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

3,586 posts (3,847 including aliases). 3 reviews. 2 lists. No wishlists. 4 aliases.


1 to 50 of 3,586 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

The kobold can start with a bite, get two claws via rage power or ranger combat style and get a tail slap in addition to that via a feat.

in addition to that they can qualify for noxious bite. But I don't think that's PFS legal.

feat racial heritage:halfling. Or settle for the weaker helpful trait that is open to every race.

How do you want to get a real consensus if only those who liked the AP well enough to play it to the end are allowed to vote?

I for my part was a player in CC and left the group because, for me, the AP sucked. so for me the fun factor was 1/10.


2) until I left in book 3 there was no central theme apparent. First you hunt the whispering way, then you suddenly forget that to help the beast...

4)the hardest part of book 1 was sitting around several fights because of multiple incorporeals and only one magic weapon for the party.

Artanthos wrote:
Umbranus wrote:
No feats let you change your pc that much like some rage powers.
Mounted Skirmisher wrote:

Prerequisites: Ride rank 14, Mounted Combat, Trick Riding.

Benefit: If your mount moves its speed or less, you can still take a full-attack action.

Normal: If your mount moves more than 5 feet, you can only take an attack action.

Unlike a pouncing barbarian, the mounted skirmisher does not have to move in a straight line.

Good to see that fighters can get something akin to pounce, too. But I don't see what this has in common with my statement that there are more different ways to buiold a barbarian than there are to build a fighter.

Is it possible, that you missread my posting? It was not about charging but changing.

Rynjin wrote:
To be fair, dropping Beast Totem for Spirit lowers the AC something fierce. Even moar damage though.

I just wanted to show that there are more ways you can go. Ways that are not open to the fighter. No feats let you change your pc that much like some rage powers.

But the one time I tired a spirit totem barbarian we had to fight a special tribe of lizardmen immune to negative energy and healed a little by it.

Build a dwarven inquisitor. You will not get trapfinding but you get lots of skills, good perception, bonuses to perception to notice traps in stone walls or floors as well as good saves vs some sorts of traps.
You can be a melee, a ranged guy, a buffer or a mix.
While it is true that you don't have a full 9th level arcane caster you do have a summoner. That has to be enough.

CountofUndolpho wrote:
Ok how about if blinded etc would I just move 10' a round full stop? Is there any ruling for it?

I guess you could do a double move. But I'm not sure how your speed would be calculated in that case. i.e. is it two separate move actions for 10ft twice or is it one move for 25ft?

Insain Dragoon wrote:

Want to play a noble and skilled weapon master in full plate? That Armored Hulk Barb archetype is a better fit, just say you're rage is the tunnel vision from the fight or flight response in combat. Not only will you be more effective in combat, but you will have more skill points to back up your roleplay.

And on top of that the barbarian can choose class abilities that let him get more use out of charisma, should you want to play a charismatic leader guy. (the spirit totem line and the rage power that lets you intimidate as move action for example) meaning that the barbarian class is more versatile than the fighter class, too. (If you go by base class without archetypes)

But one thing the fighter has going for him: He can take a trait to up his armor by 1, evening out the armor value in the first comparison. No such trait for the barbarian.

And we still have no ruling on how to treat non item buffs that grant an int bonus for longer than 24h. Like an extended threefold aspect.

If you cast this every other day, you always have one day when it is a temp buff and a second when it is a permanent buff.
New language and maxed out skill every other day?

Ricardo Pennacchia wrote:

I do remember that Star Wars SAGA RPG had a similar mechanics. Might be worth checking it.

Eridan wrote:

You can use a 'wound' system similar to the 'Earthdawn' roleplaying system.

You define threshold for damage per hit. Everytime you get more damage than your threshold you get a wound in addition to the damage. If the damage dont ecxeed your threshold everything is fine and you only get damage. Every wound is a -1 penalty to dice rolls.

The threshold can be CON, 10+lvl, ..

A wound is healed with a healing spell in addtion to the damage.

We tested this in the past with D&D3 and it worked good. You only count wounds and use penalties. That is not much paperwork.

Try it if everyone in your group wants more realism.

I would suggest a threshold of CON + 2 x BAB, so it could benefit martials a good deal.

If you use con or con +2xBAB then it is impossible to wound a level 1 char without killing him and it's even close for a level 2 one. The result would be that you can hit a low level pc, bringing him below zero and he's unwounded but the high level pc can be hit that bare nicks his hp but wounds him.

