Goblin

Weirdo's page

Organized Play Member. 5,531 posts. No reviews. No lists. 1 wishlist. 1 Organized Play character. 1 alias.


RSS

1 to 50 of 5,531 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yeah, multiple targets is a big benefit.

I'd also point out that aside from the Inquisitor, the classes that get Hunter's Blessing (Cleric/Oracle, Druid, Inquisitor, Shaman) don't get Heroism on their base list.

Shadow Lodge

I will definitely keep that in mind! Running a chapter or two sounds feasible. I've also been limited for prep time recently, so it wouldn't be unthinkable to put our current homebrew campaign on hold and run something pre-published for a change - but I really appreciate having the options available for more casual playtesting.

Shadow Lodge

Thanks Mark!

I'd like to get my group involved in the playtest but it might be easier to muster sufficient enthusiasm if there is some flexibility in what we run and/or how many sessions we are investing in it.

Shadow Lodge

Dazing spell says "When a creature takes damage from this spell, they become dazed."

If the cold resistance is high enough to prevent the creature from taking any damage, then they don't become dazed.

If the damage dealt is lower than their cold resistance, they will take damage from the spell and become dazed.

Shadow Lodge

Serisan is right, no somatic components means no hands required for casting.

I would hesitate to do TWF because of a combination of feat requirements being steep and Legacy Weapon only affecting a single weapon (double weapons still being enchanted/enhanced separately).

Having a haunted Abjuration implement wouldn't be terrible. Another possibility is Divination, if you don't expect to be able to invest enough mental focus to get the Darkvision and See Invisibility resonant powers. Or if you do take Conjuration for Side Step (and the ability to use a wand of CLW), that's also a pretty lame resonant power.

What are you thinking for your focus power selection? You want Sudden Speed (level 1), Mind Eye (level 5+), Mind over Gravity (7+), and probably Shadow Beast (9+) and/or Necromantic Servant (1+). Do you have an idea for level 3?

I find that the particulars of focus powers and mental focus allocation mean that building a good occultist, moreso than other classes, rewards planning ahead.

Shadow Lodge

I'm going to go in the opposite direction and say that Remove Curse should only allow you to discard cursed items regardless of type (it does not permanently remove the curse from the item) and the text referring specifically to weapons, armour, and shields is misleading or possibly in error. From general cursed item rules:

Removing Cursed Items wrote:
While some cursed items can be simply discarded, others force a compulsion upon the user to keep the item, no matter the costs. Others reappear even if discarded or are impossible to throw away. These items can only be discarded after the character or item is targeted by a remove curse or similar magic. The DC of the caster level check to undo the curse is equal to 10 + the item’s caster level. If the spell is successful, the item can be discarded on the following round, but the curse reasserts itself if the item is used again.

This text is very general with no indication that cursed rings and so forth can be permanently un-cursed.

Shadow Lodge

Love:

Feats. Class feats ensure each class is customizable, skill and ancestry feats allow characters to develop in those areas without feeling like they are falling behind in combat.

Alchemical items being better developed and relevant through high levels.

Multiple levels of success and failure.

Like:

Skills being able to do fantastic things at high level.

Flexible ancestry stat bonus, makes unusual combinations less punishing.

Cautiously optimistic:

Action system. Seems more flexible, will see how it plays.

Proficiency system.

Changes to magic items. Sounds positive, need to see more - and playtest resonance.

Shadow Lodge

Red/black colour schemes.

Motifs involving bones, snakes, spiders, scorpions, rats.

In addition to horns, claws and fangs - or if you want to go more subtle, very long fingernails or unusually pointed teeth, possibly of a yellowish colour.

Necromancy. Plenty of non [evil] spells. Bad reputation.

TV tropes has lots of ideas.

Shadow Lodge

GM Rednal wrote:
I disagree that min/maxing is necessary. A lot depends on how the GM intends to build enemies - and, in fact, it's good to ask them if you should try to power up, or if they'd rather you spread your power around. ^^

Generally a good idea. In my experience there are three reasons to gestalt:

1) High power games.

2) Interesting character concepts, which often lean more towards versatility.

3) Allowing an unusually small party to do the job of a 4-person party. Important to focus on versatility and well-rounded defenses, with pets and summonings being especially valuable.

Shadow Lodge

An earth/aether kineticist is... a melee tanky character with utility. Shiroi and lemeres have a good run-down on the specifics. He might also be able to inflict minor status effects such as entangled when he hits an enemy.

With kinetic blade, being able to switch between melee and short-range fire is a very nice ability.

I haven't seen a kineticist at higher levels yet, but I've heard their accuracy can suffer compared to classes that can put plusses on their weapons.

Shiroi wrote:
Egil Firehair wrote:

As SLAs, the Kineticist's attacks ignore Damage Reduction, but bounce off of Spell Resistance. Demons/devils/what-have-you tend to have CR+11 SR, so the Fiendish template (only CR+5) will slow the Kinny down, and actual Outsiders will sneer at him by 8th level. Other than spell Penetration and Greater Spell Penetration, there isn't a lot the Kineticist can do about it. Most of the tools Wizards and Sorcerers use to get past Sr work on spells, not SLAs...

If he's going Earth (and I think if he's throwing a weapon with aether instead of the pure energy version) he does more damage and ignores SR but he deals with normal AC and DR.

Correct, earth and aether (telekinetic) blasts are physical blasts and deal with DR, not SR. Rare Metal Infusion exists specifically to bypass DR, but if the character is taking both earth and aether they can't take that infusion (yet).

Also Spell Penetration works fine with SLAs.

Shadow Lodge

While we're posting guide links, I'm going to shamelessly self-promote. Weirdo's Guide to Gestalt, and discussion thread. Work in progress but hopefully useful.

Fighter//Oracle is a pretty good combo. We've got a Cavalier//Oracle in the party at the moment, and she mostly casts a pre-buff or two before combat, Prayer first round, then wades into melee and patches up the party afterwards.

Personally I'm a fan of reach builds for Fighter//Divine Caster combos since the AoO can give you extra attacks even on rounds when you cast (same philosophy as reach clerics).

Definitely recommend Warsighted archetype, if you can handle the extra complexity. You trade most of your revelations but can still take Extra Revelation as a feat, you can afford to spend some fixed feats to get flexible feats, and there's not that many revelations that you'd really want. Best revelations would be War Sight (initiative bonus), Surprising Charge, Iron Skin, and maybe Weapon Mastery (three feats for the price of Extra Revelation, though Greater Weapon Focus comes online a little late).

Thoughts on the curse? As a dwarf Clouded Vision and Lame are a lot less useful than usual. Tongues is a pretty painless curse.

Having an Int bonus is nice since the Fighter//Oracle only gets the 4 skill ranks.

Shadow Lodge

Occultists are great!

