|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Wait, what? No, that's not what Strike Back does. It lets you hit back at an enemy that attacks you from outside of your normal reach. Like, a dragon bites you from 20 ft. away, you an ready an action to attack its head when it reaches at you, even though you would normally have to be adjacent to do it. Of bloody course you can ready an action to hit someone who attacks you without a feat.
Name: Heinrick Gilantheril
Celekal - an homage to two of his greatest mortal friends, the Celekal are another nomadic people, almost their entire population living on great ships that rove across the sea. Merchants, explorers, and occasional pirates for a good cause, they resemble humans, but blue-skinned, and can breath water.
I'm currently DMing for an evil party, and have played evil characters in the past. They can be pretty fun; the trick is to keep it to subtle scheming between PCs, and try to foster an "us against the world" attitude. It is best, of course, if they are smart enough to realize that indiscriminate murder will only bring wrath down upon their heads.
Peter Stewart wrote:
I'm also in this group, usually a fellow player, and currently giving Kain a chance to be a PC as I run a quick game. Everything Peter says is true.
Only a single point of Mythic power was spent in the entire fight, and even it was probably unnecessary. My fighter used Fleet Charge to get in position to attack somebody who died before his next turn anyway.
I wouldn't even have done that if I hadn't had a bonus use of temporary Mythic Power (the GM houseruled that any Hero Points you earn over the cap roll over into temporary Mythic Power that expires if not used in 24 hours).
Except for a few points, I'm pretty much in agreement with Peter. Mythic Saves needs to be changed, Surge needs to stop taking your swift/immediate action, Unstoppable should include more things, Immortal should be a universal Path power (though giving everyone Timeless Body would be a nice touch), and tracking mythic vs. non-mythic damage is a pain in the butt.
The feats, like he said, are just bonkers. Mythic +2/+2 feats don't even deserve to exist. I do personally like the damage bonus from Mythic Power Attack and Mythic Vital Strike, but the language on MPA does severely need to be cleaned up.
More variety in Mythic Feats is probably the single most needed thing in the whole rule set, IMO.
Three key premises for this question.
1. A Barbarian's rage gives morale bonuses to Strength, Constitution, and Will saves.
My question is, do temporary increases to a weapon's enhancement bonus count for Courageous? If a Barbarian wields, for example, a +4 Furious Courageous weapon, does he get +3 Str, Con, and Will over his normal rage, or only +2?
The sad fact is, that "better without bigger numbers" doesn't really work in the d20 system. If characters are expected to compete with monster CRs of level + tier, they need to be able to hit those monsters' ACs, save DCs, and so forth. So yes, some increase to ability scores are necessary.
That said, it probably would not be a bad idea to say that you can't use them to raise the same stat twice in a row. +6 Strength / +4 Constitution is less worrisome than +10 Strength, for example.
And as Kain and Peter have been saying, making it solely based on tier means that your first few mythic tiers give no significant boosts to a group that starts getting them when already at high level.
In the same campaign, my 14th level Fighter/Barbarian, Tier 1 Champion/Guardian has 4 uses of Mythic Power. Four. That won't even last him one difficult combat.
That's how my GM does it. Speaking as one of the group's two fighters, I have no problem with it.
I would agree with Peter's suggestion, as well. Or even tier x 2. Judging by how fast I went through eight Mythic Points, four won't really be enough to affect anything in a noticeable way, especially at high-level-low-mythic.
And Monkeygod may no longer be evil, but I see his search for the truth is as futile as ever.
And if she hadn't, at least two people (my two-hander and the bard) would probably have been killed or paralyzed by his Neck Breaker feat chain.
-Where is the simplicity? Seriously, if I want to smash a guy through a stone wall, took the mythic power for it, and spend a mythic point to do it I roll unarmed (like I have unarmed damage ready to hand) and then the DM and I figure out which of the five different categories of stone wall it is, measure how many feet of stone the wall is so that we can figure out my d3+whatever failed to break through the boatload of hitpoints per foot its category of stone wall has? The simplification I would be looking for would be more like "you spent a mythic point? you break the wall. Done." The way it is is more complicated than a regular attack.
