|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Also the Nature’s Speaker ability gives you extra types of friends as you level. And I think you'd be able to choose slightly broader groups such as "birds" or at least "songbirds" instead of "sparrows" given that "cats" and "snakes" are options and those tend to cover a bit more ground - though this may be subject to table variation.
Definitely increase Con. If you're going into melee you need more HP than the base d8. I would also boost Wis a bit. You don't need it to be that high for spellcasting but cunning initiative and the extra skill boosts make it a good package deal.
Dafydd's array (17/14/14/12/14/9) is pretty good. You could even out the 12 and 9 to two 10s if you prefer.
The inquisitor archetypes are not generally inspiring, but consider Infiltrator if you want to be more of a fast talker; being able to fake a Good aura and cast good-aligned spells is also thematic for an aasimar.
That's fair. I think in this case the disadvantage to noncasters is unbalanced. Crafting feats are worth by defnition a feat; non-casters spend more than twice that for less than half the benefit.
I think the feat would be much better if it was a two feat investment that let a non-caster use all of the skills tied to the chosen crafting feat. That way the master blacksmith concept exists, and the master tinkerer can exist on the other side. That would be a feat tax (skill-enhancer) that opens the door for magic items, and allows you to poach the entirety of a crafting feat with enough skill investment.
That sounds fine; I even suggested it upthread. I might suggest however increasing the skill bonus to +4 at 10 ranks (this is more consistent with existing rules than "treat your effective ranks in that skill as two higher" and grants a similar benefit).
Adept Woodwright wrote:
Coriat. They wouldn't need to just choose one. They would have a +2 on their skill of choice, but then it would be free pickings from there.
That change is easy to miss in the relevant post. In the future consider adding changes in bold, that way it'll be easier to see where “using the chosen craft skill” becomes “using an appropriate craft skill.”
Sure, they might be able to save a lot of skills by taking feats, but the int-caster has so many skill points it is absurd to assume that they wont try to save their feats if that is a good move in their build. You end up potentially negating the benefit you were trying to bestow on non-casters - because of this, I don't see it as the best fix. This is not a personal issue with you.
In this case the caster gets to choose which cost they prefer – feats or skill ranks – while the noncaster does not get a choice and must invest skill ranks. That sounds like a decent advantage to the caster to me. Especially since they caster can use both in combination eg take Craft Wondrous Item so as not to worry about all the fiddly craft skills, but then take a few ranks in Craft (Alchemy) in order to make potions.
I think I should make something clear: I am an academic. I personally cant accept conclusions that end up being based on emotional concepts like fairness. I didn't say you were wrong to use it for your discussion, just that it wont go very far in convincing me.
But you're Ok with “balance”? What do you see as the difference between fairness and class balance?Note: I'm also an academic and I see no problem with Ashiel's argument. While it's emotionally argued, it's based on a rational assessment of the relative worth of the crafting options for the two groups compared to the desired relative worth (ie “similar.”)
It is interesting to me that this community is absolutely obsessed with RAW...until the community sees something that it doesn't like and can't account for...THEN it becomes and argument about "RAI" or (in this case) "grammar" (An argument, which is to me fantastically hilarious given that the context of this discussion is based upon a game of fantasy).
o_0 Are you trolling? Language, and therefore writing, and therefore RAW cannot exist without grammar.
The problem with using Eldritch Heritage as a precedent is that crafting items isn't a class feature like a sorcerer bloodline. It's a set of feats that has been restricted to casters for largely thematic reasons that many people don't find compelling. And it's simply not exclusive enough to be a notable ability of any particular class; only about 1/3 of current classes don't get access to crafting normally, and that's including the alchemist.
Requiring non-casters to use Craft skills instead of Spellcraft, preventing them from making spell trigger and spell completion items, and letting them struggle with missing prerequisite spells is plenty to make them inferior crafters to casters, even without the feat tax and being limited to a single skill.
You're still basing arguments on the thought that only the things that reasonably raise a player's power ought to be chosen. If I was a caster with feats already invested in magic item crafting (say wondrous item and scrolls/rings/wands), then I might not want to invest more feats into crafting. Then, my buddy fighter might really want to get a magic weapon, and take master craftsman and craft weapon to make it happen. Or maybe armor.