Half-elf is a good race choice, and you've got the right idea for implements. Keep in mind that even as a melee build you will want a very high Int - possibly even higher than your Str - to get lots of Focus. I've got a melee occultist right now at level 2 with Int 16 and Str 15 (+2=17 with Physical Enhancement) and I am happy with that prioritization.

If you're making a martial occultist, you definitely want to take Transmutation right away. The Physical Enhancement resonant power and Legacy Weapon are gold, not to mention the buff spells.

For the rest, the order looks fine, but it's worth considering which focus powers you want and timing schools accordingly. For example, Necromantic Servant is probably Necromancy's best power and it's available at first level, so it may be worth taking that school a little earlier - possibly even at level 1. Abjuration is good, but you can delay it to level 2 or even 6.

I love the Mind Eye power, which makes Divination a great pick at level 2 (Mind Eye at 5) or 6 (Mind Eye at 7). However, keep in mind that getting much use out of the resonant power requires you to sink a lot of mental focus into it - points that as a melee occultist you'll probably want to put in Transmutation.

You might want to look into the Haunt Collector archetype, since the Champion's spirit bonus is very nice for a melee occultist. Necromancy is a great school to haunt (thematic and resonant power is pretty useless) though Illusion would also do.

Shadow Lodge

I think I trend towards NG - just plain heroic and if they care about something other than helping people it's nature, art, or knowledge. Second favourite is LG (heroic and honourable) but I'm not a big fan of LN - my less heroic characters tend to be more free spirited or at least more invested in their own goals than some sense of law and order.

Villains... probably LE because it's easier to do a multi-layered and organized treat that will appear throughout a campaign.

Shadow Lodge

master_marshmallow wrote:

Omfg Point Buy is not balanced.

Stop saying it's balanced.

It gives the players control and lets them make a character without someone there to arbitrate dice rolls.

That's it. It's not better, not more balanced, and not intended by the design of the math.

It's totally fair to prefer it, but stop spreading this bullsh*t myth about balance.

It's not perfect, but it's more balanced than rolling one character whose lowest stat is a 14 and another whose highest stat is a 13, as happened in the most recent campaign I joined.

Shadow Lodge

Yeah, I definitely don't think that point buy is about preventing people from being jerks.

It's not jerky players that reduce your fun when your stats don't support your character concept. And while jerks can make it worse in a situation in which one player's lowest ability score is the same as another player's highest ability score, it can be an unpleasant situation with the best of groups depending on what your motivations for playing are. Personally I get at least some enjoyment of Pathfinder out of feeling like I'm doing cool stuff and acting as a vaulable part of the team, and that's harder if I'm objectively weaker than other party members.

Wicked Woodpecker of the West wrote:
Quote:
And looking at the stat arrays all together, I'd make the elf a zen archer (S 14 D 14 C 10 I 13 W 16 Ch 9), the dwarf the cleric (S 12 D 12 C 16 I 15 W 15 Ch 10; I'd want at least a Str or Dex 14 for a monk), and the tiefling a slayer (S 16 D 17 C 10 I 10 W 12 Ch 10; tankier than a rogue but can still handle traps and such). I'd also make the gnome the witch (S 12 D 9 C 16 I 17 W 12 Ch 11) and the halfling the wizard (S 7 D 8 C 8 I 16 W 15 Ch 12), since the witch probably needs the slightly higher stats more than the wizard does - they have a lot of single-target save-negates magic so they need the extra point of Int more, and have fewer magical defenses so they could use the high Con more.

Must say seems just fine.

I was wandering about making tiefling frontier, but that's maybe because I'm used to play with massive damage house rule where any strike with more damage than your raw Constitution is danger of serious condition, with Fortitude save must made, so 10 Con is a bit no, no.

I'd say it's fine from strikey side, but party both yours and mine lack tank...

Well yes, that houserule would make it much harder to be a frontliner in general, especially if you roll stats in order and can't make sure you have a good Con.

Without the houserule it's still considered tempting fate to have a Con below 10 for any character, with a 12-14 considered advisable for most builds, particularly frontliners. Unfortunately with this rolling method, only the dwarf and the gnome has a Con above 10, and neither of them has the Str or Dex to be a good melee striker - the active role almost always bundled with builds that are also passively tanky.

That said, as a cleric the dwarf gets medium armour and shield proficiency. With scale mail and a light shield, he could have a level 1 AC of 17 (5 armour, 1 Dex, 1 shield), and 11-12 HP. That's solid.

And slayers are actually pretty tanky. While their skills and sneak attack are rogue-like, they are more like rangers in combat abilities - they get d10 HP and medium armour and shield proficiency. The tiefling could potentially grab a chain shirt and a heavy shield for a level 1 AC of 19 (4 armour, 2 shield, 3 dex) - or 20 if they take the scaled skin racial trait for +1 natural armour. They'll put a point in Dex at level 4 for an extra +1. If they use slayer talents to take the Weapon and Shield combat style they could grab improved shield bash (lvl 1), shield slam (lvl 2 or 4 talent), TWF (level 3), and shield master (lvl 6 talent). Not quite as tanky as a barbarian or paladin but not bad at all, especially given that their flanking partner can also take some punishment.

The Halfling is still in a bad spot - he's got a darn rough first 4 levels or so. Might even recommend making him a silksworn occultist instead of a wizard, for the d8 HP and good base Fort save. Actually, that would also help with the social skills with an extra 2 skill points/level and Diplomacy, Bluff, and Disguise as class skills.

Of course, for purposes of this discussion I should point out that just because it's possible to build a balanced party using this method doesn't mean that everyone would be interested in playing the resulting characters.

SomethingRandom wrote:
Weirdo wrote:
SomethingRandom wrote:
We roll for pointbuy.
Not sure if joking, but this seems like the worst of both worlds to me.
Would buying rolls with points be better?

Marginally? That sounds like the "assign 24 d6s to your ability scores" method. It still can give unbalanced arrays and is probably more likely to give rolls that don't fit your concept than the 4d6 drop lowest assign wherever, but at least you get a pretty organic feeling set of stats.

Shadow Lodge

sadie wrote:
A high level Fighter who's been paying attention to what they've been fighting, memorising common traits and understanding their enemies, should represent that by investing at least one point in it.

I do that a lot with my martials.

It usually ends up being pretty pointless because one or two points in a Knowledge skill that might not be a class skill, on a character that probably doesn't have more than a +1 Int bonus... does not amount to much. I basically have a [I]chance[\i] to aid another for another party member who doesn't usually need the +2.

In order to get a bonus with any practical relevance, I need to invest a significant fraction of my limited points. That cannot happen with skills the character takes only a casual interest in.

Shadow Lodge

Wicked Woodpecker of the West, that does sound like it would be fun to try if everyone was on board, but personally I wouldn't want it to be my usual stat generation method.

