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

c873788's page

584 posts. Alias of Paul Van Eyk.


RSS

1 to 50 of 584 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

c873788 wrote:
Erik Mona wrote:

I'm working my way through Besant and Leadbeater's Theosophical Manuals (100-page summaries of key points to introduce the philosophy) and they haven't really covered the rays yet. The internet is practically useless on the subject, so I'm sticking with primary sources.

What I understand about the concept seems ripe for exploitation in an RPG, but I admit I can't fully get my head around it yet.

I have quite a few books at home. I'll see if I can help you in finding the right books/chapters/passages.

Sorry, none of the books I own seemed to cover the rays.

What I would be excited to see is some sort of Mystic class based around the arousing of the Kundalini (serpent-fire) at a high level to become a "super humanoid". The steps on the way to this achievement would be through the alignment of the 7 chakras at different levels starting of course with the root chakra at a low level.


Erik Mona wrote:

I'm working my way through Besant and Leadbeater's Theosophical Manuals (100-page summaries of key points to introduce the philosophy) and they haven't really covered the rays yet. The internet is practically useless on the subject, so I'm sticking with primary sources.

What I understand about the concept seems ripe for exploitation in an RPG, but I admit I can't fully get my head around it yet.

I have quite a few books at home. I'll see if I can help you in finding the right books/chapters/passages.


Erik Mona wrote:
Have you read Alice Bailey? Pretty crazy offshoot stuff.

I've heard of Alice Bailey but never had the opportunity to read her material. I know where I can track it down. You have piqued my curiosity and motivated me to go check it out.


Erik Mona wrote:
c873788 wrote:
Erik Mona wrote:

5) Bulmahn is willing to let me go off on digressive riffs about the seven principles of mankind, Theosophy, reincarnation, the Astral and Ethereal Plane, and auras for about 7 minutes, but after that he starts to make fun of me.

Are you a fan of Annie Besant?

I have three of her books in my hotel room right now. :)

I tend to think C.W. Leadbeater is a better writer and brings more of a touch of the fantastic to his books, but both of them are invaluable.

I think Leadbeater is my favourite writer though I do enjoy Besant and Powell as well. Strangely enough, I've read very little of Blavatsky but I do have a cherished book of hers at home that is a very old, hard cover book which is essentially what I'd call a Bestiary that runs from A to Z. I think it is quite rare and it has makes for fascinating reading. I can't remember what it's called off the top of my head but I'll check when I get home.

Moving off the Theosophical texts, you may find Dion Fortune's Psychic Self-Defence both an entertaining read as well as an interesting source of information for your new book.


Erik Mona wrote:

5) Bulmahn is willing to let me go off on digressive riffs about the seven principles of mankind, Theosophy, reincarnation, the Astral and Ethereal Plane, and auras for about 7 minutes, but after that he starts to make fun of me.

Are you a fan of Annie Besant?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Squirrel_Dude wrote:

Now, Paizo certainly isn't jacking their prices sky-high like GW is, but they do seem to have a similar laissez faire attitude when it comes to maintaining game balance, in exchange for maintaining internal D&D's traditional character archetypes. That's been fine most of the time, but I'm getting more than a little bored of it.

I think it's unfair to compare Paizo to GW. I played Warhammer Fantasy for decades before giving up because of:

1. High prices and ridiculous rules around regional pricing
2. Their Ivory Tower attitude to what gamers actually wanted and any reasonable criticism about the game or how they treated the players.
3. Lack of transparency and communication with the Warhammer community.
4. Incredibly unbalanced rules between armies from 5th edition all the way through to 8th edition. The lack of game balance was far higher than anything you see with Pathfinder.

Paizo actually listen to their community and are reasonably responsive to them. As you mentioned, their prices are very fair and they are quite willing to admit when they may have made a mistake which I don't think happens that often.

