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

lemeres's page

Pathfinder Society Member. 3,007 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


1 to 50 of 3,007 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Ascalaphus wrote:
Frank Daniels wrote:

* use Total Defense while you're not under attack? E.g., you anticipate that you might be under attack at some point. Alternatively, maybe you just want to walk around with Total Defense "on".

This is a bit tricky in practice. The issue is that you don't get Dodge bonuses to AC (like total defence) when you don't get Dex to AC. There are two common causes for this:

1) An enemy you didn't know was there. Stealth, Darkness, Invisibility etc; if you don't see them coming, no AC bonus.

2) Flat-footed at the beginning of combat. Until you've taken an action in combat, you're flat-footed and don't gain Dex to AC.

#2 is the tricky one, because many GMs will not let you get the jump on a combat by always being in full defence, always having a readied action, or even always having your weapons already drawn. The pros and cons of that are varied, but basically: expect table variation.

What about in certain context sensitive situations? Such as right before turning a specific corner, or before someone opens a door?

Or would all of this be covered under readied action? As in, "I ready an action to use total defense if there is anyone/thing on the other side of that door"

Obviously, you can't go through the whole dungeon like this, but you could at least be prepared at key gateways and choke points.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Fruian Thistlefoot wrote:
Kangaroo seems interesting....give it the improved unarmed strikes feat, and then ride gloriously into battle as you ride in its pouch.

I've seen it done before. They used Dragon style on the mount to ignore difficult terrain and to charge through Allies.

Now where to ride? In the pouch or on a saddle is the real question.

Fair enough, it gets rid of one of the few things that can stop a charging cavalier.

And obviously you put the saddle in the pouch.

Ascalaphus wrote:

A giant porcupine mount? Wouldn't that be fairly uncomfortable?

A giant spider mount is badass though.

Hose it down with water (the spines are just very stiff hair) and then put a mat over it. That should keep it down (I would definitely say exotic saddle though).

I would avoid the insect and such. Being mindless vermin, they only get 1+bonus tricks. Other creatures gain 3 tricks per point of intelligence before bonus tricks (and you usually want to raise their intelligence to 3 so they can take any feat and maybe drop a point in linguistics so you can give more complex and specific commands)

Kangaroo seems interesting....give it the improved unarmed strikes feat, and then ride gloriously into battle as you ride in its pouch.

Deadmanwalking wrote:
chaoseffect wrote:

Skald with Greater Beast Totem gives your entire party pounce. Not bad at all.

@Deadmanwalking: How does that work out? I was under the impression humanoids counted as biped for what evolutions they could take and Pounce is quadruped only.

You're probably right, actually (though Synthesists can work around it). There are probably other ways around it, too. I'm pretty sure the Primalist Hunter can get it, for example, given that he technically buys it for his AC then kills it and takes the bonus himself.

There are also magic items, now that I think on this subject more. Both the Quick Runner's Shirt and Stagger-Proof Boots (the latter from Inner Sea Gods) can provide a pounce-like effect once per day. You can wear both at once!

Eating tiger hearts to gain their powers? METAL!

Set wrote:
Greylurker wrote:
what about that Tengu from the cover of Advanced Races. I wouldn't mind seeing more of him (or her...I can't tell)

Heck yeah. If we can have an Iconic Keleshite Cleric of Sarenrae, or an Iconic Vudrani Monk, the notion that 'iconic' has to mean 'generic' and can't mean 'Golarion-Specific' (like, uh, Keleshites or Vudrani or Sarenrae-worshippers) then we can *totally* have an Iconic Tengu.

Tengu (and Tieflings and Gnolls and Goblins) are at least in the Bestiary (Roleplaying Game), and not tucked away in the Inner Sea World Guide (Campaign Setting), making them *more* Iconic than Vudrans or Keleshites...

And heck, some of the races are flat out Golarion flavor all over, and not carried over from previous editions, like the Gillmen and Androids and Wayangs.

If 'Iconic' meant 'core only,' they already broke that rule a bunch with the non-core human ethnicities.

If 'Iconic' meant 'generic cliché,' then they also broke that rule with the oversized bastard sword wielding Barbarian and tea-drinking Dwarf Ranger and temple sword using Monk.

IMO, 'Iconic' never had to mean 'boring' or 'stereotype.'

Bring on the 'iconic' Vishkanya Ninja. The 'iconic' Jadwiga elemental Sorcerer. The 'iconic' hyenadon-whisperer Gnoll Ranger. The 'iconic' Erastili Archer Paladin mounted on a celestial Elk.

Embrace the potential of the setting and it's many races, cultures, ethnicities, deities and tasty, tasty options.

Thinking about it, I kind of want some history from veteran PFS players (I've only even really looked at pathfinder for about 2 seasons, let alone even play PFS). With the removal of aasimar and tieflings as free choices in PFS in favor of a more Tien flavor, I notice tengu are still sticking around.

How long have they had that kind of position? Since tieflings and aasimar are being taken out since they are less populous in Tien, does that mean that tengu have good populations out west? Have they been free choices since their conception?

I kind of like the idea of tengu being a rather widespread, if not a particularly numerous race. I mean, they tend to live on the fringes of human/core races' societies, much like how crows live within real world human cities. And with the widespread habitat ranges of crows, it would make sense that a crow race would be a widespread background presence in Golarion. I can certainly see them having the wits and guile, as well as the linguistic and sword abilities, to survive anywhere.

But this might just be me making conjecture and wild theories. I would love some words from veterans about the issue.

Oh, and greylurker, if I know anything about bird biology (and if it has anything to do with bird person anatomy), then it might be hard to tell the gender, even if they weren't dressed in a gender ambiguous robe. I've heard that sometimes, penguins and parrots have to be tested genetically to tell the difference (unless they give you a suprise omlet, I guess). So I suppose it would only be visible if they wore pink bows (although I kind of like the the idea of a tengu couple dressed in attire like the one from the cover, and no one could ever tell which was the husband and which was the wife).

2 people marked this as a favorite.

There are a couple of rather effective and extensive guides in the Guide to Class Guides section of this forum.