And looking at the stat arrays all together, I'd make the elf a zen archer (S 14 D 14 C 10 I 13 W 16 Ch 9), the dwarf the cleric (S 12 D 12 C 16 I 15 W 15 Ch 10; I'd want at least a Str or Dex 14 for a monk), and the tiefling a slayer (S 16 D 17 C 10 I 10 W 12 Ch 10; tankier than a rogue but can still handle traps and such). I'd also make the gnome the witch (S 12 D 9 C 16 I 17 W 12 Ch 11) and the halfling the wizard (S 7 D 8 C 8 I 16 W 15 Ch 12), since the witch probably needs the slightly higher stats more than the wizard does - they have a lot of single-target save-negates magic so they need the extra point of Int more, and have fewer magical defenses so they could use the high Con more.

So the tiefling slayer is the main frontliner, supplemented by the dwarf cleric (who could buff and flank). The gnome witch and halfling wizard can handle debuffing, control, and other magical support. The elven zen archer handles ranged damage. The slayer and zen archer could both scout, and the casters can split knowledge skills between them. Party's biggest weakness with that arrangement is probably a lack of social skills, since the best Charisma is the wizard with a 12. Could probably scrounge up some racial +2 bonuses to Diplomacy and Bluff, and make them class skills for the right characters using traits or the fey thoughts alternate racial trait.

SomethingRandom wrote:
We roll for pointbuy.

Not sure if joking, but this seems like the worst of both worlds to me. You get variable power levels for stats, the resulting arrays are not organic, and you still don't necessarily know whether you can make specific concept until you roll (since some concepts work better for different point buys).

Shadow Lodge

avr, I think Genoin was talking about the superstitous rage power ("Spell Sunder / Superstitious") and not the archetype. The unarmoured barbarian is called the "savage barbarian" and it trades trap sense and DR for an AC bonus of up to +8 total (+3 dodge and +5 natural, increases at levels 3, 7, 9, 10, 13, 15, 16, and 19). Bad trade for a normally armoured barbarian, pretty good if you'd rather not wear armour in the first place, especially if you're not taking the natural armour bonus from beast totem. Note that Scarred Witch Doctor grants an enhancement to your natural armour, so it stacks.

3) Other two posters are correct about the general situation. Specific examples. Witches are missing Shield, Mirror Image, Blur, and Displacement, though they keep Mage Armour. They keep Obscuring Mist (and other Fog spells including Stinking Cloud), Web, and Black Tentacles but don't get the Pit or Wall spells. They don't get Fireball but do get Lightning Bolt and Cone of Cold. They keep Fly, Tongues, Dimension Door, and Teleport. They seem to get most of the important divinations (eg See Invis, Arcane Sight, Detect Thoughts, Scrying, Divination) and also add Augury. They get a good assortment of enchantments, including Hold Person as a level 2 spell (level 3 for wizards). The biggest new thing is definitely healing - they get cure spells and most condition removal spells, including Remove Disease, Negate Poison, Heal, and Raise Dead (though not Restoration or Lesser Restoration - though if you're the party's only healer you could pick these up using the Healing patron).

4) Strength Patron does look like a pretty good fit for your character.

2nd—divine favor, 4th—bull’s strength, 6th—greater magic weapon, 8th—divine power, 10th—righteous might, 12th—mass bull’s strength, 14th—giant form I, 16th—giant form II, 18th—shapechange

Shadow Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm OK with racial options being significant and powerful as long as they aren't clearly the optimal way to build a particular class or concept. Like, I'd rather see elves get better range or an easier time ignoring cover and concealment with bows than a flat DPR bonus.

Emeric Tusan wrote:
Can some one tell me where it has been confirmed that humans have a base speed of 25 feet? Are we sure that is not just an armor speed penelty on the fighter and cleric?

Just in case anyone has missed, yesterday's Dwarf and Elf blog includes the sentence: "Elves can see in dim light, and have the highest speed of all the ancestries at 30 feet. (Going to three actions per round brought the other ancestries that were as fast as elves in Pathfinder First Edition down to 25 feet from 30.)"

Also as I think others have pointed out in other threads it looks like the distinction made by Heritage feats would make it easier to specify how adoption might work (you can take Heritage ancestry feats from your birth race, and other ancestry feats from your adoptive race).

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I am going to try to keep up with comments but please bear with me - there's a reason that I'm not finished with this despite working on it for 3.5 years.

Archetypes have been extremely frustrating for me during this project. There are a lot of them, more are constantly being released, and they include both seemingly small changes that happen to synergize really well with specific gestalts as well as big changes that completely overhaul base assumptions about how the class works. I've tried to go back and update entries when new things come out, but some things like Eldritch Archer seem to have been missed or applied inconsistently. I appreciate you folks pointing these out.

Updated Bard//Gunslinger with Juggler and Gunslinger//Magus with Eldritch Archer. Updated Druid with Supernaturalist and specifically recommended Supernaturalist//Herald Caller, Monster Tactician Inquisitor, and possibly Abyssal Bloodline Sorcerer.

VoodistMonk, I may need to add a few general tips for selecting on flavourful combinations in the beginning of the guide - I like the idea of pairing racial or deity-based archetypes.

avr, added a note about Green Scourge and Flame Blade under Druid//Rogue, though I'm hesitant to make it the main combat strategy given that the spell is short duration and can be negated by SR or energy resistance (albeit with the frost/shocking options giving you a bit more versatility on energy type that once you hit level 5).

Also hesitant to recommend investing too heavily in Shillelagh as a strategy given that it's, again, short duration, and can't enhance a magic quarterstaff. The increased enhancement for Green Scourge only applies on one end, so it's better for Flurry than TWF builds. I think it might still work OK for Staff Magus since you would generally use the thing one-handed instead of as a double weapon and it looks like Arcane Pool would stack fine as long as you cast Shillelagh before making it magic through Arcane Pool. But I don't think you could use Staff Weapon and Shillelagh on the same staff. Made a few notes in the Druid//Monk and Druid//Magus sections.

avr wrote:
BTW, you mentioned under cavalier // monk that mounted skirmisher works on a charge - it doesn't. It lets you double move and full attack, or even run and full attack, but not charge and full attack.

*Sighs.* Last time I checked in on the issue, the consensus was that it did work, but is seems there were some clarifications to mounted charge since then. Fixed, thanks.

Dasrak, you are probably right about the Gunslinger//Spellslinger, but I would like to spend a bit more time reviewing the archetype before recommending focusing exclusively on on Mage Bullets. For now I have removed the specific build comments for the combination (including recommendations on opposition schools) and instead just pointed out that the archetype exists.

Dasrak wrote:
Also you seem to be inconsistent with regards to the Mad Magic feat; some options appear to be rated as if it doesn't exist, other explicitly mention it. Bottom line: mixing rage and casting just costs you a feat these days; not a serious impediment.

