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

joeyfixit's page

1,075 posts. Alias of Peter Heleva.


RSS

1 to 50 of 1,075 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Any word on the playtest?


Pan wrote:

First of all, I do not recommend starting a long term campaign with folks you don't know. If the plan is to throw out an ad and take whoever bites, prepare yourself for a possible train wreck. I would try meetups, one shots, and PFS first to try and meet some players.

This will help in a number of ways. First you can meet people and compare play styles before committing to something long term. Secondly, you can gauge the player's interest in your homebrew campaign. If players get a heads up they can let you know what they think. I believe this would help greatly when it comes to investment in the game.

Another suggestion is to take a look at Paizo's AP players guides. If you were to write up something for the players this would help them big time with chargen. I find the more I have to grab onto the easier it is for me to buy into the game. Custom traits and an introduction to your homebrew can only lead to win for you and the players.

Last bit that comes to mind is to have a chargen session. Tell the players it is ok to come prepared with a character, but they might want to make a few. Or come with a blank slate ready to hit the ground running with PC ideas. At the table you can discuss campaign character ideas. The players then can make PCs that will fit the story and have reasons to work together.

Essentially, the more you lead as a GM the better the game will be. Especially, if you are going homebrew the players will need direction. I hope you get some excellent advice I imagine you will from this community. Good luck and have fun with your next game.

Well, I'd start with a shorter-length campaign and see how it goes. I like to give frequent points of closure so that Players feel like they accomplished something even if the group falls apart.

The makeup of the group will probably be mixed between known and unknown players. Meetup will be a last resort if I can't get enough PCs together through acquaintances and PFS. But I also favor a relatively small group.


LazarX wrote:
That's going to depend on your players. You won't have any of that unless players have value in their characters as something other than bags of stats and tricks.

So then the question becomes, how does one attract the right kind of players?

I don't even mind min-max powergamers, as long as it's understood that they're fighting alongside their brother (or uncle, or roommate, or Sergeant-at-arms) and they're not going to derail.


I'm starting up a homebrew campaign soon. Rather than the typical "meet in an inn" scenario or "you answer a want ad for adventurers", I'd like the PC's to have some pre-existing connection with each other, and maybe a humble home village as well.

What are some ways to encourage a closer knit PC party and discourage murder-hoboism? This is with the intention of cutting down on PVP disputes and increasing emotional investment. On the other hand, I'd like to give the players free reign to express themselves; if one player comes to the table with a noble-born Paladin and another with a gutter-rat cutpurse I don't want to shut anyone down. Although I will shut down gunslingers because it's a medieval-tech campaign.

I should mention that I haven't even posted an ad for the group yet.


Does PFS allow AP feats?


Meaning, what could I use Martial fexibility for at level one.


Hmm wrote:
Joey, have you seen the War Sighted Archetype?

Interesting.

Can one take an extra revelation feat before level 3 if they've taken this archetype? I'm thinking no. Which meansI'm almost not an oracle for those first two levels.

What combt feats would you recommend for level one? No BAB takes a bite out of those prereqs.


bump


Melee Bones Oracle stats:

Nikolai Vladimir Ivanov
CN Human Oracle

Str 15
Dex 12
Con 14
Int 10
Wis 07
Cha 18


Feats/Revelations:

Bones Mystery
Haunted Curse

Revelations/Feats

1 Near Death/Improved Unarmed Strike, ER: Resist Life
3 Power Attack
4 +1 Strength. Retrain Magic Weapon for Compel Hostility?
5 Spell Focus: Necromancy
7 Undead Servitude, Improved Channel.
8 +1 Wisdom
9 Vital Strike?

Traits: +1 Reflex
Dangerously Curious

Level 1 Spells: Inflict Light Wounds, Magic Weapon

background:

RPwise, this is a guy who starts out wanting nothing whatsoever to do with divine magic. One day, while trying to get with a girl in a graveyard, he's bitten by a Dhampir Scarab beetle, which gives him the gift of the second sight. He can now talk to dead people, but only his ancestors, who are in turn descended from the Kings of Sloktrovia, a forgotten kingdom between Irrisen and Varisia. Ghosts of dead Ivanovs constantly express their disappointment by knocking dropped objects away from him.

Before getting his Oracle powers, he was a more melee-focused guy. He got in a lot of barfights before getting the Oracle powers, which makes him good at punching and kicking, but he knows the value of keeping trouble at a distance (and is kind of a coward), hence the spear.