Because of that I'd rather take con bonus instead of con but perhaps BABx3 instead of x2

Thomas Long 175 wrote:
The effect ends immediately if it can't attack you.

If it can not attack you in the round of its duration you can make a check to increase the duration for another round.

And even that is only for the intimidate part, not the diplomacy part.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Torbyne wrote:
Maybe for about a year people will talk about the sad death of rogues and fighters but then unchained comes out and we get new rogues who phase through walls and fighters who can cut through space and time.

I would be very happy to see fighters getting cool stuff.

K177Y C47 wrote:
Uncommoner wrote:
Hmmmmm, I get the sneaking suspicion I won't be seeing any more rangers or rogues in my games anymore..

well rangers still have uses. Some people liek the AC, and other people like the woodland feel. Also, spellcasting...

Rogues though... yeah....

For our games it will, most likely, replace rogue and fighter. But not the ranger.

I don't have my playtest document with me so I'm doing this from memory.

Example for a Dwarf Slayer:

I think PFS uses 20 point buy, right?

1st level Dwarf slayer
STR: 16 DEX: 13 CON: 16 INT: 12 WIS: 12 CHA: 8

Alternate racial trait:
Rock stepper (5ft step in some difficult terrain)

Weapons of choice:
Dwarven waraxe, light spiked shield

Defensive strategist
Glory of old

Power attack

Class abilities:
Favored target (choose a target hit better, deal more damage no daily limit)

8 Skill points

So right now the differences between fighter and slayer are: One less feat, one more good save, two more special abilities, four more skill points, no heavy armor.

At second level we choose ranger combat style weapon and shield to get TWF.

The differences remain the same except that we could ignore the prerequisites for our 2nd level bonus feat and we missed out on bravery. Let's say that evens out track, which most dwarves will rarely use.

At third level we get sneak attack instead of armor training. While sneak attack is not what we are looking for it sometimes helps deal damage and as a dwarf we get little from armor training because we are slow and steady.

At fourth level we get our next slayer talent. Up until now the best fitting might be combat trick to get a bonus combat feat, same as the fighter. We can't choose weapon spec, but instead of getting +2 damage with one weapon we get +1 hit and +1 damage with all weapons just by using favoured target.

At fifth level your favoured target increases to +2 and you can have it active on two targets. We miss out on weapon training.

I left out the standard feats, because every char gets those.

All in all the slayer can be played and fluffed just as a fighter. He can't use heavy armor if he wants to use a ranger combat style (thanks to Imbicatus for pointing out) and you don't get armor training, weapon spec and weapon training. But you (in my opinion) more than make up for the loss through what you get instead.
You can ignore prerequisites for some feats, you get two good saves, a lot more skills, a strong ability to increase hit and damage with favoured target

With the ACG we will see some archetypes so we might even get something that's even better at being a dwarf man at arms.

Edit: Just to note it, until at level 5 he gets his earth elemental, the stone lord paladin can be seen as a rather stereotypical dwarf warrior, too.

Imbicatus wrote:
Umbranus wrote:

But there is one point in which I disagree with you, Arachnofiend: I would be using heavy armor as a dwarven slayer. It's just a feat and I'm slow and steady.

Don't Slayers & Rangers loose the benefit of their combat style in heavy armor?

Right, that is possible.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The kobold racial feats and noxious bite. Especially combined.
Kobolds are one of few races that can get it relatively easily.

I still miss a class that gets cool supernatural abilities but no actual spells. Like a bard that exchanges his spells for a sorcerer bloodline.
We have enough examples of abilities such a class could get but they are exclusive to casting classes.
Bard, Sorcerer, Oracle, druid

2 people marked this as a favorite.
chaoseffect wrote:
From memory it says you can use it if you cannot take a full round action but can take a standard... which would mean you could use it while Staggered as well. Which is hilarious for a pouncing Barbarian.

... pouncing zombies...

I get the forbidden message with all of them. Including the new cavalier link.

JoeJ wrote:
L33Fish wrote:
If I were only playing with the core book, I'd still rather be a bard who happened to put max ranks into Disable Device than a Rogue. I would be able to deal with mechanical traps via DD and magical ones via Dispel Magic. Meanwhile, I'd be a better party face (via versatile performance), a better knowledge monkey, and have something to do in combat.

So what class should I play if my character is a little guy who grew up on the streets, making a living by breaking into the houses of the wealthy? He's never had the chance to learn any magic, and he's certainly not a performer - just the opposite, in fact. He spent most of his childhood trying not to be noticed.