I did point out Mad Magic in the general notes, but I don't think it makes a big difference for the barbarian in most cases because it is more limited than for the bloodrager (costs two rage powers on top of the feat and is only usable once per rage). For example, it's not very useful for the Barbarian//Magus since you probably want to use spell combat more than once per fight. I've clarified this take on Mad Magic for the Barbarian in the general class notes, and replaced a few vestigal instances of "can't cast while raging" in the bloodrager descriptions with "costly/inconvenient to cast while raging." Mad Magic is baked into the better ratings for several caster//bloodrager gestalts compared to the caster//barbarian versions, though I don't always mention it in the specific descriptions because it's in the general notes and I'm trying not to repeat myself. In fact, in places where Mad Magic is referenced in the specific notes for bloodrager it's probably left over from before I was writing general notes with all the stuff I was tired of repeating.

Dasrak wrote:
I think you're vastly underrating the full martial // full arcane caster combination. ASF can be lived with, and otherwise it's every bit as good as the full martial // full divine caster combination, which you tend to rate highly. Conjuration (Teleportion) Wizard with Dimensional Agility in particular can be an incredible nuisance when mixed with a reach fighter, and there are a few other school powers that are well-suited to a more martial bent that work well.

Perhaps, but it's not just ASF. Full divine classes tend to have more class features that support weapons combat than full arcane classes, while mages tend to have one or two nice tricks. But I'll give wizard another look-over for martial synergies, and consider softening my warning about those combinations - it may be more accurate to say that the wizard//fighter is easier to build badly (has a lower "floor") rather than it being a bad idea more broadly.

Shadow Lodge

CactusUnicorn wrote:
blahpers wrote:
CactusUnicorn wrote:

I genuinely don't understand what you're saying. I literally said there are more ways to have fun, how is that saying you play badwrongfun. I'm trying to open up more options not say existing ones are badwrongfun.

Question: Why do you have to play a Wizard? That actually doesn't make sense to me. Class in Pathfinder is just a means to an end, something you wrote on your character sheet. You can play the same concept and do the same things in many different classes.

Personally, when I create a character I think of what I want them to be. For example, for one character I wanted to play a daring pious catfolk martial. I considered multiple classes such as fighter, slayer, rogue, warpriest, and prestige classes such as evangilist, shadowdancer, and defensive stalwart (or whatever it's called) before deciding on swashbuckler/shadowdancer. The class isn't the first choice for me and I don't see why it has to be for you.

And when Bob sat down to play, he had a wizard in mind. Now he can't play one.

If Bob sat down at your table, rolled those arrays, then said "but I really wanted to play a wizard", would you argue with him that he's doing it wrong? Because that's a great way to tell Bob that you don't want him at your table.

No, I would say, "Hey Bob, I know you really want to play a Wizard but I don't think you rolled the stats for that. How about you play a Sorceror instead, their like Wizards but they don't have to prepare their spells! I think you'll have a lot of fun."

If you genuinely don't understand why Bob would be disappointed by that, I will try to explain.

When I come up with a character concept, that concept is often rather specific in ways that indicate either a single class or a very short list of classes, and have some sense of the character's key ability scores built in.

For example, I don't want to play "a spellcaster with a reverence for nature." I want to play a wise, grey-haired mystic with a talent for shapeshifting - a druid or maybe a feral hunter, not a nature oracle or sylvan sorcerer or even a cleric with the animal and plant domains.

I don't just want to play an arcane caster. I want to play a bookish academic mage obsessed with planning for every eventuality. Having a high Intelligence score, good Knowledge skills, and even prepared spellcasting are part of the concept. I could still have fun playing a sorcerer, but it wouldn't be the same character concept and I likely wouldn't be as invested in it as the character that I'd already started to develop before stats were rolled.

Even if I don't have a class in mind, I might have a broad but stat-dependent sense of what I want to do like "agile fencer" or "guy with a really big axe" or "charming con-artist" which don't work if I end up with a low dex, strength, or charisma, respectively.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Currently using 4d6 reroll 1s drop lowest, with rerolls allowed for particularly low arrays essentially by GM fiat.

It's... worked so far but I'm looking for a new method. Priorities in choosing a stat method for me are:

1) Allows people to create the character concept they envisioned. Most of the players in my group have a pretty good idea of what they want to play when they start to make their characters, and anything that makes it impossible to play eg an elven monk because you rolled badly is a non-starter.

2) Feels organic. Point buy just doesn't feel as interesting to me - ability score generation is one area of the game where I prefer a bit of surprise to another resource management exercise.

3) Balanced/fair. Ability score arrays certainly aren't the only source of mechanical imbalance between characters in a game, and we're pretty good at making everyone feel equally relevant even if there's a bit of a range in stat arrays. But it's definitely preferable if some players aren't noticably stronger or weaker because of simple luck during character creation.

I'm strongly tempted to try the "everyone rolls an array and then each player picks one of these arrays" method for the next game I run. It would be an improvement on fairness and within-party balance, be just as organic as everyone rolling their own array, and if anything increase the odds that you'll be able to find an array in the pool that fits your character concept (even if it's not necessarily the highest point buy array in the pool).

I'm also really intrigued by "organic" methods involving rolling in order or assigning dice to stats and then rolling, and have started using these methods to create NPCs with unusual talents or weaknesses. But I don't think it could ever be my group's primary method for ability score generation due to (1). Maybe for a one-shot, or if it was offered as an option alongside a more flexible method (possibly with slightly more d6s involved to make up for the likely non-optimal stat results)?

Shadow Lodge

Goblins. Small size, yet larger than life.

Second place probably goes to gnomes. I really like the flavour Pathfinder have them, and the ability to pick different sets of SLAs with alternate racial traits.

Shadow Lodge

If the issue is lack of familiarity with the spy class, you may have more luck in the 3rd party forum.

Shadow Lodge

Pizza Lord, I am confused about what you are trying to say and what you think I'm saying. I think you may be over-focusing on the details of my post rather than the general ideas.

The OP's ultimate question is not the meaning of obvious harm, but whether a wizard he considers hostile should be able to use Suggestion to compel him to return the wizard's spellbook. The passage I quoted discusses the limitations on enchantment spells, and thus is broadly relevant in determining what Suggestion is intended to accomplish.

While the example about the kingdom was given in the discussion about Dominate specifically, it is still relevant because Dominate is less limited than Suggestion - as the quoted passage states, Dominate gives you total control and your commands don't need to be reasonable, just not obviously self destructive. Thus any limitations on Dominate's interpretation of self-destructive or harmful acts probably also apply to Suggestion. If Dominate is limited in its ability to inflict social harm, then Suggestion is probably also limited in its ability to inflict social harm. If Dominate is limited in its ability to compel not just directly but also indirectly self-destructive actions, Suggestion is probably also limited in its ability to cause indirect harm. Or in other words, just because handing over the spellbook doesn't cause the target immediate physical damage doesn't necessarily mean that it's not considered harmful.

Now, the bar for what is considered "self destructive" on a non-physical level is certainly high. This is why I'm curious about why OP's character thinks the wizard is a threat - does OP-PC actually think that the wizard is practically guaranteed to ruin OP-PC's life if given the spellbook? And if so, why are they still in the same party?