This. So very much this.
I was playing the two-handed fighter in that encounter.
I'm not certain how much feedback I can give from my own perspective in particular, for two reasons. One, the enemy's ability to respond to any missed melee attack with a grapple, and use another grappled character as a shield, shut me down pretty hard, without anything Mythic being involved (Snapping Turtle Style and something else, for the record). Second, I only went into the fight with two uses of Mythic Power, having used the rest on a non-combat encounter we'd just come from.
That being said, I will definitely agree with Pete that Fleet Charge was the biggest game changer for bad guy and PCs alike. Both of my points were spent on saving throws, but the sword-n-board, our rogue/bard, and the enemy all used that power to great effect, to the extent that I felt severely outclassed by not having the opportunity to employ it myself.
Likewise, it reinforced some of my thoughts from reading the document that Archmage and Hierophant could stand to tone down their offensive powers and boost defensive/survival ones.
The part about the critical is indeed very confusing! We thought we might have been doing it wrong for 14 levels. Also makes critical damage a pain to calculate, since part of your damage is working off a different multiplier than the rest. I would honestly rather not have it, just because it would slow down my turns every time I got a crit.
Regarding two-handed and light weapons; at higher levels, is the 1.5 or 0.5 multiplier applied at the end, or the beginning? For example, a 12th-level fighter with Mythic Power Attack and a one-handed weapon would take a -4 penalty and add +12 damage. If he used a two-handed weapon, would he add +18 damage (4.5 * 4), or +16 (4.5 rounded down to 4 * 4)?
Finally, it should probably specify in the feat that the multipliers still apply at all. I had to find this thread to get my DM to agree that it wasn't a flat +3 regardless of weapon.
For reference, I am playing a 14th level fighter/barbarian, with the Two-Handed Fighter archetype, in the Savage Tide. The game's been running since PF Alpha.
It's mostly there for gishes. Magi, especially, love spellstriking with vampiric touch, since it helps them simultaneously with damage and durability, but anyone gets the same benefits. For a normal caster, you'd probably want your familiar to be the one delivering it if you're using it offensively.
Note also that temporary hp from multiple castings of it don't stack, you just use the highest.
A natural-weapon or unarmed-based Magus. Probably involves a lot of minor shapeshifting.
A sorcerous magus, with spontaneous casting and a bloodline instead of some of their pool spell features.
Archer magus, preferably one that works equally well with bows and guns.
While we're on the topic, what are the consequences to a familiar when its master dies? In our group, everyone but the DM assumed they became normal animals again. DM said the familiar dies or goes insane.
Funny, I'm in a campaign with the exact opposite situation. If my Summoner and his eidolon (who was basically built to be as much like a couatl as possible) ganged up on the Fighter, he would easily stomp the both of us. The fighter's attack bonus is 7-9 points higher than my eidolon's, assuming no buffs and depending on which weapon he's currently using, he deals far more damage, has higher AC, higher hit points, better saves and, thanks to shield feats and adamantine armor, better damage reduction.
If the summoner really is limited to one summon/eidolon at a time, my character will go from barely useful to mildly useless.
What some people seem to be forgetting is that D&D (and thus, Pathfinder) has always catered to all styles of play; the door-kicking, Monty Hauling, hack'n'slashing group can use the same rules, and have just as much fun as the mystery-solving political intrigue-based groups. Any set of Epic rules needs to have that same versatility.
Also, Jaerom and the others were absolutely correct when they said that any coherent set of Epic rules must flow naturally and easily from the core rules; 21 should be a minor milestone at best, only a slight improvement over what's "possible" or "normal" for the setting.
Make sure Fighters, Rogues, and other "mundane" get just as much cool stuff as casters. Actually, the core PF rules could stand another step or two in this direction as well.