Spreading out crafting feats is a great idea, but in my experience that usually means having 2-3 casters splitting different kinds of crafting, not having a non-caster take Master Craftsman.
The iconic trades are actually the ones that non-casters make the most use of with the two feat expense. - almost complete with weapons (either melee or ranged), and actually complete with armor.
Craft Weapons & Armour is one feat. A caster can take one feat to make melee and ranged weapons, and armour. A non-caster can make weapons or bows or armour.
If it's jeweler, you need to pick up both Wondrous and Forge Ring.
Nope. Master Craftsman doesn't allow you to take Forge Ring, just Craft Wondrous & Arms/Armour.
No, but we can come to a consensus. At least theoretically. >_>
Warpriest doesn't fill the concept, and it's not about the specific powers, it's about the broad strokes and how they influence RP.
Warpriest is a wisdom-based class; it gains its power from insight into the deity's doctrine. High-wisdom characters tend to be more aware of their surroundings and have better judgment; they make good advisors and perhaps tacticians.
Paladin is a charisma-based class; it gains its power from strength of personality. High-charisma characters tend to be better at influencing others. They're natural leaders - the ones you want making the rousing pre-battle speech.
The difference in personality between a high-Wis and a high-Cha character is the main reason that I rewrote a canny but doubt-ridden paladin I'd designed as an inquisitor. Now, you could make a Warpriest with a high Cha and make them the party face - just like you could make a Fighter with a high Wis and hunting skills. That doesn't make the Fighter a satisfying conceptual substitute for the Ranger.
A Celestial bloodline primalist spelleater bloodrager with an optional dip in lame battle oracle is a better paladin substitute both mechanically and thematically as a class that fights evil by channeling holy powers via strength of personality. Plus for a follower of Cayden you can take one or two of the flavourful drunken rage powers.
And as already mentioned, Faiths of Purity includes a Cayden Cailean spell for Paladins.
And wasn't Enhance Water reprinted in Inner Sea Gods?
Meredith Nerissa wrote:
It's not explicit, but you can see the principle in action in items like the Horn of Fog, which is priced the same as a slotted use-activated Obscuring Mist item, and the Pipes of Haunting, which are priced like a slotted use-activated Scare item. For me that makes the RAI pretty clear.
I use simple XP.
In summary, an average challenge is worth 2 XP. This includes most combat encounters and any long social encounter in which something significant is achieved.
A minor challenge, or one with little risk, is worth 1 XP. This includes easy or nonlethal combat encounters, traps, puzzles, or short social scenes.
A major challenge is worth 3 XP. This mostly includes boss fights, though really impressive high-stakes social maneuvering could qualify.
I will also sometimes reward 2-3 XP as a completion bonus for a longer running goal. For example one character wanted to recruit a particular NPC apprentice, which took a few minor social scenes spread over several sessions (1XP) and earned 2XP at completion.
Level every 30 XP (about every 15 encounters).
Since the PCs help each other even with personal side-quests I see no need to give out separate XP. I used to give half XP for missed sessions but I've decided I don't like the effect of spreading the group out. I used to give out small amounts of roleplay XP but my group doesn't exactly need motivation to RP and I've found it's best rewarded through in-game effects.
Didn't we agree upthread that that's distinctly not the intent of the feat?
Also, some fighters may indeed take Master Craftsman for roleplaying reasons - even some non-fighter martials. I played in a campaign where a ronin samurai took it, and that was even with a houserule in place that made crafting much less profitable.
But it's not a common choice because it's mechanically bad in most campaigns with standard WBL and crafting casters in the party.
If you just want to roleplay a fighter-weaponsmith, it's less costly to stick with mundane crafting and skip the feat investment.
2) Probably, see here and a few posts below it. Note the "blinded oracle" suggestion.
3) I believe that would count as averting their eyes (50% "miss" chance)
4) Meh. If I'm right about (3) mirrors aren't that big a deal, and the medusa and vampire aren't otherwise particularly synergistic.
5) Smoked goggles, though they're not as good as (2).
Yeah, too many good choices suck.
Try to think of it this way: you can't go wrong.
Honestly since you were leaning towards Beastmorph before deciding it didn't give you too much, and now you realize it gives you more than you thought... go Beastmorph. You'll be strong in melee, have a Tumour Familiar to flank with (on top of presumably the rogue), and will be able to save your extracts for utility or buffing others if necessary.
