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

Umbranus's page

3,817 posts (4,117 including aliases). 3 reviews. 2 lists. No wishlists. 4 aliases.


RSS

1 to 50 of 3,817 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Jadeite wrote:


And can Brawling be applied to Bracers of Armor now?

RAW: No


For the rulebooks I prefer to OWN the physical copy and to use an online database that is not sorted by book but by topic, like d20pfsrd.

For GMing I like it best when I have both availiable, the pdf and some important parts as printout. But the actual book works, too.
On the other hand it is easier for my to bookmark pages in the hardcopy module than in the pdf for back and forth skimming.


Bob Bob Bob wrote:
I'm not sure that they do stack. Both say they stack with any other bonuses to speed, but both of them are "Fast Movement (Ex)". Doesn't that make them the same bonus?

Good point.


You can find some of the rules here


I would assume you need wild empathy for it. But the rules are not clear on it. Seems you CAN use handle animal on a wild animal. But that might mean risking attack.


Not an official ruling butOwen Stephens stating that he would assume the same limit the skirmisher has but using the ACs HD and wis mod instead.
If I remember it right it was 1/2 HD + wis mod. There was still a discussion about whether it should be wis mod or wis bonus

"Owen K. C. Stephens wrote:

Since the category "Hunter's Tricks" on page 128 says how often they can be used (1/2 ranger level + Wis mod per day), and that is separate from how many tricks a ranger *knows*, the Hunter ability to teach his companion hunter's tricks follows the same rules except where the hunter feature says otherwise.

This would mean a hunter's animal companion would only learn tricks when taught by the hunter, and could use them a total number of times/day equal to 1/2 companion's HD + Wis mod (applying the general rule from page 12 of the CRB that monsters "rely on racial Hit Dice instead of class levels for their powers and abilities").
Though I had nothing to do with this design choice, and have no authority to make official rulings, I consider this the most likely RAW reading. Hunter's Tricks only exist as a thing under the entry "Hunter's Tricks," and thus those rules apply to them unless stated otherwise. How often you can use hunter's tricks is the same kind of thing as how often you can cast a spell. Gaining Bonus Spells Known from an archetype of feat doesn't allow you to use those spells without limit just because the spell itself doesn't include how many times per day you can cast it.

The whole post includes that there are two ways of reading it but he would use the one I quoted.

Link


Bloodrager has no alignment restriction, in case you think about multiclassing. And one cavalier archetype grants you normal speed in med armor. That would not stack with mithral but with the boots.


I wonder how (or if at all) the math will change now, that wis has become important for hunter animal companions to determine the times/day they can use hunter tricks.

And apart from that I'm asking myself why the boar is rated so low. It has a very good survivability (AC + HP) after all. With +6 natural armor and a positive dex modifier as well as a con of 15.

P.S. I know this is necromancy.


I would say as long as you make all off-hand attacks with the same weapon they all get the same benefit.
But if you wield multiple weapons that can be used for off-hand attacks it only applies to one of them.


Faelyn wrote:

So, in reference to a melee hunter build... Clearly you'll want to pick up Pack Flanking to get that awesome +4 flanking bonus at all times.

That's not the only great thing about the feat. Normally it is impossible to use both, outflank and paired opportunists. With this you can have both. That means that if either of you scores a crit, both you and your AC get a AOO at +4. And this is in addition to the +4 for outflanking.

But despite that I'm not sure the sacred huntsman isn't better than the hunter. Don't just look at what is traded away but look at what both PCs have. The power of the inquisition (or domain) depends strongly on what you choose. But sometimes the balancing is strange. You can see this when comparing inquisitions and domains. Even without the spells most domains are just superior to the inquisitions.


DarkOne the Drow wrote:

Need clarification on Hunter feature "Nature Training" with respect to Feral Hunter, which still remains as nothing of Feral Hunter replaces this feature. To me it seems to be entirely focussed on animal companion, which Feral Hunter does not have.

I think the designer of Hunter class should look at Feral Hunter again and provide an errata document containing corrections to editing mistakes that took place with initial release of the Advance Class Guide.

