Long gone are my Melf the Elf characters who had four 18 base stats and a 16 and a 15... The point buy system is designed to make you actually think about character development I think. It intentionally (most days) throws an ODD stat at you (like a 13) so you think about 4th level when you get your first stat point... do you put it to 14, or start working that 18 to a 20?
That said, while I am a little nostalgic for the old die rolls, it often unbalanced parties quickly. But sometimes that was the most fun part too... meh, I guess point buy is fine, though it feels pretty cookie cutteresque to me (so did having an entire party of 3 18's etc...). Luckily, there is enough content to not make everyone the same despite similar stat choices.
I am currently running/playing in a campaign with three rogues. None of which are theives per se. We have a ranger wannabe, a intimidator, and a skill monkey. All based on a different primary stat. Similar things can be done with most other classes (a fighter is perhaps the most versatile combat stylist, having the most feats).
So honestly, it comes down to this: in PFS/20 point buy systems you are getting a total of +7 stat modifiers. Distribute them for the most effective use of what they modify and what you want to do. Skill monkeys? INT and then CHA, then DEX, WIS, with STR being the least number of skills affected. Melee? STR or DEX with feats (I suggest DEX with feats for the AC bonus, but if in a party with a healer I often just go damage). Ranged? Dex and Int (and feats). Mage? Int/Wis as needed. 16,16 10x4 is not horrible way to start a mage character. Put the +2 wherever you want (or as race decides)
Without Feats I would go monk. Simply for the pure number of attacks. And because I feel like saying something nobody else has yet.
for one Ki point: +18/+18/+18/+13/+13/+8/+8/+3 - 8 attacks at full str bonus in a one round: 16d10 + 8x Str damage. No feats used (though monk abilities mimic feats).
Immune to a TON of stuff and SR 30 at level 20. What is not to like?
Bonnie Nuetral - As long as the PCs are winning, the cleric doesn't have to lift a finger. Even if one dies, and they killed three or four monsters, the only fair thing to do would be to raise everyone, not just the players. The player just hates dead things, that is why they are a cleric after all.
(this is named after a dear old friend of mine who DID DO THIS SORT OF THING constantly for all the years I knew her)
Yeh, I have been temped to calculate what the lyre/perform skill could do if pushed to the point of exhaustion. Say you wanted to completely remodel a dungeon some evil queen Ileosa is hiding in...
I recently used Knowledge (engineering) and Perform (string instrument) to use a Lyre of Building on several 12 hour marches to build an entire highway through Bloodsworn Vale. Due to the speed of travel, the quality was increased. Very nice roadway through the Vale now! Then used it a while later to set up the mining camps for the Adamantine mines we found. I am considering getting a few of these and trying to rebuild the causeway across the Inner Sea, but don't want Cheliax to rise in power again... And materials are still needed to be within the audible range of the instrument (GM ruling), so I would need materials to do that that are hard to find these days.
We dd up the size of the Fort in BSV, as well as change the walls to Stone, making it essentially a small Keep. And we have used the LoB twice to repair the Inn (the first time a Vampire (friend of the evil Wizard in the module) and our party's spellcaster blew it to kingdom come, the second time it was just a small hole by a fireball, courtesy of a Red Mantis Assassin/Mage).
12 hours of playing = 7200 man days of labor. Rougly 20 people working on something for 2 years. or 100 people working on something for 72 days. or 1000 for a week. Things can get built!
Another clever use by one of our party members: Intimidate on Lopo. He cooks for us now at the Inn. LOLZ!
Again, you don't need UMD if you know the command word on a command word activation device.... But otherwise, yep, even the casters can get spells before their level by spending gold. That is part of the discussion as to why casters aren't all that and a bag of chips too - anyone can copy their powers with a little coin. I am not saying they are not way way way powerful, they are. But anyone with coin and a loose GM can be as well.
One of the most destructive items in the game IMHO is the Lyre of Building... Imagine a CG character using it to subvert a city's ruler by entrenching the poorer district, walling it up and putting a moat around it so the LE overlord can't get to them... I don't know why I mention this, other than it is an example of magical force whooping manual labor's butt. I agree magic is very very powerful. (but then, almost anyone can use a Lyre of Building, see my point?)