I think it does stack. It says you get abilities from the list of the polymorph spells, but never says it functions like the polymorph spells or that it's a polymorph effect. EDIT: This looks like an ability to add physical features rather than itself being a polymorph effect. See polymorph rules: "You also lose any class features that depend upon form, but those that allow you to add features (such as sorcerers that can grow claws) still function."
Even if it doesn't, Beastmorph has a few advantages vs polymorph:
1) Compared to Beast Shape, you retain the ability to use your normal gear including weapons and armour.
2) You can mix and match the abilities you get, for example taking fly and scent at level 6, or pounce and trip at level 10, instead of having to find a form that gives you the exact abilities you want.
3) Since it keys off your essentially unlimited use mutagen it saves you extract slots and space in your formula book. That could be very useful if you find there's a lot of demand on your extracts due to being the only character capable of buffing and healing the party.
Getting back mutagen is also a single discovery tho.
Forgotten about that. That makes Homunculist much more attractive compared to just getting a Tumor Familiar, thanks to experimentation.
I would avoid Homunculist; trading away your mutagen is painful for a melee-focused alchemist and Preservationist is a better way to get melee support.
The last thing I need help with isn't so much about the alchemist but about skills. I am planing to pick up a knowledge skill but I only have enough traits for one. I was thinking religion as that could help with outsiders as well as cultist and the like. Someone else suggested history as it could be used as a for almost anything not sure about that but that's what they said.
History could be used for almost anything if your GM is permissive, but it's not supposed to be and it certainly wouldn't give you as much detail as the other knowledge skills. For example, I might tell a character with Knowledge (history) that the civilization that built the tomb they're currently exploring is known for using mummified grave guardians, but wouldn't tell them what the strengths and weaknesses mummies are. Knowledge (religion) gives you information on undead - Knowledge (planes) is for outsiders. Unless you expect to fight a lot of outsiders then (religion) is probably slightly more useful than (planes), though you could stand to put a few ranks in cross-class Knowledge skills as you level up.
Compare to a Ranger or Paladin who simply meet the CL requirements at 7th level automatically and have Spellcraft as a class skill. 100% of Rangers I make pick up Craft Wondrous & Craft Magic Arms and Armor, and even if I dumped Int to 7 during generation (a likely prospect) they will be very competent at crafting stuff because the DCs aren't so high. And they didn't have to vomit feats down the toilet to do it.
Or a bloodrager who doesn't have the same -3 caster level and thus qualifies two levels earlier! I made a mithral brawling breastplate. ;)
I'm a big fan of character backgrounds being relevant and characters coming up with unusual skills. I'm currently playing a drunken monk with profession (bartender) and a bloodrager with +17 to Sense Motive (at level 7).
What I'm not a fan of is a system that encourages a fighter to be a skilled lockpick or pickpocket over being a skilled historian or student of heraldry. Favouring the former background over the latter does not make sense to me.
Adding extra skill points, skill focus, or class skills, or creating a skill point increasing feat will all improve the ability of fighters and paladins to participate in skill challenges, but without further dictating the subset of skill challenges in which they should be able to be relevant.
I think it's not so much that dump stats are bad as that having stats that everyone dumps is bad. Having the occasional fighter with 7 Cha is fine. Having a majority of fighters with 7 Cha gets repetitive. Having a majority of fighters, rangers, barbarians, monks, wizards, alchemists, druids, gunslingers, inquisitors, magi, witches, brawlers, hunters, slayers, and warpriests all dumping cha... frustrates people.
Some have suggested letting Will saves use either Wis or Cha, whichever is higher, in order to get some diversity of dump stats and make it as mechanically feasible to play a brash and charming fighter as a canny and gruff one.
EDIT: I'm quite astounded that I got so much accusational responses. Given that this is the House Rule/Homebrew section of the forums, I expected more people would be open-minded. It seems that that is not the case, or at least not for enough people. That's really disappointing. I suppose I won't post other ideas I have here, given how defensive people get.
People are usually pretty open minded here. You happen to have suggested a change that an overwhelming majority of people think is a bad idea. While you may not agree with us our arguments aren't unfounded and I'm seeing very little in the way of personal accusations or personal defensiveness (as opposed to constructive criticism, offered alternatives, and defense of our ideas).
Yeah, I don't see this having any advantage over giving out more skill points.