Does the nature training really do anything at all? For the base hunter that is? Are there any feats that rely on ranger or druid level and modify the animal companion?

On the feral hunter: I don't see any reason why I would ever play it. Wildshape is too complex to make work well and if one wants to summon stuff there is the summoner. Instead of playing a feral hunter I'd rather play a base hunter without an AC or a druid (if I want wildshape).


shroudb wrote:


actual build could be something like:
halfing skald 10/moms2:
rage powers: lesser beast, beast, guaded stance
feats: combat exprtise, ius, 3x archon, arcane strike, combat reflexes, bodyguard,
special: ally with paired opportunist feat
traits: helpful

items:
gloves of arcane striking
+3benevolent armor
ring of tactical precision

As we will most likely be encountering a lot of giants I want to be a dwarf (for defensive training and potentially earthchild style). But apart from that it looks good.

We will be starting at level 1 so it will take some time to get to where you are with this build. Have to take a look and plan how to start it. But it definitely looks like an option. The non Halfling helpful trait is a little weaker than the Halfling one but it should work, never the less.

Besides dwarf, gnome is an option, too.


Pupsocket wrote:
Umbranus wrote:


The question is: How to build it? I'd like to make him a dwarf but then the high diplomacy is hard.
The Diplomacy penalty for being a Dwarf is a whopping -1.

While on one hand you are right, on the other hand the build is already MAD and short on feats. And adding cha and diplomacy to the equation makes things worse.


the secret fire wrote:
Neither. Tell her it's a stupid question and move on.

It was just an example, and maybe not even a good one.

@Trekkie90909: That was the separation I had in mind, too. But I wanted to see if others see it the same way.
My question was about telling the truth but in a way that lessens the consequences.


Normally the community keeps saying that tanking is not possible in PF and most of the time people are correct in saying so.

But now I thought about the following:

The archon style allows you to give an AC bonus to your adjacent allies vs one foe and to take hits meant for them.
The diplomacy version of antagonize (yes I went there) allows you to give an opponent -2 to attack someone else for 1 minute.
At the start I could only use either or but later I can use both each round (or use archon style and attack).

The question is: How to build it? I'd like to make him a dwarf but then the high diplomacy is hard. MMS monk would give early access to archon style and following, wis to AC and allow me to add in earth child style, as well. But multiclassing would be no problem when it comes in handy (for example for more survivability.
Perhaps go into stalwart defender later on?

I think there will be others around using teamwork feats so paired opportunists would be nice to have at some point. That way I could retaliate for every attack I take for an ally who has the feat.


Sometimes you are asked questions you would rather not answer but have to. This happens in real life every day:

Q(from girlfriend): Do you think this woman is more attractive than I am?
- In most cases the true answer to this is just: Yes. But that would be impolite and bad for you. So you try to give another answer. Sure saying no would be lying and for that needed bluff in pathfinder.
But if your answer is true but not really an answer to the question?
A: It doesn't matter if she is, I love you and would not want her as my girlfriend.
Bluff or Diplomacy? If it is the truth.

I don't have a better example right now. But you know that kind of thing. You do not want to tell the truth but you don't want to tell a lie either. So you take the truth and wrap it up in niceties until it is barely recognizable. But if looking closely the truth is still there.


Bob Bob Bob wrote:
Umbranus wrote:


Archives of nethys wrote:
This squat arrow has a large, bulbous metal tip that expands and flattens in flight. If you hit a creature with a trip arrow, the arrow deals no damage but performs a trip combat maneuver against the target with a Combat Maneuver Bonus of +5. For the purpose of determining Combat Maneuver Bonuses or penalties based on size, the arrow is treated as if it were the size of the creature it was designed for.
So you roll your CMB + 5 and compare it to the enemy's CMD.
No, that's not quite right. You roll d20+5+size v their CMD. The arrow has a set CMB that you use (+5) modified only by the size. It's pretty low.

Yes, now that you say it.


