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

Umbranus's page

3,997 posts (4,324 including aliases). 3 reviews. 2 lists. No wishlists. 4 aliases.


1 to 50 of 3,997 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Imbicatus wrote:
Perhaps there will be new Orc weapons in the upcoming Belkzen book

I hope so. Such a cool feat and no and only one bad weapon it works with... what a waste.

Sure the bonus attack is better made with a two-handed weapon. The idea was to use the orc weapon expertise/enforcer combo to get free intimidates. I'd love it if there was a better orc weapon.

Thug: wrote:
Deal +1 point of nonlethal damage with the weapon.
enforcer wrote:

Prerequisite: Intimidate 1 rank.

Benefit: Whenever you deal nonlethal damage with a melee weapon, you can make an Intimidate check to demoralize your target as a free action. If you are successful, the target is shaken for a number of rounds equal to the damage dealt. If your attack was a critical hit, your target is frightened for 1 round with a successful Intimidate check, as well as being shaken for a number of rounds equal to the damage dealt.

One of the best combos to make opponents shaken. But sadly we get no better orc weapons.

BTW: I noticed that I can only use one benefit from orc weapon expertise at once so taking it multiple times isn't good.

Other suggestions to demoralize reliably? Later cornugon smash comes into play. But centering a build on something and only starting to get it at 6th level sux.

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

The orc double axe is the only weapon that can be used with the orc weapon expertise feat. It is a double weapon.
If I use the orc double weapon for two weapon fighting, does it count as one-handed or two-handed?

It's about this part of the orc weapon expertise feat:

defender wrote:
Gain a +1 shield bonus to your AC (or +2 if wielding a two-handed weapon).

It IS a two-handed weapon but used as a one-handed and a light weapon. So which applies?

At the end of my turn I should be able to switch it to two-handed mode (just changing my grip) to deal more damage with Aoos and to get the higher shield bonus. So it is not THAT important unless the GM rules changing grip twice per round is too much.

How viable could a build be that uses the hurtful feat and the braggart ability from the order of the cockatrice cavalier? And how would you build it?

At first it sounds good to combine dazzling display with hurtful. But depending on your success at intimidating it's not useful too often per fight. So you need another option to intimidate.


This is no full build, more some notes as what might work together.

Slayer 2/ Cavalier x
Feats: Orc weapon expertise (+1 nonlethal damage), enforcer, hurtful
Class abilities: TWF ranger combat style -> TWF, Braggart
Traits: mindlessly cruel

In addition to allowing me to use dazzling display as standard action braggart gives me a +2 moral bonus to hit vs demoralized opponents. Mindlessly cruel gives me a damage bonus while I have a moral bonus to hit.

That way I can move to an opponent, use dazzling display and make one attack. Even if I miss other opponents might still be intimidated.

Alternatively I can just attack. If I hit and deal damage I get an additional attack. So full attack +1 if the intimidate is successful. And I have several attempts as every attack deals 1 point of nonlethal damage.

Later I could add orc weapon expertise an additional time to get a shield bonus while wielding my double axe (it is the only weapon usable with orc weapon expertise).


Could you use the attack gained from hurtful for a combat maneuver if you WANT the attack to deal no damage? Assuming you want to use it every turn it could be bad if your enemy is still shaken the next turn.

Some schools have very strong school powers that are usable 3+int mod/day. Third mind mentioned wood. Earth school, for example, has acid cloud that deals a little damage and has a chance to make those within sickened. And that's around 6 times per day.

Sure, not every school has combat abilities. That's the trade-off you have to make.

I had a build planned for CC that used the OPs combination. It was water witch 1/alchemist X. I thought having a reliable supply of holy water and an option to use it might be nice in an anti undead AP.
But as our GM was fairly inexperienced and seemed wary to allow "complex" builds I dropped the idea.

I still can't see it as exploit. Unless, perhaps, I you try to make money by selling the stuff. But then you could try to make money by casting CLW on people.