Thematically, Constitution represents physical endurance and health, not mental endurance and discipline. That's why it's considered one of the three physical stats, not one of the three mental stats.
Mechanically, you're moving a general function from a stat that has little general function (skills) compared to specialized function (spells & class features) to a stat that has little specific function (scarred witch doctor) but lots of general function (HP, fort saves). The result is that Intelligence becomes much more a specialist's stat. And that doesn't just mean people dumping Int - it means characters not specializing in Intelligence are less likely to invest in Int-based skills.
The link you posted used the example of a paladin having a hard time in a scenario heavy on knowledge (local) and (history) checks to point out the problem with not having many skill points. But would your proposed fix actually fix the paladin's problem? If you let the paladin get bonus skills based on Con, they'll probably get an extra 2-3 skill points per level. They'll also probably dump Int to 7. Now, what would I spend those extra skill points on? Diplomacy and Sense Motive, maybe a few ranks in Heal, Ride, and Handle Animal which are class skills. Perception, Intimidate, and UMD are useful cross-class skills. Knowledge (local) and (history) will be at the bottom of my list because not only am I not getting the +3 bonus for a class skill (which as the blog points out already discourages people from putting ranks in cross-class skills) but I'm starting with a -2 ability modifier. With my first rank in either skill I'm at a -1 skill modifier! At most I'll put a few ranks in (religion) or Spellcraft since those are class skills.
Similarly, a fighter with 4-5 skill points and Int 7 is not going to pick up (local) (history) or (nobility). There are simply too many useful skills which he could take instead that aren't fighting an ability penalty. They might put a rank in class skills (dungeoneering) or (engineering) but will still be pretty bad at these
Compare this to just giving these classes 2 more skill points per level. You get the same number of skill points to spread around, but it's more likely someone will place a cross-class rank in a Knowledge skill (or Linguistics or Spellcraft) rather than in Disable Device or Stealth.
And if the character doesn't dump Int so as to not suffer the penalty to intelligence based skills they're not getting as much of a benefit from your house-rule as someone who does dump Int to invest in other stats. You are incentivizing people to leave the Knowledge skills to the specialist. Sure you'll get more fighters with Disable Device but you're only half solving the problem of skill specialization.
Have you asked your players why they make sub-optimal builds with higher intelligence? It may be because they want to see the characters as being smarter or because they aesthetically like a well-rounded stat array, not just because they want more skill points. And if this is the case then they may not appreciate you adding a houserule that makes their smarter characters even more sub-optimal compared to the fighter who dumped Int.
If you're worried about a mixed group with some people liking and not liking to dump, then add extra skill points and remove the skill point penalty for dumping Int. That way the ones who dump Int won't be terrible at skills, but the ones who don't dump it (whether aesthetically, to qualify for Combat Expertise, or for class features) still benefit compared to the ones who do dump Int.
The way I was taught (by nuns), Lust isn't just about desire, but about treating another person as an object that exists for your pleasure rather than as a human being. I would suggest putting a person* in the dungeon who is in some difficulty and who the party can rescue. This person is eager to please his or her rescuers and very attractive so the party may suspect a seduction trap. Indeed, this is the most obvious way to fail the test. However the secondary test is whether the party allows the rescuee to perform uncomfortable or risky tasks on their behalf.
Can be combined with pride if the tasks the rescuee is offering to do are ones the PCs really can't perform on their own, but not ones for which rescuee is particularly well suited. So if the party tackles things head-on they are guilty of pride and if they send in their patsy they're guilty of (symbolic) lust. Success should depend on lateral thinking or an appeal for help from someone who actually is in a position to do so.
Might even overlap with wrath if the party suspects the rescuee is a succubus and attacks her. (Succubus "prisoners" are, I hear, a bit of a genre classic.)
*Likely a construct, simulacrum, or disguised outsider.
That sounds more like greed to me. Envy is distinct from greed mainly in that it is directed at something that another person has - particularly if you'd rather that no one had the desired thing than to allow the other to have it. Monsters are not really "people" enough to trigger the same kind of envy you can have for a peer like, say, a fellow adventuring party member.
Any way you could give one party member something really cool, and then provide a seemingly unrelated opportunity for another party member to gain something similarly cool at the first party member's expense? Tread carefully here because you don't want to screw with the party dynamic too much.
