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

Weirdo's page

Pathfinder Society Member. 2,976 posts. No reviews. No lists. 1 wishlist. 1 alias.


1 to 50 of 2,976 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Shadow Lodge

I don't think that's the intent of Kitsune Change Shape. It states that you always turn into the same specific human. There is no reason that a kitsune who can turn into a thin female human would be better at impersonating a fat male human than another fat male human would be, all other things equal. I believe the intent is +10 to pass as human - to hide the fact that you're a Kitsune - which shouldn't apply if you're trying to fool people familiar with your specific human form.

The reference to Alter Self definitely prevents disguising yourself as a specific human, since you can't (barring Realistic Likeness) use a polymorph effect like Alter Self to turn into a specific individual.

I would eliminate the -2 penalty for disguising yourself as a different race for a kitsune in human form disguising themselves as a different human, but that's just me.

Shadow Lodge

I think Astral Totem is too powerful. Lesser Totem Powers are generally designed to be taken at lower levels and provide more modest benefits. Most have no pre-reqs at all and even Dragon totem has only two (neither themselves capstones). The Lesser Astral Totem has effectively three pre-reqs (Superstition, Witch Hunter, and Spell Sunder) and cannot be taken until level 8 - unless a barbarian takes Extra Rage Power, in which case it's available at level 7. This is 5 levels before the monk gets abundant step. It's also the same level Dimension Door first becomes available to casters, but barbarians get it as a move action supernatural ability and can potentially use it more times per day depending on number of fights and ability to rage cycle. The pre-reqs are too good to serve as a tax to balance this out.


Lesser Astral Totem (Su)
Prerequisite: -
Benefit: While raging, the barbarian may ignore the effects of any afflictions (such as diseases, curses and poisons) she is currently suffering from.

Astral Totem (Su)
Prerequisite: Barbarian 8, Lesser Astral Totem rage power, Spell Sunder
Benefit: Once per rage, the barbarian can spend 2 rounds of rage to sunder reality as a move action, allowing her to slip between spaces as if using the spell dimension door. Her caster level for this effect is equal to her barbarian level.
Special: This rage power counts as the abundant step class feature for the purpose of feats and for feat prerequisites.

Greater Astral Totem (Su)
Prerequisite: Barbarian 12, Astral Totem rage power
Benefit: While raging the barbarian gains Dimensional Agility and Dimensional Assault as bonus feats. Additionally, she gains an enhancement bonus to land speed as if she were a monk of her level -3.

The most focused build for this takes Supersition, Witch Hunter, and Lesser Astral Totem levels 2-6 (no particular order), Spell Sunder at level 7 using the Extra Rage Power feat, Astral Totem at 8, Greater Astral Totem at 12, and Dimensional Dervish at 13. Without Extra Rage power you wait until level 10 to get Astral Totem.

I believe that this is about as good as Beast Totem. With just one extra feat you get a move+full attack option which is more flexible than Pounce, and Dimension Door has noncombat utility, though it is limited in use. The speed increase and condition immunity are probably about even with claws + Nat AC. It's still better than abundant step but that's more a problem with abundant step...

I like the Shadow Blood line.

Ethereal Totem looks pretty good, but you should only be able to attack onto the Material Plane from the Ethereal, not into say the Abyss. I would also recommend putting some additional limitation on the Greater power since the barbarian will frequently be invulnerable to counterattack while in the Ethereal plane, which is a huge benefit, especially if you're getting additional to-hit and damage bonuses.

I like Positive/Negative Energy Blood and think it's good that they mirror eachother. However I would adjust the Greater Totems to work more like channel in terms of targeting. I'm also not sure that "pull" is the best effect for the Greater Negative Totem - perhaps sickened or shaken is more appropriate? You might also consider whether the Lesser powers should be able to be used as curative, especially since both barbarians could cure themselves with that ability on getting the intermediate totem.

Shadow Lodge

Hmm wrote:
Kryzbyn wrote:
Buy a house?
Ah, but then you won't be a hobo!

That reminds me of the time when our party had to win over some hobos, and had to reassure them that we were not, nor did we intend to become, property owners.

I don't think they were murder hobos, though. Mostly seemed involved in sewer-based sporting events.

Shadow Lodge

Unfetter works, but duration is only 10min/level.

I don't think there's a magic item version of it, but if you need longer duration a GM might allow a continuous function item for a couple thousand gold (pricing formula suggests 3K, which seems fair - 5K at most)

Shadow Lodge

DinosaursOnIce wrote:
Eventually I'm thinking about it, right now I'm only level 4 so I really don't see any point in picking up a Adamantine Chain Shirt. Honestly, I probably won't go that route until I can wear Heavy Armor and get Adamantine Full Plate, which is why I was curious too, as that's 9 levels away.

Yeah, I'd wait until you can get heavier armour, too. Though it seems the small number of things that stack DR treat class feature DR differently from armour DR (Stalwart stacks with class feature DR but not armour DR, while the Stalwart Defender gets DR that stacks with armour but not class features) so things that would help me wouldn't necessarily help you.

DinosaursOnIce wrote:
I wouldn't feel too discouraged, the Paladin is meant to be that tough dude. Barbarians are like the Hulk, you don't need the defense, you just SMASH. But I understand where you're coming from.

Problem is, enemies don't always attack the toughest character first.

DinosaursOnIce wrote:
That Paladin did blow a significant amount of money though.

Like I said, about half his wealth. It's actually important to his character concept.

DinosaursOnIce wrote:

I would just do what you can to keep your AC up and then focus on killing things quickly. Buy the Rage Powers that help when you can. Unfortunately I don't think there is much else to be done for it.

I think the problem is it would be cheaper to just buy all the cheap upgrades for AC and the like than it would be to go through doing things like Potions/Wands, and a lot of the lower level good spells are personal.

We've got an alchemist in the party, so I've had access to a Shield infusion from about level 3. Then my GM let me retrain to primalist bloodrager when the ACG came out (level 5) so I'm starting to self-buff as well. But that means that I have to wait until level 8 to get Beast Totem, which means my AC is lagging if I can't pre-buff (half the time). Between a reach weapon and Snake Style (+17 sense motive) I've actually got really solid defenses in other areas and that's kind of the point of the build, but Snake Style is limited to once a round and not until after my first turn in combat, and the reach weapon doesn't do much against ranged attackers until I can get in their face.

Shadow Lodge

Yeah, trying to increase my defenses and feeling a bit discouraged because the paladin recently got adamantine full plate (about half his wealth at level 7). He now has the DR of a 13th level barbarian, and all other things equal, the AC of a raging barbarian who spent the same 16K on +4 breastplate.

The barbarian isn't set up for great AC between the rage penalty and medium armour use (proficiency and losing fast movement in heavy). DR is supposed to help make up for that but unless you're an Invulnerable Rager or spend a lot of rage powers on Increased DR it's not all that significant.