The bar for "unreasonable" is a lower one, though - and the passage I quoted made it clear that that's intentional. Suggestion is supposed to be more powerful if you think creatively about it and understand the target's motivations. It does require a bit of GM adjudication. (From the quoted passage "The main danger with enchantments lies in removing agency from a character, either a PC or NPC, and the main difficulty in running them is adjudicating just how much they do so.") In the case of PVP mind control I think it is particularly important to spend the time to make sure that the spell is adjudicated fairly.

Pizza Lord wrote:
Weirdo wrote:
Even if it's not "obviously self-destructive," it could still hazardous enough to be considered unreasonable.
This is clearly about 'obvious harm' (forgive me if you are just elaborating on another situation), but this topic has nothing to do with any other reason, that 'obvious harm' ('self-destructive' is dominate). You are stating that a suggestion is considered unreasonable, and that's why it fails, but you're then using the fact that it will fail, flat-out and without question, and that means that it must have been 'obviously harmful'. Those are two different things and you can't use an unreasonable suggestion's failure, as an excuse that it's harmful (it could be both, but since we have no actual phrase or wording for the example, we can only go by the qualifiers, one of which is that it's already unreasonable and that being unreasonable isn't the discussion).

I have no idea what you're trying to say, here.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Corvo Spiritwind wrote:
What really confuses me is why this is such an issue now when PF1 had PC ready Goblins available since June 2012.

My guess is that it's harder to ban or restrict things in your home game if they are considered "Core."

Shadow Lodge

4 people marked this as a favorite.

The only thing that having goblin PCs has disrupted is the party's baseline assumption that all goblins can be killed on sight.

Shadow Lodge

Going for the subset of my favourite archetypes that represent relatively core concepts

1) Cloistered/Cardinal Cleric, either or both. I would love to see a cleric that has social and/or scholarly skill instead of martial training. Ideally I'd probably make the Cloistered scholarly archetype, and then combine Cardinal with Evangelist for a social type.

2) Lore Warden (Fighter). Really it should be possible for a base fighter to act tactically, control the battlefield, and exploit enemy weaknesses. Tactician is similar conceptually, though mechanically it's focused around teamwork tactics which is a slightly different niche.

3) Zen Archer (Monk). There are a lot of good monk archetypes, but this one both has an iconic theme, and also feels very distinct both from other monks and other archers.

4) Feyspeaker (Druid). In general, I like druid archetypes that emphasize some specific aspect of the druid's connection to nature. I also love fey, and while I'm not super keen on the execution of this archetype I think it's a great concept. Mechanically, I think there's also a niche for a charisma-based and possibly spontaneous casting druid.

5) Virtuous Bravo (Paladin). It was hard to pick between this and Chosen One, but of the two the Virtuous Bravo felt more like it filled a hole - and as much as I love the familiar, the concept of Chosen One is pretty easy to pull off without mechanical effects. In general, I'll put in a request for support for Paladin concepts that aren't "Knight in shining plate who swore a formal oath to a knightly or religious organization," and that includes diverse combat styles. (I'm ambivalent about the Grey Paladin, because it essentially treats alternative alignment paladins as a lesser version of the Paladin, which makes it hard to be enthusiastic about playing one.)

Note: my top two are archetypes that give 2 skill/level classes more skills.

Erik Mona wrote:
Jason Bulmahn wrote:

Me on Monday - "Hey Erik, cool thread over the weekend. What were the results..."

Erik stares at me intently.

Me - "I'll get right on correlating those results for you..."

(I kid of course. This is the sort of thing we've been dying to ask, but couldn't really until the news was out. Interested in seeing what folks really like in the realm of Archetypes.)

HA HA HA JOKE'S ON YOU I AM CORRELATING THE RESULTS MYSELF.

Ha ha ha joke's on me, you're probably doing it too. :)

Joke's on me, I counted the first two pages before realizing that I was way behind you, anyway.

Nice to see that most of the popular archetypes are ones I like.

Shadow Lodge

I don't know of any such rule. The closest thing I am aware of would be the special Rock Throwing ability that giants get, which give them a greater range when specifically throwing rocks.

It would be a reasonable house rule to increase throwing range for large creatures, but I'm not sure exactly how I'd approach the numbers.

Shadow Lodge

Pizza Lord wrote:
Mental well-being has no bearing (on 'obvious harm', which is the discussion), and assuming you aren't talking about mental damage and drain or effects that would cause a mental condition like confusion or insanity. For example, depression, embarrassment, shame, etc. from being compelled to do something you later realize you shouldn't have done isn't prevented.

That's not actually true. Ultimate Intrigue discusses the use of enchantments at length:

Spells of Intrigue:Enchantments wrote:

The main danger with enchantments lies in removing agency from a character, either a PC or NPC, and the main difficulty in running them is adjudicating just how much they do so. As such, they are much easier to deal with than divinations, as they have less variety in the difficulties that arise. In all cases, a DC 25 (or lower) Sense Motive check notices that someone is enchanted. (See Skills in Conflict for more information on using Sense Motive to detect enchantment.) Charm Person: The main thing to remember about charm magic is that it is not a compulsion (that is a different subschool of enchantment), which means it doesn’t directly force someone to do something. Instead, the spell basically makes someone feel like the caster is a friend, and puts what the caster says in the best possible light. Just like in the Diplomacy section of Skills in Conflict, being someone’s friend doesn’t mean the caster gets to dictate everything they do, and even the opposed Charisma check the spell grants can only go so far; it doesn’t compel them to act exactly as the caster desires.

For instance, an evil necromancer might be willing to allow her friend to sit as her new right hand, but she won’t quit her entire life’s goal just because a friend asked, even with an opposed Charisma check. This advice applies equally as well to other charm spells (such as charm animal and charm monster).

Suggestion: Suggestion and its ilk, on the other hand, actually are mind-controlling spells. The key to suggestion is that it has to be presented in a reasonable fashion—and certain suggestions would simply never be reasonable for the target in question.

The more creative the player, or the sharper his understanding of an NPC’s motivations, the more often he can use this spell to his advantage. Players should be rewarded for this type of ingenuity, especially at lower levels when suggestion is one of the most powerful spells available. In mid-level play (or for a resourceful low-level villain), adversaries might start to succeed at Sense Motive checks to notice suggestion effects, potentially using protection from evil or similar spells to either protect against them or end ongoing compulsions.

In mid-level play, enchantments become more versatile, affecting more creature types, and dominate spells also come into play.

Dominate Person: Unlike suggestion, this spell gives the caster total control over another character, and the demands don’t need to be reasonable. The one saving grace in a game that employs intrigue is that the Sense Motive DC to detect the effect is only 15, so someone is very likely to notice it. Still, the effect is quite powerful, and it can potentially ruin a player’s time if her character becomes dominated, or it can ruin a plot if players dominate a vital NPC. The spell even allows a caster to use the dominated creature as a spy and see through its eyes, though again, the low DC of the Sense Motive check means that there are usually better ways to do so. In addition to other means of protecting against compulsions, dominate person has two special escape clauses.