Using it all for arrows is boring. I had a pc with craft (candle making) who stored lots of different candles in the quiver. Some, like insect repellant candles, were not only fluff.

@topic: GM territory. But I would say one thing I'm sure on: I would not allow to store ready to fire arrows in the larger compartments. Just bundles.

But on the other hand I treat quivers with simple, nonmagic, non masterwork arrows like spell compartment pouches. If my wizard can have unlimited sulfur, rotten eggs, live crickets, sand, rose petals, tiny hourglasses, iron blades and loadstones, just to name some examples, then the archers can easily have unlimited arrows.

Hurtful looks like it would match well with orc weapon expertise (+1 point of non-lethal) + enforcer. With every hit you deal 1 point of nonlethal damage. By that you can intimidate via enforcer and by that get another hit via hurtful.

Mark Seifter wrote:
If there are things you guys liked in ACO, be sure to write a quick review to let others know who missed this thread!

The one existing review isn't too encouraging to get ACO.

I think this is the threa I had in mind.
But this is another threat about it.

Here you should find most of them. And usually the site lists the source.

This is more or less the same discussion as the one about the question: Do you still threaten in full defense?
There, too was a lot of arguing about whether the ability to make AOOs is necessary to threaten.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
blackbloodtroll wrote:

So, now that checks that have been changed to use charisma, are now considered charisma based, would a Circlet of Persuasion, add to these?

Such as:

Skills changed to now use charisma.

Oracles with the Sidestep Secret, or Prophetic Armor Revelation, Reflex Saves.

PCs with the Irrepressible trait, making Will saving throws against charm and compulsion effects.

PCs with the Planar Savant trait, making Knowledge (planes) checks.


Yes. And initiative checks for PCs with noble scion (war)

They should at least reword divine protection to give +1 to the save it doesn't stack with as it does when stacking it with divine grace. Would still not help divine grace.

Bob Bob Bob wrote:

I bring this up because all the wizard familiars with poison I looked at cannot actually do damage (1d2-2, 1d3-4, 1d2-4) and will instead do 1 point of nonlethal... which objects are immune to.

Is that really the case? I thought damage minimum was 1 without it being turned to non-lethal.

Edit: reread it and you are right.

graystone wrote:
born_of_fire wrote:
Where is Fencing Grace found? Those feats are all from the Weapon Mastery revelation and could easily be changed to rapier instead but Herolab doesn't think Fencing Grace is a feat.

Advanced Class Origins.

Umbranus wrote:
I'd always rather dip daring champion than swashbuckler. But I do not like panache.

I'm not a fan either but Derring-Do is like Inspiration for Acrobatics, Climb, Escape Artist, Fly, Ride, or Swim so I'm pretty much planning on using it to buff my skill monkeying. It's like an int+1 inspiration pool just for physical skills.

That and 1st level dex to hit and damage sold the dip for me.

Good point.

I'd always rather dip daring champion than swashbuckler. But I do not like panache.

Bob Bob Bob wrote:
Never forget, that was the man who made a feat "point buy" system that made weapon focus cost 10 points and metamagic feats 5. Because weapon focus was supposed to be the baseline for all feats, and clearly all metamagic feats are worth half as much as weapon focus. I'd link to it, but there's a slightly passive-aggressive rant that replaced it here.

I could see that cost but then I'd make the metamagic only usable with one spell.

Chengar Qordath wrote:
Rynjin wrote:
Umbranus wrote:
In real life a thrown spear is no less deadly than an arrow. So even if we DID play a life simulator that post would be ... less than brilliant.

It must be true.

According to 3 very vocal people, SKR is a BRILLIANT game designer.

In fairness, he did put up a post on his blog more-or-less retracting the whole water balloons thing.

If you make a silly statement on TV you don't retract it on some backwater newspaper.