Beast Totem mostly makes up for the AC gap & I'm strongly considering Increased DR but I was hoping there was something I'd missed.

Are you thinking of getting adamantine armour for your Magus?

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Half-elves and Tengu also get racial traits granting proficiency in exotic weapons. But you should IMO be able to gain easier access to some exotic weapons without being one of those races.

Shadow Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Rogue wrote:
If a character already has uncanny dodge (see above) from another class, the levels from the classes that grant uncanny dodge stack to determine the minimum rogue level required to flank the character.

If the character does not have uncanny dodge from another class, the levels do not stack, even if the class grants uncanny dodge at a higher level.

Shadow Lodge

Sounds like a good outline, but be prepared to adjust as you go if the players do something unexpected, like suspecting Feyd early or getting information about the older dragon from the younger one.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The Dueling Sword definitely feels like a weapon that you should be able to get with a trait or some kind of weapon familiarity, given that it thematically makes sense for it to require special training, but it's not a mechanically good enough weapon to be worth the feat.

ShroudedInLight wrote:

I just like the thought of a Barbarian two handing a Katana.

I mean we tried to teach him to be a Samurai and about honor and stuff...but he just likes getting mad and hitting things!

That's a pretty cool character idea.

'course, I'm currently playing a LG bloodrager/monk with a naginata (martial eastern weapon). She doesn't like getting mad and hitting things, but some people give her no choice.

Shadow Lodge

ShroudedInLight wrote:
Now I'd house rule Fighters or other martial classes into being able to use those weapons if they were from that area (since not every warrior in an eastern culture is naturally a Samurai but they might use the same weapons).

I think it would be appropriate to allow players to select weapon familiarity with a small selection of exotic weapons appropriate to their character's culture (treating them as martial weapons). This could be a freebie or it could count as a combat or culture trait if you use traits.

Shadow Lodge

In this thread it was pointed out that you can effectively buy DR/- for 5K per point, the cost of adamantine armour. However, this doesn't stack with the DR gained by a barbarian or bloodrager.

There are lots of ways to buy improvements to your AC. Is it possible to buy improvements to DR, or is it only possible to improve DR through feats and rage powers?

Shadow Lodge

ShroudedInLight wrote:

The question is how Greater Chaos Totem stacks with DR and Stalwart.

Anyway, by level 11 even without Great Chaos Totem and just Improved Damage Reduction you can get a minimum of DR8/ - and then you get +6 from Stalwart, Improved Stalwart, and Combat Expertise when using combat expertise.

So that is DR14/-

You can double that with Bolstered Resilience for a single attack, but that leaves you fatigued but that is a waste of a feat.

No clue how GCT stacks with all of that.

Anyway, every 4 BAB that DR goes up by two. So at level 12 you get DR9/- and then can get +8 from your feats for a total of DR17/- when you fight defensively.

This combines excellently with Reach Weapons and Come and Get Me, since you get DR17 AGAINST EVERYTHING THAT HITS YOU.

Max DR at level 20 from just feats is 13 natural + 10 to a total of DR23/-

But that costs:

1) Uncanny Dodge and Improved Uncanny Dodge
2) Three Rage Powers
3) Five feats (Counting the Endurance/Diehard Pre-reqs)
4) A penalty of -1 per 4 BAB to attacks, which if stacked with Power Attack halves your BAB.
5) Int 13 for Combat Expertise, in a class that typically dumps Int.

That's not a totally prohibitive investment, but it means that most of your build will be focused on the DR. That combined with (4) will probably give your offense a solid hit. And while DR 23/- is certainly impressive, by level 20 you could be fighting Titans or Adamantine Golems, that do over 40 points of damage per primary attack not counting Power Attack, Vital Strike, or crits. It's a strong option for a more defensive barbarian build but you're not exactly invulnerable.

There are definitely Eremite, though.

ShroudedInLight wrote:
Prethen wrote:
But DR doesn't affect magical attacks, just weapon attacks, so it's not every attack is reduced.
Shrug, you're a barbarian. You have Superstition and all kinds of strong saves and can afford a Cloak of Resistance +5, and you have the most HP out of any class in the game.

By "all kinds of strong saves" you mean a good Fort save? Superstition replaces rather than stacking with the rage bonus to will saves. I also wouldn't dismiss save half/partial effects, or those that rely on touch attacks rather than saves.

Again, you can get very solid defenses - but you're not actually invulnerable.

baconwing wrote:
I wasnt aware that people played barbarians that werent of the invulnerable rager arch type?

I like (improved) uncanny dodge. It might be less powerful than turbo-charging your DR but I like to be able to tell my GM "You can't flank me" and "I'm immune to that invisible rogue's sneak attack."

Shadow Lodge

Bard would be my first inclination for Feyd, though draconic bloodline sorcerer would be thematically appropriate (whether or not he's actually of the Blue's bloodline).

Inquisitors can be very persuasive but they are not typically charismatic and they miss out on some of the more subtle social manipulation magic. You should have one in on the plot, but it probably shouldn't be Feyd.

Oh, and this might go without saying but if you need someone to make a mistake to leave clues for the PCs, don't make it the dragon's mistake.

Shadow Lodge

That should work, as long as the dragon is clever about how he goes about framing the leadership of Port Town.

Maybe frame them for the assassination of the Mine Town leaders?

This is more plausible if they have a reason to want the Mine Town leaders gone, so let's say that Port Town has recently raised tariffs on trade passing through their city-state. Mine Town is upset about this. This sort of diplomatic tiff could occur naturally, though the dragon might push it along by having Feyd or some pawn within Mine Town encourage the leaders "not to let Port Town walk all over you." Tie this in with the fake aggression from Port Town and you should have a powder keg.

One of Mine Town's possible heirs is known to be friendlier to Port Town than the current leadership. When the leaders are assassinated, evidence is discovered suggesting the heir has conspired with Port Town in the assassination - the heir gets power and Port Town gets an ally or puppet. This should be enough to get Mine Town up in arms, and Farm Town will also not be pleased since this looks like Port Town might be planning to take over on Farm Town after getting Mine Town under their thumb. Bonus: slandering a competing heir when Feyd moves in.

In order to get Port Town on your side, suggest that Port Town's leaders raised tariffs in order to fund some distasteful project such as necromancy or paying off a fiend. Port Town will probably already not be happy about the the tariffs' immediate effects - reduced trade from Mine Town and possibly other leverage or threats Mine Town has employed as pushed by the dragon - so if they find out that this trouble was caused for corrupt rather than meaningful reasons, they'll be doubly pissed.