To paint it in rather broad strokes, the traditional paths are either melee focused (get a decent strength score and just enough wis so you can cast all your spell levels, and then turn into something big, scary, and preferably with pounce) and the caster druid (high wis score, tends to turn into defensive things like wind elementals, which lord their flight over puny humans while spamming things like flame strike or flame sphere that have been metamagiced to the abyss and back as well as battlefield control and summon nature's allies spells)

So, rather than further reiterate the suggestions from the guides, I will now suggest weird and possibly interesting things.

With nagaji becoming free race choices in PFS, you could try Naga Aspirant for a caster druid. It gives you a more 'wizardy' selection of spells for the 1-4 spell levels (which happen to be the most commonly used and can be most easily meta magiced to higher levels....-FIREBALL!). Trades out the usual wildshape in order to make you into even MORE of a snake person.

An interesting fact- elementals (which you can start turning into at level 6 with wild shape as if using elemental body) can in fact use weapons if they are humanoid shaped according to their subtype. That kind of implies hands and corporeality that could allow weapons and armor to be worn. If you have a humanoid shape (hands) and can speak (elementals have a language)...then what is the difference between that and enlarge person for hours/level? Besides the fact that a large earth elemental works as a huge buff (+6 str, +2 con, +6 natural armor, -2 dex). You could pick up normal leather armor and still have great AC, and you could do a reach build with either scimitars or spears (they hit like greatswords when you are large). Definitely something to consider if you are a melee type and if you don't particularly like natural attacks and/or being furry.

Note: earthglide might be troublesome. Besides the fact that there is a mostly unsubstantiated belief that you can't take equipment with you (can't see that bit in the universal monster ability, spell, or any of the half dozen ways to get earthglide via class), you can't really see where you are going. Detecting enemies can be solved with the cave domain (the terrain one), which lets you get tremorsense (EDIT-if you don't like animal companions, grab a domain instead. That is an allowed option. Come on- tremor sense!). You might need the blind fight feats though. Still... have you ever seen a show where ninjas rise up from the ground/shadows? And remember that large earth elementals have 10 foot reach? Mwhahahaha

Monk's abundant step (which works as the SLA, and actually has its own recognition as an alternative prerequisite in the feat)

That is the way monks used to pounce. Now we use haymakers. And all was right with the world.

The sad thing about the tentacle discovery is that...yes, yes it does work best on magical girls (or guys, if that is your preference).

I mean, grappling any 1/2 BAB caster (who probably dumped str hard) is always a relatively easy act, and doing so means they can't cast spells.

It doesn't work too well on witches though, since their bread and butter abilities are supernatural most of the time(does this mean that witch works best as the green ranger/antihero/lancer that allows the socerer protagonist deal the finishing blow?)

Dimensional Dervish, which allows the use of dimensional door (and SLAs based off of dimensional door) to be cast as a swift action.

Gorbacz wrote:

But what about childlike emaciated goth lolis who serve as companions to wizened old sorcerers with the Tentacle bloodline?


I'm sorry, but that only looks like a loli. Any rogue will tell you that by using their trap sense.

Also, who needs made up bloodlines? The alchemists actually have a discovery, the tentacle discovery, which comes with the grab ability (I know, I know. Jokes aside, it does make grappling builds viable for them, and can stack well with reach builds)

Monstrous physique spell on things like magus and alchemist (And beastmorph alchemist have their mutagen work like monstrous physique) as well as beast shape (so level 6 druid)

Sword master archetype for rogue tengu (it has an ability like a very restricted rage that gives no stat boosts- still gives pounce [as a combat maneuver?] very early and can stack with scout)

Racial feats like claw pounce for catfolk (claws only, but I am fairly sure the claw blades count as claws still, so you could do a TWF build with that; if not, try feral combat training and play a monk to flurry with claws) and kitsune (can only be done 1/2 turns, since it needs you to turn furry as a swift action, and turn back to smooth as another swift action)

The mobile fighter and dawnflower dervish archetypes for fighter, which trades away your first iterative in return for a move+full attack (not bad if you have weapon training, dueling gloves, and weapon focus feats)

summoners' eidolons can get it at level 1

Mounted skirmisher for mounted character

Spirited charge doubles damage done on a mounted charge, but instead triples a lance's damage (which is kind of like making 3 attack- matches up fairly well with a level 10 barbarian's charge, and it can be grabbed with 1 ride rank and 2 non-level/bab specific feats)

Snively wrote:
As for class suggestions? I would probably NOT reccomend Druid (too hippy for military), Rogue (unless you wanna play as General Nuisance), Summoner (why have a standing army when I can call one up?), or Barbarian (Hulk Smash!). Since "General" would be like the "Employed Position" and your Class would be your individual path towards being a good general, play the style of character you enjoy!

...have you seen the special rules for druid followers of Gorum (scroll to bottom)?

With that, you could wear metal armor and still retain wildshape. Their armor does not meld with them, and the source even says they use followers or slaves to put it on for them. Gorum doesn't allow no hippies. He only respects might,heavy metal, survival of the fittest, and becoming the alpha of the pack (army in this case).

Grab wild speech at level 7, and suddenly the army is now being lead by a talking tiger in armor. Or a giant eagle. Or whatever the druid feels like and happens to buy armor for. And imagine an entire druidic order that takes several roles in the army as cavalry, air force, and navy... and become any of these with just a couple minutes prep (because armor). That could be highly effective, and I could see them taking an iron grip over a nation.

And lets not even get into how a druid could act as a perfect assassin that can remove opposition by flying in as a small bird, turning back and and stabbing them with a dagger (with a wide variety of poisons that can finish the job if there are any mistakes), and then turn back into a bird without anyone knowing they were there. It is hard to be the one telling them 'no' after the first few assassinations.

Druids can be hardcore when they aren't stupid nonviolent hippies. They can dictate a battlefield just using their sheer size, and just a couple taking off their armors (..or just wearing dragon scale armor) could then use their spell lists (including spontaneous summoning spells- in fights done mainly with martial warriors, a T-rex or 5 could make a large difference, at least psychologically).

Oh, to also add- I think that for many martial characters, they should at least have some levels in cavalier (maybe the 4 necessary for horse master). This doesn't necessarily mean they have to start as such, but that they multiclass into it after attaining a position so they can more easily keep up with others in the army (who may often be full cavaliers). With 4 levels, they can have a loyal steed able to keep up with them, and they can challenge 2 times per day for an extra 4 damage per hit (which isn't exactly bad).

