Tormad's page

Per the strictest reading of the rules, the GM as a cohort is an NPC that follows you and is essentially your assistant. The player really doesn't get a whole lot of choice when it comes to what their cohort can do.

But alot of GM's just hand the sheet over to the player as that is less complicated than having another aspect to manage as a GM. And then it's like you're playing 2 characters at once and that is why the feat ends up in the too over powered to consider letting a player have mindset.

my 2 cents, hope it helps.

Color Spray is always a solid option at 1st level, and you can trade it out at higher levels.

Well there goes that idea. Thanks for the heads up Mathwei.

This idea will have to be saved for a homebrew game then.

also a very cool take on the build. No focus on the intimidation but should be over all better in combat.

hmm, decisions decisions.

Hey guys, looking for some feedback.

So I find this class extremely interesting and want to figure out a build for it. I'm going back an forth on whether or not it would just be better to play a straight inquisitor or not. Right now I'm looking at Cavalier(Gendarme)2/Rouge(thug)1/Cleric3/Grey Gardener X. Not particularly in that order.

The plan would be to pick up shatter defenses at 9 and enforcer at 10 as a bonus feat. Have a merciful weapon so I can intimidate people every time I swing, therefore making them flat footed to the rest of my attacks and get sneak attack all while debuffing them. It sounds like a solid build in my head, but I can't help but to feel like I'm missing something or making this too complicated. I effectively get almost all skills as class skills, though I don't have a solid amount of skills to back it up. My AC wouldn't be great but I would have some healing, and the ability to use a CLW wand. Thanks to Cavalier I could dazzling display as a standard action instead of a full round action, pile that on top of the rouge's frightening ability and I can frighten a number of people depending on my roll.

It obviously would come up short against undead/constructs since I couldn't use non-lethal on them, and anything immune to intimidate.

I guess let me know if this sounds fun, or if I'm being silly and should just play an inquisitor. And with it's somewhat awkward start up, would this be fun to play in PFS?

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

Afterthought question, would the rouges frightening ability work with the enforcer feat?

Guided helps alot but it is also 3.5 material. Without it you would not be nearly as effective. +27 to hit still seems low for level 17.

Lets see, a barbarian would have +17 bab, +13 str (assuming 36 str while raging), +5 weapon, +2 furious enchant, + 1 haste. so +38, or +33 while power attacking(or +38 on first swing if he has furious focus). He would be swinging for 2d4 + 41 and critting on a 15-20. All while having pounce, DR 11/-, great saves vs spells, Much higher HP, etc etc.

so +38/+33/+28/+23/+18 +5 furious keen Falchion(2d4 +41, 15-20/x2).

AC 37-41 (depending on dex)= 10 + 11 Armor (+5 breastplate) + 2 shield(force ring) + 5 defelection + 10 Natural (amulet and beast totem) + 1-4 dex + 1 luck - 2 rage

or with reckless abandon

+43/+38/+33/+28/+23 for attack and an AC of 32-36.

Lower AC but DR 11/- more than makes up for it.

A fighter would be a little bit better but with less or no DR and a much higher AC, but you get the point. This was all just off the top of my head but if you want a full build i'm sure I would whip it up without much effort.

TL;DR Guided is the only reason monk is competitive and even with it they are still behind. Full martial characters should still be quite a bit above you.

I'm going to suggest outflank and precise strike as the teamwork feats. You might also want to look into cavalier. It has the ability to give teamwork feats to allies as a short term buff.

A rouge or ninja as one of yours would match up great if you can be flanking buddies with say the cavalier or a fighter/barbarian/ranger.

I would also recommend the feat butterfly sting.

Have one of you use a 18-20 weapon and the other use a great axe or scythe. Have the guy with the 18-20 (or 15-20 with keen) set up the high crit mod guy for an auto crit.

Fun stuff

I am just not a fan of this spell as a whole. It is overall better than shocking grasp in every way. Same damage, at a range, no spell resistance, and has a save or be staggered.

I saw this spell yesterday with devastating effect by a cross blooded sorcerer.

It puts me at ease to see it can't be used with spellstrike though. =D.

I had to download it to read it, i couldn't see it on google docs.

Great read.

Dot.