RAW, sure. Master Craftsman isn't technically a prerequisite for either crafting feat so you don't have to retrain those at the same time; 5 ranks in tailor still counts as your caster level for purposes of taking Craft Arms & Armour even if you can't actually create weapons or armour using craft (tailor). A GM might rule otherwise but I don't see the harm of spending a feat slot instead of retraining costs to pull that off.
Personally I think it makes way more sense to houserule Master Craftsman so that it does allow you to make any item for which you have 5 or more ranks in the appropriate craft skill rather than restricting you to one skill.
Hah, yesterday my group bypassed almost an entire dungeon by knocking and asking nicely to be let in.
I'd thrown a quick dungeon into the game to fill in an unexpected player absence - the player's character (an oread) had been waylaid by a shaitan during a sandstorm and the rest of the party had to get through the dungeon to find their friend. They spot mephits when approaching and make the Knowledge (planes) and (local) checks to deduce that they're in a genie outpost. Genies not being overly hostile, when they find their first proper (trapped) door they decide to knock on it and ask if anyone's home.
The mephits answer and after a little negotiation they let the party in to wait while the shaitan finishes his chat with his oread guest. The rest of the session consisted of me describing the guardians and traps that the party was supposed to fight their way through. EDIT: I probably should have seen this one coming because this group goes for the diplomatic option 9 times of 10 but as I said the session was put together in a rush...
Yes, Chess Pwn is correct.
The "alternative" I mentioned was not an alternative for how the judgment works. It's the alternative wording that the ability would have used if you got +2 at level 4. The ability does not use that wording, so you get +2 at level 3.
Sorry if that caused some confusion. I personally find it helpful to look at alternative wordings when making sure the rules mean what I think they mean.
RAW, the swarm is one target for the purpose of Whirlwind Attack: it acts as a single creature with one AC and one pool of hit points. Whirlwind attack is not an area effect.
The swarm does not make a natural weapon attack so it doesn't trigger Manifest Blood.
I would house-rule that Manifest Blood works on swarms and counts as an area attack, and I would give a character 50% bonus damage when using Whirlwind Attack against a swarm (still subject to resistance/immunity to weapon damage).
I don't think that's correct. The rule doesn't seem to care about whether the movement takes place before or after the step:
5 ft step wrote:
You can move 5 feet in any round when you don't perform any other kind of movement. Taking this 5-foot step never provokes an attack of opportunity. You can't take more than one 5-foot step in a round, and you can't take a 5-foot step in the same round that you move any distance.
That's correct. Having a held charge does not give you extra attacks. You get one attempt to deliver a touch charge as a free action in the same round you cast a touch spell, but only in the round you cast the spell.
So if you use spell combat and cast Chill Touch, you can make two attacks in that round: one from casting Chill Touch that round, and one normal (full) attack.
The next round, you can still deliver Chill Touch charges through your weapon as ChessPwn says, but you must use your normal single attack to do so.
Overexplaining a bit because I'm not entirely sure why you cited that particular FAQ as your reasoning so I want to be extra-clear.
The Crossblooded archetype does not treat lower level bloodline powers as pre-requisites to the higher level ones. The only limitation is that you can only select powers available to a bloodrager at your level. It's perfectly legal to take the 8th level arcane power at level 12 and then jump to the 16th level arcane power at level 16 without ever taking the level 12 power.
The constitution checks are for a character holding their breath:
After this period of time, the character must make a DC 10 Constitution check in order to continue holding her breath.
Airless touch says you can't hold your breath; you must breathe or suffocate.
Chokehold says you can't breathe; you have to hold your breath or suffocate.
If you are affected by both you just suffocate:
When the character fails one of these Constitution checks, she begins to suffocate. In the first round, she falls unconscious (0 hit points).
DM_Blake, the request was for an amulet a Hunter can wear to share his teamwork feats with all allies, not an amulet an ally can wear to share the Hunter's teamwork feats.
Also the ioun stone is at double cost due to being slotless, so an amulet functioning as you describe should cost roughly half of those estimates.
I'm not sure what the price would be but it should be expensive.
Horsemaster's Saddle for example lets you share teamwork feats with only your mount, which also limits the teamwork feats you can effectively share (for example, you can't flank with your mount so things like Outflank would be difficult).
Ring of tactical precision only allows sharing one teamwork feat.
