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

umbralatro's page

48 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS


Unless you have something that's speeding up your casting time handy, you may want a trait that gives a bonus to concentration checks since those summon spells have nasty casting times. So, I'd recommend Focused Mind, but only if your DM is the kind to mess with your spellcasting actively.


Hector Gwath wrote:

Use a "barrier" of rough terrain between the party and your NPC antagonists. This slows down the PC's, makes them think more about tactical movement. (after they kill enough, i consider the slain foes on the floor rough terrain)

Use solid barrier, or "barriers" that require skill checks/spells to pass. (chasm, river, walls, canyons, etc.)

These are great tips. Difficult terrain can be your friend. Stealth can as well.

Using these things above, if you know the party is going to run into a group who can plan for them a bit (advanced knowledge the party is coming or saw them from a long way off), you can set a line with fallen logs, pits, etc and have ranged attackers behind it. You can then attempt to hide melee attackers a good distance in front of them somewhere (treelines, behind rubble/ruins, in pits by the side of the road/path). When they try to close with the ranged and deal with the difficult terrain, have the hidden melee people pop out from behind in a pincer attack.

If the party notices the ambushing melee people first, then they still have a mess with dealing with them and protected ranged attackers firing in. Even if the ranged don't hit a ton, you can scare PCs good with it.

A nice recommendation I heard a long time ago is go walking through a park or playground. Think of all the ways something could surprise you there. Then you can set things like that up in your game.


cartmanbeck wrote:

Hellknight Signifer Requirements

To qualify to become a Hellknight signifer, a character must fulfill all of the following criteria.
Alignment: Any lawful.
Armor Proficiency: Proficient with medium armor.
Feats: Arcane Armor Training or Warrior Priest.
Skills: Intimidate 2 ranks, Knowledge (planes) 5 ranks, Spellcraft 5 ranks.
Spells: Able to cast 3rd-level spells.
Special: The character must slay a devil with Hit Dice greater than his own. This victory must be witnessed by a Hellknight.

Okay, total cake, except for the last part obviously. And having to take Warrior Priest, but I can live with that.

I'll have to ask the DM if that last bit is even remotely possible by about 8th. Thanks!

*edit for spelling. Apparently my fingers want nothing to do with typing properly this morning.


So, if you might be so kind...

I'm going to be playing an Oracle in an upcoming game and I could probably just prestige out since the upper level revelations are not going to be doing it for this character.

Is the Hellknight Dignifier hard to qualify for? That might be appropriate for this character if things pan out how I foresee them going.


When I played my Summoner (for all of about 3 or 4 sessions I believe before the game died), this is how it went. (For Carrion Crown, so I went a little dark)

The summoner herself was a wife and mother. Her husband had taken a short job to guide some people through a mountain cave system, no more than a few days time (travel to caves, through them and then back through and home). After being gone a few days more than expected, she goes to find him and instructs her son to stay home (he's 10 and should be able to handle this). But without her knowledge, he sneaks after her to follow out of concern for his dad.

She gets to the caves and goes in and finds her husband dead about halfway through. The group is missing but their stuff is scattered around. She collects his body and is heading out when she hears a scream. She runs forward and sees what appears to be her son's body (unknown if he's dead) being dragged into the darkness. She cracks mentally and starts staring blankly into the darkness below.

Then something arrives, she has no idea what it is, but it asks if it can join her. She turns and sees something that looks enough like her son (to her shattered psyche anyway) and accepts gratefully. She cares for it like she would her son and moves to a nearby town to pick up a new trade so they can survive.

Her son didn't speak much because he has a child-like voice but completely gravelly and distorted. It's obvious that he's unliked by the normal people in town, but he did generally care for people. When the party got him to talk, he admitted to them that he was not actually her son (painfully obvious from the huge black claws descending from the end of his clothing) and explained what happened. He also pleaded with them to not mention to her what had really happened, since he had tried once and she almost completely lost it.

So, I tried to make them separate, yet definitely part of the same concept and story. But since it's difficult to give equal time to two characters, I set it up so that he had a good reason not to talk often, but meaningfully so when he did.


Nicos wrote:
GeneticDrift wrote:
It's not like fighters miss against AC, after level 6.
The gunslinge can take penalties from rapid shot/ TWF / deadly aim and still hit with all his attacks, that is a big diference.

Another fun thing to do against gunslingers and alchemists at least is wind wall. A third level spell gives them issues if used properly. So human enemies packing third level spells have another added bonus. And I find it completely conceivable that casters who have suck touch ACs would want to be packing a wind wall or protection from arrows if not other things.