I'm looking for suggestions for a first level feat that boosts to-hit and/or damage for melee.

Mechanically, the Resist Life/Inflict spells are there because I have trouble resisting double duty features; the spell that harms most bad guys will heal our hero. However, in looking over this I also notice that I didn't pick a third level revelation, so either I can put Undead Servitude there or Voice of the Grave or simply push Resist Life to third and take a melee feat for 1st level.

But which one? The problem isn't so much the damage, it's hitting. If I cast Magic Weapon on a longspear I'm looking at +3 to hit with it at first level, which strikes me as suboptimal. If I take Bless instead I still get +3 but trade the damage bonus to share with friends.

On the other hand, there are probably better spells I could take at level one. Protection from Evil, for instance, can get a lot of use because you can cast it on others.

Weapon Focus? I think I can do better.

I should add that I'm not used to playing melee characters, and the ones I play are nearly always high Dex builds.

I'd also like to get some use out of the longspear's brace ability. Is there something that helps taunt bad guys into charging me?


Bacondale wrote:
Tarantula wrote:
My reading is that you could choose whether to hold the spear ready or drop it from one hand to have IUS ready while not your turn, but not both. Additionally, if you stopped wielding the spear in both hands, you would have to take a move action to ready it again on your next turn.

Releasing or re-grasping THW's are free actions per FAQ:

Two-Handed Weapons: What kind of action is it to remove your hand from a two-handed weapon or re-grab it with both hands?

Both are free actions. For example, a wizard wielding a quarterstaff can let go of the weapon with one hand as a free action, cast a spell as a standard action, and grasp the weapon again with that hand as a free action; this means the wizard is still able to make attacks of opportunity with the weapon (which requires using two hands).

As with any free action, the GM may decide a reasonable limit to how many times per round you can release and re-grasp the weapon (one release and re-grasp per round is fair).

Also, from PRD:

Free Action: Free actions consume a very small amount of time and effort. You can perform one or more free actions while taking another action normally. However, there are reasonable limits on what you can really do for free, as decided by the GM.

Since an AoO is an immediate action, and free actions can be performed "while taking another action normally", you can release or re-grasp a THW (possibly both) during your AoO.

^This.

Is what I made this thread to find. Thanks for doing my FAQ FU for me. That'll do, Bacondale.

A move action. Jeebuzz...


Chess Pwn wrote:
This is why someone with lots of natural attacks can get off lots of attacks with spells. I cast fridged touch, my next 6 attacks have the spell. If I use 5 natural attacks they can use 5 of the charges.

Not sure how you're casting six spells in one round, friend. As I see it, only the first attack would discharge the spell. And you only get that as part of a full attack if you had cast it the round before.


Can one deliver a touch spell via kick?


So, to get back to my OP:

Cleric has Improved Unarmed Strike. Casts Inflict Light Wounds, then runs (really, takes normal 30' movement while howling) at mook waving the spear around. Opts not to hit with spear but instead comes all the up to mook and smacks him with fist for d3+Strength+d8+1. At the end of his turn, grabs spear with other hand, snarls in grim determination.

On GM's turn, a different mook leaves a threatened square adjacent to cleric. Cleric lets it go because he wants to hit first mook when first mook tries to run away, for more damage (now that his spell is discharged).

First mook takes a five foot and then does a thing. A spell or a ranged attack. Can Cleric whack him with the spear, or is he frozen in a moment in time where he punched somebody and must wait for his turn to grab his spear again?

Alternatively, let's say that cleric's wizard buddy finished off first mook. Can cleric smack at second mook (one that left a square threatened by punch and not spear), or are his hands glued to the spear because he grabbed it at the end of his turn?


Correct me if I'm wrong, but off-hand attacks only exist in relation to primary attacks when you're full attacking (getting more than one attack), yes?

Those "hands full" rules you cite are under the heading of the Improved Unarmed Strike section of the Monk's listing.


I'm talking more "hold spear in one hand while make punch and then grab spear again." Much like a cleric will pop a melee weapon into weapon holding shield to cast a spell and then transfer again.

Although, yeah, a kick should do it, right? Shouldn't even give a neg if I'm not making more than one attack.


James Langley wrote:
There's an alchemical item creation kit that works like spell component pouches. It has no real effects except allowing you to make the things you brew ('cept potions).

