|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Maybe a mythic prestige class for tetori monks. Because they are the only ones into grappling enough to even begin to try that. I guess some folk just don't take well the taking Vows of Chastity, huh?
That is why I prefer a dip into archaeologist bard. With a single trait (fate's favored) and a single feat (lingering performance) you can get a +2 to your attack, damage, saves, and skills for most of the fights everyday. A few extra skill points and class skills, as well as the possibility of spellcasting (or at least easier UMD use) and the general boost to will and reflex saves just makes the frosting for your cake.
And since this archetype is not about dancing and singing, but rather exploring dangerous dungeons, it is much easier flavor-wise to write off on a big beefy fighter. It is basically just your fighter learning some minimal bits of magic and skills to help him in this crazy world. And serious, who wouldn't want to learn prestidigitation if given the chance? Cooking, cleaning, and other basic tasks taken care of with just a flick of the wrist? Heck yeah.
That is certainly true. And due to the overuse of those 'core races', many of them have gotten stale.
Humans will always be used most often, due to being 'normal', and optimization wise they are the most flexible (not always the best, but never, ever the worst). But the rest, which were in many ways supposed to have the same amount of alien flare as the "dark and edgy humans" or the planetouched have just become caricatures. Elves are hippy humans with spock ears. Dwarves are short humans with Scottish accents. Halflings are just short humans. Gnomes are short humans with ADHD. Half orcs are humans in need of a denstist and dermatologist. Etc, etc....
But originally, each were supposed to give you a feel for a world different from your own. Elves were in tune with nature, and were closer to the fey than they were to humans. Gnomes in Pathfinder have this even more so, but even that kind of falls to the wayside sometimes. Dwarves hale from a large society alien and separate from out own, embedding itself into the deep earth while facing the darkness that lurks within the depths. When your players go for these so called 'snowflake' races, they are trying to shroud themselves in the wonder and mystery of a different world that was originally evoked by the 'core' races. People want to role play in order to experience an different kind of life, and restricting them from trying to catch that feeling of an alien nature is merely restricting their creative freedom.
At the same time, I think that an over abundance of options is likely bad (since an over saturation of unique creatures does, as the arguments suggest, remove their unique flavor; could you play four different elementals without it just being stereotypes?), but you would do well to switch out some of the 'classics' in your setting with new fare that gives it a distinct taste from all the other generic tolkenesque fantasy settings.
Obviously humans aren't really going to replaced except in extreme situations, but maybe do things like have fetchlings take over the role of half-orcs as the 'outcast' race when you don't plan on having orcs appear in your game. Oread are just crying out to take over the dwarf role...and for an interesting twist, don't have all four elementals available in the same place. That can give your region a certain....something. Maybe play up the the 'earth vs fire' angle instead of the 'good vs evil' one and take out aasimar and tieflings entirely (not really core, but close enough for PFS to think so, no?). And tengu are similar enough to an elf in terms of physic that they could possibly play an elf. Or have the tengu take over the role of the held by the tricky halfling.
There are countless options, and by carefully choosing which ones are available, you can provide your players new options for roleplaying without the new races simply being character options chosen merely for optimization.
I know that tengus have a racial one that basically gives them a somewhat annoyingly restricted version of pounce at level 1. That is worth something at least (especially with either sword trained to get better weapons or three natural attacks). It also stacks with scout, which is also very useful since you are probably taking it for the charges anyway.
.....no. No you will not. Mr. Le M. Eres, you are not going to make that joke....
....I can't hold it in: How can you get a shadow demon to exercise if it has no strength score? Admitted, I suppose it could do stretches for dexterity and aerobics for constitution.
Ok, got that out of my system. Now then, for real advice: is this ring a specific item from a source book, or is it something your GM just threw in? A name or any spells it might reference in its effect might help us here. I am not currently away of any such item, so forgive me if it is just my inexperience.
I'd imagine that this is simply a form of banishment effect, in which case you would do well do get somethings shadow demons hate to help rais the save DC. Bright light (likely from a fairly decent level light spell) is your best bet.