I'd definitely either be human or half-elf, most likely human. Nothing extraordinary there, certainly not dwarven or full elven as I just don't see that.

But class-wise, I'd probably be a Ranger, especially since I've been called that recently, although in a hilarious way. But I do enjoy and have had minor training with fighting in a two weapon style and tend to pick up on natural clues pretty well.

For what I'd want to be, I'd have to go half-elf Druid. I love dealing with animals and nature in general and if I could spend all my time hanging around in weird forests and caves, exploring and dealing with all the natural-ness of those places, I would. Plus, my natural affinity for dealing with animals would seem more appropriate that way.


Easily my new favorite badger. Badger sunglasses are an auto-win.


Majuba wrote:

Player A: Stealth modifier +10, Die roll= 15

Player B: Stealth modifier +5. Die roll= 5

So both players take the highest roll (15) and each add all modifiers (+10 and +5) for a result of 25 and 20 for A & B respectively.

I agree. I think it reads basically like this:

Stealth Synergy (Teamwork)
Working closely with an ally, you are able to move like twin shadows.

Benefit: While you can see one or more allies who also have this feat, whenever you and your allies make a Stealth check, each participant uses the highest roll of any participant. They would still use their personal stealth modifier.


Bane Wraith wrote:
...But, Just for Clarification... by your definition, it Would work for Epic Tales?

The way I'm reading it, yes, it would count for Epic Tales as much as the Bardic Performance normally would. So technically you could bestow the benefits of your Archaeologist's Luck to someone else via the written word using Epic Tales, just as much as you could Inspire Courage through it.

This would be one of those interesting cases, you are definitely right there.

And since the Bardic Performance clause in Archaeologist is a do not gain Bardic Performance and not a cannot gain it, Chronicler should be able to give you Bardic Performance as well. So you'd have a bunch of rounds that you could spend on Bardic Performance or on Archaeologist's Luck as you see fit would be my interpretation.


Viktyr Korimir wrote:
But if it doesn't count, then you don't qualify to take Extra Performance in the first place.

It would count in this case, because it's a feat that affects bardic performance, which the clause specifically includes.

However, I don't think it qualifies as a prerequisite for a prestige class. That states that you need Bardic Performance and Archaeologist states

d20pfsrd.com wrote:

Bardic Performance:

Archaeologists do not gain the bardic performance ability or any of its performance types.

So the clause in Archaeologist's Luck allows you to qualify for the things that directly modify bardic performance, but it doesn't substitute when you need bardic performance in and of itself.

So if a feat, ability, effect changes the way bardic performance works, Archaeologist's Luck qualifies. But if you need bardic performance all by itself (like as a pre-req for a prestige class), then it won't do.

Edit: sorry, my first post should have been more specific in meaning that it didn't qualify as a pre-req for prestige classes.


Viktyr Korimir wrote:
Quote:
Archaeologist’s luck is treated as bardic performance for the purposes of feats, abilities, effects, and the like that affect bardic performance.
Does that also mean that it counts as bardic performance for the purposes of Feats and Prestige Classes that have Bardic Music as a prerequisite?

I don't believe so. Since it specifically states that it only counts for those things when they affect bardic performance, it would be limited to just those instances. Something like Extra Performance (which adds 6 rounds of total use to bardic performance) could be taken to increase the number of rounds you can use Archaeologist's Luck.

Now it does open some interesting feats up besides that, but I don't think it counts as prereqs for PCs and such.


Stephen Radney-MacFarland wrote:

1) The problem with creating the distraction. You will probably see a limit to the actions you can take when you make a distraction to make sure it doesn't compete with the feint and the Sleight of Hand rules.

I'm not sure if anyone has suggested it before, if they have I throw my agreement in with them, but perhaps this could help with this one.

Bluff to create distraction.
You now must spend a move action to actually move (which does allow Stealth to be started).
Potentially, attack once with Sneak.

However, they have to make two checks now as supposed to Improved Feint's one. Additionally, if they have to take a move action and actually move (you could even put a distance here, like 10 feet), they possibly open up having to face attacks of opportunity while moving.

That way, Improved Feint still means you spend a move, win one check, get the Sneak Attack. Stealthing means winning two checks, moving, and possibly facing AoOs in order to get Sneak Attack. Obviously better to take Improved Feint, but still allows the possibility of cyclical distract sneaking for one Sneak Attack per round.


brock wrote:

Fat Tire was one of the others that I tried!

Love to hear more about the Festival. Interesting American beers are starting to appear on the market here in the UK, and I like to check here for reviews.

