|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
I have thought about a sneaky wizard before. So an arcanist isn't far off. One thing the wizard has going for it is the shared skill with the familiar. Until the ACG comes out we won't know if there is a way to get a familiar, but I see that as a key class feature.
Personally I would drop acrobatics (between dimensional slide and other spells you shouldn't need it). I like to pick up UMD with an int item (won't be UMD'ing in an anti-magic field anyway).
I am coming across this late...have you already made the character? How is it working?
This is not for PFS.
Supervillan: I'm looking for a creative alternative to a Rogue PC...which sets the bar pretty low for combat effectiveness. ;-) Boon companion wouldn't do much since the Monkey domain grants a familiar instead of an animal companion.
I think at least 1 level of rogue is needed to expand the class skill list and trapfinding. Once you get the first rogue level, a second level get you evasion, BAB, and rogue talent.
But on the other side straight class druid keeps caster level up...which is pretty much a necessity if you are going the summoning route.
We just finished a mythic campaign. Mythic really lives up to the name.
The power jump granted by the first mythic tier is HUGE. Bigger than any single level in any class.
The first mythic tier is so significant that you will overshadow the non-mythic PC's even considering a 1 level deficit. Especially if you choose your feat and path abilities carefully. For a class like the Magus that can take advantage of the best of both the martial and caster paths it can get crazy.
I know this isn't what you wanted to hear, but if balance is critical at your table you shouldn't do this.
Mythic vital strike is all you need. Don't waste feats on rapid/many shot or cluster shot. If you go with vital strike then go musket
Back on topic.
I have been thinking a lot about the Preferred Spell (Heighten Spell prerequisite) vs. Greater Spell Specialization (Spell Focus and Spell Specialization prerequisite).
While we largely agree that Heighten Spell isn't the best there are some advantages:
-After Spell Perfection one could heighten for free up to 9th level spell/save.
-Persistent Spell is available at level 5. versus 9.
-Persistent Spells are still only a standard action to cast. Leaving you with a move action. Tactical movement is important in combat. Stay close to the Cleric, stay close to the other PC's you are buffing. Stay close to the martial's who will keep you from getting grappled and eaten.
-Finally, Spell specialization loses a lot of its value at high level - so ultimately becomes a feat tax much like heighten.
There are 2 sides to the story and there are plenty of reasons to go with the Gr. Spell Specialization.
As mentioned above Wish, Time Stop, and Disjunction are all SOLID choices that none will question..
But...for a little twist: Shades. It says: This spell functions like shadow conjuration, except that it mimics conjuration spells of 8th level or lower."
...so you can cast heal. If you have a solid divine caster then maybe this isn't a bid deal. Conjuration has a lot going for it.
I tried to find a good way to take advantage of the Mountain Druid's ability to shapechange into a giant...But didn't' come up with anything compelling. I felt like the high performing feats that would get me to 12th level with wild shaping would lose a lot of punch once I was a humanoid again.
2-handing a weapon on your turn then quick-drawing a shield a shield for the enemy initiative is cheesy. I know there are people who will argue tooth and nail that it is RAW.
I like the buckler and the 1-handed weapon option. You get the AC from the buckler as long as you don't 2-hand the weapon. So you have it when you are casting - which you can do while still wielding the buckler and weapon.
Archer cleric with the Reaching metamagic is fun. I am playing one now. It is feat intensive.
Just beware. As much as you plan to wade into combat I have found there is always someone in the party falling unconscious that needs healing. You will probably spend a lot more time casting spells than making attack rolls - especially as you go up in level. By end game all those combat feats will be wasted.
Arcane strike only applies to 1 weapon...so you would only get it once per round (because you throw the weapon and can't use it again until next round). Probably not a sound feat investment.
I played an optimized dagger fighter, with the idea that I could use it at range or in melee. Honestly, I didn't throw much, but the option was there. A suitably optimized fighter is just devastating - doesn't matter what weapon. Before long the weapon damage dice become practically meaningless as the static bonuses stack.
Since you are planning on ranged attacks you will have a pretty good dexterity - and will be able to fully take advantage of armor training.
The reason you don't see a lot of support for the thrown weapon specialist is that it is so hard to keep up with weapon enchantments. When the rest of the party is 11th level with their +5 weapon you need to have 3 or 4 magic weapons.
Don't forget it you want to put a lot of metal into your foes you can go the 2 weapon fighting route to launch a few extra each round.
Cleric of Erastil - favored weapon Longbow.
If you are eventually getting to the upper tiers of power something I have been looking forward to is the Staff-like Wand 'feat'. You can lay down a lot of effect for low cost.
Wand of Dispel Magic
There are a host of level 1-4 spells where caster-level, Save DC, or both matter. Obviously, only worth it for high use spells.
