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

Skylancer4's page

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber. 3,076 posts. No reviews. 1 list. No wishlists.


1 to 50 of 95 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

Yeah, but they have to be up close and personal with specific conditions for it to happen. There are drawbacks. Essentially they are using the weapon in such a specific way that it deals more damage, if you need a reason to wrap your head around.

About the only thing that regularly totally ignores DR class ability wise, is the Smite from a paladin.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

Every time I hear someone essentially nag about "quality" issues from Paizo, I really wonder how long that person would manage doing quality work themself before something wasn't quite "up to snuff", my guess is probably no where near as long as Paizo managed.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

Where is the Rules question? The Rules forum is for actual rules questions. The advice, or general, or advice/suggestions/house rules forum would be more appropriate for your complaining.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

Or, if the group has optimized characters, it was a serious attempt at challenging them. CR is more an art than hard and fast rule.

From the APs our group has gone through, we really have roflstomped 90% of the encounters and the ones we didn't were usually just made worse because of party composition being horrible for a rough encounter. Party composition and system mastery make a horrible mess of premade adventures.

Not saying whatever happened is right, just saying all we have is a complaint on what happened from one person/view point.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

I've never been a huge fan of "roleplaying xp" as a significant reward. It tends to divide the players even more and often gets used as a "reason" to "favor" certain players when overall the point is for everyone involved to have fun.

Given the fact some classes just don't have the resources to be effective in certain situations or some character concepts aren't meant to shine at times... In your example, if the rogue is the sneaky assassin/combat type, he should be getting rewards for sneaking in and doing exactly what he was doing correct? So not only did she end up disruptive in some way, you rewarded her and it cost him reward experience in a way, no?

Encounters are challenges in and of themselves, I don't believe you should ever give major rewards above and beyond with the possible exception of the very beginning of a group to set the tone of "role playing is encouraged" and it should be given to everyone equally at those times. Some people aren't the type to steal the spotlight or especially outgoing, you are doing them a disservice and provoking inter party politics if you intend to use large "roleplaying rewards" just because others are disruptive due to "reasons" that seem reasonable to you.

Just a warning from previous experiences.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

The game mechanics very often fall apart due to "simple logic", again I would suggest the OP ask on the DSP boards if they want what what the writers intended to be clarified.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

@Op that always sucks when it happens. But you just need to remember sometimes the dice aren't in your favor and if you didn't have the potential for that kind of loss, it would probably not be as fun of a game.

As for abusing the race building "rules" I guess I'd caution you on that. Are you trying to build a "light" character that you don't mind dying just so you are part of the game, or are you trying to stick one to your GM? If it is the first, don't do it. If it is the second, I'd still say "reconsider" because you could seem like your coming back with an "ultimate" character for disrupting the game due to your lost character. Is it really worth pissing off the GM and possibly other party members?

If your GM is allowing you to make races it sounds like the group is fairly fortunate. Many many groups wouldn't allow that.

Just some food for thought on the subject.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber
deuxhero wrote:

Do Warlord/Warder/Stalker/Mystic/Harbinger with Sleeping Goddess "in-class" count as a "Psionic class" for psicrystal progression and detect psionics?

There are ways to gain psionic powers and a pool, that aren't related to class, so no unless it states it counts. I think even some of the psionic classes (AEGIS) have power points but don't advance or have a "normal" ML so can't take the feat psicrystal affinity.

As for detect psionics, the default is psi/magic transparency, it is odd that they would have creatures with just a power point pool (ie someone took wild talent to get a psionic feat like deadly throw) register, yet a 20th level mage without any ongoing effects doesn't register. Peculiar to say the least.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

I think you may be confused on how the OPs build works. The character build doesn't have flurry, which is part of why it can use unarmed strikes and natural attacks in a full attack routine. It is using unarmed strikes for its BAB routine and then "tacking on" the natural attacks as secondary natural attacks with the -5 to hit. As long as the unarmed strike isn't using the "limb" of the natural attack every available natural attack is available for use.

The bird can go in and wing slam/head butt/knee/elbow/whatever it decides to do (aka unarmed strike) as many times as its BAB allows and then do its claw/claw/etc. at -5 to hit as long as the natural attacks associated "limb" wasn't used. As a monk, who has special wording indicating that they can use other body parts besides fists, the bird has options.