50k is cheap for a level 17 wizard's entire 9th level spell list. I was pointing out that its the WBL of a 10th level character. For 17th level spells! So yeh, THAT is how it is cheap!
Also, I kinda messed up the formula anyway. The cost would end up being 10x that (additional modifier of /5/50 for these items), OR 1/240 days (defeats the purpose). Which would mean that the entire 24 spell list would have to wait until a 15th level character crafter it, and would otherwise only be available to a 18th level martial by WBL. So I would end up saying "pick a few spells you want (like 3)" and then you are back at a level 10 WBL price.
Command word activated only need know the command word. No UMD roll is needed unless you are activating blindly. I know of NO GMs that would allow players to have a wish every month (well, 24 days) for the rest of their lives... but the RAW are there to allow it pretty cheaply IMHO a 8th level character who only needs to roll 27 to craft a 9th level spell item is pretty cheap considering they would have: Master Craftsman (+2), 8 Ranks in Crafting (+8), the proper tools (+2 to +5), Class skill (+3), and stat modifier (+3 let's say). plus a trait or two if you want to add those = +21 (or more) to crafting. So they would only need to roll a 6 to make it, and it would only take 3 days to make each spell (or 1 1/2 days if you up the DC to 32 and require a 11+ roll). Adding in, of course, the material cost of the spells. (so Wish, for instance, would take 25,000 more GP, In any event, about 13-25 more days to craft)
"Benefit: As a standard action, you can make a single
Single attack is any attack type listed under attacks in the combat section. Normal damage for a trip is none, just knock them prone. Move on to the next foe if they are HIT (not damaged). In short, YES, absolutely.
A harder to explain one would be throwing a splash weapon and then hitting an adjacent foe... (it doesn't say "melee weapon attack") This is where we grey into the RAI versus RAW (rules as intended versus rules as written) realm.
Let's compare a lvl 17+ mage and someone who just decided to buy a device (and a very casual GM who allowed it) to simulate being a spell caster.
CL * SL * 1800 / 5/uses per day. Let's, for fun, say they want to cast an average of one 9th level the spell a day, and we are talking about the 24 9th level spells. So we put in a 1/24 days use limit on the device. That means the cost is:
And so we have any joe schmo at level 10 who can afford this, and at level 8 can afford to make it themselves. While the GM is sleeping of course. Contrast that to "buying" a martials' ability to deal damage and change the world?
(and also note that while the delay rate on each individual spell is 24 days, all the spells could be cast in the same day, perhaps making it more powerful than any known spellcaster on a single day. And yes, I do realize that any spellcaster could buy/make one of these too! and I also realize that when I say "one" of these, I mean a series of items which allow the spells to be cast, as one item skipping 24 spells would be a +120 mod on the craft DR)
start in the middle where I say "spell casters are way way way powerful"... then redact your indignant tone and retry?
Well, the real problem is you have to see them first. A 10+ level rogue should be taking 10 continuously on stealth. IMHO. Can't cast on a person you can't see. AOE spells are all that are left.
Ps. I did mention that mages are way way way versatile and powerful, right? I was just pointing out that in some cases they become useless (like when you are in a PFS GOOD campaign and the "bad guys" have captives you fear harming with area of effect (AOE) spells).
UMD also allows Rogues the same versatility as mages, just at a higher gold cost. I can get something enchanted 1/day for CL*SL*360 gold. 7th level spells for 22k basically. Some night when I am bored I will do the math per level for gold cost versus being an actual spell caster. :)
Just doesn't seem that important of a rule. What is the benefit? The players do more than 50 to a monster with a +12 fort save (because if it has over 100 HP it usually has something like this, if it has between 50-100 and you do 50+ to it you are probably gonna kill it next round anyway). So they have a 15% chance of killing a monster with massive damage... or less if they have higher Fort saves, saving them a round. Whoopity doo. Or your monster kills a player (and again, if the monster is dishing out 50+ shots the players aren't lasting many more rounds anyway). No real benefit to it, IMHO.
All I know is that since they removed Critical Hit immunity from a host of monsters the rogue has become way more powerful. Oozes, Elementals and swarms are now the only challenge to flanking Rogues with HiPS.
A rogue with advanced evasion laughs at most area of effect spell casters, and ranged rogues with a very cheap pair of magical glasses snipe mobs from 200 feet for precision damage... I mean, honestly, spell casters are way way way powerful in that they can hit everything in an area with 10-20d6 at once (except the rogues who take half or none of that).