These are just my personal opinions but it is echoed by those who used to play Warhammer with me.


jikl2001 wrote:

I looked for this thread because it personally felt to me that the Hunter class just wasn't very good. It seems to me that both the Druid and the Ranger are superior options. Upon reading your posts, though, you guys see a lot more potential in it than I do. Maybe I'm missing something...

I think you are missing a lot.

I have a 3rd level ranged focus hunter with PBS, Precise Strike and Rapid Shot. My tiger animal companion has dark vision, energy resistance 5 to cold, electricity and acid. My tiger has a 23AC without being boosted in any way and DR5/Adamantine.

Let's imagine he's attacking the enemy now. He gets 3 attacks and gets to roll twice for each attack and take the highest roll. Each attack he can use a free action to entangle for 1 round as well as the shaken condition for 1d4 rounds. There are no saves for this. The tiger just has to hit with one of his 2 rolls for each of his 3 attacks.

Next round my hunter shoots twice and let's assume hits once. Hitting that opponent with my arrow has now granted my tiger with +2 to hit and +2 damage against that opponent for the next hour.

This is all at 3rd level. Oh, and my tiger can smite once per day.

There are lots of hidden gems for the Hunter if you just know where to look.


Ssalarn wrote:
The AnC is "the Ranger" for the purposes of the ability. That being said, the list of tricks he can actually use is only like half of the total list since some would require him to have his own AnC, and some of them proc off abilities he doesn't have. I think the best two for a melee pet to learn are Tangling Strike and Aiding Attack. Also, remember that there's a lot of normal tricks your AnC really needs to have, so you don't want to neglect those.

That's good to know. I think Rattling Strike is also very potent.

I have seen some other threads where the Hunter is rated very poorly compared to the other new classes. In fact it is rated the lowest by some. I think this class is surprisingly powerful.


Ssalarn wrote:

Yep, by the rules it certainly looks like they can. They also appear to be learned as handle animal tricks, so no daily limit. If so, the Hunter goes from strong to crazy good.

I wonder how these skirmisher tricks are applied? Most start out by stating "The Ranger can..."


Zolanoteph wrote:

I didn't see a dedicated hunter thread so I figured I would start one for the black sheep of the ACG.

There's a little gem written under Animal Companion (Ex) that could make the Hunter really powerful. Here is the part I'm referring to:

A hunter may teach her companion hunter’s
tricks from the skirmisher ranger archetype (Pathfinder
RPG Advanced Player’s Guide 128) instead of standard tricks.

I want people's thoughts on whether these tricks can be chosen from 1st level.


Broken Zenith wrote:

Tengu Bite/claw/claw ninja is in: Blackbeak. Let me know if there is anything I seriously messed up.

He handily outshines the classic ninja in the earlier levels, though the difference decreases over time. At level 12ish the classic ninja begins outshining the Tengu, but who really plays that long anyway? An extremely good choice if you don't mind being a Tengu, Tiefling, or similar, and I've marked it as such in the guide.

Thanks for including this as a build option. My Tengu natural attacking ninja has actually gone with a combination of natural attacks/scout/sap mastery foci for PFS play. I've purchased a merciful amulet which is a cheap way of getting the sap mastery to work on any of my natural attacks. At 5th level, if I can catch someone flatfooted, I do 1d3 + 7d6 + 24 points of damage with one of my attacks.


blackbloodtroll wrote:
Dervish Dance can only be used with a Scimitar of your size.

Oh, how disappointing. Thanks for the clarification.


Eridan wrote:

I would say yes.

Are there special reason why you use a scimitar? Otherwise i would retrain your scimitar based feats and use a kukri without the -2 penalty for inappropriately sized weapons. Same damage, crit-range and proficiency as a small scimitar.

I use a scimitar for my Dawnflower Dervish bard build that uses dexterity to hit and to damage and also requires use of a scimitar for the Dervish Dance feat.