And the light source might be a good idea even if you mean that you simply want to remove the demon from someone it possessed via its magic jar SLA. If that is the case, and the item works off of the demon's sunlight powerlessness, then it would just be a sunbeam or sunburst spell (which would be lovely to have otherwise, but they are 7th and 8th level spells, so way above your paygrade as anything other than a macguffin)
For a shorter list, I will give my vote to spiked.....I mean black tentacles. As far as I understand it (and admittedly, I do not really go for full casters) it is something of a win button when the BBEG is another sorcerer/wizard and you have a higher initiative. Or at least enough of a distraction to delay them while your melee characters mop up their bodyguards before they can summon up more meatshields. This kind of thing actually made me consider making a tattooed sorcerer once I gain more tactical experience.
There is an alternate human racial trait that allows them to get another race's weapon familiarities and languages in return for the bonus feat. Either that, or he just used his bonus feat to get the exotic weapon proficiency. Or any of his other two feats as a 1st level fighter.
Yeah, it was probably a poor choice to mention the adopted racial trait and the adopted trait together in the same post. We are all a bit confused already.
Halfing? If you spent any time on the advice threads, then you would know that half-orcs only adopt catfolk orphans with anger issues (seriously, why was it always barbarians?... well, other than that little misunderstanding about gaining claw attacks...still, why them? The claw pounce is kind of redundant). I almost think that catfolk have a tradition of sending their children to half-orc boarding schools in order to learn the art of growing dagger-like fangs from their mouths.
Oh, for that little drow, I think that the trifler trait is also humans only. I do always love getting some free prestidigitation, and for 3 hours a day at that. That spell is like duct tape or WD-40: good in just about any situation for solving countless problems that you can't be bothered to find the proper tools for.
I don't know about hero lab. but claws usually go on limb arms, not legs. I think hoofs go on legs.. Maybe thats how it's going error?
No, no, the claws evolutions specifically says that you can put them on a single pair of legs.
Admittedly, that rule was written with the idea that you would likely be a quadraped (putting you in line with the stat blocks of creatures such as lions and tigers). But at the same time, you could also buy extra legs for a biped...so the designers just kind of threw their hands up on that one and said 'whatever'. The whole thing was too complicated to put very strict restrictions on things like that. It is not like the biped is getting more out of all that as a pouncing quadraped.
You forget: you can use the rake ability if you pounce. So on those full attacks, you might as well have an extra two claws. Makes sense, since rear legs are usually hard to really use as offense, but when you are literally jumping on a fool it is hard to NOT sink those back claws in.
There's a separate spell that allows you to actually see magical auras, which is arcane sight. Detect magic simply lets you sense the magic if you concentrate. These two should not be confused because arcane sight is much more powerful than detect magic.
So detect magic is more like magical smellovision....
And I am not just being silly when I say that. You can detect the prescence, you can sense stronger ones much more easily than weaker ones (and they fade with time), it could theorically be used to play marco polo with invisible things, and if you have line of sight (the only immediate difference) you can identify things if you are knowledgeable enough to recognize them.
So how is that different from smell? Sure, some mechanical differences, but functionally, wouldn't that be the sense that it is closest too?
Similar things can be done with oni-spawn tieflings.
This does bring up certain differences with the typical vital strike build though: since static bonuses get multiplied as well with the mythic version, they have a fairly high priority. Do not be ashamed of finding all the ones you can stack and exploiting them.
Another piece of advice: go with the bodywraps of mighty strikes instead of the amulet of mighty fists. Typically, the bodywraps are not as valuable, since both unarmed strikes and natural attack builds tend to go for a large number of attacks, which does not work well with an item that can only enhance them for the same amount of attacks they would get if they used a regular sword. But with this, you only have to enhance one attack for everything you do on your round (and you still have uses left over for things like AoO's). With this, you save a lot of money that could be spent on things like magical items or armor.
Still, I am unsure that completely changing weapon groups and basin them off of what you view as their intended arcs and motions seems like it might be going down the wrong path. And usually, I do not see such things mattering outside of very specific situations (as a GM, you never actually HAVE to bring up aquatic combat).
Wouldn't you benefit just as much just limiting the exisitng options instead, and keeping the existing rules? Instead of having starknives, butterflyknives, kukris, etc, just say that only regular daggers are available, for example. Getting a good selection together should generally suffice for most situations, it should generally not affect most builds, and it would simplify selection for new players.
No, no, no. It is obviously 9/32.
Anyway, it seems like eidolons are always quite the trobulemakers, no? Well, I suppose that we could compare them to another, similar class feature: animal companions.