Recently at a PFS game, with the template character rogue my son tumbled and set up four or five flanking manuevers (lvl 7 rogue with a +20 acrobatics... wow!). All the "usual" PFS players kept telling him "don't try to tumble past, you will never manage it." The Sea Hag made him roll 4x. But the other option was to sit there and die instead. Once he got past her, the Knight did it's 5 step/full round attack and he did a full round flanking "sneak attack" (2x basically). I mean, honestly, it was impressive for a 7th level rogue IMHO.
Meanwhile, I played the spellcaster, who came in handy ONCE (well his magic anyway) in the entire adventure (when I DDoored folks past a wall of flame). If I had let loose with Fireball or anything else that would have ended the combat I would have either hit my friends or allies we were trying to rescue. So basically, made entirely useless simply due to bad positioning. The exact same complaint that people have against Rogues and other martials.
Yeh, I agree, its way easy right up until that Nightwing (huge monster with a 80 foot wingspan) is stuck in a 60' diameter star tower... with columns in it for support of the roof. Did we mention: familiarize yourself with the module before you run it? Hope so.
One finds players... and runs a game for them. And no. It is not fun. It is hard work. Or I should say, it is more work than showing up with a single piece of paper and playing. It is still fun to GM.
You can try local gaming shops, or other places geeks like us like to hang out. Most have a board to post on for attracting new players, or you can bring your own friends. PFS organized play sessions also look for GMs at conventions and will break you in softly/but that requires there to be a Con near you.
Kazaan: Your "Parsing A" thought is completely wrong. A FIST (singular) is not parsed that way later in the description. I would state that parsing B is completely right. A fist is NOT a claw attack, and it is ONE unarmed strike/specific area of the body which would be enhanced. If they meant it enhanced the whole body they would have put that in the desciption. They did not, but instead chose very specific SINGULAR areas of the body one can do a US with. I don't know why it doesn't appear clear to you.
Gobo Horde: I don't disagree with you on any particular point regarding the "argument" for invulnerability through no weapon break rules. I, again, was being facecious when making this argument. It was 4 am and I was being silly because the entire "your body is a single weapon" idea is so obviously wrong IMHO. Taken to another extreme it means one could NEVER be rendered helpless while conscious because they could always do 1d3 damage to their bindings. Just by breathing/using their chest as a weapon!
Maose, you're not contributing anything to the discussion at this point. You cannot use natural weapons with Spell Combat. In your home games you may feel free to rule however you wish, but in this forum, since ppl come here for legitimate answers to legitimate questions, I must ask you to move on.
I'm failing to see how what I have said is not a legitimate answer to the question, thus the whole "can't move on" part I guess. Nefreet, are you a Paizo dev? Just curious. Is anything quoted as being "RAW" by me incorrect? Is anything quoted as being RAW by others (such as "manufactured") actually in any books anywhere (it is not in the core rulebook)? I legitimately throw out page numbers and books and get this? Thanks for the honest discussion. I guess I will just move on because nobody actually wants one here.
Actually, Weapon Finesse states that natural weapons are considered light weapons for the purpose of the feat. You're reading too much into it.
...and if my normal melee attacks include using this feat then they are considered light weapons, right? Or are we now saying we cannot use two feats at the same time?
Yeh, I have a batter... er I mean better example:
We have 4 party members get attacked by 4 monsters.
So the surprise round stars with the highest init, which just happens to be the Mage. As a standard action, he casts a redied fast fireball.
Now, at this point, wouldn't EVERYONE know something is going down?
To put it another way; the fireball now attacks two mobs who go in the surprise round and two that don't.
I had a similar incident with a mob casting a ray attack in a surprise round, where it aimed at a unaware person, but was a 30' cone so it hit everyone... because the unaware person was easier to hit flat-footed.
dems the rules, surprise rounds are always a little harry, IMHO.
Diego Rossi wrote:
Yep. Starting right on page 136 where it says you can use light weapons in your offhand, and, oh, by the way, in case you are unsure, unarmed combat strikes are always light weapons (not sometimes, and only when in your main hand and holding something else).
I mean: You have a dagger in your main hand, you make an US with offhand. You swap, and make a US with your main hand, and dagger attack with your offhand. What changes between your right and left hands' ability to make US when you drop the dagger? Not a damn thing.