Yeah, the GABF is the showcase of American beers and I try to go every year now. This time I'll be attending on Thursday (first session) and Saturday morning (judging session), so hopefully everything will be available.

They basically just separate an entire convention hall into "districts" based on geography and you roam around and drink what sounds interesting.

So, if anyone has any specific requests I can certainly try and get around to certain regions to experiment. Categories of beer (i.e stouts, lagers, IPAs, etc.) are harder to track down individually, but if you want a certain regions fares, I can easily do that.


Aberzombie wrote:
brock wrote:
Not a favourite but an honourable mention. I'm drinking a bottle of 'Blue Moon', which is billed as a 'North American Craft Beer'. It's bloody good. I wasn't suprised when I flipped the bottle round though and saw it was from Colorado. I've had nice microbrewery beer from there on a trip once before.
Blue Moon is a very not bad beer.

Being in Colorado, Blue Moon is the cheap equivalent of drinking a good beer (i.e. not Coors, Bud, Michelob) which are on tap everywhere. If you want something that's kinda light and cheap, but actually tastes decent, Blue Moon/Fat Tire it is.

Having said that, I still quite enjoy Guinness despite having about a billion microbreweries around me. New Belgium is a great company, especially since I love belgian-style anything. Their seasonal Somersault is pretty good. As is Great Divide's Oak Aged Yeti. For out of town, Deschutes' Black Butte Porter is excellent.

Likewise, there are some brew pubs around that have so much on tap. I had this on Friday and it was great.

At the end of the month I'll be going to the Great American Beer Festival. I'll have much more to share then. In the mean time, I'll keep trying to remember the good beers I've had lately.

*edit* Since apparently my brain is ahead of me by a couple days, that would be the end of September for the Beer Fest.


ProfPotts wrote:
I wouldn't agree that an eidolon is required for a Summoner - in fact, a lot of the time, they kick more booty without the eidolon around (using their hyped-up Summon Monster SLAs).

No question that the Summoner doesn't need the eidolon, however, to remove it as a class feature altogether would seem very non-Summoner to me. It'd be more of a crazy modded Wizard (conjurer) build spamming Summon Monster everywhere than a Summoner build. I feel kinda the same about the Barbarian without Rage, although that one is a little more flexible in my mind, but without it, it's kind of like a Fighter archetype instead of a Barbarian one.

Now, that's not to say that either of those wouldn't be awesome or kick some monsters around, but I think the archetype needs to still feel like it wouldn't be more of a different classes gig.


Personally, I don't find many examples of true sacred cows among the classes. Without having actually tried to build them, I can picture a Rogue without Sneak Attack that still feels like a Rogue to me. The Barbarian without Rage at all I think is one of the few that feels wrong, but I remain open to it working and still feeling like a Barbarian, it'd just be tough.

The closest they get I think are
Rage - Barbarian
Hexes - Witch
Eidolon - Summoner

And that would have to be stock elimination of the feature, mods would still seem fine.


Like many above said, there's lots of ways to save someone without fending off some huge monster.

Especially in Ustalav, there's all kinds of environmental trip-ups that a no-classed character can do. He steps wrong into a bog or swamp and you throw him a rope and pull him to safety, maybe even with another person's help. He gets accidentally caught behind some rocks and couldn't push his way out but two or three of you moved enough rocks to free him and prevent a cave-in. You notice someone about to shoot him with an arrow from behind and just yell to get down so he can drop and subsequently he deals with the threat. All are reasons that he can consider you to have saved his life without you having to have been level 5 to accomplish.

It's a backstory, come up with something. And if they couldn't get that far, I'd suggest they read a lot more to enhance their ability to get a story of their character going in their head before they even start making the stats part of the character.


Michael Dean wrote:
Steak-N-Shake? They're good and all, but you've got to check out Five Guys next time you're in Indy. Best burgers and fries around. And yes, I am including In-N-Out in that comparison.

I'm undecided on if the burgers are the best, but they certainly are on the fries. Mmm...starchy goodness.


Darkholme wrote:
umbralatro wrote:
Now, having said that, I still think UM was a better splatbook than most of the 3.5 books, with some exceptions obviously.
Better than Complete Warrior, certainly. Complete mage was pretty damn good though, as were most of the FR books (which fill most of my 3.5 shelf).

Agreed. Complete Mage was one of the ones I used almost all the time. But the rest of the Complete books didn't really keep up all that well. And truthfully, I didn't have that many FR books, so I can't speak to those, but they did seem fairly good from the ones I did see/use.

Darkholme wrote:
I think 70% to 90% is still on the low side. But my experience is that its lower than that.