If you're talking about a portable Alchemy Lab, it should allow you to create alchemical items as well. Smokesticks etc.


Can a character make an unarmed strike while also holding a two-handed weapon?

I'm thinking of Attacks of Opportunity while holding a reach weapon (like a longspear) into adjacent zones not threatened by the weapon.

I'm also thinking of times when you'd rather deliver a touch spell (with an Improved Unarmed Strike) than hit with your two-handed weapon. I assume this is possible, but can we also assume that you get to grab your weapon (with both hands) after making such an attack? This would be handy for opportunity attacks, especially if you just dropped the mook with a touch spell.


Bane Wraith wrote:

It seems, at a glance, that "Effortless Trickery" will only apply to illusion spells you wish to maintain as a swift action, or to the rare circumstance that you cast two spells in one turn and wish to maintain them both. Since concentrating to maintain a spell isn't required until your next turn, the two don't seem to conflict.

On the turn following a spell cast, however, standard action spells cannot be cast while using your swift action to concentrate. Likewise, quickened spells can't be cast while you're using your standard action to concentrate.

Is there any evidence to contradict this?

Evidence? That's why I'm here. Hit that little FAQ button.

My thinking is that part of the "Special vs. Normally" section should really have included language permitting the casting of spells while maintaining and was left out due to oversight.

You're postulating that the "maintain other spells" and "at least one illusion" bits only works on spells you cast the same round, as quickened actions? Seems like a strange circumstance, and something that might have been elaborated on in the description of the spell.

Also, as I've said before, this spell is available at level one, with only a racial prereq. Seems like strange feat to offer if you're only getting decent use at level ten (and then only to maintain two spells, not cast other spells while you're illusion's maintained).

I'll ask again: who's this feat for?

Attack rolls? Yeah, but remember that this is for gnomes only, so weapon damage is seriously nerfed. Also, illusions with concentration naturally point you toward a bigger DC, meaning a higher mental stat; not ideal for a half-martial character (prehensile hair notwithstanding). And this feat is for gnomes, which steers us away from wizards and toward sorcerers and bards.

Does anyone think this feat is OP if you get to cast spells while maintaining? I sure don't. After all, it costs a feat, and gnomish bards and sorcerers are pretty feat-starved.


necro bump for interest


bump


Speak with Dead takes ten minutes to cast, but this ability lets you use it for rounds per day equal to Oracle level.

Since it is unlikely that the Oracle PC will reach level 100, we can assume that the casting time is not included. But that brings up further questions:

Is it simply a standard action to use the ability?

Is it a free action, but only lasts for nonconsecutive rounds equal to level, starting with the round you activate it? If so, what if the spook makes its will save? Does the round you first attempted to use it count?

Do you have to take the ten minutes to cast (use?) this ability "as the spell", but the duration is simply swaps rounds/level for minutes/level?

If the spook is evasive, does this count towards your rounds/day? Seems like a rough GM could really nerf this ability.


Does Shared Suffering heal creatures that are undead (and cast the spell), or react to negative energy like one?

Is the damage dealt to the target negative energy damage or just regular damage? I know that it only targets living creatures, but there are some effects that make living creatures react to channeling like undead, IIRC.

Edited for clarity.


bump


Bump for more input.


Charon's Little Helper wrote:
I still say that effortless trickery doesn't actually say that its swift action "maintain concentration" isn't inherently "concentrating". Therefore the concentrating rule you marked in bold need not apply.

To maintain concentration doesn't count as concentrating? I don't know. Seems like splitting hairs.


Keep Calm and Carrion wrote:
joeyfixit wrote:
So how does one maintain other spells normally while using the feat to maintain as a swift if you can't maintain two at once?

That's not in question. Effortless Trickery clearly would let a caster concentrate on maintaining two spells in a round, one as a standard action and one as a swift action.

What some folks are wondering is:

Does Effortless Trickery allow you to concentrate on maintaining a spell while casting another spell?

It seems pretty clear to me that the answer is no.

To me, it's as clear as mud.

As is your example. I'm not understanding how it makes use of the feat. Moreover, it requires, at minimum, a character with 11HD (or an incredible UMD modifier). This doesn't strike me as a great example of a feat that any gnome may take at first level.


FAQ'd in a new thread. Let's not derail this one any more.


9 people marked this as FAQ candidate.
Effortless Trickery wrote:


Your natural knack for illusion allows you to maintain at least one illusion spell with little effort.