Edit: This is not only because I don't like the fact that some kinds of weapons get no support but that this comment by SKR was seriously offensive and insulting.

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Ascalaphus wrote:
@Nocte: the reason I think it probably won't be/remain allowed is that it makes Dragon Ferocity a must-have feat for monks, and that's basically the reason INA wasn't allowed to work with monk unarmed strikes.

And still power attack exists.

Claxon wrote:

There is a decent selection of save or suck spells, but relative to the number of Save or Suck spells there are far less, I guess I expressed my sentiment incorrectly. You are absolutely right though that spells without saves are favorites, or at least spells that still have an effect with save.

But I also wasn't just talking about spells, I was talking general abilities throughout the game. Personally I'd be happier if all save and sucks were removed from the game, but that would drastically alter the game and would probably be left to another edition of the game.

That would be a change that could really drive me away from PF.

As is mundane characters are to weak to really play and with casters I don't like all or nothing. I lost my hope that the caster/martial disparity will some day be fixed so at the moment casters with martial abilities and save and suck spells are the only playable thing.*

*Other things ARE playable but not in every game and not everyone likes it.

In real life a thrown spear is no less deadly than an arrow. So even if we DID play a life simulator that post would be ... less than brilliant.

Claxon wrote:
It is a Save AND Suck ability, and there is a reason you don't find many abilities like that in the game because they are so strong.

In fact there are lots of save AND suck spells. My witch had and used some of them. Frost fall (especially with rime spell), ray of exhaustion, suffocate, Terrible remorse, just off my head. A lot of spells have save partial and still have a relevant effect with a successful save.

Now for EE the effect is the save IF the witch spends a move action every turn. I don't like all or nothing effects so when playing casters I tend to look for save and suck.

Does it tell you that for every class, archetype, feat etc.? I don't think so.

Joe M. wrote:

Now, I expect someone to suggest a literalist-RAW response. If that's your thing, have fun with it. My main point is that the *intention* of PA isn't in doubt.

If you are attracted to such a literalist approach, though, you will have to admit that you won't get the PA boost on your first attack, since:

... to a total of twice your Strength bonus on the first attack and 1-1/2 your Strength bonus on the other attacks ...

Since 2x != 1.5x, fails to trigger PA boost under literalist reading.


But 1-1/2 = 1.5x for all but the first attack.

Rynjin wrote:
RAW you can act while dead too, what's your point?

That would a thing that should be FAQed.

"There's a FAQ I don't like!" isn't an excuse to pretend something works even when you know it doesn't.

In fact I do not know that. I know that games have rules and those should tell us how it works. In this case the rules tell me that I can be a large scion of humanity.

I would not use it, because I would not want to play a large pc (unless in some very special campaign) but it is the rule as written.

Rynjin wrote:
Umbranus wrote:

Forgot that.

Ok only aasimar with scion of humanity can become huge. Because per RAW non-human aasimar may still take that alternate racial. but apart from that most GMs do not allow starting large.

And it still was not rules whether the level 1 domain power of the grows domain works on outsiders. Only stuff that matters gets FAQs.

So, know any Large humans?

Scion of Humanity is incompatible with the whole "My non-Outsider side is Large" idea.

As I wrote above: As far as I know RAW you can combine both. You know My Mom was a giant and my father was a human but one of his ancestors was an angel.

Neither the scion of humanity alternate trait nor the non-human Aasimar paragraph state that they are mutual exclusive. And counting as a human you could even take racial heritage (giant-type) to back up such a backstory. Perhaps I found the next munchkin loophole that needs to be closed via FAQ ASAP lest the world breaks apart.

Dragon78 wrote:
Were is this original statement about slings and water balloons you speak of? link?

He made two postings shortly after one another.

Sean K Reynolds wrote:
I want my water-balloon-throwing fighter to be able to deal the same damage as a longbow-shooting fighter. Why does Pathfinder have trap options for some ranged characters?
Sean K Reynolds wrote:

Replace "water-balloon-throwing" with any of the following


and the complaint is no less ridiculous.