The only thing that prevents the use of a natural attack when making a full attack via BAB, is using the limb to make an attack with a (normally manufactured) weapon. Example: If you have 2 claws on your arms with a natural attack routine of claw/claw, a BAB of 13 and a longsword... You can either claw/claw at full BAB or if you wanted to use a longsword you could swing the longsword 3 times because of your BAB and use one of the claws (the one not using the sword) at -5 as a secondary natural attack. The rules say, the limb using the sword makes using the natural attack associated with that limb "unavailable".

The only wrinkle that might occur, as others have said, is the feat for the claws. If they are part of the base characters form and not something that is "grown" or activated after changing shape, the polymorph school would indeed "overwrite" them. I haven't read the feat in awhile so I'd have to read it again to be sure.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

I have it as well, we don't use it because I also have the crit/fumble cards from Paizo which are easier/simpler to use. Bring two decks, toss on the table, no searching through the book/PDF looking for what happens etc.

The books are definitely more involved than the decks mind you, it is just a matter of mid combat keeping the pausing to a minimum.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber
FatR wrote:
Skylancer4 wrote:


The caster debate is old, stop beating a dead horse. PoW makes playing a martial class interesting not just a list of feats and essentially a hack and slash dice rolling machine.

Please enlighten me in what PoW ways maneuvers make a character more than a hack and slash machine.

I'll start with one: there are maneuvers that provide you with mobility that can be useful on adventure when combat music is not playing.

Anything else?

Doing damage, and imposing conditions and possibly letting you fly is well within the realm of what the druid's (and now also the oracle's and the sorcerer's...) pet can do. No, of course, the Path of War classes make you a way more interesting hack and slash machine. Your combat routine with them is more diverse than "I attack". Probably more diverse than the combat routine of your average original ToB character, where the difference between your best maneuvers and the rest was such that you generaly wanted to recharge after going through 1-2 strikes, unless you were a crusader - and you weren't because few people liked to be toyed with by random chance. But they still hack, and they still slash, and nothing else. If you are in this thread not just to hype Path of War you might have notices that I've tried to insert some non-combat utility stuff in every discipline precisely because of that (although not nearly enough of such stuff yet, coming up with ways of making swording useful outside of the usual contect is pretty hard).

My point of contention has been, why ask people to convince you to use PoW when you obviously aren't interested in it and it isn't what YOU want from the concept, so why ask people to do what can't be done? It has a lot more to do with pointing other people who might be interested in the material (that you continue to bash) because yours is apparently superior, because you made it, and it does everything you think it should do. When in reality it is a pretty good product.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

At the point you get to +6 "normally" you can afford a magic bow with the adaptive property. On the off chance you are worried about dispels or antimagic, there isn't any real limit on the STR adjustment besides the gold you want to spend on it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

It isn't a cleric, but a Life Oracle might be the right up your alley.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber
Perpetr8r wrote:

Drow nobles have no level adjust as of official published books

Drow Noble at bottom
In the stat block listed, notice that it is a CR 3, Cleric level 3 At most this might mean a level 1 set back on one class side but althought Jason Bulmahn did say their Cr should be 1 it was on a forum post, not official Errata.

I think I will focus on the weapon then, as for traits Warrior of Old gives a nice bonus to initiative allowing him to almost always move first.

Any specific weapon enhancements I should look for and why?

You will probably ignore this but... Just to make sure you are aware it exists.

Drow nobles for player characters were later rewritten in the Advanced Races Guide. As a player character if you wish to play a "noble" you start as a "normal" drow and take feats specific to the race to unlock the abilities. As the most recently released content on the subject, it would be the current "official rules" for playing a noble drow (ARG page 102 if you wish to look at it).

It was actually a rather intelligent solution to the problem. As a CR for monsters, the ability bonuses are less an issue as the single monster is up against a party of 4 so the write up in the bestiary stands as useful for the GM to quickly and easily make opponents (the purpose of the book after all). Where as the newer rules curb the front loaded power of the "monster" and spread out the abilities at a more manageable pace over the career of the PC, while still allowing the player to play the race. It kept them from having to issue errata on the book.

That all being said, the feat line is a bit on the intensive side (I'd be happy to list them and the prereqs if you need/don't have access to the book). It would be much less of an issue for you playing gestalt as you could just take levels of fighter to offset the feat investment and still get some combat feats into your build.