Note- since all natural weapons become secondary when mixed with manufactured weapons, all those claws will only deal 1/2 str and power attack damage.

Corrik wrote:
Make the rogue a bard and you could call it "Kur, Nur, and the Magic Men".

Hmm... and make the barbarians extremely superstitious and think magic is for girly men.... and then have one realizes he is actually a blood rager. DRAMABLEM!

mechaPoet wrote:
lemeres wrote:

Oh- a question about swashbucklers though- Do they really HAVE to go DEX based? I know, they are dex friendly with with finesse and bonuses that get light weapons to hit like 2 handed ones.... but do I really NEED dex?

They lack some of the main reasons why other classes would go with DEX. Their reflex save is already fantastic, so why bother adding too much to it? And, while they are restricted to light armor, they have both nimble (which eventually makes up for the armor typing) and they are highly encouraged to use bucklers since they aren't really doing much with the offhand (sword and board can get a lot of AC; +3 armor costs a lot more than a +2 armor and +2 shield, even when it is a worse, since spreading bonuses over 2 items allows you to work around the scaling prices).

Why shouldn't I just go with strength and have my stat to damage now rather than when some feat or ability allows it? Because it isn't how it is 'supposed' to be? (please tell me if a lot has changed since the playtest, since a lot of these opinions are based on that material) I've asked this a couple of times, and never got a good answer.

I haven't gone over the class with a fine-toothed comb in comparison to the playtest, but it seems pretty much the same. The biggest change from the one to the other is probably the change to the Slashing Grace feat.

When I look at the Swashbuckler's actual class features, what I think really makes them stand out from, say, some sort of finesse-duelist fighter archetype is the fact that its other parent class is the Gunslinger. And that means Deeds! If damage is all you're concerned about with the Swashbuckler as a melee class, then a Strength build is, as you say, more optimized in that regard. But I think the opportune parry and riposte deed is what makes the Swashbuckler somewhat unique, and you need at least a decent Dex to pull off the Combat Reflexes stuff. I don't know if it's particularly good, but that seems to me to be at least one reason to play a Dex...

Fair enough. Optimizing things like AoOs, and a few extra AC. And with the options available, you do not lose damage to any great extent (feats are always a bit of a cost, but such is life)

Plus, shadows are both less and more scary, since they don't cripple you, but they can kill and turn you easier. Heh.

And thinking about the paladin:

There are reasons why things like smite evil have a limit of 'until dead or until the next time you rest', even when they are single target and that single target tends to die VERY quickly after said ability is used.

These abilities acknowledge circumstances such as the cowardly villain fleeing (or trying to backstab you after you let them flee) and build it so they can reach beyond them- which seems to mean that 'until the battle end' abilities do not do the same.

And now, on an unrelated note- I kind of like the idea of a paladin in a party with (or more accurately- babysitting) two childish barbarians (we have to make the barbarians brothers here, because it works with the dynamic I've set up, and they can be a bad influence on each other). Overall, we have good potential for a sitcom here. Any suggestions for names?

Think we should throw in a kleptomaniac rogue and a wizard that is too trigger happy to round things off? A hippy druid that goes 'au natural' at the worst of times? Maybe a young, innocent cleric that the paladin tries to keep from learning bad habits from the others?

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Corrik wrote:
Now see that raises another interesting point, when does combat end? Certainly the answer can be rather obvious against enemies. Combat ends when you defeat all of them. But what about a friendly sparring match, say one that is as much or more about yelling friendly insults in between punches? What about against the training dummy? How long does posturing have to go on before combat ends? What about an enemy that keeps running away(in whatever manor) and then strikes in a few turns. Does combat end each time he runs away or when you finally defeat him for good?

I guess when both sides (and sometimes either- 1 sided things eventually just become torture) stops taking offensive actions (and I don't mean 'your mom' jokes or hand gestures).

For example, real battles against enemies might end with the enemies fleeing. If you pursue, and continue to launch attacks at them, then the fight is still going on. But if they get away/you let them flee, then the fight ends, since there is no one left to fight.

Of course, that doesn't mean they don't come back 5 minutes later with an ambush after they buffed properly. But that would be a different fight, at least rules wise.

Now a spar would end when you guys stop throwing punches. Technically.... you could both throw a punch at each other and then use a move action walking to continue the 'fight'...but this would get silly quickly. Also, the nonlethal damage would eventually take its toll, even without power attack or bonuses. I guess 2 invulnerable barbarians could theorically do it (they get double DR against nonlethal). It would eventually just devolve into two over-sized kids slapping each other until the paladin tells them that he will turn this party around and leave the dungeon HE SWEARS TO GODS!

Arachnofiend wrote:
Because Paizo did the Swashbuckler wrong on many accounts and this is one of them

Eh, not necessarily.

The thing with swashbucklers is that they gain the precise strike ability (which gives them their level worth of bonus on attacks...when in 1 hand with the other not attacking). The funny thing about how this ends up scaling is that it makes this 1 handed attack about match up to a full BAB character using a 2 handed attack (assuming power attack and decent enough strength for the level).

This kind of puts them ahead of a lot of DEX focused classes and builds, which have to rely on TWF- and thus full attacks. A swashbuckler on a standard action attack can do as well as a comparable fighter swinging a greatsword on a standard action attack. Overall, they are not as crippled.

Faced off against a rogue or ranger using TWF, a swashbuckler with spring attack would win since his attacks each hit harder and he can just play keep away so they can't show their stuff.

Is he more mobile than a fighter? Not really. Still, he is not another dex class that cries when the GM doesn't make enemies sit still and wait until they are full attacked to death.

Of course....yeah, I am still kind of high off of the idea of pouncing monks and brawlers with pummeling style and pummeling charge... ehehehehe. Oh, and the monk of the seven forms looks interesting (although I'll probably keep to sohei, admittedly- it is pretty close to brawler in many respects, oddly)

Oh- a question about swashbucklers though- Do they really HAVE to go DEX based? I know, they are dex friendly with with finesse and bonuses that get light weapons to hit like 2 handed ones.... but do I really NEED dex?