Prerequisite: Gnome.

Benefit: You can maintain concentration on one spell of the illusion school as a swift action. This has no effect on spells of other schools or on illusion spells with durations that don’t depend on your active concentration. While you may only maintain one spell as a swift action, you may take your move and standard actions to maintain other spells normally, if you wish.

Normal: Concentrating to maintain a spell is a standard action that does not provoke attacks of opportunity.

Emphasis mine.

What I take from this is that you may cast an illusion spell and maintain it while you're doing standard actions such as casting spells. However,

Spell Duration wrote:

The spell lasts as long as you concentrate on it. Concentrating to maintain a spell is a standard action that does not provoke attacks of opportunity. Anything that could break your concentration when casting a spell can also break your concentration while you're maintaining one, causing the spell to end. See concentration.

You can't cast a spell while concentrating on another one. Some spells last for a short time after you cease concentrating.

Emphasis mine.

So how does one maintain other spells normally while using the feat to maintain as a swift if you can't maintain two at once? Does Effortless Trickery count as an exception to the boldfaced duration rule above? If so, why isn't that part of the "normal" section of the feat?


Keep Calm and Carrion wrote:
Charon's Little Helper wrote:
If you couldn't cast other spells while concentrating - how in the world can you maintain other spells? You have to be able to cast them to be able to maintain them.

From the Duration section of the Magic rules:

Quote:

Concentration

The spell lasts as long as you concentrate on it. Concentrating to maintain a spell is a standard action that does not provoke attacks of opportunity. Anything that could break your concentration when casting a spell can also break your concentration while you're maintaining one, causing the spell to end. See concentration.

You can't cast a spell while concentrating on another one. Some spells last for a short time after you cease concentrating.

As for what that language means in effortless trickery, consider a spell such as flaming sphere. You could cast flaming sphere, then cast silent image, and with effortless trickery you could maintain the figment with a swift action while using standard or move actions to direct the flaming sphere.

However, if you cast silent image THEN flaming sphere, pop goes the silent image.

Flaming sphere lasts one round per level. You don't need to maintain it, you direct it.

While I tip my cap to your pointing out the duration section of magic, I think the specific of effortless trickery trumps the general of concentration rules. Also, the basic description of the feat says

"Your natural knack for illusion allows you to maintain at least one illusion spell with little effort." (emphasis mine)

which implies the possibility of multiple illusion spells being maintained. Which in turn, to build on Charon's point, implies that you can cast new spells.

If what you said was true, that the general duration rule trumps the specificity of the feat, the feat would have little use to full casters.


Keep Calm and Carrion wrote:
. I mean, effortless trickery has its good points, but after the first few levels you’re going to want your swift actions for other things. And you straight-up can’t concentrate on a spell while casting a new one, effortless trickery or no...a lot of players don’t seem to realize that.

Sorry, where does it say that?

Effortless Trickery wrote:


You can maintain concentration on one spell of the illusion school as a swift action. This has no effect on spells of other schools or on illusion spells with durations that don’t depend on your active concentration. While you may only maintain one spell as a swift action, you may take your move and standard actions to maintain other spells normally, if you wish.

Emphasis mine. Seems like the feat explicitly has you maintaining two spells at once.

CRB wrote:

Concentration Checks and Casting Spells
To cast a spell, you must concentrate. If something interrupts your concentration while you're casting, you must make a concentration check or lose the spell. When you make a concentration check, you roll d20 and add your caster level and the ability score modifier used to determine bonus spells of the same type. Clerics, druids, and rangers add their Wisdom modifier. Bards, paladins, and sorcerers add their Charisma modifier. Finally, wizards add their Intelligence modifier. The more distracting the interruption and the higher the level of the spell you are trying to cast, the higher the DC (see Table: Concentration Check DCs). If you fail the check, you lose the spell just as if you had cast it to no effect.

Combat Rules wrote:

Concentrating to Maintain a Spell: Some spells require continued concentration to keep them going. Concentrating to maintain a spell is a standard action that doesn't provoke an attack of opportunity. Anything that could break your concentration when casting a spell can keep you from concentrating to maintain a spell. If your concentration breaks, the spell ends.

I don't see anything about not being able to cast new spells while using concentration.

EDIT: ninja'd by Charon. (I'm at work)


strayshift wrote:
Not mentioned yet but with the strength that character has encumbrance will be an issue with just about any armour.