The Piranha Strike feat is similar to the Power Attack feat but is based off Dexterity and requires the use of a light weapon.

I have a character build based around using a scimitar. If I were to wield a small sized scimitar as a medium sized humanoid, would I effectively be getting around the light weapon requirement? Please see the cut and past on weapon size rules below and give me your opinion:

Weapon Size: Every weapon has a size category. This designation indicates the size of the creature for which the weapon was designed. A weapon's size category isn't the same as its size as an object. In general, a light weapon is an object two size categories smaller than the wielder, a one-handed weapon is an object one size category smaller than the wielder, and a two-handed weapon is an object of the same size category as the wielder.

Inappropriately Sized Weapons: A creature can't make optimum use of a weapon that isn't properly sized for it. A cumulative –2 penalty applies on attack rolls for each size category of difference between the size of its intended wielder and the size of its actual wielder. If the creature isn't proficient with the weapon, a –4 nonproficiency penalty also applies.

The measure of how much effort it takes to use a weapon (whether the weapon is designated as a light, one-handed, or two-handed weapon for a particular wielder) is altered by one step for each size category of difference between the wielder's size and the size of the creature for which the weapon was designed. For example, a Small creature wields a Medium one-handed weapon as a two-handed weapon (it still takes the –2 penalty for using an inappropriately sized weapon). If a weapon's designation would be changed to something other than light, one-handed, or two-handed by this alteration, the creature can't wield the weapon at all.


Broken Zenith wrote:

@ c#s and Krodjin - Thanks for pointing that out. I'll build up a Tengu Ninja and see how he turns out.

The other advantages to this are that you are covering off bludgeoning, slashing and piercing with your natural attacks against DR. You also save a large amount of gold as you can apply a +1 bonus or equivalent to 3 weapon attacks for the price of 4000gp.

In an unrelated point, I found the scout archetype invaluable with the Ninja as it gives you an easy option for succeeding with a sneak attack given that this is not always an easy thing to do.


Broken Zenith wrote:

I've made a guide to the Ninja! Comments, questions, and concerns are appreciated. Let me know if you disagree with anything, or if I've left anything out.

I'm surprised you rate Tengu as a race so poorly. Tengu lets you get 3 attacks per round from 1st level without any negatives to hit (unlike 2 weapon fighting) and is feat free.


Secret Wizard wrote:

I strongly suggest you just make a random pun relating to whatever you are making laugh. The cheesier pun the better.

Like, seriously, put 0 effort into it. The lamer the pun, the more jarring it will be when the Balor starts laughing at it.

"Get thee to a punnery."


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Dragonborn3 wrote:
Bards are Awesome

The only way you could make Bards more awesome is if Paizo created the Air Guitarist archetype.


Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
Use your second monk bonus feat, not your third level feat. Masters of Many Styles can ignore prequisites on style feats once they have the base style.

That's exactly what I did because I knew the 3rd level standard feat would not work. Based on what you've said, I will assume that it's a bug then which is good news.

I really like this build. I would try to also squeeze in Boar Style at early levels to take advantage of the bonus 2d6 rend damage when you hit and the . Does anyone have any ideas on how this build could be adjusted to fit in Boar Style?


Wiggz wrote:


As promised.

Human 2nd level Monk (Master of Many Styles) / 10th level Fighter (Brawler)
Monk levels taken at 2nd & 3rd

Feats:
1st - Weapon Finesse
1st - Two-Weapon Fighting
1st - Weapon Focus: Unarmed Strike
2nd - Improved Unarmed Strike
2nd - Stunning Fist
2nd - Snake Style
3rd - Snake Fang
3rd - Combat Reflexes

It also gives us Evasion, a slight boost in unarmed strike damage dice and free, accelerated access to the Snake Style feat Snake Fang....