They lack some of the main reasons why other classes would go with DEX. Their reflex save is already fantastic, so why bother adding too much to it? And, while they are restricted to light armor, they have both nimble (which eventually makes up for the armor typing) and they are highly encouraged to use bucklers since they aren't really doing much with the offhand (sword and board can get a lot of AC; +3 armor costs a lot more than a +2 armor and +2 shield, even when it is a worse, since spreading bonuses over 2 items allows you to work around the scaling prices).

Why shouldn't I just go with strength and have my stat to damage now rather than when some feat or ability allows it? Because it isn't how it is 'supposed' to be? (please tell me if a lot has changed since the playtest, since a lot of these opinions are based on that material) I've asked this a couple of times, and never got a good answer.

thunderbeard wrote:
Anzyr wrote:

Ok. Except all of that works for the Vivisectionist Beastmorph Alchemist... Except the alchemist will have more feats since it's combat style doesn't have tons of feat taxes. And more gold because it doesn't need to buy two weapons. And a 24/7 Greater Invisibility. And free stat buffs. And free immunities. And...
If the alchemist is taking a combat style other than 2WF, he's dealing half as much damage with his sneak attacks, and that negates all the bonuses there. The Invisibility thing is nice, if you're planning on using rapid shot with a bow, but plenty of things see invisible at high level.

Not really. Alchemists are famous for their natural attack builds, which could easily get as many attacks as TWF (feral mutagen can give 3, and they could grab the form of a monstrous humanoid with monstrous physique, which can lead to who knows what), but with most of their attacks hitting at full BAB (thus, they are more likely to hit).

Their mutagens also allow them to greatly boost a physical stat, which further increase their chances to hit. They also can work entirely with their strength stat since none of their natural attacks require a certain DEX (dex vivisectionist build are also valid, but I am making a point; also, those tend to have terrible will saves). Since primary natural attacks hit with full STR and power attack, a vivisectionist alchemist could also do great even when they are denied sneak attack.

Nefreet wrote:

Eidolons are special, and general rules should not be assumed using them as an example.

Tieflings may have feet that resemble those of a clawed predator, but the racial trait that gives them claws places them on their hands.

Yeah...the eidolon rules are a bit weird because they were written with all eidolons in mind. That means they affect bipeds, quadrupeds, serpentine, and aquatic creatures.

Now, you may say that such evos could have special rules for different base forms (like how constrict is serpentine only) and just say it goes on a quadruped's forelegs......but a biped could get another set of legs (hey, it increases speed), so it could very well end up with the kind of body that would allow forelegs/hind legs.

So the designers just gave up, since any further attempts to distinguish this would just result in it being even more confusing than before (remember, they were trying to both have the rules reflect their monster design principles....and still have them readable- never said it works). So they just left it a bit short and decided 'eh, another set of claws wouldn't make this more unbalanced than a quadruped'.

Still, the rules do stand- bipeds put talons (or maybe a rake attack) on their feet.

Corrik wrote:

The "when combat ends" and "can't be used outside of combat" effects have always confused me. RAW, you can't use them outside of combat, but that raises some questions.

How is a monk, especially a monk with a Vow of Peace, supposed to learn and practice the style feats?

...thinking about it, the way you could do this also answers the original question of the thread- how to use the ability when enemies are not around?

Answer- Throw a punch at the fighter. Have him throw punches at you. IE- a sparring match. It is a fairly important part of learning any martial art.

Not sure if this is always useful, but it certainly presents an answer. If you find that the ability would still be useful in the dozen or so rounds that you two flail at each other, then feel free.

Obviously, no one should use enhancements or power attack, since putting nonlethal damage on yourselves is probably not very conducive to....whatever it is you are doing.

Now, it has been suggested that you use a practice dummy (and realistically that might work), but it might not exactly work in game (since objects rarely make good opponents.... unless the wizard has animate object). The spar at least has some cost (you get a small bit of nonlethal damage)

I don't think range is that important, since I am pretty sure precise strike only works up to 30 feet away.

Plus, critting is rather important for swashbucklers.

leo1925 wrote:

While i agree that the monks are in a much better place than when they began, i have to ask:

Is there a way to make an unarmed, unarmored monk that is effective?

Depends on the problems you find.

After looking closely at the sohei, I actually ended up finding that at higher levels (with the right equipment for both sides), they actually had lower AC than an unarmored monk using the same stats (assuming strength based).

With 2 stats going to their AC, barkskin as an SLA via qinggong, and access to more caster focused items (bracers of armor), they can get a bit tanky with their AC while still being Strength focused. It is just that low level AC is so low without armor that most monks have to turtle with high DEX and WIS builds.

Of course, even if armor is not as effective at high level (it still makes them a lot easier at low levels), it still rocks since it is another item slot- an important one too with the brawling armor property- an untyped +2 to attack and damage that can only go on light armors. Plus, with the AC now coming from armor, that frees up the hand slot, which soheis would enjoy since they can use gloves of dueling (a +2 to their weapon training).

Pummeling Style and Pummeling charge also are godsends to the monks- this allows them to pool their full attack into one blow (thus, they only face DR once, dividing it among their blows- DR 20 seems more like DR 3 when you have 7 hits; this also means they might skip the AoMF in favor of greater magical fang- maybe bodywraps depending on how that gets ruled- wouldn't hope for it) and they now get what is basically pounce (constant full attacks means they are practically full BAB now)

Arachnofiend wrote:
lemeres wrote:

...not really. The restrictions placed on it (1 handed/1 weapon) makes it very much weaker than an agile Elven Curved Blade (which gets all the 2 handed goodness). The main reason why agile weapons are a bit of a problem is that they are a rather pricy for TWF builds. Even fencing grace is better, since it doesn't seem so antithetical towards you making your other hand useful (a shield, which is heavily supported with swashbuckler abilities, or maybe an agile weapon for TWF...although mixing a dex to damage feat and agile weapon together seems....meh)

Of course, I am in support for the idea that DEX to damage should be rather limited or a bit pricy. It is the trade off for having your attack stat add to your saves and AC as well.

All of your other options are quite a bit more expensive feat-wise and money-wise than Dervish Dance. The Elven Curved Blade costs another feat and an agile weapon is pricy as you've said; Fencing Grace also costs another feat and gets even more ridiculous if you try to TWF with an agile weapon.

Quite right, it does take more investment. But you get what you pay for I guess....