Bleeding arrows: Normal damage + 1 bleed damage
Dye arrows: No damage
Smoke arrows: Normal damage
Tangleshot: No damage
Lodestone arrow: Half damage
Raining arrow: Normal damage
Slow burn: Normal damage
Trip arrow: No damage

Quote:
On a related note, how exactly would one resolve a Trip Arrow attack?

It is in the arrow's description:

Archives of nethys wrote:
This squat arrow has a large, bulbous metal tip that expands and flattens in flight. If you hit a creature with a trip arrow, the arrow deals no damage but performs a trip combat maneuver against the target with a Combat Maneuver Bonus of +5. For the purpose of determining Combat Maneuver Bonuses or penalties based on size, the arrow is treated as if it were the size of the creature it was designed for.

So you roll your CMB + 5 and compare it to the enemy's CMD.


KnotAguru wrote:
Adriel Mistleaf wrote:

Moonlight Stalker is a brilliant feat chain.

Blindfight is a pretty useful feat.
Just be a Human and you can go combat Exp and Blindfight at 1st level.
Moonlight Stalker at level 3 because at that level it's +2/+2
Power attack is -1/+3 at that level. So take it at level 5
Moonlight stalker requires low-light vision or darkvision as a racial trait. Humans have neither.

But they can take a racial trait to get it. For me getting it through a racial trait is racial enough.

Blood of Dragons:

Source Ultimate Campaign pg. 62 (Amazon)
Category Race
Requirement(s) Any
Long ago, your ancestors’ blood mixed with that of dragons. Choose one of the following: gain a +1 trait bonus on Perception checks, gain low-light vision, or gain a +2 trait bonus on saving throws against effects that cause sleep or paralysis.


blahpers wrote:
So please don't turn this into yet another "Paizo hates martials" thread. It's certainly not the reason level-draining monsters were invented back in the day.

Not my intention, at all. But most monsters attack what attacks them instead of moving to another target and eating AoOs for it.


Haco wrote:
Umbra (shadow)?

That's the one.

And there is not trait like magical knack but a feat called boon companion that does more or less the same for pets but for four levels.

You can have an animal companion as single class gunslinger but it costs 2 feats for a companion, that is 4 levels lower or three feats for a full level one.
Sadly I do not remember the name of the first two feats. The third is boon companion, to get the companion up to char level. Perhaps someone else can help.

Edit: Found them: Nature soul and animal ally.


Haco wrote:

With the huntmaster i only can try bird or dog as a hunting pack.

Beastmaster is 3rd party too, don't legal for pfs, and i don't find survival hunter...

Remember that he is for PFS and Psionics are not legal for play...

Thanks for your help!!

Bestmaster, survival and marksmanship are the three kinds of hunters you can play in wow. The specializations. They are different enough that they should be build in different ways.

That you are fixed on a kind of animal you want as a companion was either not mentioned before or I missed it. Which is it that you want? Seems its not a dog.


The huntmaster cavalier instead of the druid might be a good way, too. You can learn ranger traps via the learned ranger trap. That way you have no spellcasting you do not want and can share your teamwork feat with your pet. You could the challenge as hunter's mark.

With the order of the beast (the one from the ACG because there are two) he would make a quite fitting wow hunter.

But in the end I would build a marksmanship hunter with different classes than a survival hunter or a beastmaster hunter.
For beastmaster there is no alternative to hunter or the inquisitor hunter archetype. For marksmanship I'd go with a more ranged focused class and take the AC through a dip or via feats.


Taku Ooka Nin wrote:
blahpers wrote:
Umbranus wrote:
Taku Ooka Nin wrote:
Negative level bestowing creatures exist to make future creatures harder.
Viewing it short term you are right. Long term they are like rust monsters. They make the party poorer and are annoying like hell. Unless you want to annoy your players I can't see any reason (even after reading this thread and thinking about it) to use either instead of other appropriate enemies.
*shrug* To each their own. I like 'em. But I also like rust monsters. : D

"That's a nice sword you have there metal-man. I'll take it! *eats the fighter's sword.* Delicious!"