Hitting the person does not break their unarmed attack ability. I can do 99% of their HP and they can still use an unarmed attack on me. Tell me what weapon gets that ability other than this? In some (rage) instances I can do over 100% of the damage needed to destroy the weapon and it remains useful.... truly, Unarmed strike is a globally magic weapon! (not. I hope you realize that I was being facecious, of course you can break people's (even monk's) unarmed strikes. Just watch "Enter the Dragon", the classic fight between Bruce Lee and Chuck Norris solves this discussion - without RAW, because it involves Chuch Norris and Bruce Lee!)
regarding the lvl 20 fighter: BAB +20 = 20 + d20 = 40 sunder attempt, which, in theory, can probably break any weapon in the game. (esp when you add in sundering abilities, I didn't go into detail because I thought we could all figure out that I meant "a properly designed sundering fighter level 20 could... etc..")
As for breaking arms - why don't we do this more in combat in the game? Because ok.... you broke his hand/arm. He has another, and two feet. Why don't you break his "head butt" first and just kill him outright. That makes the most sense. I completely agree, these rules are NOT in the game for a reason (people would exploit them). But you do have to admit I came up with a pretty good defense with the whole "you have to try a sunder on me to hit me because I am a weapon, but you can't sunder unarmed strikes by RAW so I am immune to your attacks" defense! (if my whole body is a single weapon, as some claim, this makes perfect sense RAW)
note: I completely disagree with this "body is one weapon" approach (it is not RAW anyway), as I outlined above - namely that any PART of your body can be used as a weapon (FIST, singular), but that doesn't make the whole a single weapon (I throw a punch with all my FISTS, LEGS, ELBOWS, HEAD, in a single Unarmed Strike attack)
no. it's a secret. lol
I actually was just conceptualizing a ranged poisoner. Perhaps even a gunslinger (or just a gun user, ranged touch with poison bullets?). I was definately going for bleeding attack at 4th level, though. Obviously some fast stealth eventually and a dip into Shadowdancer for HiPS.
Su are not necessarily spells. Depends on GM a little here, most likely. Since technically nothing is stacking, I'd allow it to be used; reasoning being - the Su let's you take the form of a huge animal, it doesn't "grow you"; you are "essentially" just a "normal" huge animal, which can then be enhanced further.
Maouse, you can't sunder unarmed strikes as they are not an item carried or worn, likewise you cannot disarm an unarmed strike because it is not an item carried. (you can however if these unarmed strikes come from brass knuckles, etc, although brass knuckles, cestus, and gauntlet all say say they cannot be disarmed)
Right, because an Unarmed Strike being one's entire body obviously makes it completely immune to any weapon damage whatsoever. Nobody has EVER broken their arm, fist, leg, ribs, skull in a fight. EVER. (sarcasm)
I will admit, RAW, do not include rules for sundering limbs as weapons. But I hope and pray you see how silly this discussion is getting. Luckily, my Unarmed fighter will never have to worry about losing his weapon nor having it broken. Seems perfect!
Lvl 20 fighter - can Sunder any Artifact in the game, but can't harm a level 1 NPC farmer's hands or feet! WOOT! I should use that one next time I am trying to save a NPC - nope, in order to deal any HP damage, you have to try a sunder attack... oh, wait, you can't do that because the Unarmed strike, his entire body, is protected from sundering based on RAW! And unless you try to target his weapon (unarmed strike) you can't destroy it. IMMORTALITY HERE I COME!!! LOLZ!
To wit I would reply: does this mean that if I sunder weapon on someone's foot I destroy their weapon/entire body?
Or perhaps to put it another way: Any part of one's entire body can be used to make an unarmed strike, but one's entire body is not used to make a single unarmed strike. You don't throw your entire body at the enemy, hoping for a 20! You throw a fist their way. Or a foot. Or an elbow, head smash, etc... You don't do every move in the world hoping some stray part of your entire body hits them.
If you wish to make an offhand attack, you take a -4, -8 penalty for the first fist and the second fist, repsectively. It is not hard to imagine, comprehend, visualize, or even find on page 136.