Not mage armor. A small-sized armored kilt shouldn't be too much trouble.

Also, character will have a llama to carry his stuff. Not caring too much about encumbrance most of the time.


*Every Single Time

(no comma needed)


Has PFS ever taken a stand on how illusion spells work?

I'm talking in particular about what constitutes "interacting" for the purposes of the "Image" series of spells.


Charon's Little Helper wrote:
joeyfixit wrote:
Paulicus wrote:
It's nice to have high DCs, but a properly executed illusion doesn't allow a save.
Can you expand on this?
I'm assuming that he means using the illusion in such a way that it's useful without your opponents getting a chance to interact with it. For example - that illusion over the chasm I mentioned as they only interacted with it when they fell through. (It was hilarious - the GM didn't give him a check, and he rolled near max falling damage, killing the enemy rogue outright.) I've had GMs make you roll a bluff check for such things to trick them depending upon circumstances. (another advantage of sorcerers for illusion magic - if they spend the skill points their bluff puts most bards' skill to shame)

I guess that all depends on your definition of "interact with". Has this been nailed down in an FAQ?


Paulicus wrote:
It's nice to have high DCs, but a properly executed illusion doesn't allow a save.

Can you expand on this?


Charon's Little Helper wrote:

Actually - while most illusions don't work on contructs - the image spells do. (silent image/minor image etc) Same thing with undead actually, with a few exceptions.

From contruct - "•Immunity to all mind-affecting effects (charms, compulsions, morale effects, patterns, and phantasms)."

From undead - "•Immunity to all mind-affecting effects (charms, compulsions, morale effects, patterns, and phantasms)."

However - the image spells aren't on those lists as they're figments.

Basically - while many illusion spells are patterns & phantasms (ex. color spray is a pattern) those are the illusions that mess with your opponents' minds. The image spells are simply the magical equivelent of smoke and mirrors, and are actually visible/audible (of course - silent image isn't audible :P).

I actually run a PFS gnome sorceror with similar stats, still at low level. While he uses color spray quite effectively, his favorite spell is silent image. Be careful how creative you get - as there is some table variation on what GMs will let you do with it.

Therefore, my favorite silent image trick which follows the KISS rule is just to put everyone in cages/boxes. If they have no ranged attacks, a cage will do, and the group will plink away at them with ranged attacks. If they have ranged attacks, simply put all but one foe in a box so that your group can cut them apart piecemeal.

Sure - they get a will save every turn (their turn - not on your turn - they have to spend time interacting with it) - but illusion magic is all about jacking up the DC. My level 3 sorceror's DC for illusions is 19.

(Of note - with my bard (DCs much lower - he's mainly tank/buff) I had a lot of success making a chasm appear to be a solid floor with treasure/gems scattered about. It was hilarious.)

Edit: I looked through the SRD, it doesn't look like anything is immune to figments. Though of course, something that's blind would inherently be immune to silent image etc.

Where is it written that a mook gets a save every round they interact with a silent image? My impression was that if you flunk your will save vs/ illusion, you don't get another chance without help. Like, somebody pointing out that it's illusion.


Secane wrote:
joeyfixit wrote:
Secane wrote:

If you are trying to pull this off I think you would need a performance coupled with a bluff check?

Also there is the Spellsong feat that kinda matches what you are going for? Its for bards.

Huh? You realize I'm talking about the spell, right?

Faceplam... sorry I thought you meant ventriloquism as in the act of throwing your voice.

Ok... basing on the spell, I would say your CASTing of the spell can have Silent Spell applied to it. But the actual use of the spell would require you to say something to throw your voice around.

Silent Spell only affects the casting of the spell, not its effects. A Silent Lightning Bolt is not going to be silent, just the cast of it is. the lightning bolt itself is still going to make some noise.
Hence the same for a Silenced Ventriloquism.

Never faceplam from a simple misunderstanding. Also, I didn't specifically mention "Spell" in my subject or OP.

Webster's defines Ventriloquism as "the production of the voice in such a way that the sound seems to come from a source other than the vocal organs of the speaker".

So logically, a caster who is, say captured, should be able to cast Ventriloquism (while the bad guys are distracted), and then make sounds (that the caster can normally make) that appear to come from somewhere else - while the baddies are staring right at the caster. Whose lips aren't moving (like a... Ventriloquist?)

Right?