If you view that agile costs for a single weapon are about the same worth as a feat (it is similar to the decision that people have to deal with when faced with keen versus improved critical), then the exotic weapon proficiency need to get the elven curved blade itself could be seen as just a feat that gets the benefits of 2handing.

By BAB +4, it is somewhat similar to having weapon expertise with a dervish danced scimitar, and it grows from there. If you can pick it up via race (half elves with ancestral arms, humans with adopted parents and martial weapon proficiency, elves with martial weapon proficiency, and tengu with any darn sword they want, to name a few) then it is hardly a bad choice.

I'll admit- you completely have me with fencing grace. Trying to TWF with fencing grace really only works if you are of the Two Weapon Fighter archetype (they can eventually TWF with 2 one handed weapons like without extra penalty- double rapier ahoy.) Otherwise, it is just a bit silly (price-wise, at least). As far as optimization goes, it will likely just stay a nice toy for swashbucklers (although it might be interesting on magus if you start at a late enough level that getting the feats together isn't a problem; scimitars eventually get old when used everytime)

TLaughingMan wrote:

I am trying to build a character from another RPG ruleset into the Pathfinder ruleset as a bit of fluff to pass the time between sessions. However, the class that is closest in design to the character is a Warpriest, a Wisdom based class, but the problem is that the character is a Catfolk, a race that has a -2 to their Wisdom.

I am designing it to the rules of my current game so its a 15 point buy, but it means that the drawback is so much greater. I was wondering what options you guys recommend for overcoming it.

15 pt buy....ouch....that is painful for melee casters, even if you aren't playing a race that has a penalty to the important mental stat.

Oracle really might be better. Depending on how dark you want it (god of death? Check plus plus), you could play on the idea that an oracle is someone that the gods/divine forces/eldritch powers/laws of the universe reach into and tinkered with for their own purposes- and kind of ended up breaking them in the process (thus, the oracle curse, which can only be side stepped, rather than overcome).

You could have your god literally trying to turn you into a living weapon for his purposes (interesting motifs- a weapon often must be smacked with hammers and subjected in deadly flames in order to takes on its proper composition and shape)

Under A Bleeding Sun wrote:
Lastoth wrote:
Assuming monks can use monk weapons with Pummeling Style (Temple sword/Sansetsukon), I think they just got fixed. I wouldn't call them weak at this point. A single style line gives them pounce in combination with the ability to crit fish effectively AND avoid the impact of DR. You'll still need to work hard to keep your hit bonus up but the monk is no slouch at this point.

Even without using it with weapons I'd call it a fix(albeit a lesser one). Basically solves 2 of their 3 issues in one feat line.

Really, monks have been getting significant power boosts for a while now, with styles and Qi Gong. They still lack an inherent way to boost their to hit, but Pummeling solves most everything else, and they are useful outside of combat (albeit in a rather limited roll, but better than nothing)

Eh, I know of at least one archetype that has decent inherent boosts- Sohei. It has weapon training (fairly close to the fighters, and appears to qualify for gloves of dueling) and they can flurry in light armor (brawling armor!).

Oddly, that doesn't mean they end up with better defense than an unarmored monk with similar starting stats (2 stats to AC, and they can grab bracers of armor), but soheis come ahead in offense since they can get a total of +7 to attack and damage that normal monks never see.

And with pummeling style and charge as an option, the whole '3/4 BAB but acts like full during full attack' business is not much of an issue once you get to mid levels.

Overall, they are fairly close to the brawler offensively. I guess the difference is whether you want ki powers and perfect saves or feat stuff (martial flexibility does seem appealing).

Deadmanwalking wrote:

Swashbuckler is explicitly restricted to one-handed weapons and not TWF if he wants that damage bonus. Even assuming Dex-to Damage and a Fighter (pretty much the worst full BAB melee class) , let's compare those. Assuming Str 30 (or Dex 30 and a Dex-to-damage option on the Swashbuckler) the Fighter winds up with +18 to hit and 1d10+37 damage with Power Attack, while the Swashbuckler winds up with +18 to hit and 1d6+42 damage (also with Power Attack).

So...that's +3 damage for the Swashbuckler and 20 of that being Precision, which matters a lot since both are critical-ing on a 15-20. Now, the Swashbuckler probably has a buckler and thus better AC, but still.

That's a rough estimate, but basically, the Swashbuckler's required fighting style is rather limiting and suboptimal, which makes up for their Precise Strike class feature to some degree. They also have awful saves.

Now...the Daring Champion Cavalier Archetype can add Challenge on top of Precise Strike and has less awful Saves to boot. With it you might have a point. On the other hand, that's an Archetype, njot a whole class, and might easily get errataed out of existence.

It is in fact better to say that the bonuses to swashbuckler's damage is not meant to put him above other melee classes- it is meant to take a suboptimal style (using only 1 weapon in 1 hand) and make it on par with the other full BAB classes.

The scaling of precise strike actually about matches up to the bonuses one would get from power attack and a good strength score when 2 handing a weapon. So of course their damage applies to just about everything. But it is their weapon training class feature (or whatever they called it) that really does 'extra', since precise strike is just 'catch up'.

Despite the fact that it appears analogous to the cavalier's challenge, it is actually not anything that amazing (although making sword and board an optimal style is kind of amazing in itself....) actual, legitimate, by the RAW way to exploit this feat. This honestly impresses me.

I'll be honest, as one of the people who have been the most vocal on the pummeling threads, and I must say- quite a bit of what I've done is trying to resist those that try to twist the feat itself so they can do whatever without paying any price.

So, when I stand as one of the ones most vocal in arguing that this feat must be delivered via punches... I was mostly looking for a twisted argument against twisted arguments that would at least tie up one of the arms (Thus, no greatswords or double kukris).

So let me say- it does appear this combo of feats would work to get a normal natural attack build in the pummeling style's full round attack. Admittedly, it still would be delivered via only a single attack...but reflavoring it as a powerful claw attack or a big freakin' bite. (honestly, I kind of like that image more than the frenzy natural attack build usually end up as)

And overall, this approach would not be overpowered (I mean, natural attacks have the same 20/x2 as unarmed strikes). Admittedly, with the reflavoring, I might be concerned about whether this would allow it through DR/slashing (this wasn't too much of an issue with unarmed strikes, since they always dealt bludgeoning, and if a style or something made it different, the same would apply to the 'punch'). But it isn't that big of an issue (since most common natural attacks deal the important type for DR anyway- bludgeoning).