7 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber
Zourin wrote:

The most fun adventures are ones where every magical item is something to hold on to, because it's not candy. Players seem to have been cuddled into this belief that the loot has to conform to their 'builds' and that there is a magic Amazon.com in every city where Deckard Cain runs the registers and they can simply exchange the stuff they find for what they want.

Adventures are more fun when the players get creative with the tools they're provided. You don't need 'high magic' for that. No, you can't have that flaming holy two-handed oversized greatsword you specced for. You've got a pile of holy water, a regular greatsword, and a cleric that's bleeding out because you thought the chest in the back of the room was more important.

Um complete and total opinion. The default rules of the game, the premises the game is build on, is that you can have access to the things you think are "cool" for YOUR character. Not what the GM thinks you should have. More options to give the players choices that they can ENJOY. If you as a GM want to break those basic principles of the game so YOU can have fun, realize that isn't everyone's bag of tea and you are in fact not playing the game as they wrote it and it was intended to be.

Your own little mini tyranny if you want.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

Don't take this the wrong way but I feel bad for your players. Essentially they HAVE to keep doing what you want them to? No breaks to craft items, no breaks to sit down and plan things? Making due with only what you give them with no options to get "just that right item" if you don't want then to have it?

There may be times a group flounders or needs to be pushed, as well as times it is good for the plot to be on a schedule/timer. But all the time? No thanks and I know my group would feel the same way.

On topic, how is researching a spell OP and game breaking again? Oh right, the game isn't fun unless the PCs are vastly limited in options and what they can do...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

Well until the monsters realize they should kill your familiar anyways.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

One of the various incarnations of a Belmont from Castlevania, extremely effective whip combatant with numerous "utility" abilities/magic.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber
Vera Gemini wrote:
Yes, they would substitute Charisma for Constitution, as per standard undead rules.

Problem is, they don't.

PRD wrote:


No Constitution score. Undead use their Charisma score in place of their Constitution score when calculating hit points, Fortitude saves, and any special ability that relies on Constitution (such as when calculating a breath weapon's DC).

Cybernetics aren't hit points, fortitude saves or a special ability. They are gear. Quite often in games cybernetics and magic are antiethical to each other and cause problems if outright aren't even allowed to be combined. It would be quite possible that undead aren't even allowed to have cybernetics due to no constitution score. They could interfere with the magic that sustains the undead.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

To be fair, a dispel magic can cause all sorts of havoc when it comes to "permanent" spells. Ran into a caster who tossed an AoE dispel to debuff the party? Go down the list of items and effects to see what sticks around, lost a "permanent" spell? Going to need to do it again.

And this isn't even really "targeting" you out, it is just sound tactics for any intelligent/experienced caster who might be outnumbered by the party. Or any creature, summoned by a caster, who might have the ability for that matter.

I'm fairly certain our group would be fine with you having it, just don't expect to stop the party every time something happens and you need to redo the spells. And expect to "share" when there is downtime ;)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber
Paulicus wrote:

There are some examples in PFS scenarios of using bluff to disguise spells casting as "singing and dancing," though as others have said it's not technically 'in the rules.'

Unless you're in PFS your GM can just make up a simple system for it though. Bluff, Sleight of Hand, maybe even disguise are skills that could be useful, depending on how you're trying to do it. Silent/still spell metamagic feats and eschew materials may also prove useful.

I think arcane tricksters get an ability to hide spellcasting a few times per day.

There's a feat called Spellsong that lets bards hide their spells with a perform check. Another feat called Secret Signs lets you hide the somatic components of a spell with sleight of hand.

edit- you could also simply turn invisible and use silent spell.

Casting an offensive spell is still an attack and would break the invisibility I believe.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

Do a search for Oradin, it can be a very effective tank/healer combination. Probably more so than what you are looking at. Essentially using life links you "soak" up the party members damage every round and use swift action Lay on hands to heal yourself as needed, leaving your full actions/standard+movement actions free to do as you wish.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber
Combat Monster wrote:
Snorter wrote:

Sorry, but you do indeed provoke twice for casting a ranged touch spell while threatened; once for the casting, followed by another for the ranged attack with the spell.

See FAQ

Eh, it's official I guess, but still doesn't make sense. I could see it working that way if the caster held the spell and fired it off in a round after he cast it.

At any rate hopefully if I ever play a caster in a group that runs that way, the foe doesn't have combat reflexes.