In the Tome of secrets there is a pathfinder version of Artificer. It's been awhile since I've read it or it's 3.5 counterpart. Again it is 3rd party so you'll have to pass it by the

Tome of secrets

Here it is online.

Hope this helps.

I have a follow player that is using it the second way, and is using the body in rounds per day that can be separated up.

I believe it is the other way around so its once per day for X rounds and one person per round. But I'm not gonna get anywhere on that because its up to the GM to change that, and as the GM is his GF that's not going to happen. -.-

Oh well what can you do.

I disagree, every other ability that says you can split up the rounds per days says so specifically. I believe it is only usable once per day and it lasts X number of rounds, or less if you choose.

My question is can it be used to heal multiple people in one round?

... Once per round, if you pass through a living allied creature’s square or the ally passes through your square, it heals 1d6 hit points + 1 per oracle level....

So does that mean you can only heal one person per round or if everyone stood in a line = move speed and you walked through them, you could heal each of them for that amount in a single round?

The Original file is working very nicely, thank you. I failed my check to notice it in the original post.

Thanks again, this will be a fun tool to play around with.

Awesome spread sheet. Quick question though, when I download the sheet and run it on my local copy of excel it does not like the L column. It works in google docs but doesn't work in excel 2010.

Is anyone else having this issue?

I would assume the master since it is still the master's spell. The Familiar is just delivering it.

I would say Druids and Paladins absolutely can't as they existed in core. Oracles I would say would be able to if they were 12th level.

And Since witches are arcane technechly I wouldn't allow it. Samsaran clerics/oracles yes, anything else no because it would be borrowing the remove disease spell from witches spell list.

Just my opinion though.

Thanks again guys. Delta that is a good way of putting it, and what I will pitch to the DM as the purposed solution.

So I am looking at making a water specialist wizard. This means my "opposed school" would be fire. My question is, what if a spell is on both lists? (eg on my water list as well as the fire list, such as the summon monsters?)

I could see the justification that it would cost 2 spells slots if I wanted to summon a fire elemental but that doesn't quite fit with the rest of the rules.

Thanks ahead of time for the help.

The -2 CR you see is most likely the Minus you apply to say a kobold Barbarian 4 would be CR2, Adding the template should take it back to CR4. Likewise if the barbarian was level 2 instead it would be CR 1/2 not CR 0.

they are CR 1/4, so adding a CR +2 should take it to a CR 1 at least.

Yes you can. If you use the race Samsarans, with the racial ability

Mystic Past Life (Su) You can add spells from another spellcasting class to the spell list of your current spellcasting class. You add a number of spells equal to 1 + your spellcasting class's key ability score bonus (Wisdom for clerics, and so on). The spells must be the same type (arcane or divine) as the spellcasting class you're adding them to. For example, you could add divine power to your druid class spell list, but not to your wizard class spell list because divine power is a divine spell. These spells do not have to be spells you can cast as a 1st-level character. The number of spells granted by this ability is set at 1st level. Changes to your ability score do not change the number of spells gained. This racial trait replaces shards of the past.

Since witch is an arcane caster and has the cure spells on it's list so you can pick up a few of them. Also the Razmiran Priest archtype gives you some options but no actual cure spells on you list.

Edit: Ninja'd by Serisan, and yes bard is an option too over witch.

still epic thread.

I don't seem to be having any issues, using chrome here.

Just dropping a note of thanks, this will help if I ever need a good npc on the fly.

I personally like #2 but make it a once per day power. That way the players have to decide when is the best time to use it.

Have str minuses count against you, but bonuses still not help. So dex 18 Str 8, have them only get +3 instead of the +4 from the 18 dex.

BOOM!!! balanced.

As a DM I am excited for this material as a different avenue to making bigger and better encounters. As you have stated Players are already borderline superheroes. These rules will lead to some truly epic super villains.

I'm tossing around giving my players access to some tier 1 abilities, but for the playtest at least I am going to assign abilities and flaws to them as opposed to this being another avenue to min/max something ridiculous.

my 2cp.

Hey guys,

I'm looking for some help here. I want one of my last big fights of my current homebrew campaign to be against an avatar/aspect of Szuriel, the Horsemen of war.