Overall, you are spending several extra feats to use attacks that are frankly actually a bit replaceable by the unarmed strike you need to get for pummeling style. You are working with the system and paying appropriate prices to get what you want (And I kind of question how much you are getting back for your trouble....). So I have few real problems with this.

Arachnofiend wrote:

Dervish Dance is still a better option mechanically for dex-to-damage than anything else that could be made available.

If strength builds were going to be completely usurped it would have already happened.

Expanding the list will just help those that want flavor, people who want the mechanics are already satisfied with their stupid scimitar builds.

...not really. The restrictions placed on it (1 handed/1 weapon) makes it very much weaker than an agile Elven Curved Blade (which gets all the 2 handed goodness). The main reason why agile weapons are a bit of a problem is that they are a rather pricy for TWF builds. Even fencing grace is better, since it doesn't seem so antithetical towards you making your other hand useful (a shield, which is heavily supported with swashbuckler abilities, or maybe an agile weapon for TWF...although mixing a dex to damage feat and agile weapon together seems....meh)

Of course, I am in support for the idea that DEX to damage should be rather limited or a bit pricy. It is the trade off for having your attack stat add to your saves and AC as well.

...I will say this- you will want to aim for cleric/oracle, summoner, witch, or sorcerer/wizard (for the cohort, at the very least.)

I bring this up because the spell Skeleton Crew is too thematic to pass up.

I mean, who doesn't want a ship manned by skeletons. Admittedly, the spell is purely utility (imagine the skeletons are robots programmed with 'attack' routines; they don't count against your HD pool for controlling undead though). It would be funny if they at least acted like scaredy cats when fighting started and ran (shivering skeletons)

Kudaku wrote:
Since I feel like I'm being overly negative, I have to say I actually quite like Pummeling Charge - I think it's a good thing that there is a pounce-esque option available to other martials than the barbarian, and it solves one of the biggest monk paradoxes - lots of mobility-enhancing abilities coupled with an attack mechanic (flurry of blows) that's 100% reliant on full round actions.

That is why I am so defensive here. I LOVE pummel style and pummel charge. They allow entirely new ways of using unarmed builds that makes them easier to integrate into 'normal' game play (why bother with AoMF when you could just grab greater magical fang? DR is a non-issue. Grab a Amulet of Natural Armor instead).

With this, unarmed strikes are less of a niche build, and suddenly something that has benefits for a lot of martials (heck, it might even brings in the supremacy of beast totem for barbarians into question- imagine a barbarian with the brawling powers and dragon totem?)

Few people want this feat gone, although there are arguments about how far it should stretch. I am conservative...since I am full of FEAR for its survival.

Orthodox Banjoist wrote:

in case of mounted fury build, the pc will surely start to charge and charge and charge again... is it viable to focus on charge feats?

i'm trying to make clear to me the i can create that PC..

i've 20 PB (so a try...)

LEVEL:5 -> going into 6!


STR 16 (17-2RAC+1LVL)
DEX 14 (12+2RAC)
CON 14
INT 10
WIS 12
CHA 10 (8+2RAC)

Feats: ?
Weapon: ? (thinking of a Lance-like weapon to use when charging (possible?)

Thanks for the you see i'm really in trouble and i must do this in 2 days.

The Lance is the most possible thing to do. It is a large part of why halfing cavaliers are a 'thing'. Lances get double damage on a charge (I think it was later changed to just the first hit if you can get multiple hits in.....but hey, that is basically imitating a guaranteed crit by the standards of other weapons). It also does reach, which is always a nice fighting style.

As a small character, you can have a medium mount, which means that, unlike the humans' large horses, it can go anywhere the party can fit without any problems. So you can always stay on you pony/wolf/boar/whatever you pick as a mount option, and then just wait to charge with your lance. Oh, and remember- there are rules about NOT letting your animal companion advanced to a large size in animal companion rules (just check right above the allosaurus description)

Of course, having risky striker on top of that is just gravy. So for feats- Power attack, Combat Reflexes, Mounted Combat, Risky Striker, and Boon companion to get your mount to full level (yeah, you have to decide which to delay; Risky Striker might be delayable, since it only becomes great when 'big' is common, and your stats are good enough to do well without it until then). After that, it is just you putting the fear of halfings into the hearts of dragons everywhere.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
graystone wrote:
Or a puppet! (see punch and judy)

....that is the only one I am going to accept here (assuming it is the type that you put your hand in; I would hate to see you argue that a string puppet counts as a reach weapon)

Would this end up being the favored weapon of Banjo?

I assume 1d6 damage for a fire.

Plus horrific scars, since you are both burning your hands and covering them in melted metal.

K177Y C47 wrote:
This is what I find funny... Martials FINALLY get a nice thing! They can effectively "charge and full attack" and what happens? People are trying to complain to force it into a tiny niche (unarmed attacks)... there by taking away all the fun xD

If it was just 'move and attack', then this would be less of an argument, and I would argue it based off flavor and designer intent.

The problem here is the stuff about criticals. If any of your attacks threaten a critical, then the whole full attack threatens a critical, and it is resolved with your highest BAB.

The crit stuff is what drives this over the top, since it was balanced against the unarmed strike's terrible crit range. That part is what will bury this next to synthesists and leadership if it isn't reigned in to just unarmed strikes (maybe prevent critical stuff from stacking with it too)

graystone wrote:
Punch isn't a defined game term. In the english language it means a thrusting blow (think hole punch). So as written it applies to all weapons and you attack with whatever weapon you wish for that one attack. If they meant unarmed attack, they're going to have to scratch out punch and replace it with unarmed attack.

I am going to give the same evidence to argue this that I gave to you in another pummeling thread-

Attack-Core Rule Book wrote:

Unarmed Attacks

Striking for damage with punches, kicks, and head butts is much like attacking with a melee weapon, except for the following:

There is some argument about whether things like brassknuckles or a cestus count (I lean no, since you can't apply unarmed strike damage dice to them, but that is just me; doesn't necessarily change too much of the argument that is to come), but the fact remains that a punch is a type of unarmed strike. If I said 'I throw a punch' in a game, I mean 'I use an unarmed strike'.

