hgsolo's page

Get crocodile domain , you'll get a familiar (make him a mauler archetype familiar, so it can transform into medium size and use your combat feats), crocodile domain gives you more sneak attack (+3d6 at level 16 on top of the sneak attack dice you get from nature fang) or if you are not a fan of the caiman crocodile, get improved familiar asap and get a better one (Mephit for example).

One of the main advantages of a mephit familiar is using it as a wand monkey, which it cannot do as a mauler, since maulers can't speak. Personally for improved familiars with the mauler archetype I'd go for the dweomercat cub (CN), or nycar (CN). The nycar has a higher starting STR (and remember tiny maulers get an addition +4 STR and -2 DEX in battle form), but the dweomercat has that ridiculous dweomer leap ability.

I understand that. But not everyone reads to the 60th post in a thread. ;)

Why would anyone not read the 60th post in a thread? I just saw blackbloodtroll's other thread, FAQ'd it, saw the link to this thread, FAAQ'd this, and went back to read the discussion in this thread that I missed. Is it at all possible that other people aren't as obsessive over the minutiae of every individual post the way I am?

One thing to bear in mind is that even if you are neutral you will detect as evil (and chaotic) because a warpriest's aura matching their god's alignment rather than their own. But so long as you don't have a paladin in the party, or good aligned cleric that likes to prep detect evil, that is largely a non-issue (though NPC's might be tough).

The other issue I see is that a warpriest isn't like any other cleric, they are all about fighting. While a cleric can be a primary spellcaster and focus on some more benign aspects of an evil deity, a warpriest is already inherently more violent, meaning those who worship evil deities will have a hard time maintaining neutrality.

I seriously think that if you really want a neutral warpriest of an evil deity you'd be much better served going for a NE or LE deity, so you can claim to be fighting in the name of some potentially just goal.

All they want to do is play ignorant, judgement-impaired killers? *sigh*

We prefer the term "murder-hobos" good sir!

Throw a stinking cloud on top.

Now, most people have given you the best advice (deal with it OOC or find another group). I'll just echo that as well as give you a cheap and efficient way of getting rid of him.

Simply offer him some tea as a peace offering, then coup de grace his unconscious ass.

Note that the listed DC is merely to avoid addiction - not to resist the effects. This is spelled out quite clearly in the drugs subsection. Cheesy as heck - but at the very least you will be following the actual rules of the game, unlike his plans : )

Edit: Should he be unwilling to take a drink, lace his food with it or look up the Syringe Spear

He's a wizard, meaning he has to sleep to regain spells anyway. Just offer to take watch and CDG him in his sleep, without doing anything to tip him off before hand. Remember that a sleeping creature takes a -10 penalty to perception checks, so it should be easy enough to sneak up on him by taking 10. If he complains about you having no in character reason to do so just take the alignment hit to chaotic evil and multiclass into antipaladin so his new character can try to mess with your now amped up saves.

Or, you know, handle it maturely or whatever.

Really, Alex M?

I've been poring over archery feats that don't require PBS so that I can retrain into it later, and if this is true it would be amazing! I'm pretty sure its not, so can I get a quote on it?

Yep. There is a FAQ.

The combination you are looking for does not seem to exist. There are a few gods with the domain combos you want but not the favored weapons.

I have done (and still do) the same thing for different things (it drives me absolutely crazy when people who speak American English say "an historic" - we aspirate the "h" on this side of the pond, it's "a historic").

Jumping in to agree with this statement.

Also, while I'm here, why do people bother houseruling with the shortsword? -2 to make it slashing? Just give me a dagger, I'd rather have the lower damage.

Ecaterina you are thinking of the admixture subschool of evocation.

Versatile Evocation (Su): When you cast an evocation spell that does acid, cold, electricity, or fire damage, you may change the damage dealt to one of the other four energy types. This changes the descriptor of the spell to match the new energy type. Any non-damaging effects remain unchanged unless the new energy type invalidates them (an ice storm that deals fire damage might still provide a penalty on Perception checks due to smoke, but it would not create difficult terrain). Such effects are subject to GM discretion. You can use this ability a number of times per day equal to 3 + your Intelligence modifier.