I think the problem some GMs do is just spring negative levels and expensive item destroying creatures/traps/hazards on players without alluding to the fact that these exist. Losing a 15 gp longsword isn't a problem while losing a 2015 gp longsword is a problem if the GM isn't ensuring this is balanced out with either extra money or drops.

Not only that. Most of the time rust monsters and level drainers mainly hit the martials. Rust monsters because martials are the ones with metal gear and level drainers because the martial's job is it to stand between the monsters and the squishies.

And yet, depending on the group, it is the martial who has to pay the bill.
So yes, they are fantastic monsters. Just there to pick on the weak.

Last time I've seen a rust monster it was in an AP where the party was below half WBL and it destroyed the only magic armor in the whole party (level 6). That is not gamemastering, that is showing your players the finger. And most occurances of level drainers or rustmonsters and the like is just that.


Just now that giantslayer moves more into the focus (yea, I know its still a long time away) I notices the earthchild style.

At once I started contemplating how to best build a pc using that feat.
As I do not like gnomes, race: Dwarf is set. And he has to fight unarmed.

My first ideas:
- Sensei monk for wis to AC, hit and (vs giants) to damage. But they lose flurry and can't use brawling armor.
- Steelbraker brawler because in addition to getting +6 dodge bonus to AC vs giants he can use a swift action to make a check and if successful he gets 1/2 his level on several things including AC vs the studied opponent.
- Sacred fist warpriest is another option. Or an unarmed barbarian or several others.

When using a guided AoMF would I get twice wis on damage vs giants?

I'm not sure I want to use the second and third feat in the earthchild chain because they are about tripping giants, who tend to have good CMDs.


It is not activated by rage. rage does not give a direct moral bonus to hit.
By your logic a raging barbarian would not benefit from the flagbearer feat, the bless spell or similar that grant a moral bonus to attack because moral bonuses do not stack.


The easiest way is to tell him to take one of the archetypes that get rid of solo tactics and teamwork feats. There are some. The preacher does not exchange anything else, for example.

Your option might work, too. But I'm always hesitant to replace a class feature with bonus feats.


Finlanderboy wrote:

Thats what I figured would happen as well.

Why are people fighting the transferred dead condition?

It temporary trades that condition. In the end the player will still be dead.

But as you now know that he will be dead the druid can be ready with a breath of life the second time.


Axial wrote:
The Redeemed Kobold feat would seem to suggest that there are.

And/or the gold scaled trait.


Taku Ooka Nin wrote:
Negative level bestowing creatures exist to make future creatures harder.

Viewing it short term you are right. Long term they are like rust monsters. They make the party poorer and are annoying like hell. Unless you want to annoy your players I can't see any reason (even after reading this thread and thinking about it) to use either instead of other appropriate enemies.


Seems that elf children are very dumb, being hardly able to do other things than listen to beautiful music, smell flowers and watch butterflies. Only when they get close to maturity their brain starts functioning normally.
And besides elves don't seem to be nice people because besides dwarves they are the only core race that can't have a cha bonus. So the combination of elf children being special people and the race lacking empathetic teachers leads to them growing up slowly.


Just add numbers. Colossal +1, Colossal +2, Colossal +3


Ammunition on d20pfsrd


Vincent Takeda wrote:

As a caster I can say that we suffer through the low levels waiting for the day we're high level, when we can be powerful.

Most campaigns stop the second we get there.

This is profoundly annoying, but we suffer through it... We have to put off our nifty powers until the game is pretty much over.

If a hard hitting meaty doesnt enjoy being a hard hitting meaty, then why are they choosing to be hard hitting meaties? They are the ones who shine in the low levels, and most of the time, most of the campaign is spent in the low levels.

How much more limelight do they need?

It is easy to build a caster that shines in the low levels. That caster players mostly aim for maximum high level power is their problem.


lead blades doesn't stack with shillelagh because both treat the weapon as larger than it is. Not as larger than the other spell treats it as.