Making your primary attack mode a raged attack with a 10' limit seems like a recipe for disaster. My advise is to abandon the dart idea. There are plenty of situations where you will fight someone/something with 10' of reach.
I'll leave it to someone more familiar with PFS and Meteor Hammer to comment on the hammer.
That wold be good too.
To summarize: A pure sorcerer would be better.
For fireball damage sorcerer wins.Cleric has the advantage of medium BAB/HP, good fort save, and cast in armor. That is worth a lot!
Nope. As I said, personal interpretation.
Personal interpretation is that part of the premium cost of the amulet is that it lumps all those attacks together. Also, so much more convenient. Also, a single item giving the bonus (unlike 2 dual-wielded weapons).
my 2 cp.
I don't understand what you are asking here.
Let's say right hand is primary and is wielding a longsword. left hand is off-hand/non-dominant and is wielding a short sword. If you attack with both right and left hands you lose the buckler AC bonus regardless of which arm it is on.
Please explain what I am missing here since I have seen BBT on the boards enough to know you aren't a newbie.
Feat to consider given the number of touch spells is Reach spell. +1 level takes touch to close. I doubt you would have much need to extend much beyond close range.
Selecting a new smite target doesn't cancel the old one. only death of the target or when the paladin rests (death would probably do it too).
Wizard makes the easier build because of the bonus feats.
Don't discount cleric. One of the mods available is Construct Armor which I think is really cool. Unfortunately it isn't clear to me what you get and what you don't with it. If you wanted to do that you would need to go the cleric route to be able to cast in armor.
A Dwarven Cleric of Toreg (sp?) with craft construct would be very believable. I think there are a couple of ways to make channel energy work on constructs (one feat and 1 item).
I want to echo something said above. There is more to constructs than golems. I remember gridning through some math and found that Terracotta Warriors were very cost effective. Unsurprisingly you pay a premium for infinite spell resistance.
You can pile on by taking SF-Conjuration at level 1 and Augment Summons at level 9 to bring a lot of bodies to each conflict.
If you go the wizard route, don't go universal. What do you get out of that? You are going to want the extra spells.
I am surprised that Vorpal was left in Pathfinder. Most of the instant kill effects were replaced with massive damage.
Speaking as a player I think it takes more away from the game than it adds. You finally confront the BBEG and his head pops off on the second hit. Sure you won, and that is cool, but anti-climatic. I'm sure it messes with the DM's plans too. I picked one up last campaign (hadn't had one in 15 years of D&D) mostly because if the monsters (balor or pit fiend comes with a vorpal weapon) have it we can too and had the gold to buy it.
I don't think it should be discounted. +5 cost is fine and only on a confirmed natural 20.
The worst thing you could do is make it work over a wider range (not just natural 20) then monster HP won't matter. HP are replaced by the probability field of the vorpal proc.
@Torger - Great observation. Sword and Board is the best application for a vorpal weapon.
"A creature or object brought into being or transported to your location by a conjuration spell cannot appear inside another creature or object, nor can it appear floating in an empty space. It must arrive in an open location on a surface capable of supporting it."
this is in the header section - not specific to any sub-school.
Underwater? I would rule no change.
Doomed Hero wrote:
Being Ethereal would probably work too.
Reiterating ethereal. Has the advantage of being a core game mechanic. Not all GM's allow the material from the peripheral sources.
Editorial: the feat doesn't strike me as 'fair'. Kind of like the meta-magic that allows mind-affecting to work on creatures immune to mind-affecting spells (also one that works on negative energy).
Marc Radle wrote:
Ignore the flavor text and focus on the benefit.
As an aside the flavor text is deceptively true. If you Move (A), attack (B), and move (C) then the creature is making an attack(B) before it moves (C) and after it moves (A).
You are in the advise section, not rules, so I will post my opinion: you don't get the bonus per die damage. My basis is that it only applies to the spell damage, not to the precision damage.
I can see the basis for adding the extra damage dice to the sneak attack, but I don't think that was the intent.
The question is posted in the rules section. I think the relevant rules have been stated above. The rules don't explicitly cover it, so bit of a grey area. Ask your GM.
Personal opinion - go for it. Once you surmount the hurdle of threatening adjacent while using a reach weapon you have all the ingredients to utilize cleave.
Weapons (improvised or otherwise) need to be wielded - so that you are threatening - to make AOO. The Bow is being wielded, not the arrow. Wielding an arrow is not the same as drawing it as part if firing it. QuickDraw might make that distinction moot.
Shield Mage (Magus Archetype)
This isn't balanced. 1 & 2 from both lists are a fair trade. Getting the other two 'for free' is unbalancing.
BBT - I too think it is cool. But, I think it is very ineffective. I get that as a touch attack your hit percentage is going to be very high. I assume you have the appropriate traits and feats to avoid energy resistance. What are you doing to boost damage? 1d8+ cl/2 is great for a typical full caster, but not for combat character.