A quick search didn't find anything concrete, so this is purely my best guess. The closest I found on d20PFSRD was this:
"Levels of different classes that are entitled to familiars stack for the purpose of determining any familiar abilities that depend on the master's level."
While this doesn't explicitly say you would only get one, many level dependent class abilities stack with each other (ki pool, sneak attack, etc.) Paired with the line "Your sorcerer levels stack with any wizard levels you possess when determining the powers of your familiar or bonded object," this makes me assume that while they probably didn't expect one class to grant a familiar twice, multiple familiars should stack as one.
I've heard that one argued (usually involving gunslinger attacks) and thought the consensus had generally agreed that since the extra attacks are made at certain BABs, they must be accounted for when determining attack order. I could be wrong on that one though.
Attacks have to scale from highest BAB to lowest, so you can main or offhand however you please if you two weapon fight, so long as you keep the BAB stuff in order.
So you could +6 Mainhand, +6 Offhand, then +1 Whatever-hand or you could +6 Offhand, +6 Mainhand, then +1 Whatever-hand.
Edit: And since you take penalties on TWF, you need to declare you are doing it right from the get go so everything adds up.
Sorry, I never meant to come off as sounding like DCs aren't important. I am a firm believer in using both imagination and high DCs (I generally assume most casters aim for high DCs anyways (don't shoot me for generalizing, I know not all need to)). I just feel like the imagination part needs to be emphasized, as I have seen people stumble around trying to be clever with illusions in all the wrong ways (forcing interactions with the illusions, using something not intimidating enough, or too showy to be convincing, etc).
Wizards and sourcerers are usually the best bets for this sort of spellcasting. Either one can really work, sourcerers have an advantage in that you will always have illusion spells on hand and will never be facepalming because you had one too few Mirage Arcanas prepared for the day. On the other hand, the Phantasm sub-school has a really nifty 8th level ability whereas I don't recall any illusion heavy bloodlines that weren't focus on shadows.
Edit: You mentioned the Veiled Illusionist archetype, I believe there is a prestige class called that also. It might be worth looking at.
Orfamay Quest wrote:
I once witnessed a monster lose a fight because the wizard started using illusiory walls after he ran out of real wall spells. Imagination really does equate to 3/4 of what the spells can do.
I would go through the list of illusion spells and mark down a list of fun spells followed by what they can do. Then if you run into a situation where you need something nifty, check your list for what can suit your parameters.
I hope this helps.
Edit: Rereading what you responded, I'm not sure how you could create the effects via a single spell. Using Hal. Terrain or Mirage Arcana might suitably spook an army, especially if you pair it with multiple uses of Ghost Sound (yay cantrips!). A ring of invisibility or multiple castings of the spell could help you get around and keep dropping spells (or you could hide in the fictitious terrain). Ghost soldiers could be done by a rather easy silent image, with Ventriloquism really spooking them as voices come from their midsts. Haunting Mists does Wis damage and makes targets shaken, and as a 20ft radius spell it can hit a large group (especially if you use metamagic to boost its size).
Orfamay Quest wrote:
I have to second this one, as I had a campaign in which there was a conjurer who fell back on using illusions quite often. An army was once lost because he used a well placed Ghost Sound of all spells (it caused them to charge out of hiding thinking that the party's artifact bearing warmage was down (he wasn't)).
Rocky Williams 530 wrote:
I do believe he's talking about the extra cost for things like energy resistance or shadow.
As far as I know these do not add on a percentile to the cost of the item in the same way as other magic items do.
This sounds like the premise of a Phillip K. Dick story, but as to which one it is eludes me. Perhaps one of the later ones from right before he died?
<Wanders off to check his books>
I'm running RotRL right now and there is a gnome cavalier riding a wolf that I get to deal with. In the open shes a wrecking balls and the party makes the choice to try and keep space open for her. She has learned that sometimes she has to dismount or accept that she can't charge, which is something she was warned about.
I recommend what Silent Saturn said, try to open up the map and corridors a bit more and throw the occasional outdoor/open area fight their way. Just remind them that like rangers and paladins, they can't always get to use their nifty class features.
Wands of Phantom Steed and a few ranks in UMD, playing small-sized characters with mounts who can enter more places, or even having your mount use the squeezing mechanic are all ways around that particular issue. The -4 to AC for squeezing is usually counter-acted by the Mounted Combat feat, and mechanically, there's really not that many places you can't squeeze a combat trained horse into.
Personal opinion here: Not a fan of wand summoned phantom steeds in combat, 18 AC and only 12 HP are not worth the effort to me.