Undone wrote:
Gingerbreadman wrote:
Claxon wrote:
Gingerbreadman wrote:

Instead of giving out reduced point buy I would either go E6 (as suggested) or do the following:

** spoiler omitted **

Less problems with multiclassing. You either buy the feats or not. And less free feats means significantly less power for casters, too.

Not really, you've only made the feats mandatory.
That was the whole point. To take away feats instead of point buy. It might not be the BEST solution but still, by far better than reduced point buy.
Why? That effects martial far more.

How does forcing casters to take feat taxes to cast affect martials more? Did you read gingerbreadman's posting?

Quote:


As for summoner they get 10 pt buy. They have access to 9th level magic via GATE and other 9th level spells on the list. They are the only "Sixth level caster" who would get 10pt because they are not "sixth level casters" they are 9th level casters with lower listed spell levels. As to "LOL OP SYNTH!" the base rules would be more or less PFS if it's banned there it would start banned in this game.

If you ask for advice on some houserules you should list them as they are, not pick some tiny bits.

With summoners treated as 9th casters and synths banned the worst exceptions are gone but remain more than enough.


RumpinRufus quoted the RAW and there is no indication that RAI should be different.
And, as said by two above posters unarmed strikes are not natural attacks. If they were you could kick your enemy in addition to hitting him with the sword with all your attacks.


One thing I have noticed is that some people who think reducing point buy for casters is the holy grail is that they do not like/accept the powerful martial variants like barbarians or some good feats.
I agree that casters are too strong. But by not allowing strong martial choices the problem gets worse.

In one game where this idea is being used (reduced point buy) I hear comments like:

- The GM thinks the barbarian is too strong, I'd stay away from it.
- Antagonize it OP and not allowed.
- Monster feats are op for PCs

Perhaps casters are not the only problem.


Undone wrote:


How bad or good is that for the structure of the game? Does this help simulate the extra dice some classes got long ago in 1st ed?

I feel that classes really probably should have been printed with a base point buy attached.

How does everyone else feel about this?

I don't like that approach. It furthers gaming the system. And the first consequence that comes to mind is to play a summoner. It already is one of the most powerful classes and by this gets even stronger because his 9th level casting which masks as 6th level casting is punished less than true 9th level casting.

That way you have more point buy than you deserve and still are two for the price of one.


As far as I know there is no max limit. But there are few combinations that that as high as your example. Most likely because most people start with medium creatures and try two-handed weapons to begin with.

On the other hand for this to function you have to own an oversized club which is rare enough.


shroudb wrote:

Force channel seems stronger to me.

Sure, it's half damage, but:
A) given how often you encounter elemental resistances it seems much more reliable.
B) it doesn't lock your domain
C) full damage vs incorporeal

You have some points there. And if you don't want to wait until you can cast second level spells (spiritual weapon) you can get it by taking two world magic and selecting the scoop cantrip which is the lowest level force spell.


BadBird wrote:
Umbranus wrote:
If war blessings work as prereqisites, yes. But that is by far not clear.

"Twice per day, you can call upon the minor blessing from one or the other of your chosen blessings. This ability otherwise acts like the warpriest blessings class feature."

As far as RAW goes, that should do it just fine; you need the warpriest blessings class feature, it acts like the warpriest blessings class feature without any listed restrictions.

In the end I guess I have to ask my GM. But I like it better if I have something to base my request on.

@Kaboogy: I'll take a look at the subdomains you listed.
Edit: Now the demon subdomain looks nice. Sadly it doesn't stack with energy channel.
Ferocity on the other hand is a lot weaker (for less investment) because it is only 1/2 level and only one attack per use.


From another thread.

BadBird wrote:
Umbranus wrote:
If war blessings work as prereqisites, yes. But that is by far not clear.

"Twice per day, you can call upon the minor blessing from one or the other of your chosen blessings. This ability otherwise acts like the warpriest blessings class feature."

As far as RAW goes, that should do it just fine; you need the warpriest blessings class feature, it acts like the warpriest blessings class feature without any listed restrictions.

This now sounds as if it works.