I tried putting your build together in Herolab for a PFS legal build but it wouldn't allow me to pick up Snake Fang at 3rd level without getting Snake Sidewind first. This forced me to select Fighter (Unarmed Fighter) instead of Fighter (Brawler) to pick up Snake Style at 1st level as a bonus fighter feat. Then I was able to pick up Snake Sidewind at 2nd level (1st level Monk) and Snake Fang at 3rd level (2nd level Monk).

Obviously, this disrupts picking up all those other important feats at 1st and 2nd level. Do you think this is a flaw with your assumptions on how you can pick up Snake Fang early or do you think this is a bug in the Herolab program?


Rudy2 wrote:
Here's an awesome example

It is an awesome example. And it is also an example of picking a class ability with a steep cost that will probably only ever be used once in the character's entire career.

It's a piece of junk because of the cost and because it is highly situational. In fact, it's entirely plausible that a character could go through an entire adventure path and find that he never has the opportunity to use it.


Calth wrote:
Bluff works normally, but you would receive massive penalties for impossible lies. The way I see the ability working is that you could convince someone the sky wasn't blue but instead neon pink at no penalty. Or respond to specific questions that the asker knows with utter gibberish and convince them you are right at no penalty. Negating all bluff penalties based on Int-based skills or knowledge is a pretty powerful effect in non-combat settings.

I see what you are trying to say but at the same time I would say that your interpretation of what benefit it grants is highly situational with a huge cost that I think almost nobody would take.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Rudy2 wrote:

I would say, instead:

"For the duration of the effect, you gain a +4 circumstance bonus on Bluff checks, and may attempt Bluff checks in place of Intelligence checks or Intelligence-based skill checks made to convince others of your breeding, eloquence, and refinement."

That would be pointless. In effect it becomes:

"For the duration of the effect, you gain a +4 circumstance bonus on Bluff checks."

You could just use the bluff skill anyway to convince others of your breeding, eloquence, and refinement. The extra words in no way enhance the bluff skill as it is.

I would not spend a feat or a 2nd level spell slot just to gain a +4 temporary bonus to bluff that burns a use of your limited number of rounds of Bard Performance per day.


DrakeRoberts wrote:
Actually. I believe I did make some sense of it (although it was admittedly me putting flavor to mechanics, rather than based off of the power alone). The flavor, in my opinion, is that the masterpiece is a supernatural form of extreme method acting. You take on the aura of someone more refined and knowledgeable, and supernaturally get into their mindset, making your bluff and disguises easier, and making you more knowledgeable (in my reading once per use) as you get into the head of someone of greater station/refinement/etc.

That's sort of how I see it. The Bard is channelling their muse who is some form of spiritual, almost omniscient entity.


Faelyn wrote:
Between the two races, I would say go with Aasimar; the favored class bonus, Darkvision, and Glitterdust 1/day is simply amazing. Especially Darkvision, because without magical items bards have no way to see in the dark. Nothing shuts down a DD faster than not being able to see (I should know... happened to me several times in WotR (Half-elf DD) early on.)

Faelyn is right about this. Muse-touched Aasimar was made to go with DD. The favoured class bonus means your battle dance can be +4 at 4th instead of 5th level and you get the increase sooner the more you level up.


I am also playing a Dawnflower Dervish at the moment and he rocks. He's a muse-touched Aasimar with maxed out Dexterity and Charisma and is currently level 4. This is a strong archetype and all 3 versions you suggest are viable.

I've gone a slightly different route to your options as besides Maestro of Society trait (an obvious pick), I selected Blade of Mercy trait along with the Enforcer feat which allows me to make a free intimidate check to give the shaken or frightened condition on the enemy every time I hit them.

I also picked up the Pageant of the Peacock masterpiece at 4th level which has basically made the character supernova on nearly every skill in the game... except for perception. I dumped my wisdom to 8 and have a -1 perception for fluff reasons. The way I play the character is that he is totally full of himself as he is beautiful beyond compare being an Aasimar and he carries a little hand mirror around using mage hand constantly distracted from what is going on around him while he stares at himself and whispers to himself just how beautiful he is.