Make sure everything holds up to magical investigation, at least up to the point where you want the PCs to get suspicious. Glibness, Undetectable Alignment, Misdirection, Triggered Suggestion, and False Alibi will be useful, and a Wyrm Blue dragon casts as a 15th level sorcerer. Key pawns should be bards, infiltrator inquisitors, or have similar subterfuge skills. Keep in mind that ignorance or misinformation can fool mind reading or lie-detecting magic, so as many people as possible should be misinformed as to the significance of their actions.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I like playing with cross-breeds as a piece of world-building. For example, in my current campaign gnomes are not an independent race, but rather a subset of halflings possessing minor magical abilities attributed to an ancestor receiving a divine blessing from the goddess of magic. Halflings and gnomes thus intermix freely in most regions. So far I haven't bothered with mechanical hybrids since halflings/gnomes haven't been significant in the campaign. Plus, many of the distinguishing traits are slightly different talents that could also result from variation within a race (eg +2 craft vs +2 acrobatics, +2 Dex vs +2 Con). I might give it another look now, though, especially since I've never been keen on the gnomes' defensive training and hatred and could use an excuse to shuffle them out of the "standard" set of traits.

Secret Wizard wrote:
You need to buy the Advanced Genetics Guide, figure out the number of chromosomes in each race to see if it is viable (in-game this can be provided by a map genome spell or forgone altogether with a miracle or carefully worded wish spell), determine which parent will provide the dominant/recessive alleles (1d20 + the parent's Constitution modifier to determine dominance).

That's so not how it works, and yet it sounds so plausible.

Shadow Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
felinoel wrote:
Seek Thoughts and Detect Thoughts are campaign-ruiners though and I use them a lot.

Are you using them to ruin the campaign?

This is the real issue - not how powerful a given ability is or whether it's capable of ruining the campaign, but whether you are actually using them in a disruptive way. Bonus not-points if you're being willfully disruptive.

Banning Alchemical Allocation entirely seems like an extreme reaction, but I can't help but wonder if it's a result of frustration with how you have approached the game. Your reaction to a possible ban on the Elixir of Shadewalking was "I'll just get a Potion of Dimension Door instead," which completely ignores the fact that your GM's main problem with the Elixir was getting access to a high-level spell at low levels - a problem which would still apply with Dimension Door.

That doesn't strike me as a cooperative stance.

This is not necessarily to say that you're a problem player, or that this is all your fault, but perhaps you should consider whether you have contributed to your GM's desire to just ban things that look problematic?

Shadow Lodge

Senko wrote:
(and a shame the claws aren't retractable).

Why not? It doesn't affect how they function mechanically (as long as you're not adding abilities that rely on concealed weapons) and you're the GM.

Shadow Lodge

Also notable: the Alchemist's Brew Potion as a bonus feat came packaged with the ability to use extracts for Brew Potion (since extracts don't normally count as spells for crafting purposes). The Investigator does not get the "Brew Potion" package and thus cannot make potions even if they want to take Brew Potion.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I agree that natural armour or a stat boost are both more useful than proficiency in all martial weapons, especially if you have a spare feat for Martial Weapon Proficiency.

The Bodyguard and In Harm's Way feats are also very appropriate. Note that while Life Link lets the eidolon take HP hits for the summoner, In Harm's Way lets it also soak poison or energy drain.

Also consider a reach weapon for a bodyguard (independent of the Bodyguard feat). Being able to keep people at range and attack them as they approach you (and your ward) is useful. The longspear is a perfectly solid weapon for this purpose and then you don't have to take Martial Weapon Proficiency at all. If you keep Improved Unarmed Strike you still threaten adjacent (with slam you'd have to drop the spear).

Shadow Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
spook205 wrote:
Unconditional DR is better then typed DR because as I said, nothing bypasses it. No +5 weapon, no 'I count as evil.' Nada.

I don't think that's as big a deal for a PC defense. The monsters fighting the PCs are not generally as prepared to bypass DR as the PCs are. By mid levels most PCs will have some way to bypass DR/cold iron, DR/silver, DR/good, and possibly DR/adamantine, but most monsters will at best be able to bypass one of those types. Unless you're taking DR/evil into Wrath of the Righteous, the odds of running into enemies who can bypass your particular kind of DR are pretty low.

Shadow Lodge

Ms. Pleiades wrote:
Fourshadow wrote:
Why can't weapon balm be applied to those claws? It makes sense to me.

The DR-penetrating blanches, silver, cold iron and adamantine, require that you stick the weapon in a fire and pour the powdered blanch over weapon.

Unless you're a tiefling or an ifrit, that's going to f***ing hurt.

... I want to try this with my fire-resistant bloodrager/monk. Just because.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

We can't even agree if a gauntlet interacts with effects that improve Unarmed Strike, so you're not going to get a clear answer.

If you do believe that a gauntlet attack counts as an unarmed strike, then the bonus from a masterwork gauntlet would not stack with a bonus on an amulet of mighty fists, because the masterwork bonus, like that granted by weapon enchantments, is an enhancement bonus.

You might be able to stack an enchantment bonus with special qualities, for example wearing a +5 gauntlet and using a Holy Amulet of Mighty Fists to get a +5 Holy attack, but I would disallow it given that Magic Armour and Bracers of Armour are not allowed to stack in that way. I suppose you could benefit from an AoMF and special material gauntlets, but in the long run it would probably be more efficient to get a +3 adamantine gauntlet, which is much less expensive than a +3 AoMF.

The point of wearing a gauntlet, if it counts as an unarmed strike, would be to enhance it instead of an Amulet of Mighty Fists.

Shadow Lodge

DR 11/- is quite significant. An 20th level invulnerable rager barbarian gets DR 10/-, or 13/- raging if they spend 3 rage powers to max out Improved DR, and that archetype is supposed to be the DR champion.

Shadow Lodge

Hazardous by nature means the space itself is hazardous - for example, a pit trap or an area affected by cloudkill or a wall of fire. A bad tactical position (like being flanked) is not due to the nature of the space itself, but its interaction with other spaces and creatures.

Also, if you teleport an ally into a flanking position the space isn't hazardous at all to the creature teleported - and as a bonus the ally will intentionally fail their save, unlike an enemy teleported into a flanked position.

Shadow Lodge

Are you sure you want resources to be the cause of the wars? It's a great reason, but not the only one. Some others include:

1) Religion. City-state A adopts a religion or patron deity distasteful to City-state B.

2) Succession crisis. The King of A dies with no direct heir, and thanks to political marriages, the Queen of B is the niece of the late King of A. The Queen of B thinks she has (or her non-inheriting children have) a better claim to the throne of A than her second-cousin who is otherwise next in line.

3) Self-defense. A might receive (possibly fabricated) evidence that B plans to attack them, so A initiates a pre-emptive strike. Alternatively, some radical group within B actually does attack A, which retaliates upon the entirety of B.