"Shield enhancement bonuses stack with armor enhancement bonuses. Shield enhancement bonuses do not act as attack or damage bonuses when the shield is used in a shield bash. The bashing special ability, however, does grant a +1 bonus on attack and damage rolls (see the special ability description).

A shield could be built that also acted as a magic weapon, but the cost of the enhancement bonus on attack rolls would need to be added into the cost of the shield and its enhancement bonus to AC."

Also check out this feat.

Dotting this;I keep losing it in the forum flow, and while I disagree with the Primalist emphasis (it feels like focusing on the benefits of barbarian rather than Bloodrager, and it's a bloodrager guide), I'd really like to see where this goes.

I think the big issue with primalist is that it is never a bad option. You can pick from the best rage powers the barbarian has to offer by trading out your worst abilities.

Furies have been mentioned, but the Denarians from Harry Dresden are perfect Synthesists - outer planer beings that the human can call upon; they have a physical manifestation that changes how they look and grants all sorts of extra abilities.

Fetchling shadow caller Nicodemus.

Yes, you are adjacent in that instance. As for the second question, I would argue that if the wizard has cast shocking grasp it is no longer prepared.

You could also run this variant by your DM. It is from 3.5 but it is completely compatible with PF. Personally I see no reason to not run a CG paladin with the base paladin abilities and a different code, but the variant provides an appropriate mechanical difference.

Net as a long term debuff is also fine. Although I'm really hoping to use it to buy us some time.

Increasing the range of a net seems almost like cheating. The range is so short, you've got to be in danger to throw it. Making it a true ranged weapon takes away the primary downside of the net.

But assuming our net has a range of only 10 feet, the monster can trivially break it with its first attack and then tear into the thrower with its remaining attacks? Because that makes the full round strength check a bit meaningless. 5 points of damage is pretty trivial.

If your GM is consistently throwing solo monster encounters at you then they deserve to be trivialized by a net. If you ever face more than one of something the net can only be as good as any other single target debuff.

hgsolo wrote:

Bandw2 wrote:

Claxon wrote:

I disallow Neutral Evil and Chaotic Evil characters. Lawful Evil can be made work with groups relatively easily, but doesn't help if everyone is evil.

finally, someone else that realizes lawful evil isn't as story breaking as the other evils.

Other evils don't have to be game breaking either, especially if you have all evil characters to start. My last all evil campaign (largely CE, with one ostensibly CN druid) we ended up being more like a very dysfunctional adoptive family. Everyone was constantly posturing and beating up on each other, but really the only people that anyone in the party cared about were the others in the party, so we helped each other out. Basically, if everyone is evil, just make sure there is a different flavor of evil that they want to kill because it is stepping on their toes. Remind them that several evil gods were instrumental in stopping Rovagug the first time, and give them some other option for stopping the big bad. If they still want to release Rovagug, then turn your original quests on their head and have the "antagonists" be the good guys.

I'm just saying, it's not as easy to go fullmurderhobo(and possibly to start killing important people) as lawful evil... because it's not very lawful.

That's true. Luckily we didn't have any LE to get in the way of our murderhobo'in.

Claxon wrote:

I disallow Neutral Evil and Chaotic Evil characters. Lawful Evil can be made work with groups relatively easily, but doesn't help if everyone is evil.

finally, someone else that realizes lawful evil isn't as story breaking as the other evils.

Other evils don't have to be game breaking either, especially if you have all evil characters to start. My last all evil campaign (largely CE, with one ostensibly CN druid) we ended up being more like a very dysfunctional adoptive family. Everyone was constantly posturing and beating up on each other, but really the only people that anyone in the party cared about were the others in the party, so we helped each other out. Basically, if everyone is evil, just make sure there is a different flavor of evil that they want to kill because it is stepping on their toes. Remind them that several evil gods were instrumental in stopping Rovagug the first time, and give them some other option for stopping the big bad. If they still want to release Rovagug, then turn your original quests on their head and have the "antagonists" be the good guys.

hgsolo wrote:

Bigdaddyjug wrote:

If those are pre-racial, it's just screaming angel-blooded Aasimar draconic sorcerer to me.