I was hoping I could get some help for designing such a creature that so that it would be a memorable fight. I'm hoping to land in the CR19-20 range.

Any ideas?

I'm ok with the PC's acting first against non-mythic's but the extra turn seems to be way too much. An extra turn is what I would give a solo encounter BBEG to keep up with action economy of the party. I also believe this will bog down combat with everyone taking 2 turns. Its just a bit too much to give to everyone baseline, and so early in the tiers.

I'd be happy with just a light version, had to cancel my print at work today because it was taking forever on a laser printer.

Awesome undead and paladin don't really go together in my book but to each their own.

While yes technically an atonement would fix you for a short while ultimately I as a GM would rule that the act of becoming a grave knight so heinous that atonement would not fix it. Have you read up on grave knights at all? The acts that must be done to become one are some of the worst things a person could do, let alone a paladin. Not to forget that the act of raising an undead is an evil act (up for debate i guess) and you are raising yourself.

Also the graveknights armor is inherently evil and as that is where you soul lives, I'm not sure how you could argue being good.

Here just read more about them and them me in a compelling argument how they could ever be good, let alone a paladin. It'd be like having have lich paladin, or cleric of a LG deity.

no, all undead are evil and by the fact you cannot be a paladin and undead. Switching to anti-paladin would make more sense, but I as a GM would never let a player have such a powerful template. That may just be me though.

I see. So since it is worded slightly different it does make sense by RAW that it increases. The question arises that since it is a bonus and not a base natural armor does that mean you get to keep the bonus when you poly say when using form of the dragon?

I am not sure on this one as I assume the DD class feature natural armor you get to keep but the base from the draconic blood line you don't.

One thing to remember is that the natural armor from Draconic resistances and snakeskin do not stack.

This is due to the fact that they give you a natural armor, they are not increasing your existing natural armor, like DD does.

The same would apply if you had a race that started with natural armor, you take the highest natural armor you have, not all of them added together unless it specially says so. Also the reason an amulet of natural armor would stack with everything above is because it is an enhancement bonus.

Hey guys, looking for some pointers. I have a build I want to play in an upcoming game. A dwarf barbarian/inquisitor of Gorum. The key point I want is a decent raging inquisitor, picking up 2 levels in Barbarian for fast movement, and a healthy amount of rounds of rage. So far here's what I'm looking at.

stats(20 point buy)
str 16 dex 12 con 14->16 int 10 wis 14->16 cha 8->6

Anger Inquisition

Traits
-magical knack
-<open for suggestions>

feats
1: Power attack
2: rage power (superstitious)
3: Extra rage power (Moment of Clarity)
5: Extra Rage, teamwork feat(outflank)
7: <open feat>
8: teamwork feat(precise strike)
9: <open feat>
...

plan to take Barb 2 then Inquisitor onward. I am considering at 7, 9, and 13 picking up extra rage power 3 more times and get the beast totem line for pounce and some extra AC, also considering spending one of the feats on Extra Bane to make up for missing a few levels of inquisitor. I plan to use a Dwarven Waraxe so I can switch between two handing and having a shield.

Are there any other rage powers worth looking into? I'm not sure I'm sold on the beast totem line just because I'll get claws I won't end up using (unless I have to fight naked, which has happened to me in the past when I had a character with claws funny enough).

With my Anger Inquisition on top of my levels in barbarian, that means I should get con + 6 rounds(barb levels) + wis + inquisitor lvl-3 + 6 from extra rage feat. I want to say using most of my feats for rage powers is a cool idea, but I want to make sure I'm not missing anything obvious.

My reflex save is going to be kinda cruddy, but my other saves should be good - and they will be great against spells. I will put stat level ups in str looking at the stats right now.

Suggestions?

Familiars are quite nice. Do you use the Arcane Strike feat? If so you wouldn't be able to use that with arcane Accuracy, so that would be a turn off. The same goes for spell shield, as it using an immediate action.

Besides the three I mentioned I don't find any of the other level 3 arcana to be all that attractive.

So the final say on a heighten Deeper darkness or darkness spell is that it would need an equivalently heightened or higher light spell to negate it or dispel it.

Or even if the deeper darkness is heightened to say 6th level, it could still be suppressed by a 3rd level daylight?