4) Kin defense. A persecutes a group of people with ethnic or religious ties to B; B attacks A in order to protect/liberate their fellows.

And of course wars can be started or justified for multiple reasons. A adopts a patron deity hostile to B and begins persecuting followers of B's patron deity, which gives the Queen of B the pretext she needs to mobilize her people against A and put her second son on the throne he "deserves" (possibly securing not only an additional throne for her family but also a valuable trade route). The more reasons one country has to want to go to war with another, the less likely they are to resolve disputes peacefully.

EDIT: I really like Ms. Pleiades' idea about the triangle and think it's a great base on which to layer some specific political bull-headedness using the above or similar reasons. However I see a bit of a problem in that if this is specifically a desert environment, good farmland will almost certainly be found within a narrow range of a river (see: the Nile in Egypt) and rivers are also major trade routes, so an agricultural power will likely also control trade. It may be possible to have an agricultural power on the river and still have a different power control trade, but that would take a little fiddling. The simplest solution might be to stick a mountainous or otherwise inhospitable region between the Agricultural and Mining powers and have the Trade power control the pass between the two. Coastal shipping (with the Trade region controlling the point at which Agriculture's river reaches the sea) is an option, but that suggests to me that the trade is external rather than between the three city-states - unless there's some obstacle preventing direct trade between the two inland city-states, the latter are likely to want to set up an overland route between themselves in order to bypass the control of the third.

Shadow Lodge

I would think that the meaning of "prone" and "climbing" would prohibit climbing. "Prone" means lying down ie on some horizontal surface with the body oriented generally parallel to that surface. That's not a position favourable to ascending vertical surfaces.

Byakko wrote:
Weirdo, just because they're grouped together doesn't make them the same type of move action. For example, different combat maneuvers are also grouped together, but are also not the same type of standard action. Still, I feel this is a bit anal to enforce, and would allow someone to crawl in my game if it came up, as mentioned before.

I appreciate that you would allow it but I also think it is allowed by RAW or at least RAI and would like to argue that point. It is not 100% clear but I do believe the organization is intended to indicate that crawling is a part of the "move" action (and not a separate move action).

Firstly, the "Move" action and crawling are within the part of the Combat chapter that is organized by action type, while Combat Maneuvers are not. That suggests that the subsections underneath the "move" action are united by action type, but the same does not necessarily apply to subsections under Combat Maneuvers.

Second, the general text under the "move" action reads: "The simplest move action is moving your speed.... Many nonstandard modes of movement are covered under this category (examples)." This suggests that the subsections below (which again include climbing) are examples of nonstandard modes of movement which are covered under the "move" action.

The general text under Combat Maneuvers in contrast indicates that "Although these maneuvers have vastly different results, they all use a similar mechanic to determine success" which suggests that the specified mechanic is the unifying theme, and moreover it explicitly states "While many combat maneuvers can be performed as part of an attack action, full-attack action, or attack of opportunity (in place of a melee attack), others require a specific action."

Shadow Lodge

Info on the rings here.

Galadriel's ring, Nenya, is actually the ring of water.

Elrond's ring, Vilya, is the ring of air.

Gandalf has Narya, the ring of fire, which rather than possessing the ability to create physical fire has the ability to ignite hope.

As far as I know the exact elemental natures of the rings of water and air are unclear.

Shadow Lodge

felinoel wrote:

Alchemists don't get very many spells, the best thing out of a small number of things isn't insanely amazing it is only the best thing available.


Spells and weapons do not define a class, how the class is played defines the class, or as I put it, how an alchemist is a user of utilities.


No, because the other spells available are just meh.

I think you're underestimating the rest of the Alchemist's extracts.

At first level, Shield, Enlarge Person, Reduce Person, and Long Arm are all excellent combat spells. Comprehend Languages, Disguise Self and Jump are solid for out of combat use, and Reduce Person can be a great scouting effect for a small character because becoming Tiny gives you stealth bonuses and lets you fit into small spaces.

Other second level extracts include all the stat enhancers, Barkskin (one of my favourite AC buffs), Resist Energy, and Blistering Invective (a fantastic debuffer in the right hands). You also get Alter Self, Invisibility, and Detect Thoughts for the sneaky stuff.

Hilights of third level include Fly and several polymorph effects.

You also get most of the key healing effects - cure, lesser restoration, remove curse, remove disease, remove blindness/deafness, neutralize poison - making you a competent secondary healer.

Alchemists - and only Alchemists - can use the Infusion Discovery to pass out personal-range effects to allies. Being able to grant Shield to a barbarian will make you very popular. Blistering Invective can be given to the the party member with the best intimidate (in our party, the paladin), and there's some fun to be had passing around polymorph.

Alchemists can also uniquely use effects with longer casting times as a standard action. Examples include Enlarge/Reduce Person and Lesser Restoration.

Shadow Lodge

Byakko wrote:

Crawling is a move action. You can't generally substitute one move action for another just because of interruption.

If you allow a crawl move action to substitute for a "moving" move action, then couldn't the player substitute any other sort of move action, such as retrieving an item?

Note that when people say they're moving, they're not simply "using a move action".

"The simplest move action is moving your speed. If you take this kind of move action..."

They're using their move action to "move their speed", a distinct type of move action.

No, crawling isn't a different kind of move action, it's a subtype of the "move" move action. The format in the CRB is as follows:

Actions in Combat wrote:

Move Actions (Heading)

- (Paragraph) With the exception of specific movement-related skills, most move actions don't require a check.

Move (subheading)

- (Paragraph) The simplest move action is moving your speed. If you take this kind of move action during your turn, you can't also take a 5-foot step.

- (Paragraph) Many nonstandard modes of movement are covered under this category, including climbing (up to one-quarter of your speed) and swimming (up to one-quarter of your speed).

- (Paragraph) Accelerated Climbing: You can climb at half your speed as a move action by accepting a –5 penalty on your Climb check.

- (Paragraph) Crawling: You can crawl 5 feet as a move action. Crawling incurs attacks of opportunity from any attackers who threaten you at any point of your crawl. A crawling character is considered prone and must take a move action to stand up, provoking an attack of opportunity.

Direct or Redirect a Spell (subheading)...


Move Actions
--Accelerated Climbing
-Direct or Redirect a Spell

Given this organization, I believe the correct interpretation is:

HangarFlying wrote:
In this case, I don't look at crawling as a separate move action from moving, rather its costing you your entire movement rate to crawl those 5 feet.

It is generally accepted that different forms of movement can be combined in a single move action (though I believe climb is the only one that says so explicitly, under the climb skill). A character can move 10ft, turn a corner, unexpectedly encounter a wall, and use their remaining 20ft of movement to climb 5ft. Since Crawling is listed as a subheading of the "Move" action, with (accelerated) climbing, it should work similarly. A character should be able to begin a move action to move out of a threatened square, be tripped, and then use their remaining full movement speed to crawl 5ft (provoking an AoO for crawling which is separate from one for leaving a threatened square).