17/15/15/13/11/18 pre-racial becomes 19/15/15/13/11/20. You'll have great save DCs on your spells, lots of uses of your bloodline abilities, great melee damage, and decent AC.

You could also make an archer ranger, with the 18 in Dex and the 17 in Str, with your level 4 stat bump into Str. Also choose a race with a Str boost, preferably human so you can have PBS, Precise Shot, and Rapid Shot by level 3.

Go 2 levels of barbarian with fiend totem for a gore attack, then go into dragon disciple for a badass natural attacking caster.

I will keep this in mind, but I don't want to end up outshining the party in terms of killing things, as that is how most of the people in my group measure success. For future reference though, barbarian's can't cast spells while they are raging correct?

I see, in that case, bard or cleric sounds good. I read the rest of the thread and saw you are interested in prestige class but if you change your mind an arcane duelist would be nice. Still buffs like a bard but you get a lot of fun melee abilities as well.

As for the barbarian sorcerer, you cannot cast during a rage. The idea is to buff yourself up, get into melee and then rage with a full attack. With dragon disciple you have 3+CHA rounds of claws and bite, with barbarian you end up with rage rounds worth of gore attacks. DD gives you crazy boosts to STR, so natural attacks work nicely. Pick up some utility spells, as well as some blasts that match your draconic energy type for range.

*Edit: Seconding Wasum's idea for a mystic theurge. They certainly are not optimal, but they are great for group support, and since you said you are more optimized than the other players you could use your system mastery to help the team overcome most any obstacle.

If those are pre-racial, it's just screaming angel-blooded Aasimar draconic sorcerer to me.

17/15/15/13/11/18 pre-racial becomes 19/15/15/13/11/20. You'll have great save DCs on your spells, lots of uses of your bloodline abilities, great melee damage, and decent AC.

You could also make an archer ranger, with the 18 in Dex and the 17 in Str, with your level 4 stat bump into Str. Also choose a race with a Str boost, preferably human so you can have PBS, Precise Shot, and Rapid Shot by level 3.

Go 2 levels of barbarian with fiend totem for a gore attack, then go into dragon disciple for a badass natural attacking caster.

That's because they changed the way class skills work in Pathfinder. In 3.5 you had class and cross-class skills, with class skills costing one skill point and cross-class costing two. In PF, all skills cost 1 point, and having a skill listed as a class skill means that if you have at least one rank in that skill you receive a +3 bonus to the skill. This was changed in order to make skills simpler, and the +3 bonus is there to balance the fact that PF does not provide x4 skill points at level one.

/Ninja'd

The two things still throwing me off are:

1.

Quote:

...Corruption resistance protects against spells, spell-like abilities, and special abilities

as far as i know special abilities include extraordinary abilities like favored enemy.

I do however see your point regarding the ranger's ability stems from familiarity with said creatures rather then something inherent to their evil nature/alignment.
it's not conclusive, but i'll probably follow your suggestion.

2. as far as i know, if i pick Outsider for my bane weapon/favored enemy i can choose Outsider(evil).
actually Outsider(Devil) or Outsider(Demon) isn't even suggested as an option in the PRD while Outsider(Evil) is.

anyway, thank you for replying.

I would say the spell doesn't apply to favored enemy, but it does apply to bane. Reason being the spell says it provides "limited protection from magical effects" including "spells, spell-like abilities, and special abilities" but not physical attacks. In this case I take special abilities to mean supernatural abilities (such as a paladin's smite) and not extraordinary abilities (like favored enemy). Bane is clearly a magical effect, and it targets an alignment subtype (definitely not devils or demons as Lost In Limbo said). That said, I could see bane being argued, since it technically targets a subtype and not an alignment, but it makes sense to me to allow it.

Requirements

Spells: Able to cast 2nd-level divine spells and 2nd-level arcane spells.

My understanding is that Spell Like Abilities do not count as Spells and cannot be used to meet the prerequisite for the prestige class.

It has been clarified that they do. Check the faq.

pardon the doublepost, but does the cruoromancer's commanding infusion stack with the effect of desecrate to 6xCL (3xCL doubled) undead created per spell? the wording seems a bit iffy to me.