Normal(as in, without the TWF feat): If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon. When fighting in this way you suffer a –6 penalty with your regular attack or attacks with your primary hand and a –10 penalty to the attack with your off hand. If your offhand weapon is light, the penalties are reduced by 2 each. An unarmed strike is always considered light.
untrained fighters may also provoke AoO.
..again, unless you have the Weapon Finesse Feat which then treats them as LIGHT MELEE WEAPONS under it's SPECIAL note. (and not just for attacks, whatever... there is no limit placed on it... just that they are treated as LIGHT weapons now).
(ps. sorry, got this thread and the magic fang one mixed up a little)
Diego Rossi wrote:
As you aren't holding a unarmed strike or a natural attack, we have a key ability that don't work with them and speak about having a weapon in your hand and not your hand being the weapon.
And it says "holding" not "wielding." And I have NO PROBLEM with that NOT working with a monk's manufacturered (or not, doesn't really matter one wit at all) unarmed strikes. Though that might be interpreted as a semantic argument.
He can hold it, enchant it, and perhaps give it to another person to wield?
Completely not RAW.
p. 136 Defensive fighting:
Implies that NORMALLY you can WIELD Nat Weapons and Unarmed Strikes - this feat specifically excludes them, which is "not normally the case with wielding."
And again, we are talking about a MONK, right?
Though the word Manufactured only appears 5 or 6 times in the RAW Core RuleBook and essentially means NOTHING. RAW. Unless you'd like to quote me your source for what you say.
I agree in part. NORMALLY you cannot use natural weapons during spell combat. If you have the weapon finesse feat, you can.
That is why it says "SPECIAL". The term "wield" simply means "use", it does not mean hold onto.
(I thought someone already corrected us all on the fact that the spell combat does not say "manufactered" anywhere)
I am curious, can a Shadowdancer / ranger / et al use a Lyre of Building while Hiding in Plain sight? The reason this comes up is because a character I am running for has one, and in theory I don't see why this would not simply be a negative to his roll to hide (like hiding behind a crate and playing it). It would be something like a -20 normally, basically a still invisible person would be hard to locate, but eventually anyone could find where the music came from (take 20, cancelling out the other 20 points of invisible).
It is not directly attacking anyone, so it doesn't automatically end Hide/Stealth.
All your senses don't count with HIPS (you still are hidden, even when directly viewed) so in theory it wouldn't cancel it. So being directly heard wouldn't cancel it either (in theory, though the ability is not called "hide in plain earshot").
Two Weapon Rend would require TWO weapons, as it states... which CAN BE a right and left hand (grab the weapon and bend it)... or if a monk, a foot and a hand (grab it and kick it)... or any other sort of thing that makes perfect sense RAW as well as visually/RAI. TWW need to do full attack with US to get the bonus. Absolutely.
I mean, seriously... the argument that a monk's hands are lethal weapons, but HEY HEY HEY NOW!!! ONLY ONE AT A TIME!!!! is beyond silly!
The idea that he can PAIR absolutely ANY OTHER weapons in the game, but hey hey hey now!!! Not his FISTS!!! is likewise beyond silly! (especially when this includes cesti and gauntlets!)
What about the Two-Weapon Warrior? Can all of his abilities be used with one weapon, which is both one, and multiple weapons?
"make one attack with both his primary and secondary weapons" again, I don't see the confusion... The versatile weapon thing - again, it is ONE weapon, and I don't see the confusion here either.
Guess I am waiting for RAW eratta instead of just wondering why it all doesn't make any sense when it is already pretty clear.
You can attack with an offhand LIGHT weapon, so since Unarmed Strikes count as a light weapon, there you go... -4, -8. No big whoop. p 136.
The spell affects ONE natural weapon or unarmed strike (note, most scholars would read this as "One natural weapon or ONE unarmed strike). Since normal creatures cannot make multiple attacks with ONE FIST (as described in the spell), and must use the LIGHT WEAPON (their OTHER fist) in the other hand, it does NOT affect BOTH. Since a MONK can strike several times with the SAME unarmed strike (fist, foot, etc...) they need only enhance ONE to get the benefit for every attack. Normal Non-monks don't see this advantage.
I don't see why that is so hard to follow/why everyone wants to claim that a RIGHT FIST is the same as a LEFT FIST, when clearly they all have a right and left hand and can tell the two apart. (monsters with right and left claw attacks have no problem understanding that this spell only affects one claw... and they are only monsters!)