Shadow Lodge

felinoel wrote:
leo1925 wrote:
Yes I know that summoners get as a 3rd level spell, that's the class that wrecked havoc with spell level (mostly).
Then... yes... it can be a potion?

Don't count on it. Some GMs (and IIRC PFS) use the sorc/wizard and cleric spell levels preferentially for things like potions or wands on the grounds that summoners getting access to a few spells like Dimension Door or Haste at a lower spell level is not intended to make those spells cheaper for everyone.

felinoel wrote:
Weirdo wrote:
If it's good enough to not only be the best 2nd level extract, but good enough to fill every 2nd level extract slot, it needs to be nerfed. Single spells, unlike major class features, aren't supposed to be good enough to define a class.

If that is how you feel then fine, also fighters need to have their weapons nerfed since using a weapon is not a major class feature and yet every fighter uses a weapon of some sort.

Alchemists are users of utilities, fighters are users of weapons. Just because I went the non-fighter-based alchemist doesn't mean that one of the major reasons to choose the non-fighter-based route needs to be nerfed when fighters get to use their weapons without fear of nerfing.

Fighters use weapons. Each individual fighter selects a subset of weapons to use. Some weapons are better than others, but no one weapon is so good that it's the only weapon worth using.

Alchemists use an assortment of extracts, some of which are better than others but no one extract should be so good that it's used to the exclusion of all others of the same level.

"Extracts" or "Spells" or "Weapons" may define a class. A single example of any of those categories should not.

felinoel wrote:
Weirdo wrote:
Alchemists, and only alchemists, get...
Those aren't as often used though...

Because they're not markedly more powerful than other extracts available at the same level.

Mackenzie Kavanaugh wrote:
It's ridiculously more versatile than the other alchemist-only spells and some of the elixirs have effects not at all matching their base spells. One 2nd level extract and boom! +10 competence bonus to any one skill you have an appropriate elixir of for the next hour!

And as such it's still worth having even if you can't use it on Potions of Dimension Door or the Elixir of Shadewalking.

Shadow Lodge

Byakko wrote:
In effect, what happens is the trip happens first, putting you on the ground. You may now continue your move action... however, you are attempting an action which is no longer possible.

That's not quite true.

"Crawling" is the type of movement used when prone; it is listed as a sub-type of the "move" (distance) move action alongside climbing or swimming. I think it's accepted that if you begin to move and then fall off a pit into water, you can continue the same move action while swimming for a reduced distance.

Since you haven't actually moved any distance you should be able to devote the entire distance of your move to a 5ft crawl, provoking an additional AoO. This may not be worth it in many cases, but I believe the rules allow it.

Move wrote:

Many nonstandard modes of movement are covered under this category, including climbing (up to one-quarter of your speed) and swimming (up to one-quarter of your speed).



You can crawl 5 feet as a move action. Crawling incurs attacks of opportunity from any attackers who threaten you at any point of your crawl. A crawling character is considered prone and must take a move action to stand up, provoking an attack of opportunity.

Shadow Lodge

The first FAQ uses the phrase "bonus equivalent" in a context clearly applying to something other than DR:

The +10 bonus-equivalent limitation is a hard cap for all weapons; you can't exceed that even with class abilities or other unusual abilities.

The bolded portion of course refers to this text from the CRB:

Magic Weapons wrote:
A single weapon cannot have a modified bonus (enhancement bonus plus special ability bonus equivalents, including those from character abilities and spells) higher than +10.

So the total of enhancement bonus and special ability bonuses cannot exceed a +10 bonus equivalent.

The mythic rule for DR/Epic (the only kind of DR that cares about your bonus equivalent instead of just your enhancement bonus), and the FAQ clarifying how it interacts with conditional bonuses, refer to this same total (enhancement bonus plus special ability bonuses):

Mythic DR/Epic wrote:
A type of damage reduction, DR/epic can be overcome only by a weapon with an enhancement bonus of +6 or greater. Weapons with special abilities also count as epic for the purposes of overcoming damage reduction if the total bonus value of all of their abilities (including the enhancement bonus) is +6 or greater.
Second FAQ wrote:

The second way is presented in Mythic Adventures: You can use a weapon that has a total "plus-equivalent" of +6 or higher. For example, a +1 vorpal longsword and a +2 flaming frost shock keen longsword both are +6-equivalent magic weapons.

A weapon with a conditional or variable enhancement bonus, such as bane or furious, gets the best of both options. As a baseline, it include the plus-equivalences for its enhancement bonuses and special abilities; when the conditional or variable enhancement bonuses activate, it adds those to its total as well.

Shadow Lodge

Ravingdork wrote:
It totally makes sense that multiple people working on a large project will likely be more efficient (within reason). That's why crafting guilds existed, both in real life and in many sources of fantasy literature.
Ravingdork wrote:
Now, how would/should you handle such things? That's the real issue.

Members of crafting guilds probably have the Cooperative crafting feat.

That said, I think it's reasonable to get some benefit to working in shifts as long as that benefit is not so much as Cooperative crafting. This represents the loss of efficiency due to the less coordinated characters trying to figure out what the others are doing and have done already.

I might suggest that the second and third shifts produce only 4 hours of progress during 8 hours of work, meaning you need three crafters to double your speed. Since these crafters are not working at the same time, each of them has to provide each pre-requisite in order to consider the pre-requisites filled; add +5 for each pre-requisite that at least one team member lacks. Finally, the crafter with the lowest spellcraft bonus makes the check.

Combining cooperative crafting with shifts would get a bit messier...

Shadow Lodge

Running from an enemy doesn't generally overcome them - especially if the enemy you're running from is likely to seek revenge or enact other plots. I like to think I offer and reward non-combat solutions (my party certainly takes advantage of them) but I wouldn't award full marks/XP if the party leaves loose ends like turning a one-off threat into a recurring villain.

hogarth wrote:
You might have stated this already, but what level is the party?

Level 5. Hence the concern about cheap access to a 6th level spell.

Ckorik wrote:

Yeah after looking it up - that elixir isn't even in 'Pathfinder' (the RPG) - it is a specific item from a 3.5 pathfinder (when it was the only title) adventure path.

As such it's not actually available or known - did the crafting player have to research the new item?

The GM goofed by allowing it in the game. Don't use that non-paizo website to look stuff up - because it's not official.

That's not the fault of the website - it lists the source right under the item title. It's the fact that there exist Paizo products with the "Pathfinder" title and logo that aren't actually part of the Pathfinder rules system. People frequently use the 3.5 material from the Pathfinder Campaign Setting with the PF rules set so it makes sense to include it. Also, the pfsrd is a much more usable website.