From levels 5 to 8 I intend to go Paladin (Oath of Vengeance) as this will give me a +6 bonus to all my saves as well as Smite and Lay on Hands pretty much whenever I feel like it. I will also pick up Arcane Strike at level 5 when the bonus becomes +2.

Levels 9 onwards will be bard again.


Umbranus wrote:

If this is not about the price, why is it important? Is there some corner case where it is important which it is?

Apart from that Captain Zoom gave the RAW answer.

The real reason I care can be found at this thread: Rhino Hide and Pounce

So, the bottom line is that if bipedal animal companions can wear armor, not barding, then perhaps they can wear rhino hide.


I don't mind if it is more expensive and I suppose what you're saying is a RAI interpretation. According to the definition for barding, it seems it's for horses and mounts only. Do we have a RAW answer one way or another that tells us whether it's barding or armor?


I want to know whether a medium sized Ape animal companion with light armor proficiency wears armor or barding.

Barding in the rules is defined as follows:
Barding is a type of armor that covers the head, neck, chest, body, and possibly legs of a horse or other mount.

An Ape being a bipedal creatue, would seem to not qualify as a mount. This idea is strengthened by rules on the Summoner’s Eidolon and the 1-Point Evolution called Mount (Ex):
An eidolon is properly skilled and formed to serve as a combat-trained mount. The eidolon must be at least one size category larger than its rider. This evolution is only available to eidolons of the quadruped and serpentine base forms.

This would seem to suggest that the Ape would wear armor instead of barding. What are people’s thoughts on this?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

James Jacobs answer should be sufficient. The DM is being arrogant if he wants to overrule Paizo staff who take the time out on the message boards to answer rules questions.


I want to second Frank's comments and say what a pleasure it was meeting Mike as well as playing with him.

PS - To all society players out there, jump in if you get the chance to play with Mike in a scenario game as it is very rewarding. His Oracle saved us from a potential TPK.


chaoseffect wrote:
TarkXT wrote:
Why not a polearm?

A couple reasons I had were:

1. Reach is nice, but I dislike not being able to attack directly in front of me. It may not be a problem all the time, but its a threat that's there enough to make me wary. Along the same lines I've come to dislike using two-handed weapons as opposed to just using a one handed weapon in two hands; never know when I'm going to end up grappled.

Just use one of the 2 monk weapons that allow you to attack close as well as being a reach weapon.

If you are playing that high a level, pick up the weapon that will give you +9 to your CMB.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think what I have learned from all of this is that next time I am adventuring and come into town, I will kill all the bakers... just to be on the safe side.


I think it is worth mentioning if I have remembered this correctly that Trip works differently from every other CMB maneuver if you read the Core Rulebook closely. Trip requires you to roll higher than the CMD of your opponent while all other maneuvers only require you to equal the CMD.


Sub_Zero wrote:

6 (bab) + 6 (strength+belt) + 2 (lore warden) + 2 (wayfinder with dusty rose ion stone) + 2 (brawler enchant) + 4 (trip/greater trip) + 1 (amulet of mighty fists)+ 1 (bred for war) +1 (weapon training)

You could potentially get a much higher trip score if you do 3 things with the build:

1. use a weapon instead of unarmed and assuming you have standard wealth for your level (the trick is to buy a +2 dueling weapon instead of using the expensive AoMF)
2. fury's fall (let's assume you have a dex of 14)
3. weapon focus

This would grant you an extra +9 to your CMB to trip.


Nice story and a good beginning. Good luck with future sessions. It sounds like you're doing your bit to introduce this wonderful game to the next generation.


Dekalinder wrote:

I'll not mince word. This version sucks. It has all sort of problems and no advantage whatsoever

I'm glad Paizo have taken the time to qualify what this ability really does. But wow, what a nerf. Have to agree with Dekalinder. The decision is easy for me and that is that this archetype is now one to avoid playing. Luckily, there are lots of other interesting and awesome archetypes out there to play.