While we all know that an animal companion can take any feat it can qualify for if you raise its INT to 3, the base feat allowed to them represent abilities it can master based off of its physical form alone. You can see that they are not allowed to simply take multiattack (and other feats, such as ability focus) even if they would be able to be trained into such skills phsyically. From that, you can take it as a general guide that bestiary feats could possibly be restricted from 'monstrous' allies gained through class abilities.
Although, as it has been stated, this character is just a couple of levels away from getting the feat for free anyway. Why not let them burn a resource?
Ilja(edit for brevity) wrote:
I'll give you boarding axes and those racial weapons (I kind of discounted those from the get go anyway, since people rarely, if ever, use them), as well as the general fact that longswords should be able to do piercing (I was under the mistaken impression that they could for a long time, and I still generally think the basic blade progression is weird), but the rest of those could be said to deal piercing damage due to simply applying pressure and short shanking motions, which a regular gauntlet cannot do effectively for real damage.
I also won't argue much about the underwater rules. Just having it apply due to the nature of three simple types seems straight forward and easier to grasp than the possibly much more complex system of swing motions you are suggesting. While I'll acknowledge that the underwater rules might be a bit much given all the things that affect it (ground, swim checks, swim speeds, cover, etc), I think that the damage type decision was one of the better choices and it presented a serious tactical problem to melee characters that normally would only grab a greatsword and earthbreaker back up. It helped to present a new dimension of challenges and making the creatures lurking in the depths a much more serious problem.
Kazumetsa Raijin wrote:
I was thinking perhaps the Elven Curve Blade could be used, as it is " a longer version of a scimitar" in it's description.
Even if it qualified, it would not work, since you need to one hand the weapon and leave the other free. So unless you are some titan mauler barbarian (in which case, due to the fact that it is incompatible with urban barbarian, begs the questions of why you would even bother) then it would not work.
Isn't going on about the picks just choosing the worst examples as your sole evidence? I mean, looking at the rest of the simple and martial weapons, I can only see the morning star as another bad example, and that at least has the excuse that it could have a stabby spike at the very tip of the head to do a proper piercing with.
And, if you were restricted to this three type system (just take a short step out of your shoes for a moment, and think as a writer that got it handed to you from on high or as a grandfathered system that your bosses did not want to change), how would you have typed the picks? Slashing? Bludgeoning? Neither seem really representative. So can you blame them for not making the picks with realism in underwater combat in mind? Can you blame the writers of the underwater combat rules for not having picks in mind?
Karui Kage wrote:
Well, fair enough, of course. The same could also be said of waiting for someone on the thread to tell you if it is legal or not though. So, while I would of course do my homework for my own builds.... I feel comfortable using it as a resource when advising others (since it is their responsibility to double check for their own work). The worst I feel could happen would simply be someone saying I am wrong. Thanks for the input, and sorry for the tangent.
That is actually a reason why I think it exists. At least, in the original D&D system where they started (I would love some input from more experienced gamers who can tell me if the distinction and selective DR was more common in that system)
You can also look at simple weapons for examples. The idea of simple weapons is that, while they can serve you, they are supposed to generally be less useful than martial weapons, right? So how to do that? Well, you could give them less useful damage types.
You obviously can't take out bludgeoning (too many undead and such to do that without just saying "don't even bother if you aren't a full martial"). So we come down to the other types. Have you noticed that, out of all the one handed and two handed simple weapons (i.e. the ones to use on a high strength build) there are no slashing weapons. Heck, in the two handed category, the quarterstaff is the only one that isn't piercing. And the best of the lot, the longspear, is decidingly piercing.
In essence, slashing is the 'good' damage, but not 'great' enough like bludgeoning that you couldn't live without it. Piercing, on the other hand, is the 'bad' damage type, and making most of your better options (such as the rogue's only 18-20/x2 weapon) into this is a kind of nerf. Whether this design philosophy satifies you, Ilja, is your business, but I am happy enough with it. I mean, I'd also be just as happy saying "axes and spears do different types of damage", since it is obvious enough to just accept at face value.
Weren Wu Jen wrote:
To my knowledge, catfolk haven't been given and "official" presence in Golarion. So, until we get a "Catfolk of Golarion" book, you can fit them in where ever you like.