Shadow Lodge

The wording is imprecise, but you cast Magic Circle, then one round later Dimensional Anchor, then one round after that the calling spell.

It is implied in the second line "allows you to cast a dimensional anchor spell on the magic circle during the round before casting any summoning spell" without interfering with your ability to complete the calling.

It's perhaps best to think of the dimensional anchor as extending the casting time of the circle itself to add an extra layer of protection.

Shadow Lodge

I'm not a fan of GMs banning things as a reflex, but keep in mind we don't have the GM's side. It's not clear this is a first reaction or that this is a railroading GM annoyed with players jumping off the tracks.

Also, I'd have more of a problem with a GM who allowed it without complaint and then went out of their way to shatter the Elixir than one who said "I had no idea that ability let you do that, I think that's too much." Though it's a bit better if it's at least an angry BBEG who was evaded by use of the Elixir, rather than a random encounter who decided to conveniently attack that particular bottle.

And casting a 5/6th level spell using a 2nd level spell slot does rather subvert the resource expectations of the game. Since most of the more powerful elixirs appear to have been introduced more recently than Alchemical Allocation, I expect the idea was to allow players to trade a higher up-front investment and an extra round of prep in order to use 2nd level extracts for 3rd level effects like flight - as the OP was doing prior to this incident - or handy non-spell effects like an elixir of swimming. Being able to use one Alchemical Allocation for one of several potions is an extra flexibility bonus. The addition of super-powerful elixirs like Shadewalking unbalances that trade in a way I don't think was intended.

Elvis Aron Manypockets wrote:
How is another player able to cast the prerequisite 6th level spell Shadow Walk, minimum CL 11, in order to craft the elixir to sell to you? Is this where the exploit of raising the spellcraft check by 5 for not meeting a prerequisite comes in, so he doesn't need to know the spell or even be able to cast it but can still somehow fake it enough to create the elixir anyway?

That's how the rule works. Normally I think it's a fine rule but I think it hilights a design problem with the Elixir of Shadewalking. Most Elixirs are distinct from potions in that they don't duplicate spells. The Elixir of Shadewalking however is a spell in a can, except that it duplicates a spell of a higher level than potions are allowed to. It's made an Elixir in order to bypass that restriction. Unfortunately it also bypasses the restrictions on most spell-in-a-can items: "For potions, scrolls, and wands, the creator can set the caster level of an item at any number high enough to cast the stored spell but not higher than her own caster level." and "you cannot create potions, spell-trigger, or spell-completion magic items without meeting its prerequisites." Even without Alchemical Allocation it's a recipe for a party getting access to high-level effects very early.

Honestly the easiest solution is probably to ban a handful of Elixirs rather than Alchemical Allocation.

Shadow Lodge

Chengar Qordath wrote:
thejeff wrote:

Only because the hideout was apparently set up so they could get in and get to the hostages, but were then expected to fight their way out.

Bet that doesn't happen again. :)

Indeed. If the GM designs an encounter with such an obvious and easily exploitable flaw, the PCs can't be blamed for using it.

There are plenty of flaws that are obvious in hindsight or to an outsider. Some of these flaws are much easier to exploit if the party has access to abilities like pseudoteleportation much earlier than expected. This is not to say that the PCs should be blamed, simply that if an unexpectedly powerful PC ability is making it hard for the GM to run a fun game, that ability should be moderated, hopefully through group consensus.

Mackenzie Kavanaugh wrote:
Since it tends to fill up every single 2nd level extract slot for so many Alchemists and is often regarded as their best spell for precisely this reason? ... It's every bit as iconic to their class as mutagens and bombs.

If it's good enough to not only be the best 2nd level extract, but good enough to fill every 2nd level extract slot, it needs to be nerfed. Single spells, unlike major class features, aren't supposed to be good enough to define a class.

Mackenzie Kavanaugh wrote:
They're alchemists, and this is the one spell that they uniquely get which is most inherently keyed to their class.

False. Alchemists, and only alchemists, get:

Affecting potions: Transmute Potion to Poison, Amplify Elixir, Alchemical Allocation
Affecting extracts: Universal Formula, Delayed Consumption
Affecting mutagens: Orchid's Drop, Mutagenic Touch
Affecting bombs: Bomber's Eye and the Targeted, Shadow, Lightning Lash, Viper, Languid, and Caging Bomb Admixtures.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I usually require a little creativity to cast a spell stealthily, but try not to make it too difficult.

In yesterday's game one of the PCs wanted to stealthily Detect Magic on an NPC. One of the other PCs created a diversion and the caster ducked behind cover to cast the spell (the diversion was suitably loud to cover verbal components).

I do find it's in practice often difficult to get targets for enchantments alone. I managed it only about twice when playing my bard. Maybe could have pulled it off a few more times, but there were usually easier ways to get what I wanted.

Anguish wrote:
Remember... aside from having witnessed the casting of major image, you can literally shove your arm into the dragon's gut, fail your save, and still think it's real. Doesn't matter that you just got undeniable physical evidence... you failed your save, it's real. You could stand in the middle of it, fail your save, and still think "well, I guess I'm getting eaten... sure hurts a lot!"


Saving Throws and Illusions (Disbelief) wrote:
A successful saving throw against an illusion reveals it to be false, but a figment or phantasm remains as a translucent outline. A failed saving throw indicates that a character fails to notice something is amiss. A character faced with proof that an illusion isn't real needs no saving throw. If any viewer successfully disbelieves an illusion and communicates this fact to others, each such viewer gains a saving throw with a +4 bonus.

Shadow Lodge

Komoda wrote:
I believe they are saying that no matter how it is used, it is still EQUIVALENT to +10, and never goes higher. Not that the functions fail to work.

So what makes increasing a weapon with a +10 equivalent bonus and a +3 enhancement bonus to +5 with Bane different from increasing that weapon's enhancement bonus with Greater Magic Weapon?

mplindustries wrote:
The trick is that Bane is a +1 equivalent ability, even when it makes the weapon count as +2 better. If you have a +5 Keen Holy Frost weapon, you can add Bane to it, and when that Bane triggers, it will be a +7 weapon, and, if it were to matter for some future purpose, it would count as a +12 weapon for overcoming SUPER EPIC DR or whatever. But the weapon's actual bonus is only +10.

I'm not sure why you have concluded that the +2 is only included in the effective bonus for purposes of DR. Could you point out the specific statement within the FAQ that says you only add the conditional +2 for purposes of DR? I do not think the context of the FAQ is sufficient to limit its application. For example, this FAQ is made in the context of applying weapon finesse to combat maneuvers, but also establishes the general rule that disarm, sunder, and trip maneuvers use a weapon and receive weapon bonuses (not just finesse but other effects).