As I pointed out: TWF does not give you an additional attack. It modifies the attack made with an offhand light weapon. Page 136 clearly states that ANYONE can fight with a weapon in their offhand and suffer penalties for it WITHOUT the feat. And that YES they get an additional attack per round with this offhand weapon, even WITHOUT the feat. RAW.
Where in "Benefit: Your penalties on attack rolls for fighting with two weapons are reduced. The penalty for your primary hand lessens by 2 and the one for your off hand lessens by 6. See Two-Weapon Fighting in Chapter 8." does it mention "you get an extra attack because of this feat"??????????
Without the feat you get -6, -10 for using two MEDIUM weapons. 2 Attacks per round. OR you can use a LIGHT weapon offhanded and get -4, -8. OR you can get the FEAT and get to -4. -4 with two MEDIUM weapons, or -2,-2 with an offhand LIGHT weapon. RAW.
Two weapon fighting merely gives an additional attack, the feat reduces the penalty, imp grants an additional attack, and greater another additional. But again whatever house rules you play with, they are just that house rules.
How can you say there are no rules for it?p. 182
"Unarmed strikes count as light weapons for purposes of two-weapon attack penalties and so on."
There certainly ARE rules for it. It's just TWF with or without the skill, with LIGHT WEAPONS (two unarmed strikes, each being ONE light weapon).
p 136 tells you exactly what penalty to apply if you DON'T have TWF and try to attack with an offhand LIGHT WEAPON (of any sort)
"If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon. When fighting in this way you suffer a –6 penalty with your regular attack or attacks with your primary hand and a –10 penalty to the attack with your off hand. If your offhand weapon is light, the penalties are reduced by 2 each. An unarmed strike is always considered light." (ergo, an UNARMED STRIKE with the OFFHAND, gets you to -4, -8... so your main unarmed strike is -4, your offhand unarmed strike is -8, without the skill. RAW, and yes, they are actually WRITTEN)
Maouse check the FAQ in the OP
"This means there is no game mechanical reason to require magic fang and similar spells to specify one body part for an enhanced unarmed strike. Therefore, a creature's unarmed strike is its entire body, and a magic fang (or similar spell) cast on a creature's unarmed strike affects all unarmed strikes the creature makes. "
The "Therefore" part is completely wrong. "A CREATURE'S" is NOT the same as "A MONK'S". When it says "A CREATURE can attack with fist, elbows, knees, and feet." (as opposed to "or feet") then it will mean the same thing. Or is the contention that every creature has Monk abilities? Every creature can attack with its hands full? Is that your contention?
"A CREATURE" = anyone who is not a monk must specify ONE location to enhance. A MONK must ALSO specify ONE location to enhance. HOWEVER, said MONK can attack UMPTEEN TIMES with that same location. A CREATURE cannot.
Nope, it does NOT enhance the entire creature as far as unarmed strike goes. It even points out that it is a single FIST (not plural) as an example. So I don't know why they think it applies to "both fists, head butts, and feet" when it clearly states a singular term in both the benefit and later description.
As for the whole "unable to weild two hands" - Um. If you have them... and they are light weapons... you can weild them. You take a negative, just like normal. It is absurd to say "you can't hit with both fists, but if you put a dagger in your offhand you can hit twice." I mean, really, it is not RAW nor RAI. Of course you can take the negatives for unarmed strikes (and note, that is PLURAL). If someone wants to try to punch, punch, kick, kick, head butt someone else in combat, as a GM, I see no problem with this. Take your negatives and roll... the spaz combat style might even work fairly often (rolling 20s on 5 dice?). But then I would make them PAY on 1's.
(ps. if you attack without skills multiple times and they have combat reflexes - you are SCAAAEEEROOOOD! AoO for each attack... have fun with that spaz attack style)
I think the confusion was this: You START OUT with one unarmed attack. You can take TWF to get a second, offhand weapon attack. This light weapon can be anything, including UNARMED STRIKES (which are light weapons). So now you have the ability to do this.
So PRIOR to getting TWF, can you make TWO attacks, with the appropriate negatives for NOT having the skill - As a GM I would say ABSOLUTELY!
As for the spell - I would say that it applies to ONE WEAPON (right or left hand) just like it says in the description. It is pretty clear to me that someone wants to abuse the rules and say "it suddenly enhances every part of my body." which it clearly does not say. It does say ONE, not ALL.