My thoughts, as I read through the document. Apologies if any of them have already been said and I don't mention it; just take me as agreeing with you. Oh, and not to sound pretentious or anything, but I have been playing 3.5 and designing my own material since it came out, so I do know a tiny bit of what I speak. ;)
Arcane Archer: Death Arrow is useless. A typical character gets it at level 17 (Wizard1/Fighter6/Arcane Archer10), and there is only one CR 17 monster in the SRD that can fail a DC 20 Fort save on anything but a natural 1. And that one, the Aboleth Mage, only needs a 5 or better.
I like what you did with Imbue Arrow; now, you have to pay for enhancements on the bow, and use the class features for special abilities, rather than vice versa.
Seeker Arrow, Phase Arrow, and Hail of Arrows are cute gimmicks, but only being 1/day, they don't actually bring much to the table. I might suggest a number of "trick shots" or something, that can power them all, with daily uses equal to (half?) the class level.
I agree with the people who've said that some spellcasting advancement would make the class much more playable.
Arcane Trickster: Not much change. Sneak Attack has always applied to spells that use attack rolls to hit, just now they can do it with AoEs too.
Assassin: Need to clear up when the sneak attack advances.
Quiet Death is awesome. So is Swift Death. However, I do think that without spells, this version of the class is overall weaker than the one in the DMG. Greater Invisibility alone makes a huge difference in combat, and they're one of two classes to get Glibness...
Dragon Disciple: Hell yes! Even with lower ability boosts than an actual half-dragon, this class rocks. There's no real reason not to take 1-4 levels of it, and even Sorcerer10/Dragon Disciple10 is a very defensible build now.
Duelist: I would allow them to use slashing weapons in addition to piercing, but that's just personal taste.
Anything that Sneak Attack applies to, Canny Strike should apply to, as well.
Parry is nice, but the penalties seem to stack up very quickly...
Since most Duelists will probably crit quite often, Crippling Critical is very, very nice.
Eldritch Knight: Nicely boosted, but still seems kind of... bland, at least before 10th level. I think they really need some kind of armored casting ability, probably just like the Bard's. Arcane Armor Training/Mastery consume your swift action, meaning you can't use Spell Critical or a Quickened Spell that round, and not wearing armor means he's terribly fragile for a front-liner.
Mystic Theurge: When using Spell Synthesis as a sorcerer/cleric, I assume the only arcane spells you can prepare in your cleric slots are the ones on your spells known list?
Spell Synthesis... wow. That ability was really awesome, until I saw the 1/day line. Now they can be fully effective... for round round a day. I'd say at least 3 times; if the class needs harsher prerequisites to balance that, so be it.
Pathfinder Chronicler: Deep Pockets is interesting. Almost seems more like a feat chain than a class feature, though.
Epic Tale is pretty nice; make some during downtime, and you've got a reserve for when you run out of music.
Inspire Action is awesome.
Why are all the legends barbarians? Why not fighters, or paladins?
Even with Intelligence at 12, 14, 16, I still find myself wanting more skill points. I find myself thinking "hey, this character should know how to do such and such, but I don't have the points for it."
That's not the point at all. The idea of giving more skill points is to have points in a larger number of different skills, not more points in one. Skill Focus and the pathetic +2/+2 feats do nothing to help with that.
No more so than sorcerer Bloodlines, fighter Weapon training, or all the new paladin Auras you've added. Picking two extra skills takes less than a minute for existing characters, man and it will make those classes so much more fun to play. I was actually disappointed to not see it on them.
Seriously, Paizo. That just isn't enough to cover the things your class is expected to do and still have any kind of individuality. Two more skill points isn't going to overpower any class, and it will make Fighters, Sorcerers, and Paladins so much easier to personalize with a few roleplaying choices without falling behind in their core skills. The problem is especially made harder by the reduction of skill points at level one, and lack of any increase over levels like in Alpha 1.
I'd like to toss a vote for this, as well, if we're keeping the rank system at all (which is vastly inferior to the Alpha 1 version). The only class I could see getting 2+Int is wizard; fighters, sorcerers, clerics, all need more to get anything beyond the bare bones necessities.