When you add Bane it is only +1 equivalent, but when it activates it is +3 equivalent. You can add Bane to a +5 Keen Holy Frost weapon, but when it activates it attempts to add another +2 to a +10 weapon, which will fail. Perhaps the RAW conclusion is that a +10 equivalent weapon including Bane only gets the benefit of the 2d6 extra damage, not the increased enhancement bonus. This still looks like a bad deal to me, but at least it means you can use a class feature to add Speed or Brilliant Energy to a +5 Bane weapon.

Shadow Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

It's the GM's job to roll with the punches... but that's a hard job. It's made harder when a character somehow gains early access to an ability that they're not supposed to have until later. Just like the ability to fly at level 1 would trivialize low-level adventure designs that feature cliffs or pits as obstacles, teleportation effects make it much harder to design adventures that rely on accessing or escaping from secure areas.

The GM shouldn't dismiss things out of hand, but if he has honestly looked at the implications of this ability and said "I'm not able to adjust the campaign to deal with this while still keeping it challenging for you and fun for me," that's fair. GMs aren't perfect - even good GMs can have a hard time with some parts of the game. Running a game is significant mental work and if it's too hard for you to keep ahead of the PCs you can burn out.

And if it's "stupid good when used correctly" it's perfectly fair to nerf it a bit.

felinoel wrote:
How would you have it restricted though?


1) Limit the character's ability to purchase expensive elixirs. The Elixir of Shadewalking costs 3,500gp. A village won't have that kind of item, and towns would only contain a handful of magic items of that power. The highest-value items in a settlement are unlikely to be elixirs because most people spend most of their wealth on durable items - you won't find a $10,000 bottle of wine in a town where most people don't own $10,000 cars.

2) Limit the substances Alchemical Allocation can affect:

2a) Only potions, which are more limited in effect than elixirs.
2b) Only if your CL is at least equal to the CL of what you're allocating.
2c) Potions, or any elixir with CL < 5

I personally might go with allowing Alchemical Allocation to work automatically on potions or elixirs with CL equal to or lower than yours. Higher CL potions or extracts require a caster level check (d20 + caster level) against DC of 10 + Caster level of the item. If you fail, Alchemical Allocation is expended to no effect and you waste the action used to gargle the potion/elixir, but do not expend the potion/elixir. This means you have a chance of using it on more powerful effects but might waste time and extract slots (with 2nd level extracts being fairly valuable at low levels where over-reaching is most dramatic).

Mackenzie Kavanaugh wrote:
While I agree that the ability to make infinite use of this sort of item is one of the key unique class features of the Alchemist/Investigator...

Since when is a single second-level extract a key feature?

Shadow Lodge

Wouldn't that same logic allow you to use a class feature to add Vorpal to a +5 Flaming weapon because 5 + 1 + 5 = 10, not 5 + 1 + 5 = you can't use the 5?

Or to cast Greater Magic Weapon to grant a +5 enhancement to a +1 Holy Flaming Burst Speed Weapon because 5 + 2 + 2 + 3 = 10, not you can't use the 5?

If something temporarily contributes to a weapon's enhancement bonus equivalent, it either is prohibited by the +10 hard cap or it is not. The second FAQ states that the Bane quality's increase to enhancement bonus is considered to temporarily contribute to its enhancement bonus equivalent, and it doesn't limit this to DR purposes. Even if that was the intent, it's not stated. I have not seen anything in the rules text indicating Bane, specially, can be +11 equivalent but not count as one for purposes of the +10 cap.

The "best of both options" in the FAQ does unfortunately specifically refer to the question of DR: the two previously stated methods in the FAQ for piercing DR/epic (actual enhancement or bonus equivalent), not best of both options when deciding whether or not Bane increases the effective enhancement bonus for the weapon.

NikolaiJuno wrote:
I really don't think that a total +10 weapon that includes Bane is intended to make Bane stop working when Bane is working.

I agree with you. I just don't see what the alternative is aside from "Rule 0 that poop."

Shadow Lodge

Just don't stand within 5ft of the Lyrakien when it's using its ability. Same goes for non-CG party members.

Strict RAW the text says "a neutral spellcaster can gain a wolpertinger as a familiar..." Not "Only a neutral spellcaster..." so the text doesn't actually negate the normal "one step on each axis rule" (note: different from "two steps"!). A 5th level LG character has a sufficient level, and the alignment is compatible by the usual rule, so you should be good to go.

I believe it's also the intention for the entry to establish the level and ideal alignment rather than apply an extra-firm restriction. There's no particular reason a Wolpertinger would care about a LG master when Elementals and Stirges don't.

However, a different GM might disallow it if they disagree with me on the intention and see the strict RAW as a technicality (which, honestly, it is). Would it be a big deal if you designed the character with a wolpertinger familiar but had to change it for an actual game?

Shadow Lodge

You're missing the second FAQ. I understand why it would be nice to pretend it doesn't exist and I will certainly do so at my table, but here it is:

FAQ wrote:

As a baseline, (bane weapons) include the plus-equivalences for its enhancement bonuses and special abilities; when the conditional or variable enhancement bonuses activate, it adds those to its total as well.

For example, a +3 undead-bane longsword is a +4-equivalent weapon, which on its own is not enough to overcome DR/epic. When used against an undead creature, its enhancement bonus increases by an additional +2, making it effectively a +6-equivalent weapon (+3 baseline enhancement bonus, +1-equivalent from bane, +2 conditional enhancement bonus against undead from bane) and therefore able to overcome that undead creature's DR/epic. (Another way of looking at it is when bane is active, you add its conditional +2 enhancement bonus to the weapon's normal +4-equivalent bonus, temporarily giving you a +6-equivalent weapon).

While this statement was made in the context of DR I don't see anything limiting it to that context. For example, it does not read "+6 equivalent weapon for purposes of overcoming DR/epic."

Maybe it should be limited to that context. Maybe it's intended to be. Lord knows Paizo could use more technical writers. But it doesn't currently have anything preventing it from interacting with the +10 hard cap rule.

Shadow Lodge

PF magic is very different from Middle Earth's, but you can certainly make a character in PF with a strong resemblance to Galadriel - the best possible approximation.

Gamerskum wrote:
I think Galadriel was referred to as the enchantress and witch upon several occasions and said to "bewitch" the minds of those that came into her woods by the men nearby.

Beware of being too literal. Popular usage of some terms, especially terms for magic users, does not always correspond to the roles of those terms in PF.

"Enchantress" is often used in fiction simply to indicate a woman using magic. "Witch" overlaps in usage but usually indicates evil powers. People calling Galadriel an "Enchantress and Witch" were essentially saying she was a scary magical lady. Her ability to bewitch others' minds could be represented simply by having her PF version learn the Charm Person or Suggestion spells - or even simply being very charismatic, which superstitious neighbors misinterpreted as a sign of magical influence.