I agree somewhat. I think that honestly if they hit 80-100%, I'd be overjoyed as that would be better balance than I've seen in most other systems. And I have not had enough time to really go through all these new options to "test" how useful they really are, but UC so far looks awesome for monks and between good and eh for most other classes. Which is pretty good I think, but UM needed more for sure. And I'm with you in hoping the Advanced Race guide gives a good monster/pc conversion.


Jiggy wrote:
haven't had a chance to try it out yet, but Second Chance seems like it would be great

I'll be taking it too pretty soon here, and likewise I think it looks pretty good.

wraithstrike wrote:
An old standby-->Improved Initiative

+1

Depending on the style of character, I love Stand Still (obviously better with other things on top of it though)


Ultrace wrote:
umbralatro wrote:
Otherwise, my vote would be for Extra Cantrips/Orisons. Totally worthless next to Expanded Arcana.
I'm not sure I follow. Maybe I'm missing something, but doesn't Expanded Arcana do exactly the same thing as Extra Cantrips/Orisons when you specify Level 0 spells? Expanded Arcana allows you to add 2 spells of any level lower than your highest castable level, Extra Cantrips/Orisons adds 2 cantrips or orisons... It looks to me like they function the same in this case and are interchangeable. How is Extra Cantrips/Orisons useless?

Useless as in redundant. If I can use Expanded Arcana to get a 1st level spell or two cantrips/orisons already, why would there need to be a feat that just gives you two cantrips/orisons?...

I just noted the difference, which is that Expanded Arcana can only be taken by someone with a limited spells known, whereas Extra Cantrips/Orisons can be taken by any spellcaster. But I still think it should do more than just the two to separate itself from Expanded Arcana more.


Merkatz wrote:

I hope you took the Additional Traits feat first. It gives you two traits.

-Reactionary for a +2 to initiative
-Desperate focus for a +2 to ALL concentration checks.

Vastly superior if you are looking for a half and half feat.

Now if you already have Reactionary AND Improved Init... I think you are a little bit crazy just going for the 1 more...

No, had I been having the smarts that day, I would have realized I could do that instead. I completely forgot that option. I revoke my defense.


Kabump wrote:
What?!? There aren't any Steak 'n' Shakes out West?

Sadly, no. They don't even extend into the mountain states really. At least as of Colorado, there are no Steak n' Shakes and we are tremendously sad for it.

But I totally agree. I love the NW rain over the midwest hot any day. And glad you enjoyed the spectacle known as Gen Con.


Just noticed this. Playing an Oracle, this will come in super-handy when picking spells.

Thank you very much!


Souphin wrote:
Warrior Priest = +1 to init is cool but the other is too situational

See, one of my characters actually has this and the +2 to concentration has yet to come up, but I'm loving that +1 to initiative. I haven't regretted taking it yet and since that character is also a fighter, I very well might need that concentration bump sooner rather than later.

I think of it as halfway between Improved Initiative and Combat Casting. And i'll take that on some characters.

Now, Run is also a tremendously suck PC feat. Animals and such, fantastic though, so it's got some use at least.


Back in the day (like 2E), I always carried cooking supplies around with me because of their general usefulness in other ways. As mentioned, frying pan makes for an excellent improv weapon, pepper to induce sneeze attacks, flour for finding invisible things, etc.

But now with this knowledge, one of my future characters will absolutely have to take this path. It's not a ton of money, but I will never be the broke one.

And who doesn't want delicious, infinite bacon!


Darkholme wrote:

Party build:
Here was the basic party:

Social character. (I believe he was a Cha focused Rogue of some sort) - was very good at the social stuff, and underwhelming in combat.
Blaster Mage. I gave him a 'gun' that fired magic bullets, and he could fire it as a standard action. the magic bullets were essentially scrolls of combat spells, with the same range and cost as such. I let him make them priced as potions as well, and the potion priced ones anyone could use if they had one of his patented guns. All the same limits and costs as potions usually have.
I dont remember what type of healer they had. I just remember they had a full progression caster with access to cure spells. May have been a druid with a domain, may have been a cleric. I know it wasn't a witch or an oracle. But they were support/healing focused.
DPR focused rogue. Surprisingly effective for the player's first pf character. The only skills I remember him using are stealth, disable device, and bluff.
Aand the 'tank': a fighter/barbarian. He had decent strength, but didn't take advantage of it. He didnt go with more than hide armor, used kukri and javelins (and harpoons: was a seafaring (mostly on coastal towns) campaign so I allowed stormwrack stuff). His feat selection wasn't much to write home about either.