Yeah, that is usually the problem with discussion of them on the boards. We have the info listed in ARG, and the rest are either vague memories of some scattered mentions from...somewhere.... or a vague memory of someone else's vague memories
For example, I am going to add here using the latter: I remember hearing from....someone.... that there are two main racial groups of catfolk. The first are your anime-esque women with cat ears, tails, and way way too much flexibility, and the other are the ones with straight up cat heads. Where does this bit of fluff comes from? Who knows, I certainly don't. I would love for someone to point to where this comes from (if it is in fact true) so I can have another source to forget.
Funny thing is though: even if you aren't making your own group, there are plenty of other sources of 'cat people' that might be able to fit your flavor (and oddly, they all det +2 dex -2 wis, +2 cha). There are the Rakshasha born tieflings and the weretiger-kin. Making a small tribe of either of these could easily allow you to place them anywhere, and they can easily be given a more beastial nature based off of big cats
The American Ninja series had "meditative" healing as does Ninja Assassin...if you are looking for modern stuff, but a lot of the old Japanese movies have it too. I'd have to look them up individually, as I am just remembering from my youth. But even Mister Miyagi had special healing techniques. It's just a common thing to see in movies with eastern characters.
Yeah, I can understand that, but still, fast healing is a whole nother animal. You can view it as halfway to regeneration to some extent. Automatic healing, done in battle, with minimal concentration required. It is the ability where you take a full on sword slash...and then your wound just starts to instantly close.
Could you honestly say that the healing techniques there truly represent that? Or is is just the same as the monk's wholeness of body, where you get slightly better if you take a minute to sit back, relax, and feel your ki?
Yeah, yeah, that is the definitive resource. But if tattooed sorcerers weren't called out by name, I would have to cross reference things back and forth depending on what I am looking for. That is why I tend to go for websites like that, where helpful people have already taken each feat, weapon, etc. and tried to group various resources together and (hopefully) check the legality of each and apply the appropriate label.
So, for the sake of my bad research habits, would anyone be able to speak on whether the Archives of Nethys has a good reputation?
No, I am fairly sure you do not. You gain the ability to gain scaling claws at first level, and the upgrade is not in and of itself a separate ability. It is part of the scaling that is granted by your 1st level ability.
So sorry, as I said, the archetype might not be for you, since you stuck with your bloodline for particular reasons instead of the direct solution of going arcane. C'est la vie.
Also, while I did not dredge through the additional resource page to check, I did see that it was marked as PFS legal on Archives of Nethys (side note: I would really enjoy it if someone could tell me if that is a reliable resource. While it does a fairly good job of citing its sources and giving the direct text, you can never tell these things without asking someone with more experience)
Well, not sure how much this helps, but you could also have taken the tattooed sorcerer archetype to get a familiar at first level. The archetype trades out your 1st and 9th level bloodline abilities. It is more personal taste whether this is a problem though, since you do get fairly decent replacements (the 9th level ability is a somewhat restricted extra use of a spell is the same type you specialize in; isn't stuff like that the almost the entire reason why some people pick a bonded object over a familiar?)
Ah, weird point buy. A bit harsh for melee combatants, but it is better than the suggested values for APs, so nothing to really complain about other than the unconventional decision.
Well, I wouldn't exactly call lore warden a crazy archetype (it is certainly no synthesist summoner, or even an invulnerable rager barbarian), but it is certainly true that the vanilla versions are often good enough to suffice. Only a couple of classes can really be said to suffer too much from the lack of archetypes (I hardly ever even look at the idea of a vanilla monk).
Still, you might want to consider using medium armors, since the vanilla fighter does have armor training at that level. You can run around in a breast plate at your normal speed and only face an extra 100 gp expense and another 2 to your armor check penalty. Unless you are also facing a relatively low starting gold for that level. Do you get less than 3,000 gp to start with?
For more feats, iron will or lightning reflexes are also nice, since boosting your weak saves can always help.
Hmmm... the typical logic of most sword and board builds on this board is to go with TWF (or at least a buckler so two handing is an option while still getting some shield bonuses), but sure, why not? Oh, and I think your point buy is off (if you are using one). This link right: here has a good point buy calculator. You appear to be on a 25 D&D, but you are only 18 in a PF one.
So power attack is obvious. Maybe improved initiative since you have no dex? Weapon focus too, since you want to get weapon specialization as soon as you hit level 4 to help your damage.
I noticed that you have good INT and you are not going for heavier armors. This brings up the question of archetypes, which is a big thing PF brought to the table.