Some options are worse than others because the game actually tries to model that some options in life are worse than others. And by "worse" I mean "does less damage per round."

It was in this thread.

Mekura wrote:
I've played and DMed a decent amount, I've noticed that characters pump strength and grab a two-hand weapon seem to have minimum issues in games, or at least few in comparison to other characters. They start out with massive dps and great hit chance, they can generally one hit most things before they have a chance to fight back, and generally they make everyone else pale in comparison. And this is before you add in class features or power attack.

So you have a high strength guy with power-attack who goes first in combat (one-hit before the other one can fight back) and has lots of skill points (generally they make everyone else pale in comparison) without class features.

Could you elaborate how you build that one?
A fighter can deal lots of damage and can get two feats to start without being human. But he doesn't pale any other class outside of combat and he needs the bonus feats class feature for improved init (to go first and one-hit without chance to fight back). He also doesn't get perception as class skill and because of that will rarely act in surprise rounds at low levels.

I could try other classes but I guess not a single one can do what you describe.

If I assume that you just meant: He deals more damage than others and doesn't need to invest much, you are right. But casters are still stronger. If built right from level 1.

Craft yourself a hat of disguise or add the properties of one to your head item and all is good.

Forgot that.

Ok only aasimar with scion of humanity can become huge. Because per RAW non-human aasimar may still take that alternate racial. but apart from that most GMs do not allow starting large.

And it still was not rules whether the level 1 domain power of the grows domain works on outsiders. Only stuff that matters gets FAQs.

You can start as large (aasimars and tiefling can be of non-human heritage and then have the size the parent race has). Then you can add enlarge and I think that's it because of the following rule from the polymorph subschool:

You can only be affected by one polymorph spell at a time. If a new polymorph spell is cast on you (or you activate a polymorph effect, such as wild shape), you can decide whether or not to allow it to affect you, taking the place of the old spell. In addition, other spells that change your size have no effect on you while you are under the effects of a polymorph spell.

So even if you combine a size increasing polymorph spell with enlarge person the size increase would not stack.

The only chance would be if there was a non personal polymorph spell that increased your size by more than one step.

TL;DR If you start medium: large is the limit and if you start large huge is the limit.

ZanThrax wrote:

While I was on the side of the argument that thought the majority of these double-dips ought to work, I can't see what's so complicated about this FAQ.

1: Does an ability give you a typed bonus to something (like Arcane Accuracy, which grants an Insight bonus)? Then it stacks normally as any other bonus of that type.

2: Is it applying one of your ability modifiers to something? Then it doesn't stack with any other abilities that also apply that ability modifier to the same thing.

That's it. Done. No step 3. The only confusion is that which is being created by people who want to get the ruling reversed because they don't like it.

The problem is the collateral damage it causes to other abilities. Like now some are not sure anymore whether flurry of blows works with dragon ferocity. And dragon ferocity had to be reworded because of this FAQ. So it IS causing problems.

BigNorseWolf wrote:

The argument for it working had to resort to epistemic nihlism about a bonus being a bonus and arbitrarily decide what a source was.

Really from the rules there was not even a hint that something like agile maneuvers + fury's fall could be potentially something that was not intended. No riding the razor or something. The rules gave every indication that it works and is as intended.

Only after some paizo guy not in the rules team said that he subjectively thinks it should not stack was there the first doubt. For me at least.

TOZ wrote:
Umbranus wrote:
Now the one with twice the same stat is worse. That is stupid.

The PDT disagrees.

Umbranus wrote:
Considering that it's no big issue if the PC in question is a little better at something he does it for.
Actually, it is an issue when the PC in question is a LOT better for much LESS cost.

The cost is only a lot less if you neglect the cost of multiclassing.