Moving on, an attacker disarming while unarmed already prompts an AoO unless you have the Improved Disarm feat and the disarm attempt is done at a -4 penalty. It says that if you successfully disarm the foe, that you can automatically take the weapon. It seems the intent is that the attacker automatically snatches the weapon straight from the defender without excess issues, not that he stoops down to pick it up and prompt AoO's after the fact.

It's been "official" for almost two years now... And it sometimes surprises me how many people arguing rules questions aren't very well versed in what the rules actually are. Not to say we don't all make mistakes, but I would like to think that people are trying to be helpful instead of just argue what they think it should be in the Rules forum. This isn't an attack, I'm just trying to point out a good portion of this thread was unnecessary back and forth due to erroneous information.

No we don't know what the intent is, you would LIKE the intent to be that. None of us having this discussion helped hash out the rules when they implemented changes from 3.5. Intent is completely lost to any of us, what we do have are the written words in the rules book and FAQs on same type situations. You may not like the rules we have but that doesn't change what they say.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

The more I think about it, a good portion of that fluff could probably be packaged into a nice little book. Similar to the PFRPG Companions. Mix in the characters with story/backgrounds tied to plot hooks with places of power and NPCs with ties to the various traditions. Depending on how involved it is, do it in 16-32 pages.

It would be a good avenue to publish more fluff/setting material with sprinklings of crunch to entice those of us interested in such things ;)

For a book like PoW:E, I'm shopping for more options, more classes, more maneuvers and feats. More of what I got from the original book, lots of crunch for the players to pour over and tweak their existing characters/concepts. The expectation (or at least from my perspective it is) of expanding on the rules we got from the first book.

That isn't to say your "fluff" isn't good (what I have read is good and enjoyable), but most of it isn't going to mesh with what is going on in a currently running homebrew/home game. Thus it doesn't have much marketing value in such a scenario. Giving a page of tradition background and a page of crunch for it, means I am probably going to have to rewrite or disregard a page of the book to fit it into the game we run. It isn't that it is "bad" it just isn't "useful" for my game. As the world has been in play since 2nd edition, it isn't very often something comes out and can be transplanted right out of a book fluff intact, into our games. Way more often, it gets tweaked and placed in an appropriate place that has preexisting background. I would imagine that would be the case in games that haven't been running as long as ours as well.

I mean I'm not going to lie, I'm going to buy the book one way or another. And any others for the PoW that come out "fluffy" or "crunchy", but I know that isn't necessarily an option for everyone. Just like I subscribe to the companions, adventure paths and modules. I've supported DSP for a long time, our group enjoyed ToB and we will enjoy PoW. I'm just the type of consumer who would prefer my crunch and my fluff in mostly separate books. It is kind of like when you had to haul around books, I would have my rule books all the time, and extras as needed. It is much easier to flip through a crunchy book (in PDF form using search as well) looking for what I need than to read through a book with them both interspersed when we need questions answered.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

You also don't seem too enthusiastic about Paizo's choices on this book, which has been stated already a few times, meant to be "psychic" ala SP abilities and following the typical spell slot that is already used in game. AKA magic.

You can view it as a missed opportunity, but the reality is a long time ago they was discussion about psionics and they kept quiet about it as they knew no matter what the answer was, it wasn't going to be well receipted by a good portion of the players. Psionics tends to have two very distinct camps, either pro or against. They decided they weren't going to implement a new rule set that would further complicate the game and DSP stepped up to take advantage of it.

What makes you think if they weren't going to do that, that they would complicate the game with an all new rule set for alternate psychic abilities and Psychic Resistance that doesn't mesh with the current in game Spell Resistance? But does mesh with the spell slots and SP abilities? It makes absolutely no sense to do so.

The reality is, what you want isn't going to happen no matter what you say or lobby with. Accept it and move on. I honestly don't even know why this discussion is still going on (not even trying to be a jerk about that).

Also, it is your loss if you don't want to use DSP's material. Ultimate Psionics rivals pretty much anything Paizo puts out in terms of quality and balance (if not MORE balanced in some cases). If the material fits the bill for what you are looking for, you should at least take a look at it. And seeing as it is free to do so at d20srd... Well no reason not to right?


7 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber
Gwiber wrote:

Not everything is about balance. Or SHOULD be about Balance.