This way, you can make it sound like members of your party (or a Paladin, or a hungry cyclops, if you have the skills to make such a noise) around the corner, and buff with a bluff ("I'd be poopin' my pants if I was you, goblins!")

Otherwise it doesn't seem like it's much good for anything. It would be less useful than ghost sound, except for duration and the fact that Ghost Sound can't create specific words.

This is my interpretation. I thought I'd bring it here for a second opinion.


Captain Zoom wrote:

Personally, I'd definitely go Sorceror if I wanted to be a hard-core illusionist.

If I wanted to do illusions and wasn't sure how accommodating my GM might be, and didn't want to use conventional spells, then I may consider Bard as it offers something else to do with my time (i.e. perform and be a skill monkey). You can also design a bard to fight (Archaeologist or Dervish), so again, you have other stuff to do if your GM nerfs your illusions.

Also, if your GM is the type to require Knowledge checks to see if you know how to do a believable illusion of a Gnoll or a T-Rex or a brick wall, then Bard has the benefit of having the skills and the skill points to pull it off.

You really, really, really, need to find out how your GM is going to handle illusions.

It's for PFS, so the GM is going to be amorphous. Sometimes I have to fill in as GM at the last minute.

I'm also leaning Sorcerer pretty hard. I played a non-melee high Charisma bard once upon a long time ago and I found combat to be really repetitive after a few encounters. With the strength as low as it is for this character, I'd have to go for Slashing Grace with a whip to be effective in melee, which is a lot of feats away from the illusion-build I want to go for (and a non-human Bard is feat-starved).

One of the things that gives me pause is that the Sorcerer won't really get much of a chance to shine at the higher (11+) levels anyway.There's one spell level difference between the two classes at level 11, although the Sorcerer will have a significant edge with things like metamagic to boost DCs.

Also, Bardic Knowledge, as you pointed out.


:(


Secane wrote:

If you are trying to pull this off I think you would need a performance coupled with a bluff check?

Also there is the Spellsong feat that kinda matches what you are going for? Its for bards.

Huh? You realize I'm talking about the spell, right?


No one? Anyone ever played an illusionist in PFS?


Also, can you apply Silent Spell to this one?


So, this might be an odd question.

Ventriloquism has a verbal component.

Huh?

I mean, I get that the end result is a magically "thrown" voice. But the whole point of actual ventriloquism is that the ventriloquist's lips don't appear to move. So, if you're seen using a verbal component, then the jig is kind of up, right? Unless it's meant that the verbal component refers to the sound produced, which also wouldn't make sense.

How is this supposed to work? Can the caster fold her arms and/or drink a glass of water while the voices are coming from somewhere else?


bump


El Baron de los Banditos wrote:
joeyfixit wrote:
ElementalXX wrote:
Welp its fantasy, i was just pointing out reality tho
I appreciate the input. I guess I'm expressing frustration at the fact that they don't list a price for an animal that they show a PC (and an iconic, upon closer inspection) riding in one of the splat books.
See, but that picture is there because that page lists the stats for a Llama Animal Companion, so it's not a random tease...

But the picture is of the iconic bard riding said llama. But if I roll up a small character who wants to ride a llama, it's a world of grief.

"What's the carrying capacity of that llama? Oops, your character plus a saddle gives him a check penalty."

"A llama's an 'inappropriate mount'. Minus five to your ride check, please. Oops, you fell off your llama."

Also, the stats for the llama as an AC don't include the spit attack, which seems pretty unfair considering the llama is an extremely underpowered animal companion.


This is for PFS.

Gnome Stats:

Str 5
Dex 14
Con 12
Int 12
Wis 10
Cha 20

Trait: Born Rider (+1 Ride and Handle Animal)

The concept is that this is a particularly lazy individual who abandoned the toil and drudgery of his parents' gem mine for a life of adventure. He rides on a llama, usually as far from the battle as possible.

First level spells will be Silent Image and Ventriloquism. First level feat will be Effortless trickery. His specialty will be illusory walls or creating the illusion of a giant evil looking wizard or monster (depending on the enemy) and using Ventriloquism to give him a voice to intimidate enemies.

As a Sorcerer, this guy gets a familiar (Arcane Bloodline), which would be either a rabbit (Improved Init) or a Skunk (+2 Fort, Spray attack).

As a Bard, he gets better armor, better skills, knowledge, performance, blah, blah, blah.