First, the creature never takes obviously self destructive actions. The spell doesn’t mention whether this means only bodily harm, but there are many sorts of destruction beyond the physical. For instance, a command to make a king announce something that will obviously irreparably destroy his reputation and tear his kingdom apart likely counts. Even if something isn’t obviously self-destructive, each time a command forces the dominated person to take actions against his nature, he receives another saving throw with a +2 bonus. It’s up to you to determine how often to give these new saving throws if orders result in many successive acts against a character’s nature, but be fair in applying them at the same rate for both PCs and NPCs. Since being dominated can be highly frustrating for PCs, you can consider choosing a particularly fast rate in applying these new saving throws in both cases, though be sure to let the PCs know about this if it looks like they can use a dominate effect before the NPCs do. The advice here also applies to dominate monster.

So:

(1) Non-bodily harm, including social or political harm, can be included in "self destructive actions."
(2) The reactions of others to your actions can be considered in determinging whether harm is obvious (eg the physical act of making an annoucement doesn't ruin a reputation and destroy a kingdom, others' reactions to the announcement do that).
(3) Actions that aren't obviously self-destructive can still be unreasonable per Suggestion. The requirement to phrase your Suggestion reasonably is an intended limitation on the spell, but it's also intended to be exploitable by a creative caster.

By these guidelines, giving a hostile wizard a spellbook might be considered obviously self-destructive depending on how certain you are that he can and will use the spellbook to hurt you. Even if it's not "obviously self-destructive," it could still hazardous enough to be considered unreasonable.

If your character felt strongly enough about the threat posed by the wizard that he took special effort to take and hide his spellbook, then I would say that a simple suggestion to return the spellbook would probably be unreasonable. However, given that your PC is still at least nominally in the same party as the wizard, odds are pretty good that there is some way that the wizard could phrase a Suggestion that would result in him getting the book back. For example, he could Suggest that you give it to a third party member and then get the book from that party member - or otherwise Suggest that you move the book "for safe keeping" in such a way that would actually make it more accessible to the wizard.

Given that in this situation the GM is mediating a PC/PC conflict about what constitutes a reasonable Suggestion, I recommend thinking of at least one such Suggestion your character would consider reasonable, and telling the GM about it. That way the GM can assure the wizard's player that there is a possibility Suggestion would work - but the wizard's player has to figure it out.

Shadow Lodge

I'm assuming you're looking at the Feats table in the Advanced Class Guide?

The designation as a Combat feat (indicated with a * in the table) doesn't prevent anyone from taking that feat - it just gives specific classes the opportunity to take those feats as bonus feats.

Shadow Lodge

Kazumetsa Raijin, glad the guide is useful to you! That sounds like an interesting build, but it might be a bit complicated for the guide, and I'm not clear on where everything is coming from. How are you flanking with yourself? Are you taking the Dimensional Savant line based on abundant step? And which 1-handed weapon are you using that both has the monk property and qualifies for use with Rogue's Finesse (or are you not using Finesse)? Sickened on crit from Kyton bloodline, Dispelling Attack is an advanced rogue talent, and Wild Flanking and Outflank are teamwork feats - where are the rest of the debuffs and flanking bonuses coming from?

VoodistMonk, I'm a big fan of Paladin//Bard and Inquisitor//Ranger, and those archetype combinations look like fun. I also made a note of the Spellbreaker/Spellkiller Inquisitor pairing with ranger or other archery classes. Personally I do like magic, so I gravitate towards martials gestalted with partial or divine casters.

avr wrote:

Fleshing out witches. Invoker witch gestalted with another character class that boosts spells too or which can debuff the enemy in a way friendly to the action economy could be something special. Mesmerist for example for debuffs, or occultist for passive buffs.

White haired witch with so many things, but especially a grappler or tripper with full BAB and no urge to wear heavy armor.

Hexes, hex strike & long term spells, gestalted with a class which provides solid defense (even via heavy armor) could be another way to go. Esoteric magus, fighter, steelblood aberrant or shapechanger bloodrager, kinetic knight kineticist... the list goes on.

White haired witch definitely has lots of gestalt potential.

Invoker looks flexible - you get to switch between lowering DR/SR, increasing hex and patron spell DCs, spell or natural attack damage, spell duration (in rounds), and attack rolls. I think it has a nice application for builds with a split casting/fighting focus, like witch with kensai magus or inspired blade swashbuckler. Any particular reason you think it works better than a standard witch with other classes that buff spellcasting or debuff saves?

Hex Strike only works with UAS, or monk or natural weapons if you're springing for Ascetic Style/Feral Combat Training, so that wouldn't work well with the kineticist.

Seducer's also notable for Cha synergy: paladin, Scaled Fist Monk with Hex strike, maybe better for the mesmerist than invoker?

Shadow Lodge

I think that whether a discount for crafting is appropriate and how much depends on how difficult it is for characters to purchase specific items, on how much of an investment is required to craft magic items, and on how many limitations exist on the kinds of items you can craft.

Having wizards take Craft Wondrous Item and use Spellcraft (which they would invest in anyway) to make headbands, amulets, belts cloaks, gloves, boots, etc. is a low of power for not a lot of investment.

The blog mentions that magic item crafting is tied to your rank in the Craft skill. If this means that you are required to invest in a specific form of crafting, and not the versatile Spellcraft skill, then it could mean a bigger investment in skills paired with a more limited variety of items (eg, Clothing might make headbands, cloaks, and gloves, but not amulets, belts, and boots). The investment/versatility payoff is why Master Craftsman isn't a great feat for martials in the same way that Craft Wondrous Item is a great feat for wizards.

The investment for crafting also gets higher if the Downtime system gives you a wider variety of valuable things to do with downtime other than crafting.

Shadow Lodge

Yeah, which is why I think that Spirit Guide with Flame Spirit is not so much about the free Flaming weapons, its about the 3rd level Hex ability, which can give you Gaze of Flames. (Gaze of Flames is also available from the Flame Mystery, but if you're willing to plan your mystery around getting you consistent sneak attack I personally would pick Lunar for a pet to flank with).

Shadow Lodge

I think your math is wrong; d4+10+8d6 has an average damage of 40.5 (with a critical of 53, since most of the damage doesn't multiply on crits). Which means an expected damage of a little over 162 per round - if all four attacks hit. A CR 12 monster is expected to have an AC of 27, which means that your main attacks only hit half the time, and your secondary attacks hit less often, for an actual expected damage of only 70 per round (including crits threatened on 19-20), compared to a CR 12 creature's 160 hit points. Taking a little over two rounds of full attacks to finish off an equal-CR opponent is respectable for a standard character but hardly impressive by gestalt standards.

