Going back to the O.P. for a minute and that specific situation, I can't help but wonder if perhaps the DM wasn't comfortable with a torture scenario.
And bravo to everyone who is saying that torture is evil, it kind of worries me that people argue that it isn't. (That said, I do understand the arguments that say it isn't more evil than murder, which pathfinders get a pass on but c'est la vie.)
I've read it, however if that was truly the case why make a thread saying how deities need to have other favored weapons? If you want your character to use a mace, use a mace, no need to worry about favored weapons at all. Doesn't quite add up if you ask me.
But the religious accoutrements of her faith do not fit this character and unfortunately I don't see an alternative Deity that has the same domains.
The gods don't require you to use their favored weapon, their favored weapon is just that, their favored weapon. Maybe your father killed your mother with a sword before you were called to the priesthood and so you swore never to wield a blade in anger against another man, or maybe as a child you swore an oath not to shed blood (the traditional 2nd edition reason clerics used a mace) and so avoid the bladed weapons. There's tons of ways to justify using something other than the deity's favored weapon.
When I do animate any, I want it to be fast, cheap and easy. I don't plan to use that Blood spell that bypasses components tho. Too cheesy for me. However I do wish to get most of it economically.
You wish to find something that will help you animate them cheaper, yet something specifically designed to make spells cheaper is too cheesy?
IMO: Using that spell isn't cheesing anything (unless you have to manipulate the rules to get it) but jumping through a dozen hoops to get the same effect might well be.
Its all part of Asmodeus's evil plan. People don't think using healing magic can corrupt them, so they use it freely and frequently, not thinking anything about it. They make wands of it and pass them around. And slowly the world turns more evil. In another couple hundred years he releases a new spell that allows the restoring of a life at the cost of a life and people think of it as recycling, and the forces of evil continue to grow stronger.
Shain Edge wrote:
Actually, I'm pretty sure Fighters aren't winning the DPS game either. They may be in the top 3 if you only care about indefinitely sustainable damage output, but I think that's probably as good a thing as can be said about the fighter.
Actually a wizard isn't a glass cannon, nor are they meant to dish out massive amounts of damage (with the exception of some very specific builds). At least not since second edition. Wizards are meant to straight up end encounters.
So you come to us asking for money but without giving us any information about your writers, their backgrounds, and without having produced anything for pathfinder before?
One of the big advantages of this rule is that it helps spontaneous casting classes, which always lagged behind in crafting power, some more power in crafting. It still doesn't make them as good as the prepared classes for crafting, but it helps.
That said, if a discussion amongst friends, about a game turns violent, maybe you all shouldn't be playing that game.
Evil is insidious. History is full of examples of people doing horrible things for "good" reasons. That doesn't make them less horrible. History also has examples of people doing good things for bad reasons, that doesn't make them good.
It reminds me of an article I read where an 18 year old girl got arrested for sexual activities with a 15 year old girl. People commenting on the article were yelling discrimination and complaining that it was right. Yet when guys get arrested for being with a 15 year old girl there's no outrage.
Equal rights should mean equal, same punishments when they break the law, same holidays (how's an orphan going to feel on international family day?), etc.
Quintin Belmont wrote:
Or a cleric. I hear cure / cause wounds is kinda their schtick. (One of their schticks at least.)
OP: Why do you believe the wizard (one of the most powerful classes in the game) needs a feat that allows them to step on other classes toes? The "arbitrary" decision to close off certain types of magic to wizards is also known as balance.
That said, the cure / cause wounds are conjuration rather than evocation because they don't actually create said element, they pull it from elsewhere. Evocation deals with the creation of energy (fireball, for example, is created fire, it isn't fire pulled from the elemental plane of fire) conjuration gets to handle moving energy across the planes.
It is important to note that while your idea doesn't work mechanically, it doesn't mean you can't play it out in game. All base attack bonus means is the number of attacks you make in a round that have a reliable chance to harm. While you're still young and learning that may mean that several of the people you do this to duck, or the blade clinks off their armor, or what have you. As you grow higher level and get a larger number of attacks this same maneuver (sadly sans the movement) can improve (ie. you get more attacks).
Alternatively, the overrun and combat reflexes approach mentioned above works (probably works better in fact).
Shadowrun's okay but it's also the game that said if you modify yourself too much you drop dead and lose your connection with magic, which is a bit less transhuman than others.
The idea that if you modify yourself past a certain point you cease to be human, but if you do it properly you can become *something else* isn't transhuman?
Something else being anything from a cyber zombie to a brain in a jar.
That said, just because transhumanism often relies on technology doesn't mean it has to rely on technology (just generally technology is the only method for transhuman games to explore). Metahumanity and the S.U.R.G.E. are as much transhuman as the cybernetics.
Shadowrun is definitely transhumanist on a certain level, it has been exploring the questions "what does it mean to be human and what can be beyond humanity" since its release. You sure you're thinking of Shadowrun Irnk? It has also been heavily based on both cyberpunk and fantasy since the beginning. No one should complain about the magic in shadowrun, it has been there, front and center, since the beginning. Such is the 6th world.
And yeah, cyberpunk hasn't been a thing for a good long while, though I do miss it. (Though, I always have been much more of a shadowrun fan. Now I really want to break out my shadowrun novels and read some more.)
Classes that give animal companions generally stack with one another for the purpose of a single animal companion.
Ie. Cavalier (with mount) stacks with the ranger's effective druid level for purposes of determining the cavalier's mount (assuming the ranger takes the pet as his option). This is in place of him actually gaining a pet as a ranger, however, not in addition to.