At level 3, an unaltered fighter has armor training 1 that allows them to move like normal while in medium armor (includes heavy armors at level 7, as well as some vague bonuses to max dex and ACP). But if you value skills so much, you could go for the Lore Warden Archetype. It gives you an extra 2 skill points per level (must be used for INT skills though, typically knowledge due to other mechanics). But you lose your higher armor proficiencies with this, and armor training is traded away for other abilities that may or may not appeal to you (just check out the link to see if it works for you).
There is also the tactician archetype, which also gets more skills, but it trades away weapon training (which just gives you a straight scaling bonus to attack and damage...which you need) instead.
Also, have you looked into traits? You typically get two, and some just plain give you bonuses to a save, so you could put some of those points you had in wisdom into other stats if you are using a point buy. I particularly like the birthmark trait, since it gives a +2 against charm and compulsion effects (which are the ones that typically trip up fighters)
Looking at all this discussion....wouldn't he be better off just dropping the second bastard sword, two handing the first, and I don't know, maybe grabbing shields with the extra arms? Or at the very least use light weapons in his off hands?
Actually hitting your opponent seems like an important part of being a melee combatant.
Wave your cane at them and maybe they'll get off your lawn.
Ooo...does the cane separate into two swords? is he going to take levels in monk?
Ipslore the Red wrote:
Well, I wouldn't quite insult intelligence as a sweeping generalization, I will admit that people asking for help are less likely to have a lot of system mastery as well as reliable help from someone that does. Also, if they have stuck around the fora long enough, they will likely get pumped up by all the 'fighters/monks/rogues/anything that is not a full caster or archer sucks' threads. So when one of the players pulls out a decent build and plays it well, then the false expectations that have been made are shattered.
Anyway, if I am remembering right, the amulet of mighty fists only costs 1.5x normal prices now. Not much of a consultation, but meh.
Gah....sorry for a tangent, but I must ask: why didn't anyone call me on that mistake? I ended up confusing the bodywraps of mighty strikes with AoMF there. And BoMS is a terrible option for anything other than using unarmed strikes as offhand attacks while you mainhand with another weapon. Anyway, sorry for spreading misinformation and making myself look like a fool for a bit.
A stereotypical invulnerable rager beast totem, superstitious barbarian...with a single level dip into archaeologist bard. With the fate's favored trait and the lingering performance feat, I could get +2 to attack, damage, saves, and skills for about the same number of rounds as I can rage. Because the barbarians needed more to be an excellent tank. It would go even better if it was gestalt between those classes though.
A similar concept comes with a MoMS monk 1/ranger x. This is because I like the idea of unarmed strikes, but ranger is just plain better as a TWFer. Maybe take boar style feats, since I also like claws, but actual natural attack builds can't really rely on them. Again, I could do more interesting things if I gestalted the two.
Yeah...there is a lot there to argue against. In that case, I think the term 'ninja' would actually apply to any class. So it would be fighters, barbarians, clerics, wizards, etc.
And having healing is very different from fast healing. That implies a much more automatic aspect (although use of a free action or an early activation of a mid to long term buff would be acceptable for that). Given those requirements, I think only one or two characters have that out of a cast with....hundreds...? Yeah, lets say hundreds.... at least a couple hundred..... of unique or semi-unique ninjas.
So this goes back to my question of sample size when the phrase "Most movies involving Ninjas" was used. I am not dissing the idea of an immortal shadow warrior here (it is a great character concept to work from), I am just questioning how it sounded like this was something as common as a black cowl and katana.
Charlie Bell wrote:
I notice that several people have brought up modern military oaths and creeds already, but for me, I want to turn towards an actual discussion of military and law enforcement ethics. This is because, while mantras and high sounding ideals are nice, and they are often the details that survive into the historical records (or at least the ones that most people bother reading), they might not actually reflect the spoken and unspoken codes of conduct that were actually followed.
This is because clarifying some of those details are important since the line between 'strategy' and 'dishonorable conduct' needs to be very clear so that the paladin can be something other than a froathing leeroy jinkins style religious fantatic. Are ambushes and steal dishonorable tactics? What about the use of smoke screens?