Small sized characters are fun when mounted, that is true. But for all the medium characters they have to deal with squeezing (-4 Atk, -4 AC and doubled movement cost(that phantom steed would have 14 AC, and could move 25 feet a round)), space issues, and the inability to use those nifty charge bonuses because they have to pass through ally's spaces.
But a very important thing about Mounted Combat is this: it requires a mount. Yes mounted combat is often better than Vital Strike, but not indoors/caves/tunnels, in flight, or simply when you because you never bought a horse because it'd die at the sight of what you fight past level eight.
If you find yourself moving a lot and don't have a build that allows for pounce, mounts, or "skirmisher shenanigans" then Vital Strike, while not great, isn't a terrible choice.
Sadly you can't get the best of both worlds here. FoB abilities only trigger when using FoB as it is its own special action, TWF can't be tied in to or play off of it.
Edit: Misread something in your response, so I removed my response to that.
Nope. FoB says "as if using two-weapon fighting", what you really want/need is the feat to be granted to you.
How do you mean "avoiding having to take double slice"? I assume you are considering the full strength bonus to offhand FoB attacks. If you flurry with both weapons, you get full Str on both attacks. TWF however, will require the feat investment. You're pretty much stuck either going all the way with monk or going the full feat route if you want all the extra attacks.
Sean K Reynolds wrote:
Our in-house, not-for-public-use Excel spreadsheet that handles most of the math and layout of building a stat block.
I see what you did there.
As someone who is looking at finally typing up one or more of his homebrew ideas in modules and/or settings this sort of clarification is fantastically useful.
Are you looking to post more on designer related subjects in the future?
Edit: Or should it be "designer-related"?
Considering Clouded explicitly limits your vision, I imagine it's a pretty hard one to circumvent. I would say limiting everyone else to your circumstances is the best option. Like Scythia said "Wand of Darkness" or grab anything that can negate/avoid those pesky ranged attacks from targets you cannot see. (Is it just me or does sneak attack really destroy Cloudy Vision oracles? (assuming you have one of the class features or magic items that extends SA's range)
Side note: I feel like I've read several posts on the forums saying the cloudy vision curse isn't that bad, but I really can't agree with that opinion. Anyone else's thoughts?
Edit: @Serisan: That's a good one, I forget Deepsight exists sometimes.
My personal opinion with the flaws is that while yes, some are worse than others, this is true with any archetype/class comparison. I do think that some will need clarification/restriction (dependency for example needs a narrowed down list to avoid a certain amount of ridiculousness (limiting "blood dependency" to "blood of others" to eliminate people cutting themselves and drinking in a pinch)).
I have to say, I really like both of these as options. The first definitely suits something like a bladebound/kensai magus or a swordsaint and the second tailors well to themes present in clerics, paladins and even witches.
This made me laugh way more than I should have.
I second the "genie" races (Sulis) as being doable if you're willing to allow the planar races. Fetchlings aren't too bad to pull off, especially considering that aside from their eyes they look rather like they are sick humans. Some go so far as to dye their hair black or red.
The ARG lists Tengu as a not uncommon species often living in ghettos near/in larger human settlements. My view is that if people can stand to live with anthropomorphic crows, they can stand to live near other non-monstrous humanoids.
Gark the Goblin wrote:
As a citizen on Minnesota I was unbelievably cheerful this morning after I awoke to find out that we voted no to both constitutionally banning gay marriage and requiring ID for voters (I have a 91 year old grandmother who would be sorely inconvenienced by a solution to a problem that is largely nonexistent).
Maybe the next step will be to removing the legislature that still bans gay marriage and actually allow those friends of mine who are to vote.
If we are including all the resources at their disposal then yeah, it does narrow it down quite a bit. But then again, what time period? That does make all the difference considering neither's rule overlapped the other.
Assuming some crazy vortex ripped both them and their holdings into another plane (Ravenloft?!) and they ended up duking it out, I would agree that the odds swing closer towards Karzoug. Yes I know Tar-Baphon had hordes of orcs, but how many is that? Karzoug had armies of enhanced giants at his disposal (and disposal is a very accurate word here).
Then again, being wizards they could probably sidestep the opposing forces and bring things face to face if need be. What's the worse that could happen? The Whispering Tyrant loses and reforms near his phylactery having learned his opponents weaknesses? (Albiet, this does give Karzoug some time to make strategical decisions/locate the phylactery while Tar-Baphon's forces are leaderless)
In retrospect the "+" in 24+ does account for exceeding the CR max that Pathfinder has, but after you've been awake for 18 hours you tend to miss certain small details like that. It also doesn't help that while Leska is ridiculous BBEG (cleric 3/wizard 3/mystic theurge 10/hierophant 1/archmage 5/loremaster 2/ thaumaturge 4 with regenerate 30), I always imagined Tar-Baphon as being well past her. The not having epic rules still throws me off, even having played Pathfinder for 2 years now.