Both have other benefits but the limited feat sharing is probably a good chunk of their 11-12K price. Sharing all your feats with all your allies should cost many times that.
I'm not misreading it. This question has been asked repeatedly and it's generally pointed out that these discounts are not intended to let the wizard get a 30% discount on his headband of intellect which only works for wizards.
Thankfully, since all custom magic item creation is subject to GM approval, the rules encourage a GM to decide whether this is a fair and balanced price. And a discounted price is only fair if there's some disadvantage to the person getting the discount. The risk of losing the condition that allows the item to work is not greater than the risk that an enemy will steal your item and use it against you.
As Nardoz Zardoz said I would only think this makes sense for a custom item if it only works while using a class feature, or if you have to spend uses of a class feature to make it function. For example, Greyflame provides better benefits than Flaming (since it bypasses resistances and some DR) but requires you to spend Channel Energy to activate it, so it costs the same.
The higher in level you go, the more temp HP you get from raging, the greater the chance that any hit knocking you unconscious will kill you.
With a 13 Con, unconsciousness equals death at level 6 (at which point at reaching -1 HP you lose 12 rage HP, drop to -13, and are dead). If you want to avoid this, you need to take Raging Vitality by level 5.
Do you want to count on getting a constitution belt by level 5? If your group has a crafter, or your GM agrees to make sure you can find or buy one, great. But not all GMs like it when a PC build depends on finding exactly the right item at very specific levels - at this case, somewhere during level 4, since before then you cannot afford a 4,000gp item at standard WBL.
Even then, at level 4 there's a pretty narrow safety window for SBDS; an attack reducing you to -5 or lower while raging kills you. If you're OK with that, fine, Raging Vitality is very much about how much risk you're comfortable with.
But I personally would just aim to get a Strength belt around level 4-6 and not worry about exactly when I find it, instead of needing to get a Con belt by level 5 and spending levels 3 and 4 worrying about dying. I personally would also take Combat Reflexes as my second level 1 feat with Raging Vitality at level 3 since Combat Reflexes, paired with a reach weapon, is good for keeping foes from getting close enough to hit you in the first place.
Charon's Little Helper wrote:
With Toughness at level 1 and a Con of 13, you'll have 17hp to start with. That is very high already.
I thought we'd agreed that there were better feat choices than Toughness - in which case the extra HP is more useful.
Charon's Little Helper wrote:
The extra accuracy/damage from strength is far more important than a smidge extra hp/fort.
It's +1 to attack and damage; note when two-handing weapons for 1.5 Str, odd strength bonuses (such as 20/+5) get rounded down.
That's good. But far more important than a little defense? You're a barbarian. That +1 attack and damage could easily be overkill. My level 2 monk/bloodrager killed an enemy witch by accidentally punching him too hard - once - nonlethally! Double max HP with one hit!
Righteous Might would be fantastic for a maneuver monk thanks to the size increase... unfortunately it's a personal-range spell, like many of the cleric's best single-target buffs. Point for the Sacred Fist rebuild...
Greater Magic Weapon may be a good idea depending on whether it overlaps too much with an AoMF - it's often advisable to get only weapon qualities on the amulet and then increase your enhancement bonus with GMW.
Gwen Smith wrote:
And most of the negative effects have an onset of 1 hour or more.
Drugs do appear to be better poisons than poisons, especially if they bypass ordinary resistances to poison (which appears to be RAW, maybe not RAI).
Ms. Pleiades wrote:
My group has encountered two individual orcish/half-orcish youths.
In a casual light-hearted game she was adopted and became a minor side character.
In a more serious game the youth ended up going on a homicidal rampage when we got back to his home village, killing two PCs who tried to stop him from murdering an orc baby. The youth then ran off. It was a very interesting scenario and I mostly just regret that the campaign ended abruptly before we could find the youth and reach a more complete resolution of some sort.
My group has also encountered goblin babies with no problems. My monk is currently raising about a half-dozen which we found apparently abandoned in a shed near our new base of operations.
My current houserule is that any character with 5 or more ranks in at least one craft skill can take the Craft Arms & Armour and Craft Wondrous Items feats, and use their craft ranks as their caster level when crafting so long as they use a craft skill in which they have 5 or more ranks to create the item.