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

In another thread about a feat that has domain or blessing as prerequisite people tell me that I can just take the above feats.
But here the only answer was that they do not count.

So yes or no?


BadBird wrote:
While you would have to go through the 'War Blessing' feat to get from having an Oracle mystery to having Energy Channel, it may well be worth it since you get to treat your Charisma as your Dexterity for AC purposes with those Mysteries.

If war blessings work as prereqisites, yes. But that is by far not clear.

@Kaboogy: I've seen and contemplated that. But half bonus damage is something. But often that might be offset by resistances.


How Do you think a Paladin build with a 1 level dip into cleric would work for this?
You would have access to energy channel earlier (even if it's only +2), have full BAB from then on and you don't need an archetype that grants a domain.

I'd go Paladin 1, cleric 1, paladin x. That way I can get power attack at 1st level and get more hp to start with. Then 2nd level the dip into cleric. I get some useful spells + slots and two domains, one of which has to be an elemental domain. Possibly both for more options.

Going Paladin most of the time makes choosing the deitie for the favored weapon unnessesary. And I get more use out of having a high charisma.

1st level:

Human paladin warrior of the holy light of Torag

Alternate race traits:
Adoptive Parentage (Dwarves)

Traits:
Called (Faith), Blooded (Region)

Feats:
Power attack

2nd level:

Seperatist cleric of Torag

Domains:
Earth, Fire (Arson)

Do you think that might work out?

Edit: This way I do not get energy channel until 3rd level. But without this dip I would get it another level later and would have to take an archetype that gives me a domain.


Not sure about that. Would be nice if it did qualify. But from another thread I got that this doesn't work:

would having the feat that gives you access to a minor blessing or a 1st level domain power fulfill the prereq?

- War blessing gives you access to minor blessings
- believer's boon gives the 1st level domain power of one domain
Both do not have a special line about counting for prereqs, that other feats have.
All from the ACG.

wraithstrike wrote:
The (...) two do not qualify you.

And believer's boon has no note that it works for prereqisites while a follow up feat of believer's, that allows you to lay on hands once per day boon has it.


There has been another thread about this feat but that was not seen as such. So I thought I'd add this one.

Energy Channel:

Prerequisites: Channel energy class feature; Air, Earth, Fire, or Water domain or blessing.

Benefit: A swift action, you can expend one use of channel energy to grant your weapon attacks a bonus on damage rolls equal to twice the number of dice rolled for your channel energy. This additional damage is of an energy type determined by your domain or blessing: acid (Earth), cold (Water), electricity (Air), or fire (Fire). If you have more than one of those domains or blessings, you must choose one of those damage types when you use this ability. This effect lasts for your next three weapon attacks or until the end of combat, whichever comes first.

So you need channel energy and an elemental domain or blessing. Because of that there are not a lot of classes who qualify without multiclassing.

- Cleric: Streight forward. Take the right domain and you are good to go. But for a lot of channels you are MAD, needing Wis, Cha, either dex or Str and a little con. The only stat you do not need is int and that with only 2+int skillpoints.

- Warpriest: Takes longer to get because channel doesn't come online before 4th level. And it works through fervor, which is an important ressource for the warpriest. That means later and fewer uses of energy channel.

- Paladin: The sacred servant and the temple champion archetype gets a domain. Apart from that similar to the warpriest when it comes to starting level and uses/day. But extra channel fixes that.

Did I miss another option?

Via multiclassing other ways open up. The life oracle, for example. That way one could build more for cha. But does it offer other goodies for a melee guy?

Which way would you go?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

There is a trait, river rat I think it is, that increases damage with daggers by 1.


Another thing I've been thinking about is taking a badger or wolverine pet and learning sympathetic rage myself. That way my pet and I could rage together for some rounds per day.

That's instead of taking the maneuver route.

Or alternatively multiclass hunter and barbarian for ferocious companion and amplified rage. But this one would take at least 'till 5th level to come together.
Perhaps if I combine both ideas?

1 to 50 of 3,817 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com 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.