Look, you asked people's opinions on your idea. My opinion is it is a bad idea to give some of the more powerful classes in the game yet more power, and specifically power that steps on the toes of the less powerful classes.
If you don't want people to give you their opinion, don't ask for it. If you want to be praised as a genius, stay far away from the internet.
And on an aside, should people be able to gain spell casting by "just practicing with it"? It is obviously a learned skill, no different than the proper handling of weapons.
I want to stress this isnt about game advantage. It is about the way our characters, in particular the clergy, worship their gods. I know the rules dont say you have to wield your deity's favored weapon. But as a representative of god, spreading his word and teachings, you wouldn't want to use anything else. You would use "the Rod and Staff" that the almighty uses. And that is the conundrum I face. I dont see how, in this case the scimitar, is a practical fit for all priests of a deity.
You saying that often does not make it true. And this obviously is about gaining a mechanical advantage.
If you don't see your cleric of Serenae using a scimitar, that's fine, spend a feat to get a different weapon or use a simple weapon. Don't like that option and want to change the rules so you don't have to spend a feat? That's a mechanical advantage.
Do what you want in your home games, that's your prerogative. But don't come here and try and lie to us.
It isn't that no one knows how to get the most out of animate dead economically, it is just that short of building a character around it entirely your options are pretty much "use your undead efficiently" or "use blood price" (or whatever that 1st level spell that lets you skip material components is.
And since using undead efficiently isn't that easy in a setting where you can't keep undead from game to game (and thus can't ensure you have good undead). . .
Its DC scales every bit as nicely as spells. And a DC 26 is still very difficult for anything that isn't specifically focused on will saves to make. (Your average wizard, for example, is only going to have +10 or so. That's 75% chance of failure. Fighters and rogues even less.
What did you do against anyone that had a decent Will save? Or even that didn't roll a 1, for that matter.
Given that slumber's DC scales with level, that it can be modified by feats and racial abilities, it isn't too hard to make a "decent" will save pretty meaningless. I'm pretty sure DC 19 (maybe 20) is doable at first level, that's dropping casting focused dwarven clerics half the time.
If the melee inquisitor / vivisectionist is having a tough time in melee, good, they're meant to. Those classes require a bit more creativity to make work as a melee combatant than just picking the best martial weapon and going to town like you would a fighter or barbarian.
But seriously, half-orcs can gain falchion as a weapon choice, elves get long swords, half-elves can have their choice of exotic weapons, and humans can use their bonus feat to get any weapon they want. Where's the awkwardness?
I'd probably go with dipping the cavalier archetype that grants power attack and another bonus feat at first level.
And for most games you would need to be small, but kingmaker isn't most games. Enjoy having a medium sized mounted character when you can.
And no, a battle cleric can do fine without high charisma but realize you won't be healing as much as most clerics (instead, you'll actively be preventing the party from taking damage by killing foes). And no, everyone does not need charisma.
Oracles, Inquisitors, Clerics, Bards, and Alchemists are already more powerful than the fighter. Why would you want to make them more so?
If anything I think I'd make a rule, let classes with all simple weapons take a martial weapon as a trait, and a class with all martial weapons take an exotic weapon as a trait.
The Sorcerer 7 / Eldritch Knight 2 would have 4th level spells. When you get +1 level of casting you advance everything casting related, except prepared casters don't gain their 2 automatic spells per level. (According to RAW at least, most DMs let them have their 2 spells.)
The epic level magus would not gain access to the spells from the sorcerer / wizard list but would instead use his higher level slots to memorize spells from his own class list with metamagic built in.
One thing I think would be great would be location / culture pdfs based around the real world. For example, a pdf about egypt, including real world information but also including information like what classes would likely be common (both paizo classes and 3rd pp classes). (For example, IIRC Pharohs were believed to be gods, so demigod classes would be acceptable for them, a significant portion of the religion was based around the dead and so necromancers would be more common, etc.) Basically a spring board for anyone who wanted to run a game with that theme. If you really wanted to go crazy with it, you could include crunch that support that theme.
Inspired by the comments here.
@Haskul: Warrior of Holy Light is an idea I'll look more into. Unfortunately divine hunter and oath of vengeance (the one for more smites) aren't compatible. But I don't see a need for musketmaster when I'm not going to be using a musket, I have access to advanced firearms so I'm using a revolver.
@Vehas: Pistolero and mysterious stranger archetypes aren't compatable with one another. I also don't need to worry about a double barreled pistol, I'm getting a revolver.
Okay. . . I appreciate y'all trying to help. . .
1) Holy Gun sucks in that it gives up smite evil. Compare it to a gunslinger 1 / Paladin 19 and the multi-class wins out every time.
2) Guns are everywhere gives gunslingers gun training at level 1 so even if holy gun was good (which it isn't) I'd still be multiclassing with 1 level of gunslinger.
3) Mysterious Stranger doesn't work with what I'm doing because I get gun training at level 1, which mysterious stranger doesn't get. (If not for the guns are everywhere aspect, this would be good advice.)
Does anyone have any good advice?
593. Because the Math teacher in this town sucks.
594. Because your DM instituted the optional training rules and no one in this town can train you.
595. Because your DM instituted the optional training rules and all the low level adventurers want you to train them.
In a sense that is worse then. When I first looked at the Mythic playtest one of the things I didn’t like about it is you didn’t feel ‘Mythic’. Sure, there were some really nice abilities, but there wasn’t any (or very little of) those uber abilities that made you feel on your way to standing among the best on different planes.
I'd suggest you go back to the mythic play test and draw up a character with 20 character levels and 10 mythic tiers. Now have your friends draw up characters of the same class with 0 mythic tiers. Play those characters side by side for a while and tell me you're not "among the best on different planes."