I would allow it in a game but I can certainly see why someone would not, since desecrate allows you to create double the normal amount of undead (normal is 2, and your ability is strictly outside normal). That said I also wonder if it might be intended the same way critical multipliers do, so that you end up with 5xCL undead. It sounds weird, but offhand I can't think of anything that stacks multipliers like this ability other than crits. My rationale is that the ability that comes along with the commanding infusion lets you control up to 5HD worth of undead per CL rather than 4, suggesting (albeit very weakly) that this was intended to stack with desecrate for 5xCL.

Matthew Shelton wrote:

You could borrow from the Roman virtues. In order to properly share the company of their divine predecessors, does the petitioner carry sufficient gravitas, dignity, and piety (respect for the position of deity--responsibilities and obligations as well as privileges and benefits)?

Cayden Cailean pretty much invalidates those virtues.

Listen you, if I hear you talk that way about MY GOD again, I'll kick you so hard tha-zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz. [passes out drunk]

Jumping back in to say for buffing/debuffing go for witch or bard. The mystic theurge is a whole lot of fun, but it is as Corvino said, more a utility caster. A MT should rarely be unprepared for a specific encounter due to the sheer number of spells they get, but the things that make witch and bard good at buffing is their class features (and as I said, MT gets none of those).

I don't really think there is much hype. Despite the fact that some people on this forum (myself included) like the idea of playing a MT, it is generally considered a suboptimal build choice. The primary reason MT is weak is that you have to spend several levels splitting classes, losing out on class features other than spells (which all classes have a lot more of in PF than they did in 3.5), and getting your spells later than a single classed caster.

One thing that helps if you do want to go this route is based on errata that says you can use spell-like abilities to qualify for prestige classes. The most common choice for this seems to be an aasimar with an alternate SLA (as daylight is a 3rd level spell, and thus doesn't meet the 2nd level spell requirement). You then take 3 levels in either wizard or cleric (or whatever your base classes will be), take one in the other, and you've qualified by level 5.

If you are at a home game rather than organized play a MT can be more (or way less) appealing. If you start at mid levels the class can hold its own. You can also run by your GM the possibility of qualify for the class one level before you get 2nd level spells, i.e. wizard2/cleric2 istead of 3 each. This worked especially well for me in my old group where we started at level 5 and never seemed to make it past 10. Though that group had other issues.

I'd go Paladin. Maximize on that CHA and enjoy roleplaying your goodie-two-shoes kobold. Alternatively go Barbarian and get a pretty nice natural attack build.

I would recommend myth-weavers for your sheets, both NPC and PC. It won't do everything for you, but it will do the basic arithmetic for you, calculate CMB/CMD, etc. by plugging in the appropriate stat mods when it can. You can also sort and save sheets, so you can tweak them for later. It isn't hero labs, but it is very useful.

Another one raised from the dead? What in the blue blazes is going on here exactly?

Well, as this thread points out, you have to raise the dead before your spontaneous inflict spells are a worthwhile class feature.

Gilbin wrote:

See Magic Items on the Body

Shields have their own item slot. Characters only get one shield slot. You can carry more than one shield, but you only get the benefits of the one you equipped in the shield slot.

Then you can not use or get the benefit from any sort of a Weapon or staff or wand, as there is no slot for it on that list =) now that makes it absurd don't it ?

You wield weapons and wands, while you wear the items with slots. Even in the case of a shield you wear it for the defensive bonus, and (unless you have the appropriate feats) you have to enchant it separately if you want an enhancement bonus while wielding it as a weapon.

I'm surprised that anyone even cares about this question that much. An extra spell known for a wizard is the equivalent of an extra 50 gp in treasure, and the earliest you are going to see an INT increase is 4th level. Is that 50 gp really making an appreciable difference?

You think that's crazy? A giant porcupine deals the same amount of damage with its tail slap. Giant porcupines are the greatswords of the animal kingdom.

As I read fetish weapon, it goes like this:

While wielding a weapon decorated with trophies from slain enemies, the True Primitive feels psyched for battle (morale). Because he feels psyched for battle, he hits things a little harder (morale bonus to damage rolls).

Considering that the game defines a morale bonus like this - "A morale bonus represents the effects of greater hope, courage, and determination" - it seems a bit odd to me to have a morale bonus that's restricted to a single weapon. To each their own I guess.