Sometimes the world is "sh*t" and bad stuff happens. Sometimes there are things you just can;t deal with under a normal circumstance.

Psychic power, ISN'T spell power. That's kinda the point.

You make it rare, and unique.

It needs to be different from Magic. Removing Spell Resistance from the equation goes a long way to doing that. Showing that it is, not, magic.

It is psychic.

Seconded that it is a bad idea to remove SR. This is still a game, and some choices should be better than others on some ways. Despite how YOU think about it, mechanically balance is a "thing" as they need to consider how it works in organized play and such.

Removing SR makes it vastly superior to spells. Not in a "sometimes you are unlucky way" but in a "every instance of this is better way" and that isn't good for the game as a whole. "Rare" is meaningless in a vacuum, in each setting this can be as rare or common as the setting makes it. That isn't a "mechanical" system limitation, like you are proposing. ANY "special" ability can be fluffed as "rare" or "unique" be it spells or psychic abilities or what have you. The mechanics don't make it "rare", your desire to see it that way in your game does. The mechanics still need to be balanced in regards to other existing abilities for when they aren't "rare" for other people's games who don't share your opinion on the subject.

Fluff or description of an ability makes it what it is. You could use two differing mechanics and call them both spells or psychic abilities. It doesn't matter as long as one isn't significantly better than the other so it is always "the" choice to make. The new mechanics are still "special powers" above and beyond normal physical damage such as smacking you over the head with a club. That is what "spell resistance" protects against, the supernatural, not the mundane (in the general sense not system mechanical). Whether it be spells or psychic ability, SR is the defense versus "caster" types as a whole.

The "fluff" makes it different than magic, it doesn't need this mechanical change to make that obvious distinction more obvious.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

Feral combat training with a natural weapon having an 18-20 threat range is theoretical possible.

FCT will allow the natural attack to be used in place of the unarmed strikes effectively.

If you can find a natural attack with 19-20 and then use the keen power from DSP for natural weapons you can push it to 18-20 (or improved crit feat, but that might take a bit longer due to prerequisites). Getting a natural attack to 15-20 might be difficult to say the least.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

A church or several, or another town that could offer said services even, probably would develop on the outskirts of said area. Chances are there would be a very well kept road to these places.

It would be no different living in a suburb present day and having to commute to the city to get hospital assistance. The heal skill provides the emergency treatment "in zone" to keep someone alive for the trip to where they can get more serious treatment. 10 miles is just outside the normal travel amount a humanoid in game. Toss them on a horse or use any of the other magical schools (transmutation for example) to get access to more mobile options (friendly druid with a super strong fast flying companion for example) and it becomes a day trip.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber
Cheapy wrote:
Take the Book of 9 Swords. Bring it to "Pathfinder", with all the nice things and warts from Bo9S.

You mean like what Paizo did with 3.5 when developing PFRPG. Yah it was pretty ugly... /pointed yet playful sarcasm


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber
Weirdo wrote:
Spell Combat wrote:
To use this ability, the magus must have one hand free (even if the spell being cast does not have somatic components), while wielding a light or one-handed melee weapon in the other hand.
FAQ wrote:

When using spell combat, can the weapon in my other hand be an unarmed strike or a natural weapon?

Yes, so long as the weapon is a light or one-handed melee weapon and is associated with that hand. For example, unarmed strikes, claws, and slams are light melee weapons associated with a hand, and therefore are valid for use with spell combat. A tail slap is not associated with a hand, and therefore is not valid for use with spell combat.

A hand-associated natural weapon is considered "wielded in the hand."

No the FAQ states you can use the natural weapon for this class ability. The two are not interchangeable nor does a FAQ specifically for the Magus class mean that it is a blanket rule sadly. It means for this specific instance it can be considered to be that way. Extrapolating anything beyond what it says leads to debate on RAI.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber
AmyGames wrote:

its not a house-rule btw

http://paizo.com/prd/magicItems/magicItemCreation.html

in the big chart, its under the special tab thing

Multiple different abilities Multiply lower item cost by 1.5

it doesn't even need DM approval

that's like saying you have to ask the dm if your allowed to craft an INT item

it doesn't add any power to the items, it just allows you to get the items you want, even if two of them share the same slot

EDIT alright, if yall say so ill go with the DM approval thing
its simply not worth discussing

Those are guidelines for GMs who are interested in creating other magical items. They even say that prices resulting from the charts should be compared to existing items before deciding on a final price. Guidelines are not hard and fast rules.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

I'm a little surprised no on mentioned the Oradin. Granted it multi classes into oracle but it is very effective at what it does. Basically you "tank" by absorbing the other party members damage through the life link from life oracle. You use your swift action to LoH yourself which allows you your full round actions still.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber
Prince of Knives wrote:
Dualistic is back to +1 because that sets it as being essentially equivalent to what the Soulknife pays for the ability. The ability to pass the weapon around is being addressed, and we very definitely appreciate the catch.