If you'd prefer a more concrete comparison, I am currently playing an 8th level Unchained Monk//Alchemist. This is hardly an optimal character, and in particular is quite MAD. My typical attack routine is +17/+17/+17/+12. This assumes only use of my mutagen and a heroism extract, both long-duration buffs that I have multiple daily uses of, and the use of a ki point (I have 8 ki points, or one per level, like your rounds of invisibility). My only offensive item at the moment is a Belt of Str +2. My accuracy already beats yours, 4 levels lower. And I'm not a primary damage dealer. I'm a combat maneuver specialist designed to keep enemies in a prone, flanked position between me and our actual damage powerhouse, a Samurai//Rogue.

Let's advance that character to 12th level. Assume the only additional offensive purchase that I make is a +1 Shocking Flaming Amulet of Mighty Fists (same cost as your two +3 daggers). Add BAB, the unarmed strike die increase, the extra flurry attack, and improve the mutagen to Greater Mutagen, but do not add any other temporary buffs or stat increases.

My attack routine without spending ki is +23/+23/+23/+18/+13. My damage is 2d6+9 + d6 (fire) + d6 (electricity) + 6d6 (sneak attack from vivisectionist), average damage 44. And because of the rest of my build, there's a good chance I'm adding an extra effective +8 to attack because I'm hitting something that is prone and sitting in between me and my Outflank partner. If I'm not flanking, I can chug an extract of Greater Invisibility (at level 12, I can make up to 3 per day). I get more attacks, much better accuracy, slightly better damage.

And again, this is me low-balling the 12th level damage output of a MAD build designed primarily as a battlefield controller and support character.

Shadow Lodge

I have essentially two concerns with Oracle//Unchained Rogue. The first is heavy reliance on sneak attack for damage. The second is low accuracy - it doesn't matter how many d6s you're adding to damage if you can't reliably hit. For the unchained rogue, these issues are related, since your best accuracy boost (Debilitating Injury -
Bewildered) relies on you first hitting with a sneak attack.

I've adjusted rating to "green if you can consistently sneak attack" and given some suggestions regarding how to do so.

What option gives Kitsune a Greater Invisibility SLA? Magical Tail only grants Invisibility (and then only after a 4-feat investment). Or are you talking about the Wind Mystery's Invisibility talent?

I also notice the Flame Spirit gives you an ability to see through smoke and fog, which could also be helpful in engineering concealment.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm not sure more spells known is going to fix the problem.

If the player is inexperienced and unaware that battlefield control spells are useful, then sure. If they want cool electricity spells but don't have enough spells known to also be versatile, then sure. But if they really want to play a blaster and just don't know how to do it well (or the mechanics don't exist to allow them to do their specific blaster concept well) then giving the sorceress access to Obscuring Mist isn't going to help them feel like a better blaster.

Personally, I would lean in the direction of free metamagic. Empowering or Maximizing electricity spells would increase raw damage numbers. There are probably also good metamagic feats for adding debuff "riders" to the types of blast spells the sorceress likes to use. If not, you could probably make up some new ones.

The "psychic echo" concept sounds like some material from Occult Adventures. Look into Charge Object, Object Reading, and Psychometry.

By default, intelligent items are at least able to communicate through empathic impulses - but these could easily be described as reflexive echoes of the psychic imprint on the item rather than the product of any independent sentience.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dave Justus wrote:
Maybe I'm missing something, but it seems to me that AC bonus is a monk class feature that would change from WIS to CHR. So a Water Dancer would get + CHR (untyped) + CHR (dodge) + X as a bonus to AC, and the wouldn't be particularly MAD, not needing WIS or really STR.

Huh. Yeah, that's RAW. I think the only reason I didn't make that connection is because I didn't think that they'd give one class Cha to AC twice. But that would explain why Nereid's Grace is so much more limited than the normal bonus; why it's capped by level and why it explicitly goes away when the Water Dancer is flat-footed.

That would certainly solve the low level AC issues, and probably put the Water Dancer solidly in the lead for defense overall.

Dave Justus wrote:
Scorching Ray would be a nice Qinggong addition for DR problems.

Bit expensive, but that would work in a pinch.

Shadow Lodge

Elemental monks are really cool, but implementation has been spotty, with the Elemental Ascetic serving as a notable disappointment.

Looking at it from the other direction - how does the Water Dancer pan out?

Right off the bat the Water Dancer is more MAD since it needs some Cha.

Offensively, the Water Dancer loses flurry and stunning fist and takes a hit to UAS damage, which means it is going to have a hard time as a primarily unarmed combatant. Fortunately, it gets a blast... but without elemental overflow, infusions, composite blasts, or any way to reduce the burn cost of the one metakinesis it has access to (empower) the Water Dancer is significantly behind the hydrokineticist as a blaster. It's also going to have more difficulty with DR or cold resistance since it never gets a second type of blast. The unarmed strike is potentially useful as a backup strategy, but takes a lot of investment to keep relevant at higher levels compared to just switching blast types. Maneuver training is nice, but not a big benefit in absence of other features supporting maneuvers.

Defensively, the kineticist has a better low-level AC. At 1st level it can wear studded leather and use shroud of water for 5 points of AC bonus before using burn to enhance the shield. The Water Dancer gets to add Wis and 1 point of Cha as a Dodge bonus; since Wis isn't used for any other class features this is probably 2 points of AC. This may even out at high levels. At level 20, a hydrokineticist could get +6 Con +4 Dex from elemental overflow size bonuses, investing 4 points of burn into shroud of water for a +12 armour bonus, or +14 AC with the Dex bonus. This is assuming that the Kineticist's Dex is now high enough that armour is limiting; if the kinecicist gets better AC using shroud of water as a shield they can do so. The monk gets Wis+Cha+5, so assuming Wis is still 12 it needs a +6 Cha bonus (score of 22) to match the hydrokineticist's AC. Likely at this level, but again, MAD.

The kineticist is carrying more burn in order to activate Elemental Overflow, but that does also boost Fort/Ref saves. On the other hand, the monk has better-rounded defenses with a good Will save and still mind, immunity to disease and poison, wholeness of body, and SR.

The kineticist gets 10 utility talents. The monk only gets 5 with a 2-level delay, but water dance, water stride, and empty body are roughly comparable with kineticist talents available at similar levels so we could almost call it 8 talents with 3 locked-in choices. The monk also gets fast movement, a ki point for an extra +20 speed, high jump, timeless body, and tongue of the sun and moon (with the option to trade the last three or empty body out for better abilities using Quinggong).

Skill ranks/level are the same, but monk gets a slightly broader skill list: Kineticist gets Heal, UMD, and Knowledge (Nature) while Monk gets Climb, Escape Artist, Knowledge (History and Religion), Perform, Ride, Sense Motive.

Summary: The water dancer looks like it's at a significant disadvantage offensively. It has a lower low-level AC, but a better Will save, and its special defenses and lower incentive to take burn may give it a defensive advantage in the long run. It has more mobility, but generally less flexible utility.