You still have to invest in more skills than the caster to get full use out of the feats, but at least you don't have to spend an extra feat and you can eventually make the full range of items.
Still needs playtesting. Notably this makes it a better deal for rogues than fighters, since the former have more skills. If this bothers you perhaps let fighters use a single craft skill to make anything under the Arms & Armour category. (Or just give fighters more skill points...)
That said, I can't seem to find where Profession (Blacksmith) is as Aelryinth describes.
The fact that both a Craft (Armour) and Craft (Weapons) skill exist implies that you cannot use Craft (Blacksmith) to create items in both those categories.
Ranks are the skill points contributed to the skill, not the overall modifier. There is no way to have more ranks in a skill than a character has hit dice since the maximum ranks you can have in a skill is equal to your hit dice. The +2 bonus is merely that, a bonus. It has nothing to do with ranks, so it doesn't contribute to caster level.
Yes, so if you had 7 ranks in craft weapons you would take +5 to the DC to create a +3 weapon (which requires caster level 9).
However Keen does not have such a requirement - the caster level merely sets the DC, which you can use your total skill modifier to meet.
My thinking was that parenthetical expressions were examples, not an exclusive list. Hence my question.
Not all parenthetical statements are lists of examples; their function is more generally to extend or clarify. In this case, the parenthetical is an imperative statement, so you should do what it says.
Magda Luckbender" wrote:
It's true that threatening adjacent occasionally comes up. It might be a 1% to 5% factor, depending on tactics and play style.
I think it can be quite a bit more than a 5% factor depending on playstyle. In the second-last combat my reach character was engaged in, narrow twisty spaces made it difficult for me to maneuver into reach range, and when it was possible, my opponent got cover. The GM also generally likes to use ranged attackers which makes that cozying up trick I mentioned much more applicable.
I wouldn't worry too much about threatening adjacent for most builds, but when armour spikes cost just 50gp and as a paladin OP is going to be wearing armour - why the heck not?
He probably wont go for it though. He is an old school GM. He is used to 2nd ED where party members have various level disparities.
Then it's possible he knows some strategies for dealing with such groups. Have you talked with him about his concerns?
Don't summon things, at least until the rest of the party catches up in level. Stick to buffs and maybe some debuffs. If you are using most of your energy making the party better, and some of your energy making sure the enemy has a hard time killing the party, the rest of the party will be able to do cool things and feel good.
Conversely summoning things that are better than the party, or using higher level SoL to shut down the BBEG will emphasize the disparity.
Another thing to consider about threatening adjacent with a reach weapon: it makes it harder for people to escape you.
Is a caster or archer causing problems? Move adjacent and attack with your close option. If they 5ft step away, they're still in your reach. For an character with a good UAS it's like getting multiple feats for free. EDIT: probably not nearly as useful for your paladin but still a good option to have since some of the options for threatening adjacent easy & cheap.
I meant thematically, in response to Drevek's comment:
Which also makes me hate the idea that you can't make money on things because you don't have a store. I have never, EVER needed a store to make money. So ridiculous!
There's no reason something can't mechanically act as a limit on WBL and also thematically represent the limits of the magical enconomy.
...okay, reasonably speaking a few rounds shouldn't do it.
The point of the rule is that you don't rest properly if you sleep in your armour. Therefore the reasonable interpretation is that if you're sleeping to gain the benefits of rest (regaining HP, arcane spells, etc) you also invoke the penalties for sleeping in armour.
The reason that my first response was so brusque was because this seems to me like a case where the RAI is really clear and the Ring of Sustenance issue was an attempt to create a loophole. In this case, nitpicking the RAW for loopholes instead of accepting the RAI... screws over anyone in medium or heavy armour when subjected to magical Sleep effects. :/ Doesn't seem like the way to go to me.
For a more productive contribution, Restful armour actually does both reduce the amount of sleep you need to two hours (like a Ring of Sustenance but without the other benefits) and lets you sleep in that armour without penalty.
Might I suggest Str 18 Dex 16 Con 13+2?
You get all the goodies associated with a high Dex (AC, ranged attacks, AoO with Combat Reflexes, Initiative, Reflex saves, and skills) while still maintaining eligibility for Raging Vitality and getting +1 HP/HD and Fort save compared to putting your racial bonus in Str for another +1 to hit and damage.