Urban ranger, slayer, ninja, urban barbarian

The problem with gorum, while allowing you to take that nice trait, is that he gives a two-handed favoured weapon and as such you'd still not have a good one-handed weapon for sword and board.
That's why I suggested Ragatiel earlier in this thread.

On the other hand there ARE some simple one-handed weapons that can be used. The morning star for example.

For stats I'd go str > con = wis > int > dex > cha

Half-Orc Gorumite Inquisitor:

Going half-orc would allow you to use longswords through the city raised alternate race trait, would give you a bite attack through toothy and, if you like it as much as I do, endurance through shaman's apprentice. You are steel, you don't want to take off your armor at night, do you?

Without dumping you could have: STR: 18 DEX: 12 CON: 14 INT: 13 WIS: 14 CHA: 10

Imbicatus wrote:
Hmmmm... I see an Ulfen Gorumite Brawler with the Shield Champion archetype in my future.

I could see me playing a Gorumite Dwarf Slayer sometime in the future.

After some feats/talents I'd rock heavy armor (spiked for fluff), TWF without dex, heavy shield as light weapon, tons of skills. With favoured target and a situational sneak attack to up the damage.


Arachnofiend wrote:
Okay just... take power attack and go to town. You clearly have no intention of actually taking anyone's advice so feel free to derp around with a suboptimal Dwarven fighter. If you want to make "the most powerful Dwarven warrior", your options are Slayer, Ranger, and Barbarian. You will not be using heavy armor with any of these. You shouldn't care.

Some people can't overcome what they see as a class's fluff. If for him the slayer is the sneaky backstabber, the barbarian the raging madman and the ranger the robin hood/strider guy, let him be.

But there is one point in which I disagree with you, Arachnofiend: I would be using heavy armor as a dwarven slayer. It's just a feat and I'm slow and steady.

I will not add names because it makes reading this threat even harder for those who try to contribute to this community without being named/appreciated.

If YOU are one of those, feel my thanks. (even if Ipslore pulled the ninja on this).

But I can't stay away from stating: Again without name calling, I have been shocked by some names I had to read around here, while others were not written down.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Deadly Juggernaut wrote:
With every enemy life you take, you become increasingly dangerous and difficult to stop. During the duration of the spell, you gain a cumulative +1 luck bonus on melee attack rolls, melee weapon damage rolls, Strength checks, and Strength-based skill checks as well as DR 2/— each time you reduce a qualifying opponent to 0 or few hit points (maximum +5 bonus and DR 10/—) with a melee attack. A qualifying opponent has a number of Hit Dice equal to or greater than your Hit Dice –4.

I read the wording of the bolded part in a way that only the bonuses are luck bonuses and that the DR is in addition to the luck bonuses but not one itself. And as the DR doesn't seem to be cumulative as per the wording.

And the increase from fate's favoured is only applied once.

I'd say it should be able to replace the tunic, shirt or robe but not a full outfit. As the silken ceremonial armor is eastern I'd suggest just adding a monk's outfit (2 lbs) and asking your GM if he's willing to drop some of the weight for not wearing the loose shirt. I MIGHT allow you to reduce it by 0.5 lbs while still being (more or less) properly dressed.

RAW a kilt for 1 lbs might be enough but it would look strange because a kilt and silk armor doesn't mix well.

stuart haffenden wrote:

Hexcrafter White Haired Witch can use INT for attacks and gains the grab ability. Using Arcane Accuracy will allow to to add that INT bonus again.

I have +36 at level 9 when buffed.

Normally creatures with the grab ability gain a +4 bonus to grapple checks. Is that true for the white haired witch, too?

universal monster rules wrote:
Creatures with the grab special attack receive a +4 bonus on combat maneuver checks made to start and maintain a grapple.

If you had any way to get beast shape II (like wildshape at level 6)you could shape into a large animal to get grab (with the +4 to grapple) and a +4 size bonus to strength but a -1 size bonus to hit. This would net you +5 and the option to grapple after dealing damage.

I think you can only add weapon enhancements to those CMs that specifically call out being usable with weapons.
Grapple and using unarmed seems to be a special case but I'm not sure that the enhancement bonus applies.

What would apply would be size bonuses to attack. So if you were small but had an ability letting you be treated as medium for CMs you'd get your +1 size bonus on attack.

And I think there is some weapon enchantment that gives a bonus to CMs.