Sorcerer has a better spell selection/list (eventually). I'm not interested in Color Spray (as a known spell; I'd use a scroll or wand), but a wand of Mage Armor would be handy. Course, a chain shirt +1 is even better...

As a Sorcerer, I'd be tempted to make Spell Focus: Illusion his first level feat so as to get Threatening Spell as a third level spell and get some use out of the 3rd level bloodline power. On the other hand, taking effortless trickery at first level means getting a lot more out of a silent image, since I can use not only Ventriloquism but also Ghost Sounds to supplement the illusion. And a Still Spell'd Silent Image is even more convincing and gets a bump in DC.

...'course, I also could use the truckload of skill points the bard gets me for staying on the llama with Ride and Handle Animal...

Argh! This is a really tough call. I should also mention that I've never played a pure Sorcerer before. The one time I dipped was with a drow rogue going for Arcane Trickster in a home brew who got creamed immediately after taking a level in Sorcerer.


Bigdaddyjug wrote:

Talented makes any perform skill a class skill. It's from Ultimate Campaign. Initiative isn't a huge deal for an illusionist, so go with the skunk since it seems like you want that more.

Loathsome veil is the best level 3 or below illusion spell in the game, in my opinion.

You know what I just realized? For what I want, I actually want to play a bard.


ElementalXX wrote:
Welp its fantasy, i was just pointing out reality tho

I appreciate the input. I guess I'm expressing frustration at the fact that they don't list a price for an animal that they show a PC (and an iconic, upon closer inspection) riding in one of the splat books.


RumpinRufus wrote:

As a general tip, if you want advice, ask specific questions at the beginning or end instead of making a big post and then saying something like "Thoughts?" or "Suggestions?"

You're also better off searching "Pathfinder gnome illusionist" to find one of the many many builds that are out there. Since you haven't posted anything about the flavor of the character, all we can give is generic advice anyway.

That said, not taking Color Spray would just be silly. You might not have a choice about whether you end up head-to-head with that group of orcs, and if you do, then Color Spray is probably the only way you're coming out alive. At low levels, it's basically just the best spell there is.

Thanks for the tip. This isn't my first rodeo.

Okay, so my main dilemmas are:

Rabbit vs. Skunk - Improved Initiative or +2 Fort? I'm leaning towards rabbit, but the spray attack of the skunk strikes me as more useful than the rabbit's ability to run real fast.

Traits? I like Born Rider (a llama gives me a spit attack and effectively doubles my speed) but I'm not married to it. I like Trickster but I'm not married to it. If there were a feat that made Perform a class skill I'd take it, but I haven't found one.

Color Spray - I've been burned too many times. It strikes me as one of those take-it-for-granted pieces of advice that often don't hold up at the table. (The other being "never invest in poison") The first character I had that took it got killed when she failed to drop three NPCs in a row and since then I actually can't remember a time when it's worked, though I've used it a bunch. And I can always get a wand or even scroll of Color Spray if I think I need it.

I'd rather have a couple of spells that work really well together.

Flavor: this is an extremely lazy character who got into adventuring to avoid a career toiling away in his family's gem mine. He doesn't want to have to walk anywhere for any significant length of time, hence the llama.

Despite being lazy and kind of a coward (note the extremely low strength, even for a gnome), he's an imaginative individual and has an innate knack for illusions. He's also good at talking his way out of tricky situations, which he developed when growing up and dealing with bullies.

His basic strategy when combat starts (and he should be at the back of the party, on his llama) will be

a) throw up a (illusory) wall to divide the battlefield
b) if I know what the bad guys are afraid of, spend the first round casting Ventriloquism and using Perform (Oratory) or possibly Intimidate to sound like the thing. Next round cast Silent Image to give the voice a form. So now there's a giant bugbear or kobold-eating sloth or whatever and it's audibly licking its chops and talking about how hungry it is. Use bluff to supplement the illusion.


ElementalXX wrote:
As a native of peru(aka llamaland), yes they are not that big that humans can ride them. A gnome could i guess but they are never ridden, they havent been trained for that. The same way you could "theretically" ride a sheep as a halfling

Pg 28 of the Animal Archive depicts a halfing riding a llama. Presumably a bard, since he's playing a flute. Got a pretty elaborate saddle and saddlebags and everything.

So presumably it ought to be more than theoretical, yes? Even though on that same page it lists the llama's strength as 12...

1 to 50 of 1,075 << 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.