Is PDT the pathfinder design team? If so do they disagree that someone who should get two ability mods and now only gets one is worse than someone who should get two ability mods and now still gets two (if different ones) ? Or do they disagree that such a situation is stupid?

Now the one with twice the same stat is worse. That is stupid. As I said if the ruling was that by stacking same stats you only get half the benefit from the second time I had lots less issues.
And multiclassing is a lot of investment. Considering that it's no big issue if the PC in question is a little better at something he does it for.

Why is it good to kill options and by that diversity?

1 person marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:

. Everything else that was stopped from stacking was never intended to stack anyway.

The question that remains is why it is intended that one can not multiclass lore shaman and inquisitor to get twice wis to knowledge skills while it is possible to multiclass lore oracle and inquisitor to get cha + wis to knowledge skills?*

*wis from inquisitor only applies to checks for monster knowledge.

Why is it ok to get two different stats to something but not twice the same stat? Why not at least give half the bonus for the second time or something. Why is someone getting twice the same stat (that doesn't stack now) far worse than someone getting twice different stats.
There seems no balancing in this only a knee jerk reaction.

The above is just an example. There are several cases where it is hard to understand for some of us WHY it is bad if same stats stack but ok if different stats stack.

Lavawight wrote:
Venom is not the same thing as poison.

After recently being told about the difference I try to use it. Even if I misunderstood it somewhat. Here is the wiki entry, something easy to understand even for non-native speakers like me.

wiki about poison, toxin and venom:
The term "poison" is often used colloquially to describe any harmful substance, particularly corrosive substances, carcinogens, mutagens, teratogens and harmful pollutants, and to exaggerate the dangers of chemicals. Paracelsus (1493-1541), the father of toxicology, once wrote: "Everything is poison, there is poison in everything. Only the dose makes a thing not a poison"[2] (see median lethal dose). The law defines "poison" more strictly. Substances that are not legally required to carry the label "poison" can also cause a medical condition of poisoning.

Some poisons are also toxins, usually referring to naturally produced substances, such as the bacterial proteins that cause tetanus and botulism. A distinction between the two terms is not always observed, even among scientists. The derivative forms "toxic" and "poisonous" are synonymous.

Animal poisons that are delivered subcutaneously (e.g. by sting or bite) are also called venom. In normal usage, a poisonous organism is one that is harmful to consume, but a venomous organism uses poison (venom) to kill its prey or defend itself while still alive. A single organism can be both poisonous and venomous.

Bob Bob Bob wrote:
I'll post the same thing I posted last night. Universal Monster Rules for Poison.
Poison (Ex or Su) wrote:
Poison (Ex or Su) A creature with this ability can poison those it attacks. The effects of the poison, including its save, frequency, and cure, are included in the creature's description. The saving throw to resist a poison is usually a Fort save (DC 10 + 1/2 poisoning creature's racial HD + creature's Con modifier; the exact DC is given in the creature's descriptive text). Poisons can be removed through neutralize poison and similar effects.
Bolding for emphasis. So without some exception to this rule, the snake must make an attack to use its poison. Handle Animal doesn't help you because it doesn't bypass the rule that the snake has to attack something.

That alone would not be a problem because it could attack the container you use for milking. Like a dried animal bladder.

The worst thing about evil eye, for me, was that often times when I wanted to put my spells to use my party went: " Just use evil eye and carry on." which was some kind of boring.

Joe M. wrote:
Umbranus wrote:
Kazaan wrote:

and it would have been far less trouble to just say that stacking the same stat from different sources is perfectly fine.
Is there any real doubt about that?
Yes. Whether or not you share that doubt, it does exist. See Mark's confirmation upthread that the design team was unanimous that double-dipping (generally, not specific) was never intended to work.

I really do not care whether it was intended but in my opinion it would be clearly better for the game if above ruling (that which I quoted) would have been made. There is no real problem with double dipping like there never was a problem with flurry with one weapon. But it was (for a short time) FAQed to be illegal.