The Wiz5/M.Spec10/Arch5 my buddy ran in my WotBS campaign what heading down this sort of path and no doubt would have done something along those lines had the campaign continued past level 20.
As a special treat to my players I will have him in place of the Runelord of Sloth when/if the party makes it to/through my post RotR plans.
@Rathendar: Only 24? This disappoints me. Leska weighed in at a hefty CR 28.
The Tyrant by far. He died at the hands of a god, then managed to come back as a lich after the fact. Following that he held off numerous crusades until an artifact wrecked him and then he was still so powerful that the best anyone could do was imprison him.
Karzoug on the other hand had more of his power simply from ruling a country and enslaving giants.
I would guess that both are level 20 wizards, but Tar-Baphon is a lich and probably had some mythic powers happening too, whereas Special K sits middle of the pack among Runelords (http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2mcd6?Runelord-Sorshen-Spoilers#7).
Edit: I also forgot that the Tyrant killed Arazni, the herald of Aroden.
'Core rules on Phantasm pg 211' wrote:
The fact that True Seeing allows you to see through illusions and that phantasms are entirely within the minds of the target makes me believe that Ughbash is correct.
My play group(s) seem to hover around the 6 round mark for combat ending or being in the wrap-up stage. When the party hits into those optimal situations (no ambushes, clear battlefield, no huge distance) the battles can be over in 2-4 (huzzah for barbarians and cavaliers?). I lean towards the 3 round mark being a good idea to aim for when building a fight and sometimes wonder if developers either only occasionally use that rule of thumb or use it when picking the monsters, but forget about other modifiers (terrain, length of the adventuring day, etc.)
At the same time though, this short fight concept can ignore what an enemy caster can do to the party. A single entangle spell cast in a recent 3.5 session added 13 rounds to the fight.
The longest fight before that involved the party fighting an unholy red dragon wearing a mask woven from 3 litches, with a guard of polearm wielding gargoyle rogues nested atop his clock tower. That took 15 rounds in game and over 6 HOURS of real time and that was with a party of a Conjurer/M.Spec/Archmage, Warmage, Rogue, Archer/OotBI, and a Cleric/Warlock/Eld. Disciple.
Sometimes things never go the PC's way, sometimes your players actually work in unison.
I have must have missed that bolded bit god only knows how many times. Now I feel stupid for bringing it up.
In the last 3.5 campaign I was in I ran a Wizard 4/Warblade 6/Jade Phoenix Mage 10. Extended Wraith Strike + Greater Invisibility leading into a next turn Avalanche of Blades and Lightning Recovery to keep it going on that first miss. I took down two different BBEGs by hitting them 11+ times with a greatsword.
I miss that character...
Anyways, I take issue with DA not affecting guns that are within their touch range, but boosting ones past that point.
"I can't hit you in your weakspot when you're within 20 ft of me, but by the gods when I finish backpedaling you will suffer!"
I would think that a Lore Warden would have a decent shot at being a swashbuckler, just a more intelligent one. You're almost certainly playing a LW as a Dex/Int build. You can disarm, trip, and dirty fight to your heart's content while possibly working towards going into Duelist.
Skills are still a bit of an issue, but if you were oh, say, a human with 14 Int and were willing to put your favored class points into skills you would be getting 6/level with an additional 2 for Int based skills.
I find myself making frequent use of phone apps to reference. Even with prep and owning all the hardcovers, there is often just too much going on in most sessions to cover adequately without killing off a small forest for notes and printouts.
Also, keep in mind that your players can't see the stat block. If you do something wrong, they won't know. Focus on making the fight fun instead of perfectly using the monsters.
This should be in big letters inside the cover of every AP, with a footnote stating "*Unless likely to TPK"
Regenerating creatures cannot be killed by while their regeneration is active, someone would need to suppress it with whatever overcomes it (fire, acid, etc.) for the kill to be possible.
For the concentration checks, I've heard this two ways:
B) Make one concentration check using all the modifiers added together (so a defensive grappled casting would be 15+twice spell level+grapplers CMB).
I favor A as the casting rules list the concentration situations separately.
As for your grappling situation, it's a perfectly valid tactic. If you don't want to deal with letting the monk feel useful/necessary every fight, toss in some larger opponents, some flying opponents, some opponents who are on fire, etc. I recommend you give them chances to use the tactic, but don't be afraid to make them try for it slightly,
It is possible he was just referring to the increased concentration check that all spells castable in grapple get.