Ormin1982 wrote:

Hi All,

I am interested in switching over to a monk for pfs. I have built one around the flowing monk archetype with the below stats and feats. Please reply with feedback on effectiveness.

Thoughts ?

A maneuver master/ weapon adept monk would be far stronger. Take both Improved Trip and Improved Dirty Trick (this feat lets you blind foes) for the times that the opponent is untrippable.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
c873788 wrote:
I can't remember when and where I saw it, but there was another thread on something very similar to what you're doing somewhere in the Pathfinder messageboards. Someone had taken the initiative to launch Pathfinder at the local school. If your search-fu is strong, you might be able to find that thread as it was quite a good read and had some good ideas.

Found the link. Hope this generates some good ideas for you:

Go to Starting-a-middleschool-Pathfinder-club


I can't remember when and where I saw it, but there was another thread on something very similar to what you're doing somewhere in the Pathfinder messageboards. Someone had taken the initiative to launch Pathfinder at the local school. If your search-fu is strong, you might be able to find that thread as it was quite a good read and had some good ideas.


Hobbun wrote:

So what you are saying is move the bomb to where it is only doing splash damage and not hitting party members.

Sure, I can do that, but then my bombs aren't being used at full effect (no direct damage). Also, if I move the bomb to the extent where it doesn't affect party members, the effectiveness in hitting the enemies will be significantly less, as well due to my allies and enemies will be intermingled.

I think Sitri was talking about aiming your Stink bombs at the ground near your targets so only your opponents and not your party are in the area of effect after combat has begun. It's also dead easy to hit the ground.

Not sure about this but I'm assuming that the Stink Bombs do no damage because their effect has been changed to nauseate in a foggy clouded area as opposed to doing explosive, fiery damage. Can anybody clarify if this interpretation is correct?


N. Jolly wrote:
Multiclassing section is up, next is a quick jaunt to Prestige Classes, as so little offer the Alchemist anything.

I'm keen to see you write about the Archetypes. Great guide so far.


Cao Phen wrote:
What you also need to know is that when calculating damage, you have to separate your damage dice. Very important when going against DR or Hardness. So with the recalculation of a 6th level Aasimar Sound Striker, you are doing not 9d8+36, you are doing 1d8+4 x9. This means that a DR/Hardness of 10 will give you a really tough time. DR/Hardness of 15 will put you at a dead halt.

Agreed. It will be of limited use against creatures with DR.


David_Bross wrote:
Several rules things. First, Dawnflower Dervish alters bardic performance (including inspire competence), so you can't take it and sound striker, at all.

Not sure about this:

When the Dawnflower dervish uses the inspire courage, inspire greatness, or inspire heroics bardic performance types as battle dances, these performance types only provide benefit to the Dawnflower dervish himself. All other types of bardic performance work normally (affecting the bard and his allies, or the bard’s enemies, as appropriate).

This ability alters the standard bardic performance ability.

Herolab allows the 2 archetypes to work together and it has inbuilt programming to remove incompatible archetypes. Having said that, I understand that Herolab is not the ultimate authority on this matter.


Chris O'Reilly wrote:
They were clarified by a developer to be one word per target and subject to DR. If someone else doesnt post the link in a while I'll see if I can find it.

I remember seeing the clarification that it is subject to DR. I don't recall seeing that it was one per target. In fact, what I read on the various threads seemed to indicate the opposite. If you could find the developers comments regarding targets, I would appreciate it.


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.
Thalin wrote:
I don't think so either; but cover and such do apply (it is just a "ranged touch attack"). So to make it good you need precise shot.