Just because it isn't given its own weapon listing doesn't mean it isn't defined in game. And just because you don't like it doesn't mean that it isn't RAW.

Now for the funnier parts of my argument (this is me arguing from the already insane perspective of 'use anything', so of course it is flawed; still brings up good points), given that you need to deliver this via a punch, and that you need a free hand to do that specific kind of unarmed strike, I would argue that you can't make this with 2 handed weapons, 1 handed weapons being 2 handed, or with a second weapon in that hand while doing TWF (this bit is where the argument about brassknuckles comes in; you still can't do double kukris at least; I do at least some good in this world).

I would also argue that you need to wield a weapon in order use it for pummeling style, and that changing your stance during the middle of a full attack so you can make a different type of attack is generally not allowed, so just 'hold greatsword, take hand off greatsword, deliver punch' doesn't work. If you let go of the weapon before you perform the full round action, you are not considered to be wielding it.

Tels wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:
Why wouldn't you ever play a brawler?

I feel the Brawler steps on the Monks toes way too much. The Monk is one of my favorite classes, so when I did the playtest and saw the Brawler got, like everything that wasn't Ki fueled on the Monk, really annoyed the hell out of me.

Even worse, in the playtest at least, some of his abilities were superior to the Monks. Like the Brawler being given TWF in his Flurry instead of being similar to TWF. Or how the Brawler's DR bypass was superior to the Monks because he was capable of choosing the alignment bypass.

But, basically, he gets Monk Unarmed Dice, Monk AC bonus (delayed), Monk skills, Monk skill points, Monk DR bypass, Monk flurry, he's treated as a Monk for Monk access to feats etc.

I strongly argued for different mechanics for the Brawler so he had a lot more different abilities. I really wish the Brawler had more unique mechanics to himself instead of just ripping off the Monk so much.

There are items that change you alignment for the purposes of DR with monks. I think they are some kind of prayer wheels. One is covered in hymns, the other in heavy metal lyrics (I guess). One item makes you count as good, the other makes you count as evil. Just meditate with the appropriate wheel 1/day, and you are good (or evil) to go. And with the option to stay lawful, you cover everything except DR/chaotic (which is not exactly common). Not to mention the fact that pummeling style is meant to make all this moot (DR 20 applied over 9 hits is basically DR 2)

I also like this martial flexibility thing they added in after play test, which lets you basically just grab any combat feat you qualify for a minute (and you can switch which one you gain for free during that minute) for x times/day.

While people might think them a straight upgrade over monk....I kind of thought the same thing with sohei monks.....

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yes, right here

Just scroll to the bottom.

Oh, and apparently druid worhsippers of gorum can wear metal armor, although they lose everything other than wildshape.

Yeah, risky striker is a good reason to be a halfing.

Admittedly, you need to be facing large or bigger creatures for it to work, but it means random swordsmen are more troublesome than a dragon is to you....which seems hilarious.

For an even greater laugh, enlarge person targets fort saves, so you could have your party caster cast it on the enemy wizards and sorcerers to give you a major buff.....

w01fe01 wrote:
it is indeed allowed lemeres.

Ah, good. So spending 3 feats so you have enough uses to splurge on a fight can be good.

Some days you have to fight in darkness. Other days, you have to grab a bow and shoot down flying enemies. Heck, grab a gun and just go for touch AC when that problem comes up! You could get EWP and some ranged feats, and then switch to amateur gunslinger when the thing blows up on you.

Or grab a dip into MoMS monk and then combine any styles you choose!

You are only restricted by your skill points and stats, for the most part.

w01fe01 wrote:

thankyou lemeres, you have helped my over stressed brain understand lol.

until level 20, you can only have up to 3 "temporary" feats from flexibility at a time. tho doing so burns 3 "uses" of the ability. tho as someone mentioned, the fact that you can during those 1 min duration uses change them incredibly liberating. being able to go blind fighting one round, to tripping the next, to getting over difficult terrain...all on those same 3 uses.

until that was pointed out (as i had missed it repeatedly when reading it) i thought you would have to spend 3 more uses to change the feats in combat...not so. brings a lot more longevity to it.

Well, yeah, you might not have to spend uses to switch feats... but my thought was to grab an entire feat chain with this ability.

Is it possible to grab blind fight with 1 use, then grab improved blind fight with a 2nd use, and then greater blind fight with a 3rd use? (picked these since the only other prerequisite is X ranks in perception, which you generally have anyway) so I am unsure about specifics.

Or are there rules against using martial versatility granted feats to qualify for feats via martial versatility? I lack the text (and I am unsure in how many different threads I've mentioned this, since I TOO am tired), so I lack the specifics on such limits.

If it is allowed, then grabbing an entire (situational) chain when you need it seems appealing. It would make feat taxes into much less of an issue (and heck, you might even take some common feat taxes like mobility just so you can open up more possibilities)

And wraithstrike, just because they changed how something worked doesn't mean it wasn't originally a good idea. Just remember crane wing as it was in the good old days- before poor GM's complaining about MoMS tore off its wings. Crane wing was not that bad- just have someone flanking (add 1-2 weak things to the fight), using TWF, natural attacks, etc could have dealt with the problem at low levels. And that higher levels, where it was made for, mostly mitigated it with iteratives. But no- NERF NOW. And thus, the whiners won the day.

Tels wrote:
lemeres wrote:
Cao Phen wrote:
The Pummeling charge feat, with Horn of the Criosphinx, and Dragon Ferocity. Unarmed strike damage plus STR x2.5 for all attacks on the charge? If you work it right, you can get this psuedo-pounce at Level 8, maybe earlier (not certain the build, it is late and I am tired.)
Probably not. Remember, pummeling style is a style feat, so you can't use dragon style with it (unless you are a MoMS monk; either you are only using 3/4 BAB regular full attacks, or you only dipped to mix styles, and thus you delay when you can qualify for this feat)
MoMS 2/Brawler X :P

Can you grab pummeling charge with MoMS? I am quite honestly ignorant if it is labeled as applicable. If he can, then I suppose it is possible (grabbing dragon style feats normally). Although few GMs will appreciate pounce at level 2.