Those questions make me turn towards the kind of conduct expected of a SWAT team as a comparison (although, I'll admit, my understanding is based more off of hollywood here). They are expected to protect civilians and maintain public trust, which lends well to being LG (even if it is not strictly necessary). Typically they are expected to try to issue warnings and try to negotiate surrender. At the same time, they are allowed a certain degree of leeway when a civilian is in immediate danger. And due to the extraordinary circumstances that typically call for a SWAT team, they also are equipped with various types of tactical gear such as flash bangs and tear gas, which increases the likelihood that they can protect the lives of both hostages and teammates, as well as their ability to capture a hostile alive (which is one of their prerogatives) At the same time, they cannot use extreme chemical warfare, due to the risk to themselves, civilians, their enemies, and the trust that people have in them (mustard gas does not make a good impression on the 6 o' clock news)
Is anyone more experienced in such subjects that could add further to this line of thought or link an appropriate source? I think that seeing some detailed rules of engagement as well as the treatment of prisoners would help in making a much more skeletal code that would present more realistic expectations on a paladin and give the player some clear boundaries.
I honestly don't know this either. My first instinct is to keep the requirement to either pass a swim check or have a swim speed, since being able to somewhat maintain your balance while doing an attack is pretty much a requirement for doing any noticeable damage whatsoever. But slashing and bludgeoning weapons seem like they could work (overhead swing?) in such a situation.
If no one can end up finding a proper answer, I think that will suffice for a homeruling, since it is still vaguely connected to the underwater rules.
No, dual-wielded pistols are! ...ok, got that silliness out of the way.
Anyway, if I am remembering right, the amulet of mighty fists only costs 1.5x normal prices now. Not much of a consultation, but meh.
With the advantages of a temple sword (you can TWF, but get two handed power attack bonuses? Yes please), I can understand why one would not go for unarmed flurries. Admittedly, since the monk's unarmed strikes are never offhand, they actually work better as a dip while you go into another TWF favoring class (such as ranger). That would allow you to get the most of of getting full power attack on every hit.
And if we are going to ignore all the bits about cestus rulings, then the simplest solution for making a monk's unarmed strikes scale well would be to have them get an enhancement bonus on par with that AC bonus they get while they level. Simply say that it is a part of ki strike (which means you can lose it if you use up your ki). That seems like it could work well enough as a house rule, and make monks the best at using their own unarmed strikes (unlike what I suggested above).
A is the correct answer, according to rules questions thread after rules questions thread (which is the part of the forum where this question should have been asked...I guess. Or you could have just done a search there for your answer). Check those out for the appropriate rationales and developer comments.
The cestus is just a light weapon with the monk special property. Nothing more or less. Your unarmed strike ability does not apply to it. If it is adamantine, then your weapon attack goes through adamantine like normal. If it is enhanced, then it is an enhanced light weapon.
I do find it a legitimate question about whether it counts as a free hand though. Although, if you are using flurry, would it matter? You can flurry using only one weapon, so why not just wear one cestus? Sure, it looks weird, but mechanically it works. It cheaper too, since you only have to buy one weapon. But yeah, I never did find a good answer about crane wing or whether you could weild weapons while wearing these.
Most movies involving Ninjas show them to have a healing ability of some kind. It's just a thing that is common. I have no game balance reason or anything. I just thought it would be appropriate.
....what movies are you watching? Ignoring the general 'invulnerable protagonist/implacable villian' bits, where every non-civilian with a name just plain ignores major injuries in order to save the day/do a jump scare, I usually see injuries as something that is very plot relevant (got injured before the big fight while protecting the love interest/morality pet).
The closest I can even begin to imagine would be more associated with the junk thrown at general martial artists, which is the source of the monk's wholeness of body ability. Other than that, I do not know of ninjas having any such abilities.
Unless you have been watching too much anime, where 'ninja' is sometimes synonymous with 'monster of the week'. But even then, the ability to instantly heal damage is more a villainous ability if anything.
Alexander Augunas wrote:
I would second this, if only for how creepy it would be. And let us be honest here: it is not going to be a PC that uses this hex. Far too circumstantial for anyone to take it outside of a joke. This is a hex made purely for GMs to accomplish creepy, creepy things due to their prior knowledge of other available NPCs (although, it would be fantastic for a boss in a campaign where all the PCs were children)
So why not let them have this creepy tool? A GM could find a way to stick regular scent on the witch anyway (a wand of the bloodhound spell, which is a first level ranger spell, has a duration of hours/level for example), so it is not that unusual.
Admittedly, I'd probably wait until like, the second trimester, when you start to see the development of baby-ly bits. But that is just personal preference.