FWIW I would allow this based on the argument here. It is not game breaking, and the bonus very easily could have been described as applying only to the weapon with the fetish. I can still see why a GM might balk at the idea, though, and if someone came up with something truly ridiculous based on the same premise, I'd tell them to stop being an ass. Which is why I play home games, and also why this provides no real help for organized play.

Also, I really don't see the point of posts like this:

There's usually an agenda behind questions like this. What's yours?

Why bother popping into the thread to say that? It is pretty clear what the OP's "agenda" is here after the first five posts, and you have not actually helped to resolve the rules question, except to i,ply your disapproval.

I'm in camp 1. When a monk uses flurry of blows, his BAB is equal to his monk level. When using power attack, he uses his modified FoB BAB for the effects, but he cannot qualify for the feat using this modified BAB. I would think the Warpriest works the same with their sacred weapon. That said, I'll FAQ it for full clarification.

Seoni looks like a drag queen's worst nightmare (really bag wig, terrible fake nails, and that amulet isn't hiding her huge neck. Alahazra has that blank stare that she does that makes me want to run away. Plus I think she has just purposely dislocated her right arm, and her right hand is actually an alligator flipper. The other lady (Katniss Everdeen maybe?) is looking pretty mean and has swords and stuff. At any rate, I don't believe a romp with her right now would be particularly enjoyable.

I agree with your thoughts on Seoni and Alahazra, but the third woman is just HOT! [/crickets]

I think the wizard can absolutely scribe the scroll if the cleric provides the casting. You are basically having two characters spend 8 hours to create a single item.

Note that all items have prerequisites in their descriptions. These prerequisites must be met for the item to be created. Most of the time, they take the form of spells that must be known by the item's creator (although access through another magic item or spellcaster is allowed).

The line that Samasboy1 quoted about needing the spell prepared shows up in every item creation process, and seems to be a reiteration of the need to meet the pre-reqs. It looks to me that the feat is intended to allow you to create items faster and give a slight boost to your spellcraft check (not a great feat IMO).

So, yes the wizard can create a scroll that he cannot use without UMD.

A one level dip into Shadowdancer will also get you HiPS. The skill requirements aren't an issue for a ninja, the feats can be depending on what you were planning on taking.

Shadowdancer and eldritch heritage require 3 feats each (at least for HiPS), and IMO shadowdancer gives up more than the feats give you.

As for HiPS versus invisible blade, I would generally prefer HiPS. It does require that you be within 10 feet of a shadow, but that is not that hard to get, and invisibility is trumped by some pretty low level spells. I'd rather put my stealth up against someone else's perception than try to beat them at spell selection.

I'm liking this so far. I would definitely set the long chart landscape on its own page. And as for the bonuses hanging on gear, it makes sense and I like what you've done with it so far. I would probably put the natural and deflection bonuses on an amulet and a ring, respectively. Give them a base cost as well, and allow them to be further enchanted at 1.5 cost. You can still have two ring slots. The main reason I'd argue for this is that it spread the burden out. If you have magic armor and a ring of deflection with the current rules, the armor can be sundered or the ring can be stolen. By putting all armor bonuses on armor you make sunder significantly more powerful. This also makes the monk equally vulnerable to losing their natural and deflection bonuses, but they keep a higher ac than the fighter without any gear (just like the current system).

Also, I completely agree with the idea that the integrated bonus should not overcome DR. It becomes much more feasible for a melee character to get exotic items that still deal decent damage, and they won't need to enchant each one separately. This also reinforces the notion that the party needs to be prepared and gather intelligence on their enemies.

*Edit: You can also put the stat boosting items on the belt and head slots. Perhaps the belts, amulets, etc. should only cost 50 or 100. You can further enchant them at the same increased cost as weapon enchants. Sure you are still gear dependent, but the cost is nominal, and it prevents sunder-happy barbarians from trashing all your bonuses in one swing.

I'm fairly certain you would end up with a +2 in either situation. The enhancement bonus applies to your shield, and increases your overall shield bonus to ac, it is not directly applied to your ac.

hgsolo wrote:

I've seen a couple of people talk about chill touch being useless against undead, but no one has mentioned that it forces undead to flee as if panicked. That seems like it would be fairly useful to me.