Yes, offense is very important, especially for a barbarian, and you probably don't need the extra HP or even Raging Vitality - which has saved my character from unconsciousness but not death. Still, it sounds like the OP is defense minded and will enjoy himself more if Sudden Barbarian Death Syndrome isn't a concern - which is absolutely worth accepting a slightly less terrifying DPR.
Dual Talented as Ughbash suggested also works if you're not planning on doing anything fancy with feats long term and don't care about skills. You can always take Raging Vitality at level 3 and Combat Reflexes at level 5.
The Chort wrote:
Most characters that are ever built by point buy have 12 to 14 con, just because it's an important stat, but not the stat that makes your character shine, it's just necessary to stay alive. 13 Con, or 14 at level 4 is about as good as you can expect. D12 HD + Con 14 is a respectable amount of HP
That's only true if your playstyle is adapted to typical stat arrays. I play in games with higher stat arrays than you typically get through point buy, and it's pretty common for our frontliners to have 16 Con (in addition to a Str of 18-20). And because our opponents are balanced against frontliners with lots of HP we use it.
Though still not enough to need Toughness on a barbarian.
Drevek, not every GM enjoys playing powerful outsiders to their full potential, not just because it could be very lethal to the players but because it's a whole different sort of tactics. Chat with your GM about whether he/she wants to up the ante in this way before you go looking for ways to survive it.
I think the restrictions on selling magic items aren't meant to represent the lack of a physical store as the lack of mercantile contacts. With or without a storefront adventuring wizards are not assumed to have the time to run a business. Plus, there's probably not enough economic demand for magic items to buy everything you could potentially produce.
Of course if you work with your GM you could certainly subvert these assumptions.
I personally find that many skills provide poor benefits for high skill investment, and more options for accelerating skill use in exchange for a higher DC would help this.
Yeah, I can say I'd have to level it out to some degree based on the scenario. Perhaps +5 for the first speed up with cumulative +5 increases, such that to craft at double speed is +5, triple is +15 (5 +10), quadruple is +30 (5 + 10 + 15), five times is +50 (5 + 10 + 15 +20), six times is +75 (5 + 10 + 15 + 20 + 25), etc.
That sounds like a fair progression to me.
Therefore, any amount of sleeping in medium or heavy armour causes fatigue.
Meredith Nerissa wrote:
Doesn't the price hike only really apply to slotted items? Neither weapons or rods are slotted items.
Held items are treated as slotted for pricing purposes because the number of held items you can use at one time is limited. It's more advantageous to have a weapon that also acts as a metamagic rod than to have a weapon and a separate metamagic rod, so a price increase is appropriate. True slotless items do not force these tradeoffs. There is no benefit to having an ioun stone with +2 Con and +2 Str compared to two ioun stones each with one of the two benefits.
Brain in a Jar wrote:
Warpriest seems more like a balance between people wanting/not wanting Paladins of various alignment.
At which it fails, possibly because those designing it didn't pay enough attention to the latter group to realize that "a cleric, but more fighty" wasn't the point. Otherwise the crusader cleric or the inquisitor would have already done the job. EDIT: Note that the inquisitor is more than just a fighty cleric but it does do rather well as a more martial divine caster.
Bloodragers make better alt alignment "paladins" than the warpriest - especially with a little oracle.
Celestial Spelleater Primalist Bloodrager gets you:
Multiclassing with Lame Oracle gives you access to limited divine spells (also charisma-based) and immunity to fatigue by level 9 depending on the oracle/bloodrager proportion. It also makes you eligible for Divine Protection to get Cha to saves like a real paladin! The battle mystery has a few good revelations for multiclassing with.
Not sure what the best proportion of Bloodrager to Oracle would be (of course, this would make a gorgeous gestalt...)
Agree with Dave Justus that if you run it properly the large number of encounters will feel like a marathon to the players even if they don't actually gain the fatigued condition.
Also that where possible, players should roll the dice.
In addition to reworking the encounters to be more manageably draining, strongly consider some of tonyz' suggestions for adding noncombat solutions to reduce the stress a bit.
Since the party is low level I would recommend adding a few extra consumables, particularly healing potions, to the rewards during the dungeon crawl portion in case they are unlucky or you misjudge the number of encounters necessary to wear them out. This will make it much less likely that they will die because you miscalculated something - and if they do well and don't need the consumables then they get extra loot as a reward.