chance).
Thus, when you trip an enemy with Improved Trip you 'save' on an average of 12 damage/round, compared to Lighting Reflexes where you 'save' an average of 7 damage/round.
Slatz Grubnik wrote:
This is critically important. A large majority of the responses in this thread accept that the mathematics posited by the OP is correct, and attempt to justify the weapon via flavor or cost reasons, when in fact the math isn't correct.
Let's extrapolate some, shall we? Assume you're a Level 1 Warrior with no STR score, and you hit a monster with the following rolls:
With a Longsword, you will crit on both the 19 and the 20, while with the Battleaxe you will crit only on the 20, while the 19 will be a normal hit:
It's the same. Even when you add flat damage bonuses such as from enchantments or strength, they scale the same. Heck, let's even throw in a Flaming Burst enchantment, to really complicate things!
+1 Flaming Burst Longsword:
+1 Flaming Burst Battleaxe:
• larger spikes in damage(battleaxe), useful against single targets or creatures with DR or Resistances.