How accute is the tremor sense? Does it detect heart beats? Because that is what mine does. It also sends out pulse waves and reflects them just like ground sonar, working double duty to map the area as well as tell instantly where any living thing (touching a surface) exists within said area.
I also have it sense up walls and onto ceilings if it has the range...
Kazaan, I loved your earlier arguments, but you cannot use natural weapons with Spell Combat. Sorry.
OK. You are weilding (using) a light weapon in your offhand? Yes, Unarmed. Questionable with and Nat Wpns; if you have another feat they may be. If they are light weapons, and if that is what the other hand is using to attack, then there is no other restriction, is there? It doesn't say "all light weapons except natural attacks and unarmed strikes" does it?
page 141 under light weapons:
I will grant that the classification of a natural attack is seperated from being a light weapon. But with the feat that treats them as such, they fall into "usable" by spell combat if they have the weapon finesse feat.
ps. page 182
Spell Combat doesn't call out requiring a manufactured weapon. Both Unarmed Strikes and Natural Attacks are light weapons.
Correct. Ergo, treat is as if it doesn't say what it doesn't say... logical. If there is no restriction (as the re-write would put in) then there is no restriction.
while wielding a manufactured light or one-handed melee weapon - seems pretty clear to me that this means it does not apply to natural and unarmed strikes. They get their full attacks with that weapon, and if hasted, get one more attack with IT (not with some third arm weapon or some such thing...).
77,000 gp is the crafting price for a 3 stat +6 item. So two of them grant +3 to all skills. That is EVEN with the IOUN stones skill bonus, with the exceptions we both pointed out: the IOUN stone method costs 108,000, the stat method costs 154,000. The stat method gives you three skills at rank CL.
As for the "only three slot" being expensive... yeh, well, I would craft a three slot WITHOUT any abilities added. Cause first I don't like any it has, and second, it would be way cheaper to make one without any abilities (since stones are going to be in it anyway).
As for the other bonuses you get with stats. I'd concede that getting +3 AC, +3 to hit/damage, +3 saves, +3 INIT, +3 CMB, +6 CMD is a nice set of bonuses to go along with whatever class bonuses it might raise.
But one has to keep in mind that getting three extra Feats is also nice. Say you are a rogue and want options, or are missing the end of an entire combat tree (1 feat)? There ya go!
Just for kicks, I decided to see what "my" level 5 wizard, level 10 Harrower could do with the delicate ability called Reading the Signs(Ex). This ability, in case you don't know, allows a Harrower to pick two cards, ignore one, and shuffle it back into the Deck of Many Things.
Now, given that the DoMT is basically half good and half bad, seems like it would be right up someone's alley to pick two each time. Well, the DoMT has a 1 hour time limit on drawing the cards. And the Harrower has a 1d4 round cooldown. I skipped these rolls and basically said the Harrower would draw 120 cards, presuming the average of 60 minutes (10 rounds per minute) was well above 4 (it is 6). So plenty of time for cooldowns and fighting if any should occur.
The first 17 draws went as expected, getting some wishes in close proximity to each other would allow two stats to get +5s. Unavoidably (because I had yet to pull the ace of hearts/The Fates more than once), I lost all wealth and property about every 20 draws the first fourty. But things started turning up. I made another stat +5 with wishes, and had a few dilemnas stored for later. I also just drew a major magic weapon. Around draw fifty I was out of Fates again and ended up drawing the Skull. Now, if I survive that encounter (major magic weapon in hand)... well, let's just say I made it for sake of argument.
This is where things started turning around. Between the Dread Wraith and the next ten rolls I had a good store of three Fates by draw 62. From here on in, it was pretty much all gravy. Though I only ended with a single The Fates, I was up to seven at one point!
So what can I expect from this hour of draws?
I am suffering -2 to all my saving throws, had to fight a dread wraith, 2 of my friends are now enemies (unless a wish could correct that any of that... like +5 to all saves to balance it at +3 total). There were 10 extra wishes that did not go for stats (unless the aforementioned stacking worked, then there would be 30 free)
All in all, 120 draws didn't turn out bad at all! And that is why you don't let a Harrow Master anywhere NEAR a Deck of Many Things!