Tormad wrote:

Ok just so I'm straight on this, let me give a situation and see what happens.

- I have an npc start off a fight by throwing half a dozen coins with deeper darkness cast on them to a bunch of points in a room. The starting light in the room is dim. So with this the light would drop two notches to magical darkness (which would be the case with just one casting of deeper darkness).

- Now the cleric casts her daylight spell. Would the light in the room go up to darkness or dim light? I assume in no case would it go up to normal light. What if the original light in the room is darkness, deeper darkness would take it down two steps but as magical darkness is the lowest you can go, would the daylight take it back up to darkness or would it stay magical darkness due to daylight only increasing it 1 step and deeper darkness takes it down 2 steps?

No matter how many points are radiating DD, the daylight will negate any of the area with which it overlaps, returning to ambient light levels. Within the overlapping areas, you won't even be counting "steps" up and down the "light level ladder" - both effects are suppressed, leaving you with whatever light level would be there if neither spell were active. Period.

Ok that's what I was thinking, but just wanted to double check.

Tormad wrote:

- Also on a side note, what effect does mundane light have on deeper darkness? If the room was originally lit by torches making it normal light, would the deeper darkness take the room down two steps of the normal light from the torches or would it negate the mundane light and take it down two steps from what it would be from natural light (such as that from the moon which would mean dim light.)

DD functions as darkness which says in its description that it prevents mundane light sources from raising the light level at all. So a torchlit room that's then subjected to DD will lose its torchlight AND drop two steps. As a result, DD used indoors will almost always result in supernatural darkness.

Very cool. Thanks again guys. So within the radius of a daylight spell would mundane light function again, since the two are negating each other?

Ok just so I'm straight on this, let me give a situation and see what happens.

- I have an npc start off a fight by throwing half a dozen coins with deeper darkness cast on them to a bunch of points in a room. The starting light in the room is dim. So with this the light would drop two notches to magical darkness (which would be the case with just one casting of deeper darkness).

- Now the cleric casts her daylight spell. Would the light in the room go up to darkness or dim light? I assume in no case would it go up to normal light. What if the original light in the room is darkness, deeper darkness would take it down two steps but as magical darkness is the lowest you can go, would the daylight take it back up to darkness or would it stay magical darkness due to daylight only increasing it 1 step and deeper darkness takes it down 2 steps?

- Also on a side note, what effect does mundane light have on deeper darkness? If the room was originally lit by torches making it normal light, would the deeper darkness take the room down two steps of the normal light from the torches or would it negate the mundane light and take it down two steps from what it would be from natural light (such as that from the moon which would mean dim light.)

Thanks again guys, I just want to make sure I'm crafting quality encounters for my players.

If you want to give the PC something cool, make the cool item something the eidolon can use, not the summoner.

There is a quick translation, took a couple minutes.

Rules for making a zombie are here. After you do a couple it will become super quick and easy to make the switch.

One thing to remember,

Domain Spells: Depending on the domain you choose (see below), your domain spells selections could either be really good, or mediocre. We’ll look more into domain specifics in another section.

Inquisitors don't gain the spells from a domain, just the domain powers.

Still always a funny thought, the dragon could alter self into a halfling but still have his almost 40 some strength.

I would assume "DD" stands for Dragon disciple. I am absorbing the build. It could be effective. Your mid levels 4-7 could be pretty tough.

This advantage is short lived. The other players will be able to get their hands on some weapons, armor, spell books, etc pretty quickly as long as they don't sit around doing nothing.

If he has no armor check penalty there is no penalty for not being prof with the armor. So he can wear medium or even heavy just fine, if you can find a way to get the ACP down to 0.

A couple questions. My party just left rickety's last night and are out making a name for themselves, and I was just wondering what cities I should be aware of that they could go to besides port peril and blood cove? I am not very familiar with Golarion but want to have options for the crew.

Second question is what port did your parties choose as a "home" port when they hit the first infamy threshold? I know mine is looking at Port Peril just because they don't really know many other options so this goes back to my first questions.

Thanks in advanced.

If you go Arcane bloodline that would net you a familiar or an arcane bonded item, both of which can be quite fun.