That is a very very bad reason to price it so low, you are looking at it in a vacuum which isn't good design practice. The soulknife's weapon is what the entire class is based around. When all your class abilities revolve around a weapon, you should get a break. It is essentially what you "do" after all. Giving that to every other class, cheapens what the soulknife has going for it, especially when you make it available so cheaply. A simple "+1" isn't what a soulknife "pays" for the ability, lack of feats, spells, and various other class abilities that it DOESN'T get are what the soulknife pays for that benefit. All those things that another class will get and then some, by making this class ability available for an inexpensive item enhancement. A soulknife doesn't get to cherry pick weapon enhancements, it has a list of available choices, there are restrictions. A soulknife doesn't get to add enhancements that cost a flat gold rate, they aren't on the list.

Your reasoning for the price is flawed, the cost of the ability really needs to be higher, you honestly cannot expect a comparison of class levels invested to equal out to a +1 ability. Not to mention the "fragile" drawback is essentially not a drawback (how many DMs actually sunder weapons on PCs regularly?).

The closest prices I can suggest for comparison would be the crystalline focus items and the one legendary weapon that DSP has published that grants the ability to create a mindblade.

D20srd wrote:

Crystal Hilt

Aura faint psychokinesis; ML 3rd (+1), 6th (+2), 9th (+3)
Slot weapon; Price 11,200 gp (+1), 44,800 gp (+2), 100,800 gp (+3); Weight 2 lbs.
DESCRIPTION

A crystal hilt looks like a crystalline sword with no blade and comes in light, one-handed, and two-handed varieties. A soulknife, or anyone else with the ability to manifest a mind blade, channels their mind blade through the crystal hilt when summoning it. This does not otherwise alter the action needed to summon a mind blade, the summoner must simply be wielding the crystal hilt and choose to manifest the mind blade through the hilt.

Crystal hilts have 45 hit points and a hardness of 15.

When a mind blade is manifested in this fashion, the enhancement bonus and the maximum enhancement bonus of the mind blade is increased by the enhancement bonus of the crystal hilt, although any enhancement bonus above +5 is lost.

Characters wielding two mind blades only gain the benefit on the mind blade channeled through the crystal hilt. Multiple crystal hilts would be needed to affect multiple mind blades.

Throwing a mind blade while wielding a crystal hilt does not require the crystal hilt be thrown. If forming your mind blade into two blades, only one is altered by the crystal hilt unless you are wielding two crystal hilts.

Crystal hilts may only be made with a +1, +2, or +3 enhancement bonus.

Just adding a +1 to a single weapon is priced at 11k, up to +3 being 100k. You're granting another whole weapon mimicking the first weapon for what? 42k at the most?

I would suggest asking Jeremy what they did for the "formula" for those and see what he says about pricing the soulknife ability as a weapon enhancement. I know he is busy with Ult Psi and all (I contributed to the DSP kickstarter and he sends out updates religiously), but it can't hurt to have some feedback from a person who consistently puts out quality material.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

I'm not sure that you get to "stack" the penalties from one into another. If you make a successful attack, you spend two uses of the Touch of Corruption so both the poisoned greatsword and the cruelty go through. Those three would go "off" at the same time, weapon damage, poison (save) and touch of corruption (save). Then as you have met the requirements for the feat (damage being dealt with power attack), you can make an intimidate check (with possible modifiers from the weapon damage result).

At best, there is an "attack resolution phase" and a "damage phase" to deal with. I've not seen an example where damage is split up and one type of damage cascades into the next in a favorable manner like you are asking about. The attack happens, damage is applied and after that point penalties are taken into account.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

@Extra question: nothing says you cannot, in a core rule book game no PC has a natural attack innately to gain the feat. Obviously the game has expanded since then so RAW as long as you can fulfill the requirements you can take the feat. In the end it is up to the GM as always though.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

I second the Green Ronin skill based psychic class even if it was 3.5 (it was easy enough to convert over), it was based on the abilities doing non lethal damage when you used them. It was found in both the Advanced Players Handbook and the Psychic Handbook (I believe?).