Ok, I am totally buying a sheep to follow me around and I'm gonna name it Mareep. It's totally fitting since it's going to be a crit-fishing magus with lots of shocking grasps.
Are you going to take the arcana that gives you a familiar? I think a reskin of the goat would work wonderfully.
This is just me throwing out a gut answer: For eidolons- Nature's Soul, yes, since having it take handle animal is perfectly legitimate (they have more skill points than their summoners; sometimes you diversify out of combat and also take that sweet +8 to a skill evolution). No on animal ally, but mostly as a fiat, since this line of thought seems silly. I am against Matryoshka dolls when it comes to character concepts.
For animal companions- an animal is more in tune with nature and animals than other animals? Over all, no on both feats. The bit about 'limited intelligence' Irnk brought up also seems like a decent enough excuse. Even if you bumped your int to 3+, I would be inclined to deny both accounts. Also, I might feel that handle animal in general is impossible. Wouldn't it be diplomacy instead?
Well, in general, I feel that eidolons were made with the idea that they would include the general design principles that Paizo itself uses, and then place point values on it in order to ball-park an idea of how powerful it is. It was likely also meant to be accessible (never said they accompplished everything they set out to do, obviously).
The unfettered eidolon is just an extension of that idea, and it cuts the eidolon free from being shackled to the role of some magical jerk's dragon. That leaves you free to turn it into a random encounter, a living obstacle, or even a BBEG itself (that +8 to disguise from skilled and a bipedal form looks like it could easily allow it to blend into a theives' guild or a high court quite readily; it also helps to free you from RP restrictions on that whole "has to look like a fantastical creature" bit; I would say that the bonus from the evolution comes from a bit of light shapeshifting, and sure, the 'true' form would still be fantastical)
If I remember right (and it hasn't been changed) you can also put up to one pair of claws on your feet.
I need to add a bit more to that statement though. This move is possible because, due to the fact that the rules for eidolons having to both mirror the designers' monster design principles as well as trying be easy to understand (never said they did it well, but it was a concern). Plus, they had to design rules that could be used by bipeds, quadrapeds, and even bipeds that bought some extra legs.
So, while talons normally go on a bipeds legs, you have RAW written a bit more for quadrapeds that allow you claws on your legs. Everything beyond that goes into rake territory (which is not much use to you, since you are a biped and can't pounce)
You need an Amulet of Mighty Fists, not handwraps. As for claw claw bite, you could take the claws through Maw or Claw and then used the Adopted trait to pick up an Orc specific one that gives a bite iirc. I don't remember the name of the Orc trait, but for some reason it needed to exist both as an alternate racial ability and as a race trait.
Or a two level dip in ranger with the natural weapon style. Which seems slightly more reasonable than the vast number of creatures that seem to be adopted by half-orcs (tieflings, catfolk, etc).
I doubt the dip would do that much damage if you are optimizing well enough. Fate's favored really does frontload things nicely, no?
....but one of the designers said himself that it worked like that to increase the duration. Relevant link: Russ Taylor on the issue
Admittedly, I can also see why your GM would rule against that. With fate's favored, you kind of keep up with the barbarian, and you can even just take it as a one level dip and still get all those +2's to throw around all day. Imagine that on your average superstitious beast totem barbarian... ("why no, I do not have a vested interest in barbarians and archaeologists. Why do you ask?")
Anyway, I am in favor for half-elf (assuming you can get better news from your GM about Lingering Performance) for weapon proficiency, but for a bow instead. Longswords work perfectly fine for the usual two handed build, but getting a bow could help in a pinch. Even if you are non dedicated, your bonuses could easily provide a lot of help.
The Golux wrote:
there are actually different kinds of oni that are formed when oni spirits fuse with different kinds of humanoids; the Ogre Mage is the most common, but there are more kinds in the bestiary 3 and in the Jade Regent adventure path. There's no existing type based on Orcs (because Orcs don't have much territory overlap with Oni, probably), but you could look at the Kuwa (Human-based) and Ja Noi (Hobgoblin-based) for examples of stats or traits an Orc oni might have.
While that certainly may be true, I question the problems that might bring balance wise, since those are CR 4 and 5 respectively compared to the Ogre Mage's 8. Plus, Ogre Mages have useful things like a fly speed and at will invisiblity and darkness, all of which can define an encounter at lower levels. Of course, this is somewhat custom creature, so balance could still be preserved, but it still seems troublesome to alter the originally written creature that much.