Edit: Found it. It's one of the two enchantments called duelling but it doesn't work with grapple.

Haco wrote:

Thx for all your help mates.

@Umbranus: Slayer is not a fighter... and doesn't have the fighter feats that is very important.

Well i looking the other options, titan mauler... or two handed fighter but this low mi CA...but is a good advice. Thx!!

If you want to go fighter, so be it. You should have stated that. In your opening post you only wrote that you wanted to be a warrior and I assumed that you did not mean the NPC class. And as you wanted something powerful fighter was not what came to mind.

minoritarian wrote:
Inquisitor of Gorum with the Shield Trained trait which makes proficient with shields and heavy shield counts as a light weapon so your twf penalties are smaller. Birthmark trait for a greatsword on your face!

That's a cool trait. Didn't know that.

For dwarves fighter is not good. You don't get much from armor training. And armor training is about the only thing the fighter has going for him over a slayer.

Inquisitor of Ragatiel to get the bastard sword proficiency. Then a light shield in the offhand. Take a race that gets an arcane SLA to qualify for arcane strike. That way you can up your damage (in turns you have your swift action free) without needing PA.

How about a slayer? You can get two weapon fighting via the slayer talents and go axe and board. With a dwarven waraxe in one hand and a shield in the other. You get full BAB, lots of skills, lots of feats (as you can turn some talents into feats).

Instead of axe and shield you could use the thunder and fang build. It fits Dwarves very good. And again, you can get TWF without dex requirement.

Lincoln Hills wrote:
Umbranus wrote:
Victor Zajic wrote:
disallow the cleric dip cheese.

Would you elaborate on this? Do you feel all dips are cheese?

I must have misunderstood the question. I was about to recommend guacamole, which is a superior dip.

This is something I can wholehartedly agree with.

Tursas wrote:
Jonathan DesLauriers wrote:
Paired Oppoptunists - Gives the owners of this feat a + circumstance bonus on AoO and when both you and another ally have this feat when both of you are threatening the same enemy and one of you provokes and AoO you do as well.
This works with another ADIACENT ally. But adiacent allies can't flank!

They can with gang up or if they are ratfolk with the swarming trait.

Victor Zajic wrote:
disallow the cleric dip cheese.

Would you elaborate on this? Do you feel all dips are cheese?

Matthew Downie wrote:
Umbranus wrote:
tony gent wrote:
Because you will run out or spells after a set number of rounds a fighter can swing his sword all day
All day, as long as he doesnt run out of hp. Which are mostly healed with what?
Wands of Cure Light Wounds.

if we bring in wands the caster will not run out of spells

1 person marked this as a favorite.
tony gent wrote:
Because you will run out or spells after a set number of rounds a fighter can swing his sword all day

All day, as long as he doesnt run out of hp. Which are mostly healed with what? Spells.

And there are casting classes, like the witch, that do not run out of things to do.

1) I think they cap out
4) Being in the form of something that can speak allows you to provide verbal components.

Ravingdork wrote:

I've just come from a thread where someone actually said that taking Butterfly Sting with their martial characters was a "cheesy move." This manner of thinking just totally blew my mind.

A lot of people have a strange sense of smell.

Sometimes I think every time someone builds a pc that is capable in combat without mainly relying on magic that's a bad thing.

Recent threads: My inquisitor archer is breaking my game, two ratfolk PCs using teamwork feats and their swarming trait are OP, etc, antagonize is too strong (I'm not talking about hating it for "common sense" reasons).

My advice would be to include a hit that this is about archery in the title. At first I thought this was some kind of joke or riddle when reading the title.

Other than that: If the bow still deals the best damage just carry on until you get either clustered shots or weapon versatility.

It very much depends.
Fighting incorporeals popping into and out of walls is always very tedious. Even more so if they have the ability to heal (CC, I'm looking at you) and if not every one has something to hurt them with.

Apart from that I like tactical combats. Or Iat least I think I would. The problem is that I have yet to find a group that uses tactics worthy of the name.

Slime wrote:
Kildaere wrote:
(...) but breaking a PCs hard earned equipment is dirty pool. We have a game “sunder truce” I don’t break (...)

I fully understand your situation but we came up with another way to "house-rule" threw it: We allow magic items to me repaired with Make Whole at a straight caster level requirement but with a material cost of 10% of the "crafting-cost" of the item or re-crafted (with the feat) at the same 10% cost.

So it goes both ways (PCs and Monsters) and it allows the "obvious ways" to use Sunder without losing big amounts of the earned treasure.