If he can't grab them with MoMS, then he has to wait since the prerequisites are monk 8, brawler 8, or BAB +12. So that would be level 10 for monk/brawler (can you multiclass monk and brawler? I seem to remember some restriction about that, but I am unsure if it is still in palce) or level 13 with monk 2/full BAB class 11.

w01fe01 wrote:

@marcus, ya i read the capstone, interesting stuff. and i agree while taking all feats as extra flexibility would be entertaining, definitly need to work out some base feats.

@lemeres, maybe im tired i keep reading your first sentence and its greek to me lol. i did just get out of work.

trade out 3 in? spend 3 feat slots on extra flexibility?

fill in what 3 feats?

god maybe im tired

Spend 3 feats on extra flexibility, and then use martial flexibility to pick any 3 feats you need.

With 9 extra usages (bringing you to a max 21 uses), it does not seem to hard to consistently use this ability.

You indicated that you can only have 3 uses going at once (don't own ACG, can't check). So spending more than 3 feats on this is a waste and means your build is short on feats. But with all the uses you get from 3 feats, it seems like it can work out well.

Cao Phen wrote:
The Pummeling charge feat, with Horn of the Criosphinx, and Dragon Ferocity. Unarmed strike damage plus STR x2.5 for all attacks on the charge? If you work it right, you can get this psuedo-pounce at Level 8, maybe earlier (not certain the build, it is late and I am tired.)

Probably not. Remember, pummeling style is a style feat, so you can't use dragon style with it (unless you are a MoMS monk; either you are only using 3/4 BAB regular full attacks, or you only dipped to mix styles, and thus you delay when you can qualify for this feat)

w01fe01 wrote:
Marcus Robert Hosler wrote:


Human brawler can get 30 extra uses (assuming you can take it multiple times)

Feats aren't all that great, but if you can get a custom list for each encounter that is really nice.

its funny but im not sure how effective that would actually be, as youd never have more then 3 feats "working" on your character.

That still seems like you could trade out three feats for an extra 9 uses, and then just use those uses to fill in the three feats (along with the uses from the class).

It is like how Critical versatlity is better than any single critical feat since it can stand in for any of them, and then leave in the option of changing when you can't make the elementals bleed or blind the eyeless werebat-morlocks.

Overall, sounds like a good idea to me.

The best counter response I can find to this is that, by RAW, you have to deliver the attack from pummeling style via a punch (which is defined as a type of unarmed strike). This part is inarguable, as it is written in the very first sentence in the description.

Now, while most people would accept that means this style is for unarmed strikes, I see this logic might not work with you.

Instead, I will argue this-because the attack must be delivered via a punch, you need one free hand in order to use it. Thus, you cannot use a 2 handed weapon, a 1 handed weapon in two hands, or use TWF (unless at least one of your weapons is an unarmed strike).

If I cannot stop madness, I will at least give my all to hamper its spread.

I will also say- I've done the math. A fighter with 2 TWF kukris at level 6 can crit with his ENTIRE FULL ATTACK ~48% of the time. This feat was not meant for anything other than unarmed strikes (which only gets 18% under similar circumstances). That is going to be my moral justifications in all this, and how I try to get everyone to understand why I take a hard stand. I love pummeling style and charge- they solve the problems of unarmed strikes (DR and need for TWF, which means only shines in full attacks). It can put the monk as a serious choice next to barbarians as DPR tanks. I do not want this to buried next to the synthesists and the leadership feat.

Jeff Merola kind of hit it on the head- you don't have to use them, so what does it hurt?

With the short sword, it is kind of a grandfathered in thing since just about everyone that mainly hits things gets it as a proficiency (bards, rogues, and monks get it, for example). This gets a bit iffy with the more castery types like cleric, alchemists, and druids, but the point is- brawlers are pure melee, so they get short swords.

I suspect that the hand axe is more related to the fact that it is the one proficiency monks get that you don't other than the javelin.

Admittedly, I kind of agree that battleaxes would have been more useful, since brawlers have a serious problem with slashing weapons (specifically because their proficiencies are built around mainly simple weapons, and those have a weird grandfathered balance thing that makes it so you have no simple slashing weapons that can be 2 handed). Having something you could 2 hand when facing DR/slashing would be nice. As is, you might as well just grab a knife.

Ahunting wrote:
Brawlers are solid, smart players will use them to amazing effect, getting the perfect feat to fit the situation. Base class wise you grab WF+PA+PS+CE and you face roll until you need to worry about saves. Then you get creative. But there so much flexibility. Just have decently balanced stat array, carry of copy of the combat feat list with you and your set. Need Fire resist? multi-into perfect style or one of the elemental fighting styles. Need to hit in the dark, grab blind fight. Can't melee? Grab throw anything, Point blank, and precise, and go to town with rock, branches, whatever is at handy. Need to win the jousting contest? No problem Mounted combat, ride by attack, and Spirited Charge. Can't get near the big dragon cause its got all the reach? Dodge, mobility, spring attack. Yeah those are all 3 feat combos but you can scale down easily.

Blind fight seems particularly good for someone focused on pummeling, since that '1 hit for your whole full attack' thing can work against you with concealment. But you don't always end up in darkness, so putting actual feats into blindfight could be questionable (at least when there are more routinely relevant stuff)

Marcus Robert Hosler wrote:
Hrothdane wrote:
Marcus Robert Hosler wrote:

Is there a feat for extra uses of martial flexibility?

Seems like there should be.

There most certainly is.

So is it like two extra uses or something?

Cause I could really see grabbing power attack and then just that feat over and over again.

EDIT: Please tell me that there is an FCB for extra uses too.

I don't have ACG, so I'll differ here-

w01fe01 wrote:
id be ok with flexibility if i could use it more honestly. yes there is a feat for it (3 more uses a day) but really? how come every shortcoming of a class has to be bandaided with a feat.

Bertious wrote:
Hmm this may be a little cheesy but a dawnflower dervish (bard)/Warpriest of Saenrae could get the crusaders flurry feat with a dervish danced scimitar for the equivalent of 2WF attacks.

Dawnflower Dervish bards are probably better off not even using scimitars and dervish dance. The doubled up bonuses on inspire courage are enough to justify a regular TWF build with them.

Not sure how well your suggested build works out, with the problems of multiclassing and all (and I don't have ACG, so no idea how much support your warpriest side is giving). I suppose it could work, but would be simpler to just do straight dawnflower.

1 to 50 of 3,007 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email 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.