It's been argued in other threads regarding Weird Words that the supernatural ability does not count as a weapon so therefore the benefits and drawbacks of attacking with Weird Words do not count. This would also mean that feats such as Precise Shot could not apply. See below:

Precise Shot: You can shoot or throw ranged weapons at an opponent engaged in melee without taking the standard –4 penalty on your attack roll.

Personally speaking, I don't really know if it counts as a weapon but it would be nice to know whether you should invest in all the ranged feats for this.


Kyoni wrote:

So... Weird Words says it's a bunch of ranged touch attacks... similarly to a Scorching Ray for example.

Casters can take Weapon focus in "rays" (aka. magic ranged touch attacks).

So the only thing to still clear up is whether rays include all ranged touch attacks or only spells with the word "ray" in it...
Though, I don't see why those feats work on Scorching Ray but not on Acid Arrow.

If you rule Acid Arrows and Weird Words are something non-ray, you should houserule cover and shooting into melee... because right now cover and shooting into melee does affect all ranged touch attacks: lengthy post about rules

I don't think it can be compared to Scorching Ray or Acid Arrow as Weird Words is a supernatural ability, not a spell.

Kyoni wrote:


As for the Favored Class bonus for being an Azata? I'd say you still only get the Performance at level 6, but it'll do 8d8+x at that level. I don't see how that favored class thing gives you early access to a performance,
boost it: yes,
early-entrance: no.

I hadn't considered it as a boost but with a denial of early-entry. Your explanation of how the Favored Class bonus works seems the most plausible.


CWheezy wrote:

Remember it is still subject to things like cover and precise shot.

Yep, it is good, but lots of things are good.

Actually, it is not subject to precise shot. Weird Words do not count as weapons and therefore do not get bonuses from things like PBS but they also don't suffer -4 to hit into combat for the same reason. See this thread which discusses this at length:

Sound-Striker-Weird-Words

I am still unsure whether I would get 4d8 or 6d8 damage from Weird Words at 4th level.


By 4th level, my bard build looks like it could potentially dish out 6d8 plus 24 points of damage as a ranged touch attack using up just one round of bardic performance.

The bard build I had in mind was a Azata-Blooded Aasimar (Musetouched) Bard (Dawnflower Dervish, Sound Striker). The Sound Striker archetype grants the Weird Words special ability at 6th level. This gives you 1d8 plus the Bard's charisma modifier in damage as a ranged touch attack (fortitude for half damage) as a number of attacks per bard levels that can be targeted against a single or multiple enemies.

Apparently, I could gain this bardic ability by 4th level by selecting the +1/2 to Performance (specify Bardic Performance type) if I chose Weird Words as my Favored Bonus for being an Aasimar. That means one of 3 things:
a. I'm reading it wrong somehow and the Favored bonus won't let me get Weird Words early at all.
b. I get 4d8 plus 16 points assuming 18 charisma at 4th level as potential damage using Weird Words.
c. I get 6d8 plus 24 points assuming 18 charisma at 4th level as potential damage using Weird Words because my favored bonus treats me as being 6th level for this matter only.

If this favored racial bonus doesn't work for Weird Words, it could still be very powerful for Inspire Courage as by 8th level it would grant my character +6 to hit/+6 damage when performing the Dawnflower Dervish style of Inspire Courage which is different from the standard bard.

I am interested in people's thoughts on this. Am I misinterpreting the rules?


Lastexile0 wrote:
Seriously, I can't get enough of this game, but unfortunately the people I play with, aside from my brother, don't share the same passion. So, I'm unable to get enough playtime to satisfy my craving.

You should consider playing Pathfinder online to overcome the tyranny of distance. My friends all have their own lives with families but we manage to get together once a week and I GM online using D20Pro, Herolab, Skype and the Adventure Paths. It works out really well and players are more likely to be available to play if they can just play from home without having to worry about travel.

I can't remember where I've seen it, but I'm pretty sure that somewhere there are websites where you can find and then hook up with other people to play online who might be living far away from you.

1 to 50 of 584 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.