As long as items are only broken, not destroyed a simple mending (or multiple simple mendings) do the trick as well. No cost involved.

mending wrote:
This spell repairs damaged objects, restoring 1d4 hit points to the object. If the object has the broken condition, this condition is removed if the object is restored to at least half its original hit points. All of the pieces of an object must be present for this spell to function. Magic items can be repaired by this spell, but you must have a caster level equal to or higher than that of the object. Magic items that are destroyed (at 0 hit points or less) can be repaired with this spell, but this spell does not restore their magic abilities.

As the one doing the sunder can choose whether he wants to destroy the object or not that's usually enough to not loose treasure. You sunder enemy weapons to give them the broken condition. That's often enough.

Careful with armor or heavy two-handed weapons. They might exceed mending's weight limit.

You can't have two campaign traits because you can only take one trait per category.
Apart from that it depends on the kind of bonus the trait gives. Most give trait bonuses and those do not stack. So having two traits that give a trait bonus to initiative would not work.

You could first ask your other players if they have a problem with how things are going.
If no, don't change a thing.
If yes, ask the player in question if they want to rebuild some aspect of their pc to lessen the power gab.
Apart from that just upping enemie's hp is always an easy option.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
strayshift wrote:

Likewise casters have FINITE resources (even God Wizards) in terms of spells and a smart DM will limit their opportunities to run the 15 minute adventuring day (as well as scry and fry). Prepared casters rely on intelligence (as in knowledge) to forward plan but often don't have many of the key spells and spontaneous casters know fewer spells (but can spam) again a smart DM will present challenges where these factors come into play.

Full casters are the most powerful characters at high level but a good DM will adopt tactics to challenge and counter them allowing the rest of the party to shine.

Sure spalls are a finite resource. But a cha based full caster can well fill in with intimidate. A witch can fill in with hexes, wizards have their (still limited) school powers in addition to spells, clerics have their domain powers and at least the divine casters can be competent melee or ranged combatants, too.

The myth that wizards without spells are useless might have been true in AD&D, but it is no longer.

Sorry, did not notice how old the thread is.
Just irritated that often times people claim that the feat forces stuff it just does not.

wraithstrike wrote:

That feat is broken. That was a very recent long debate on it. Nobody gets rage bonuses. The feat basically forces you to do things you would not do otherwise such as forcing casters to enter melee.

The target will try to charge to reach you. Casting spells is not an option.

On its next turn, the target must attempt to make a melee attack against you.

That is very much wrong. I will not imply you did it on purpose but the longer quote definitely clears up that casting IS an option and the feat is totally ok.

On its next turn, the target must attempt to make a melee attack against you, make a ranged attack against you, target you with a spell, or include you in the area of a spell. The effect ends if the creature is prevented from attacking you or attempting to do so would harm it (for example, if you are on the other side of a chasm or a wall of fire). If it cannot attack you on its turn, you may make the check again as an immediate action to extend the effect for 1 round (but cannot extend it thereafter). The effect ends as soon as the creature attacks you.

So casting flare or daze would be totally enough to follow the feat.

Kwauss wrote:
I would say oratory would not affect animals without a speak with animals spell, for the same reason I'm not going to let you pick a lock with no tools whatsoever, even at +10 DC.

There is a goblin feat that specifically states that, while using this feat, allies who don't understand goblin are unaffected. I read that in a way that specific trumps general and general would be that you'd be affected when not understanding the language.

Battle singer wrote:
When using bardic performance to inspire courage in allies, you can choose to sing in Goblin—allies who do not speak Goblin gain no benefits from this performance.

Dunmuir wrote:

Basically, why use a class that relies on weapons when you could use a class that relies on something that doesn't cost anything, comes readily each morning, and can even take you places (the plane of water, hell, heaven, bacon world, etc.) that no other class ever could?

That is a good question that is brought up from time to time. Most of the time about half the posters tell you that martials suck and the other half tells you that asking this question makes you a power gamer.

I like swinging swords and such. But I hate standing around more or less useless and on mop up duty so I try to build PCs who have more tricks than hit it with something sharp/pointy/blunt.

My kobold slayer can make enemies nauseated, effectively taking them out of the fight for some time. My Inquisitor can cast spell as well as fight with his axe. The scarred witch doctor eschewed melee completely to keep up with the summoner. The magus speaks for itself. That's only a part of my recent PF PCs but I think you get the gist.

1 to 50 of 3,586 << 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.