And a lot of problems follow this new FAQ, as has been shown. Dragon ferocity needed to be reworded, now there is doubt if it still works for monks for whom it was written. And so on.

What I would like to see is examples of problems the FAQ solved. Then we could better judge for ourselves whether it was worth the hassle. And I doubt it. I do not see a single occurrence of double dipping that needed to be fixed so badly it was worth the collateral damage.

Edit: Don't change a working system doesn't only apply to computers.

Kazaan wrote:

and it would have been far less trouble to just say that stacking the same stat from different sources is perfectly fine.

Is there any real doubt about that?

Or play a shaman to use hexes and wear armor and cast spells and... you know do many of the witch stuff only while wearing armor and having a different spell list.
But beware, some of the shaman hexes will vary in strength depending on the new FAQ about abilities as sources.

blackbloodtroll wrote:
Jadeite wrote:

Now Dragon Ferocity no longer works for flurry of blows.

This FAQ created far more problems than it solved.


Flurry states that you always to strength damage no matter what.

But I think this is a case of specific trumps general and it still works.

I'm asking myself where to look for the rules on the abilities you named. Is vitalist an archetype or some 3pp class or what is it?
Is spirit of many a class ability?

StrangePackage wrote:
Kirin style does need Imp. Unarmed Strike, but say you are a human and take IUS and Weapon Finesse at level 1, then at level 7 you take Kirin Style and Level 9 Kirin Strike. That still leaves levels 3 and 5 for whatever other feats you might need. I'd advise against Arcane Strike since Kirin Style and Studied Combat are going to be eating up your swift actions.

The problem I see with kirin style is how long it takes to get going.

First round activate style, second round make knowledge check, third round you can now start dealing damage with it if you do not have anything else you need a swift action for.
If you can start studied combat as swift I'd do that first so you will not use kirin style for another round. And if the opponent dies you have to start again with the knowledge check.
In many fights you will get little benefit from the kirin style line if used RAW.
If the GM allows entering a style out of combat or allow knowledge checks for creature types instead of single creatures this changes somewhat.
Kirin style:
While using this style, you can spend a swift action to make a Knowledge check to identify a single creature (DC 15 + the creature’s CR for this purpose). If you succeed at the check, while using this style, you gain a +2 bonus on saving throws against that creature’s attacks, as well as a +2 dodge bonus to AC against that creature’s attacks of opportunity. These bonuses last for as long as you use this style. If you cease combat with the creature during this time and resume it later, you can attempt the check again.
It always states the creature, so it is only for one creature not one type. When fighting 5 orcs you have to identify each one separately, each time using up a swift action.

After reading the title I thought you would be going the way one of my players did:
High strength
Feats: IUS, revelation strike
Revelation: Touch of flame

After first level he went slayer to get TWF without the dex prereq. Add dragon style and the damage starts to look decent. He's still only doing 1d3 base damage thou.

Pathfinder Design Team wrote:

Dragon Ferocity and Tiger Claws have been FAQed promptly.

FAQ wrote:

Dragon Ferocity and Tiger Claws: These feats both tell me to add 1/2 my Strength bonus to damage. How does that affect my damage? Does that reduce down to 1/2?

No, Dragon Ferocity should read "While using Dragon Style, increase your Strength bonus on unarmed strike damage rolls by an additional one-half your Strength bonus, to a total of twice your Strength bonus on the first attack and 1-1/2 your Strength bonus on the other attacks" and Tiger Claws should read "If you use Power Attack in conjunction with this attack, increase your Strength bonus on one of the damage rolls by an additional one-half your Strength bonus, normally to a total of 1-1/2 your Strength bonus." These changes will be reflected in future errata.

Thanks to everyone for being part of the FAQ process!

The good part about this FAQ is that people with a uneven strength bonus get much more out of twice strength than out of 1-1/2str + 1/2str.

1 to 50 of 3,997 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email 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.