Rise of the Runelords Anniversary Edition is great, the group I am DMing is only into book 3, but are having a grand time. We've had no deaths, but enough close calls and scary situations to keep the PCs alert and interested.
Carrion Crown had a great premise, but in my opinion it starts to fall apart the farther you go through it. If you play the books as individual modules they are interesting and fun, but otherwise it's a lot of "your princess is in another castle/follow the ever distant villain" crap. Also, this can be a rough one for less experienced/optimized groups. We played through the first two books and had six deaths among four players before they finished book 1. The only reason two people survived the final fight was because one ran away and hid for part of it while the other two who were still alive fought on, only for the coward to return in time to let off a single magic missile.
I've heard good things about Jade Regent, but have not read my copies as I passed them to someone else who intends to run it.
As for non-Paizo APs: I've been through War of the Burning Sky twice, once as DM and once as a player. It was quite fun, but occasionally had frustrating moments for the DM and/or player when it came to information the party could/would miss. If you run this, read through the beast of a book once and take lots of notes.
By large range weapons do you mean "Ranged weapons that are large sized? If so, yes. Here is the rules text from d20pfsrd.
"Inappropriately Sized Weapons: A creature can't make optimum use of a weapon that isn't properly sized for it. A cumulative –2 penalty applies on attack rolls for each size category of difference between the size of its intended wielder and the size of its actual wielder. If the creature isn't proficient with the weapon, a –4 nonproficiency penalty also applies."
Edit: This also applies though:
"The measure of how much effort it takes to use a weapon (whether the weapon is designated as a light, one-handed, or two-handed weapon for a particular wielder) is altered by one step for each size category of difference between the wielder's size and the size of the creature for which the weapon was designed. For example, a Small creature would wield a Medium one-handed weapon as a two-handed weapon. If a weapon's designation would be changed to something other than light, one-handed, or two-handed by this alteration, the creature can't wield the weapon at all."
I am not 100% sure on this, but it is probably that a +X bonus from a trait is considered a +X trait bonus, which means they would not stack (such as how enhancement bonuses and morale bonuses do not).
Edit: I took so long to hit post that I got ninja's. I also found the rules excerpt:
"Many traits grant a new type of bonus: a “trait” bonus. Trait bonuses do not stack—they’re intended to give player characters a slight edge, not a secret backdoor way to focus all of a character’s traits on one type of bonus and thus gain an unseemly advantage. It’s certainly possible, for example, that somewhere down the line, a “Courageous” trait might be on the list of dwarf race traits, but just because this trait is on both the dwarf race traits list and the basic combat traits list doesn’t mean you’re any more brave if you choose both versions than if you choose only one."
I have to say I find it a shame that the player dropped from the campaign, the most reaction the horror elements drew from my characters has been "Oh my god!" and a hand to the mouth from one of our female players (Ironic in that she still seemed to have some idea that she could seduce back Aldern).
As for the bearer of the Sword, that seems like a grand idea! We had a bard (daredevil archetype) who dropped and I keep trying to incorporate the character back in, but haven't figured out how yet.
You say they are in book 6 pf an AP? So many options then! With a highly caster-centric party relying on mass buffing you have quite a few choices:
A) Thousand Mook Swarm: This basically relies on you throwing a spread out group of lower level enemies to fight the team, with a couple keen-eyed and keen-witted commanders to point out who is the powerhouses among your PC's. Stoneskin can only shunt so much damage at a time, and a couple lower leveled casters mixed in can help screen/buff for the mooks (how many arrows can a hasted level 6 fighter fire off?)
B) As Tonyz showed, Antimagic! (Also known as, enjoy being a commoner mister wizard): This can be a good route for making your party have to react on their feet. A magus with Dimensional Agility and Spell Blending or a scroll can teleport near a wizard and cast Antimagic Field, then trip mister wizard when he tries to flee. Other options include Arcane Archers with Antimagic Field, you can shoot AMFs around the battlefield then. (Be careful with this though, too many Antimagic Fields can have such side-effects as rage quitting, table flipping, or punching-the-dm-in-the-face syndrome.)
C)Golems: Huzzah for magic immunity! Nuff' said
D) Talk to them: I really shouldn't post this last, as it is the first thing you should do. Find out what the sourcerer and bard aren't doing that is putting them behind or what specifically the others are doing that's putting themselves ahead.
You mentioned mass buffing, but how are actual enemies being taken down? Dragons and outsiders tend not to lose to a wizard flexing his well buffed arms (unless they die laughing). If the Wizard and Witch are buffing so much, how many encounters are they going through a day? How many slots are not being eaten up here? Is your Bard getting to inspire a bunch of wizards or are they summoning a horde of creatures for him to lead into battle.