Yes it does so, but after a failed will save, and since rogues aren't going to have a sky high INT (and even if they did it still has the DC of a 1st level spell), nor take feats in order to increase the etc. then it pretty much it's useless against undead.

Fair enough. Still remains useful at lower levels though. Then again fire resistance isn't usually coming in at level 1 either so I guess it comes back to finding some way to shore up weak points later on.

I've seen a couple of people talk about chill touch being useless against undead, but no one has mentioned that it forces undead to flee as if panicked. That seems like it would be fairly useful to me.

Fast learner is actually not a particularly useful feat. It doesn't allow you to pick 2 favored class bonuses, it allows you to pick (+1 HP and +1 SP) or an alternate racial option. Link.

Even though most people will houserule it to be not worthless, it won't be much use in PFS or for rules intense GMs.

In the ability scores section you state that you do not get more skill points for an increase to INT. This is a 3.5 rule that specifically didn't carry over into PF. The rule is now that you get retroactive skill points, and even a new language, when you bump INT.

I know this is a long shot, since a lot of people do not allow 3.5 stuff in PF, but the dragon fire adept from dragon magic is awesome for this. I actually played mine as a demented (CE) kobold who was already convinced that he was a dragon. Loads of fun if you can get your GM to go for it. Also, the class is not feat starved, so you can grab some of the draconic feats for some nice flavor too.

Oh man, I had completely forgotten about this guy. Glad to hear it worked out Wasum. I'll be needing a villain soon so I'm glad I saw the dot.

I actually like fighters for this type of play. If your group is super optimized than you'll want to plan regardless, but if you go for a generalist fighter you can have a little bit of everything. Get a good STR & CON with a even moderate DEX and you can two hand, sword and board, or do some archery. You won't be great at any of it, but you can fight in way more circumstances than the guy who threw every single feat at being the best falchion fighter ever, and you aren't completely screwed when you lose your favorite weapon.

Thats easy to say, but if your landlord isnt fixing your leaking roof for 2 years, do you think he will suddenly fix it this year? I mean he could also claim that he's "busy".

FAQs should be a core part of the business...its support for a product. You dont just sell something and say "yea we have your money now, run along". Imagine if microsoft never issued patches for windows because "we would have to pay developers to make the patches! that costs money!".

FAQs are a core part of Paizo's business, but they cannot always be the number one priority. In fact, Microsoft is not really a great example, because they often take a long time for "minor" patches that seem kinda important to the people that they are affecting. That said, I agree that two years is a bit much, and as such I'll be FAQing this as well.

hgsolo wrote:

My recommendation would be to get rid of EWP, and use a great sword instead of the bastard sword.

Booo! Where's the fun in that? :D

With EWP Bastard Sword, you can always carry a shield and sword+board it if you need to.

Also, you might consider trying Fortified Armor Training and carry along a stack of Bucklers in your backpack.

Haha. Don't get me wrong, I love bastard swords, but I'd really only bother using one in a dedicated sword and board build. If you are going for two-handed outright there is no reason to go for the bastardsword (even large sized) over a greatsword. This way, he has one more feat overall, which can allow him to go into some mild ranged combat (deadly aim anyone?), or go even more beastly on a charge (which is where furious focus makes itself known). I do quite like the fortified armor training idea, though. I can just picture a guy with a huge sword carrying around bucklers expecting them to break.

Definitely necro-ing this thread again, but if you need some help with the powers I had some thoughts while reading through the pdf. Also, just to sort of jumpstart things here -- I know some people were complaining about a low number of spells hung, so what about something like casting stat times caster level/3? I know most rules use something like level/2, but we are already well into the realm of home-brew, and this method clearly appeals to those who don't mind slightly more complicated casting. The way I see it, casting stat times level/3 (minimum equal to casting stat) gives you anywhere from 3-5 spells hung for a wizard at levels 1-5, 6-10 for levels 6-8, etc. It gets to be a lot at higher levels, but you guys have already suggested that the books are based in a relatively low-level type world where casters are king, which makes me think this system is geared more towards low-level campaigns to begin with (I haven't read any of Zelanzy's works, but this thread has me intrigued).