But I am unsure if we are actually facing a problem here, since the complete replacement might not be necessary. Ogre Mages have the ability to change shape into any humanoid from small to large. So even if he starts off as a medium Orc (handwaved under the idea that they fill a somewhat similar niche, so they could produce similar oni), he could still take on an ogrish form. The only real problem I could imagine from the strictest RAW sense is that it would not be able to look like an 'ogre mage', and instead just an 'ogre', which can be misleading. Ignoring that small detail by slapping the typical fiendish red skin and horns for the final showdown/reveal while just saying 'magic lol' would simplify things.
Plus, I am not entirely sure if that is the right oppressed group to focus on. While I can certainly understand that there may be the opinion that poison is a 'woman's weapon', I highly doubt that the average male farmer would be that much better in a straight fight against a well trained nobleman either. Martial skill and training is a privilege that has, quite often, been afforded only to rich men.
Not to say that it isn't possible to kill them with a melee weapon. My advise in that case though would be to take a nice, long, slender dagger and shank them by surprise. Rondel and stillettos have historically been associated with assassins due to their ability to pierce through thick leather and chainmail (often the common forms a knight's every day protection) and their relative ease of concealment, such as within a cloak. But if one is going this far, then it hardly matters whether it is a poor farmer or moderately wealthy noblewoman.
Still back to the issue of 'which oppressed group uses poison', I would much more readily associate with with the lower classes. This comes from the fact that they are the ones that become 'disposable pawns' for the upper class with a bit of coin when they need someone taken out of the picture. They are the ones usually responsible for preparing food and drinks. And depending on their position, they might have enough freedom to roam about the castle/manor on the excuse that they are checking tomorrow's cooking ingredients, or other similar lies. That leads them to become 'invisible'. Everyone notices when the new mistress is wandering about, but what about maid #34?
Ah, thanks for the link. I am horrible with site navigation and I do not play PFS, so I have little to do with that page. And I know that it wouldn't take much to have dealt with that....but sometimes you are a bit too burnt out to post responsibly. Sorry.
Anyway, so yes, a quick control+f gives a confirmation that heritages are PFS legal, and the fact that BoE is not mentioned at all tells me that fiendish heritage is not (please tell me if I am being negligent again though)
There is also the fact that there is not also a corresponding celestial heritage or vampiric heritiage feat for aasimars and dhampirs, despite the fact that they have a similar system (admittedly, aasimars are already a bit favored in the system, but still...)
As a cleric who likes to summon things with sacred summons, I usually preface the spell with "Sarenrae, please send help!" or some such. I've heard there were also some popular houserules along the lines of 'if you summon an intelligent creature, it's always the same one and it remembers you.' In short, build your own relationship with your summons. If your party wants you to summon them to throw them into a pit of lava for funsies, say no. But when you have to summon them, understand why you have to summon them and try to get that across to them somehow...build it into the verbal component of the spell. Just a thought anyway. We could just be evil, too.
Wait, do the rules mention much on whether it is the same one every time? If not, then the spell might just call any random member of whatever type of creature you are summoning, and you might never get the same one twice. Hardly slavery. The less intelligent creatures just might get an experience equal to a bad dream and go back to their own business.
Well, the Hague Conventions are designed for Wars. And let's face it: anything meant for war that isn't just infantry equipment has a very, very high likelihood of causing tons of causalities. I mean, the mustard gas cloud or arsenic in the water supply meant to kill 1000 soldiers is not exactly going to just go out of its way to avoid medics, refugees, and other noncombatants.
With Blood of Fiends and Advanced Race Guide, you don't need Fiendish Heritage anymore. Although I believe Blood of Fiends isn't PFS-legal.
The situation here is long and complicated, but I will try to explain as much as I remember.
Bastards of Erebus (that was the first one, right?) is no PFS legal. It had bloodlines that could be accessed via a feat.
Parts of Blood of Fiends are PFS legal. Specifically for this discussion, the bloodlines are legal. The difference it has from BoE though is that, despite having the same bloodlines, it does not include the fiendish heritage feat.
So, the feat is not PFS legal, but the bloodlines are, and they are from a source that never mentions the feat. From that, we can presume that you do not need the feat to use the bloodlines in PFS.
Forgive me if I got any of this wrong though. It took a long time for me to find all this out, and that was quite a while ago, so the details are fuzzy.