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber
Ken Pawlik wrote:

@Ssalarn: I'm still watching the Magic of Incarna playtest, don't worry! I think a noble Vizier will be bedeviling (be-angeling in this case?)our villains in my Way of the Wicked campaign this weekend. Hopefully I'll have some useful playtest data for you.

@Prince of Knives: I don't envy ErrantX his work on the Path of War or yours on the project you've been hired for. The Tome of Battle is both reviled and beloved; working to keep fans of the Bo9S happy as well as drawing in new fans is more stress than I would want to take on. In it's current incarnation, PoW isn't working for me, but hopefully I'm in the minority. I generally remain silent about things I don't like, but I really want to like the PoW. The author clearly loves the subject. The concept is great. The writing is tight. Some of the maneuvers are awesome and evocative. It addresses the caster/non-caster disparity and gives martial characters some much needed fun stuff to do. But... I want a rules module to work relatively seamlessly within the PFRPG core rules without having to either convert the rules module to fit my game table or explain to my players why we're rolling opposing rolls to cause an opponent to fall prone, as a general example, rather than using CMB vs CMD as we usually would. I don't want to belabor my point, I can concede that this nitpick may just be me, so I won't clutter the thread further about this particular subject.

@Anguish: I will respond to your PM. I thought it was sweet that someone that goes by "Anguish" was concerned about my distress :-)

I just want to point out, using a skill in an "opposed roll" in combat is something that exists in PFRPG. Escape Artist in a Grapple.

The PoW crew has essentially expanded on that, an existing mechanic. It isn't a "3.0/3.5'ism"... It is a PFRPG'ism at this point if we're going to be honest about it. A CMB roll is still an attack roll, it just has a handful more modifiers that will possibly be added. PoW still uses the fundamental mechanics of the current Pathfinder rule set, AC, attack rolls, saving throws and skill rolls. A handful of the maneuvers use them in abnormal ways, just like the Pathfinder core/expanded rule set occasionally does.

If you take issue with that, well you are also taking issue with the system we are playing with. That isn't something another publisher can do anything about, all they can do is take a look at the existing mechanics and say "What else can we do with it?", "What rules are interesting, thematic, and can be expanded on?", "What roles in a party can be better defined and/or improved on that hasn't been done before?", etc.

PFRPG set the precedent to allow skills in combat situations in the current rule set, PoW is just taking that a 5' further.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

I think the point being made is that for dealing with numerous characters/NPCs "preallocation" is more work than just marking off points as the character uses their abilities. For one or two characters it isn't bad, but if you are in charge of a handful of wizard characters who aren't just seeing action once off, it is more work than just marking off a few points for a little boom or a bunch of points for a big boom.

That index card might last one encounter for a mid level prepared caster versus weeks of the campaign for a psionic character just tracking points spent (assume ink). Is it hard to track spells? Not really, especially because most of use do it regularly. But I agree tracking PPs is easier than planning out spells, basic napkin math essentially. You'll spend more time pouring over your spell book choosing spells in the long run. The downside is less utility in comparison to the wizard.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

Debatable.

Polymorph Subschool wrote:
While most of these should be obvious, the GM is the final arbiter of what abilities depend on form and are lost when a new form is assumed.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber
I'm Hiding In Your Closet wrote:
If you just want to use base Pathfinder material to create what an Iron Man analog would probably be in a 'typical' Pathfinder setting: How about a Gun Tank?

In a "normal game" bullet defection is pretty much useless, then you trade away feats (for a class that is normally feat starved) for armor training, in general it is a poor archtype.

If we're talking pathfinder only; Synth would be significantly more useful, have the advantage of being able to do what the concept requires and allow you to spend your wealth on shoring up the loose ends. The Gun Tank would require you to spend all your wealth to get even close to the concept and still fall short in many respects.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

The write up of the creature says "This armor becomes an icon of its perverse natures, transforming into a monstrous second skin over the husk of desiccated flesh and scarred bone locked within." And the only other references to the armor being off the graveknight are when it has been destroyed. Going with a resounding "No" to being able to take off the armor. Though you can still play with it a little bit, mithril full plate (or celestial) to make it act as a lower class of armor for some builds. Glamored property to make it look as if the graveknight wasn't in full battle mode. Various other properties as well.