Enchantment certainly isn't a bad choice for a school for Galadriel, but it's not required. Abjuration and Divination are both perfectly good fits.

Really, you could probably make Galadriel with any full casting class in PF with the right spell & ability selection. The ecclesitheurge cleric archetype, for example. Make a philosophy cleric with access (through the Domain Mastery ability) to about four appropriate domains and select a ring as the bonded holy symbol.

Shadow Lodge

Arcanist works fine with archmage path.

Most of the abilities simply require arcane spellcasting. You'll miss out on the class-specific abilities but there's still plenty to choose from. Even then the blood arcanist or school savant archetypes should qualify you for most of the bloodline or school powers. RAW the blood arcanist has the bloodline class feature, and I'm pretty sure there's something that says School Focus counts as Arcane School since they function identically. That's certainly the spirit of this FAQ - "It doesn't matter if the archetype's ability name is different than the standard class ability it is replacing; it is the description and game mechanics of the archetype ability that matter" - even if it technically doesn't apply to classes poaching other classes' features.

The only things you can't use are divine knowledge, mythic hex, bloodline intensity, and bloodline immunity. (A blood arcanist could take the last two but they're useless even with blood arcanist because you don't get the feats & spells).

Coupled Arcana doesn't work well unless you take blood arcanist or school savant, but a quick houserule could allow you to use it with an exploit as well.

Flexible School would be neat with School Savant Arcanist - take Abjuration as your primary school (better spells), then Flexible School with Divination to get limited use of Divination abilities, including Foresight's ability to act in the surprise round.

Kysune wrote:

Already covered that.

Summary of previous post: That interpretation makes sense if we assume that paizo mangled their syntax due to poor editing of the ACG, but would leave School Understanding generally underpowered compared to other exploits. The School Savant archetype is a better deal as long as you like the entire package.

Shadow Lodge

mplindustries wrote:
However, it still doesn't stop a +5 Elf-Bane Holy Wounding weapon from providing a +7 to hit and damage vs. elves (or counting as a +12 equivalent weapon).

First FAQ: "The +10 bonus-equivalent limitation is a hard cap for all weapons; you can't exceed that even with class abilities or other unusual abilities."

If +10 is a hard cap you can never have a weapon that temporarily counts as +12.

This is probably not the intended interaction of those two rules since if it was, it should have been clarified in the first FAQ that bane increased the weapon's total bonus equivalent and is, like class abilities and "unusual abilities," subject to the hard cap.

But they do interact in this way.

Shadow Lodge

Nenya is actually the water ring. It's counter-intuitive because Elrond's ring has a blue stone (a colour most associate with water) and because Elrond used his ring to affect the river into Rivendell.

Elrawien Lantherion wrote:
Arcanists can't bond to rings/items can they?

Only if you take the Blood Arcanist archetype and select the arcane bloodline - but you can't get the ring if you already have a familiar (for example from the Unlettered Arcanist archetype).

As the GM, you could let the player take the Unlettered Arcanist archetype and substitute the Bonded Witch's bonded item for the familiar.

Shadow Lodge

The feats:
Aberrant: Combat Reflexes, Great Fortitude, Improved Disarm, Improved Grapple, Improved Initiative, Improved Unarmed Strike, Iron Will.

Abyssal: Cleave, Great Fortitude, Improved Bull Rush, Improved Sunder, Intimidating Prowess, Power Attack, Toughness.

Arcane: Combat Reflexes, Disruptive*, Improved Initiative, Iron Will, Power Attack, Quick Draw, Spellbreaker*.

Black Blood: Combat Reflexes, Diehard, Endurance, Great Fortitude, Improved Initiative, Iron Will, Toughness.

Celestial: Dodge, Improved Initiative, Iron Will, Mobility, Mounted Combat, Ride-By Attack, Weapon Focus.

Destined: Diehard, Endurance, Improved Initiative, Intimidating Prowess, Leadership, Lightning Reflexes, Weapon Focus.

Draconic: Blind-Fight, Cleave, Great Fortitude, Improved Initiative, Power Attack, Skill Focus (Fly), Toughness.

Elemental: Cleave, Dodge, Great Fortitude, Improved Initiative, Lightning Reflexes, Power Attack, Weapon Focus.

Fey: Combat Reflexes, Dodge, Improved Initiative, Lightning Reflexes, Mobility, Step Up, Intimidating Prowess.

Infernal: Blind-Fight, Combat Reflexes, Deceitful, Improved Disarm, Improved Sunder, Intimidating Prowess, Iron Will.

Kyton: Alertness, Blind-Fight, Exotic Weapon Proficiency (spiked chain), Great Fortitude, Improved Dirty Trick, Iron Will, Toughness.

Undead: Diehard, Dodge, Endurance, Intimidating Prowess, Iron Will, Mobility, Toughness.

Most barbarians will want Power Attack before level 6, and if you're making a reach build you'll want Combat Reflexes before level 6. Maybe some builds will want a maneuver feat early. But for the most part, these aren't must-have feats, they're little bonuses that are nice to fit in. +1 to AC. +2 to one save. +(level) HP. It's no big deal to pass over these options with your normal feats if you plan ahead. The bummer is that they get less good as you advance in level. Since most don't have pre-requisites, you take the best ones first and then by level 12-15 it becomes a question of what's left. But at these levels the Barbarian is getting Trap Sense, so I'm not expecting much.

I've got the Destined bloodline on a bloodrager 5 / monk 2. Will probably take Improved Initiative next level. Leadership will probably be the bloodrager 9 pick, depending on how the campaign feels at that point. Probably Lightning Reflexes at 12 because it works well with evasion from the monk dip. I use multiple weapons so Weapon Focus is less useful but it's still something in the unlikely event we make level 15 (character level 17).

Shadow Lodge

Hero Lab can have errors.

Unlettered Arcanist is a good find! Better fitting spell list with enough new mechanics to hopefully keep the player interested.

Going full wizard's not a bad choice. I don't think it's thematically as appropriate as witch, but if you want the wizard/sorc spell list it makes as much sense as arcanist. Selection of school is a big deal. Divination has better abilities and enough good spells to keep you occupied, but its spells aren't great. Abjuration has great spells, but the abilities are meh. I think it's personal preference. For opposed schools I'd probably pick Conjuration and Necromancy. As mentioned above Conjuration is not Galadriel's style. Most of Evocation is too flashy but you don't want to lose access to light spells; Necromancy has some good stuff but you can do without it. Instead of a school, you could also try the spell sage archetype to - again - add access thematically-appropriate healing and druid spells, and avoid choosing opposed schools. Unfortunately you also give up arcane bond.

If you're going for Witch the Bonded Witch archetype allows you to take an arcane bonded ring - it's supposed to be a half-elf archetype but I'd ignore that.

1 to 50 of 2,976 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2015 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.