Is it worth it? Could we make it worth it? Trading high jump for barkskin would probably put the water dancer on top defensively. Are there any Quinggong abilities that would significantly increase offense? What about a 2-level dip in Paladin, giving access to Smite for +Cha to hit/+2 Damage, and Divine Grace for +Cha to saves?

Shadow Lodge

Unless there is an explicit restriction I read that kind of flavour text as referring to a common, well-known, or originating example of the archetype. "The ratfolk enforcers who protect Goka’s infamous Deepmarket" may be the most notable opportunist fighters, but that doesn't mean they are the only ones. I could also easily imagine a halfling hanging out with ratfolk.

You're right about the archetype's tradeoffs, though. Maybe a 1-level dip in alchemist on either side? Since you get Throw Anything it doesn't slow down qualification for Slipslinger Bombardment, and the Mutagen alone is probably worth delaying other class features a level. Plus 1st level extracts and maybe an extra point damage on bombardment if you can manage an 11-12 Int, and a die of Sneak Attack if taking Vivisectionist.

...I like slings.

Shadow Lodge

Is raw data available? I'm not a fan of pie charts and would like to play around with visualization options.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Seelah would definitely be putting Paizo's best foot forwards - and I can see why you might be extra-concerned with the CRB cover, without arguing that sexy art should be removed from the game entirely.

In that case, maybe swap Valeros for Ezren?

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Setting aside Seoni's general design and that revealing costume...

I don't think that the specific pose on the 2e CRB is particularly sexualized. She doesn't look contorted, she looks like she's climbing stairs while turning to face the dragon. There's some attention being drawn to her bare leg (which perhaps should not be bare given the weather) but her groin/butt area is covered by her cloak and her chest is not emphasized.

Found the image here, for reference.

Shadow Lodge

avr wrote:
You'd need the halfling warslinger ability to reduce the reload time of a sling in order to use flurry. Or just use daggers, darts, shortspears or spears with quick draw (spears would need two-handed thrower as well). I think the zen archer or far strike monk are likely to be better with ranged flurry attacks though.

Yes, warslinger would be required (or possibly Juggle Load if you wanted a different race badly enough to spend two feats on it). I doubt it would out-damage Zen Archer, but I was wondering whether any of the recent sling-specific abilities would provide a niche for a gestalt that included a "sling flurry" mechanic. Maybe an Opportunist Fighter with Slipslinger Bombardment and a sling staff (which can be used with any abilities requiring a "sling" if you have Slipslinger Style) for a bit of extra damage/range?

I will keep svylvan trickster//low-hex witch in mind when I go flesh out the witch (it's next on my list).

@Yomabo - That sounds like a fun build but not particularly powerful by gestalt standards. You say you never got to actually try it in play?

@deuxhero - I had not heard of that method, but it makes a lot of sense. Re-wrote that section. Would you also keep track of feat qualifications on each side separately?

Shadow Lodge

I would be on board with slowing the increase of ability scores at high level, especially if the change simultaneously makes it more efficient to increase your secondary stats as you level. I don't mind that SAD builds exist so much as I mind the fact that it's way easier to pump your Int or Dex than it is to spread your investment among 3-4 stats.

Shadow Lodge

Yeah, I think it's only chaotic good characters that would have a broad opposition to mind control since they're the only ones that have a strong value for other peoples' freedom. (Though full on thralls definitely feel more CE than CN to me.)

I could see TN or CN depending on whether he's anti-authority in general or just anti-"authorities I disagree with."

Having someone suffer a nearly-fatal self inflicted injury sounds like a good way to give the character one last chance to realize the impact of his actions, change course, and avoid alignment change.

Shadow Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

OK, let's look beyond the reflexive deontological idea that "making people addicted to something is bad," and unpack the different ways in which this is harming people.

1) Wis damage from the addiction.

2) Some "purposefully injure themselves" because they are addicted to healing. Even if healed for free, self-injury causes pain and is potentially risky if someone accidentally inflicts lethal injury on themselves (for example, jumping from a height and getting unlucky with falling damage)

3) Addiction interferes with a person's ability to make free choices about their lives. A character that is both Chaotic and Good cares about other peoples' freedom, which should include the freedom of mind in addition to freedom from physical bondage. (From the CRB, a CG character "hates it when people try to intimidate others and tell them what to do" and from Champions of Purity "Chaotic good characters want the freedom to do as they will and desire others to be free of oppression as well.")

4) Accepting gifts for healing people who are addicted to his healing feels really sketchy, but isn't harmful per se... unless he's diverting income from an existing healer or non-evil church, or if he's accepting money for healing wounds that people ordinarily wouldn't have paid to have heal (whether self-inflicted or just a trivial injury). So pretty likely that he's causing additional harm by accepting gifts, actually. Just because people aren't poor doesn't mean it's necessarily OK to take their money. Robin Hood is heroic because he's inverting an oppressive tax system; merely avoiding stealing from those who can't afford it just keeps you out of the "evil" zone.

The fact that he can suppress the amulet's effects, and that it offers no benefit to the person being healed, makes this less defensible.

Not everyone with good intentions has a Good alignment. CN characters can be selfish, or they can simply lack the conviction to make sacrifices for others that is characteristic of the good alignment. Limiting others' freedom because they think they "can do better than the town mayor" is not Chaotic Good.

Unless there's serious mitigating factors that weren't mentioned I'd strongly consider an alignment change. If the priest has a patron who would disapprove, they might also expect a divine warning - possibly a temporary loss of ability to use healing magic.

Shadow Lodge

You can only use the Mneumonic Vestment once per day, though, and it takes up the body slot.

By which I mean to say there are pros and cons to either approach.

Shadow Lodge

Hm. I could see an Unchained Scaled Fist // Eldritch Scion being workable. Probably still only yellow, though. You've got a lot of abilities on both sides using your swift actions. Eldritch Archer//Zen Archer has some weapon synergy, so might also do OK if you've got a generous stat allotment - you'd want a very high Wis and everything except Cha to be at least 12-14.

Made a note of Enlightened Warrior and the Menhir Guardian (plus Martial Artist) in the general description for the monk.

Wonder if you could do anything interesting with Menhir Guardian's different weapon list. Flurry with slings?

Shadow Lodge

Malik Gyan Daumantas wrote:
Thats not 100% true. I imagine an iroran monk might find fun and enjoyment in self improvement and testing themselves as well. Thought they would probably be an outlier and likely lawful good rather then lawful neutral being simpleminded focused on self perfection.

The difference between "my god doesn't mind if I enjoy competition as part of my quest for self improvement" and "my god thinks that friendly competition is the best way to seek self improvement" means quite a lot when we're talking about forming the kind of bond with a deity that dedicated worship represents. You don't want to feel like an outlier in your church.

1 to 50 of 5,531 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>