It is probably better to think of the armor as the graveknight, the body inside is just a hp pool. Taking the armor off is tantamount to ripping the skin off a creature and in most cases would be inflicting significant damage if not out right killing the creature.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber
Cleric of Caffeine wrote:

Ok now that a couple of years has gone by on this thread & a bunch of archetype/class options are available.

I'm starting up a new campaign & my wife is really interested in playing an Ironman concept. My brain thought some type of archetype of Artificer from Tome of Secrets, but I thought I'd throw it out there and see if anybody had some homerun ideas/concepts?.... It'd really help me out.

Dreamscarred Press, Aegis.

Summoner, Synth archtype.

Those two give the basic character concept of a custom "suit". Aegis is probably more suitable and less difficult to construct and use.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

This really isn't a thread about a rules question, it's a "I don't think it should work the way it does" thread. Flagged so it can be moved someplace more appropriate.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber
MrSin wrote:

Oh, they use brainwashing now?

Edit: I should add to my point, doing evil doesn't turn you evil, and a large part of life is finding alternate solutions. Again, this goes back to gripes about alignment requirements. If they really will turn evil, you can just add a bit about how it can be compromising, but as is your just asking for alignment arguments and adding unnecessary restrictions. Leave it to the table, rather than set up an arbitrary restriction.

Any table that takes issue with alignments is already house ruling things about them regardless. They (the authors) are just following in the steps of what already exists and working in the established framework. Not quite sure this is the place or product to start pushing for changing the alignment system of the game.


6 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

So should the title of this post be switched to "Designer actually did their homework and the OP didn't"?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

This should be in the PFS forum. I've flagged it but maybe someone will be able to answer it before it gets moved.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

Strict RAW, unless there was some wording regarding a condition ending on the creatures death it would seem to persist through death (unless the spell/ability used to return the creature to life stated it cured/removed something).

As a house rule, we treat corpses as objects. One of the reasons why is it invalidates the targeting of many spells/effects (living creature/humanoid/etc) and so those effects cease to function.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

Gaining the Celestial Template doesn't change the HD. The magical beast 'rules' you are referring to are the build rules for creating a creature of that type. I imagine there are exceptions, but unless the creature is being rebuilt from the ground up there is nothing indicating the stats should be changed. Animal companion, Familiars and Mounts all have strict stats that they adhere to and redoing the stats makes no sense for at least one of the options. Familiars are treated as having a certain amount of hit dice, but their hit points are figured out in a completely different manner.

The feat does what it says it does. It grants the template and changes the creatures type to magical beast (if it wasn't otherwise, again familiar) to make allowances for what can target/affect it. The feat doesn't say rebuild your familiar/mount/animal companion to have these stats, it just says it becomes a magical beast. The class ability that grants the companion/familiar/mount still dictates the stats. You're altering a preexisting creature to gain a type, not creating a whole new creature using the general rules in the bestiary.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

RAW, it would, but I'd definitely say that wasn't the intent.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

A big problem with maneuvers is they are conditional, disarm doesn't work against natural attacks (and LOTS of creatures use those). Taking and investing in them just to not be able to use them... is a let down.

Also many manuevers are more 'risky' to use. You try to grapple and have a worse chance at success than just out right hitting the creature with a weapon for damage? It's a wasted action, no thanks. When they work, it's really cool. But they are less likely to be effective and often are less likely to work unless you specialize in them (feat investment requiring 2-3 feats over several levels). And worse, by the time you do that, many creatures are essentially immune to them. Cannot trip a flying creature, the big bad nasty that you try to grapple is 2-3 sizes larger and has a huge strength score, and of course you cannot disarm that dragonss bite or claws...And sundering the Big Bad Evil Guy's weapon??? Heck no!! That is money down the drain and treasure you are throwing away!

Most people want to roll the dice and see numbers taken off hit point totals. Disarming might be a good idea and a sound tactic but it isn't nearly as exciting as possibly rolling a crit. In that way, manuevers are almost an 'advanced tactic' for someone who doesn't mind playing a 'support' role. When it works, it might do wonders, but it is far from showy. And it takes a certain type of player to enjoy that.

1 to 50 of 95 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

©2002–2015 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.