Yeah, that party would really suffer from having the tank be ineffective. When you're the only real down and dirty melee class in the group, that would be trouble. At that point, I think they could have switched to trying to rely on the rogue to talk them out of a lot of combats, which at least in our group tends to get you XP for "defeating" an encounter, much like "defeating" a trap.

To the rest of the response, I do agree that filler should be useful, but I tend to find most of the options in the 70-90% range of usefulness. There are those that are terrible, certainly. But as for UC, for example, the feats section is probably half monk-ish type feats. And from a cursory reading, most seem at least pretty useful. So, overall I wouldn't say UC did too badly. UM so far has been my least favorite, but I think it's focus went a little too broad and that was it's real downturn for overall quality.

Now, having said that, I still think UM was a better splatbook than most of the 3.5 books, with some exceptions obviously.


WPharolin wrote:
Caustic Slur - This feat makes your favored enemy "angry" except that all it really does is grant them power attack or make their power attack stronger. It doesn't actually force them to attack you or anything like that. Its a feat that makes your enemies stronger...that's it.

Yeah, this one is quite weird. I have no idea on why you would do this other than you've figured out that another -1 or 2 would make the enemy miss ALL THE TIME. Otherwise, you've potentially opened a can of whoop a** on yourself. *shakes head*

Otherwise, my vote would be for Extra Cantrips/Orisons. Totally worthless next to Expanded Arcana.


sieylianna wrote:
There have been tanks in D&D for ages, but it doesn't have the exact meaning as in MMO. Heavily armored and high hit points, such as the "Dwarven Defender", personify the traditional D&D tank.

This is the picture I most often get when i'm trying to think of a pnp tank. Heavy on the defense, HP and armor, but with some hurt options as well to keep enemies from just avoiding you as often as possible.

I'm currently playing something tank-like. Shielded Fighter archetype. We have a barbarian in the party, so he out HPs me, but I'm spreading the AC bonuses around like crazy and it's actually quite useful. As long as I stay near other party members, it's AC bonus for at least one other person and mine is starting to get crazy with no magic stuff at all yet. It's actually been a good use of Combat Expertise as well (surprisingly).


This seems like one of those cases where it works thematically, but not mechanically. Or it's an oversight *shrug*

But thematically, Indiana Jones (for example) didn't really have Disable Device. He was good at finding traps, and following their rules to defeat them, but not actually stopping them from functioning. So, the Perception and Trapfinding style things make sense, but no Disable Device also makes sense.

Now, mechanically, it doesn't really work since the character probably should have DD. But as Krispy pointed out, a trait will get it for you, so easy fix at least.


Darkhome wrote:
So it's not just the guy who makes the useless character that can have their experience soured. It can be any/all of the players who don't enjoy the campaign as a result.

I'm interested to know what kind of party was at the table and how the one player brought the entire team's power level down. Likewise the build of "tank" that caused said problem.

However, on the more general topic, I have found that there are very few systems which have managed to strike a balance for one book, let alone the whole system, in producing new options that are both flavorful and have a good overall balance without some filler stuff. The amount of playtesting and revision needed would make splat books come out on a completely extended timeline and consume so many resources that the company would have trouble making them profitable in the least.

Too many new feats/options/classes would need to have full roleplay experience built in. You'd essentially have to drop fishbowling to make it all be okay. And Paizo has done a nice job of at least open the playtesting of classes up so that they get playtested, in essence, for free. But to do such with entire books at a time? That would be so incredibly problematic to track it would be crazy.

I understand the desire to have your players avoid the fluff feats/options, but I for one, have not really had a problem with that so far. Thematic builds with the occasional fluff option usually end up pretty well off in our games.

And if the concern is truly for new players to the game, my recommendation is always to play the first couple characters with the most straight-forward options as possible. Have them give you their concept and then help them build something easy to manage. That way after the first couple characters (probably 2), they'll have enough grasp of what is a better option and what kinds of things work better in games than others.


Mathwei ap Niall wrote:

Also the big advantage for the 2hd weapon rogues is the bonus damage from strength and power attack. Using two hands on your weapon gives it 1.5*strength bonus on damage (at 16 str it does +4 dam) and with power attack it does +3 damage per increment instead of +2.

It may not seem like a lot of extra damage but it can quickly become scary how hard you hit, plus it keeps you mobile unlike those twf'ers who can only take a single 5' step per round.

I've noticed the above to be very true actually. Replace the use of the MWK buckler with Dodge and save the gold on it as well (not that it's a terrible lot). I'd invest a least a few points towards UMD as well as that can keep your options open to low-level wands and such that can make up for some other things.

But the two-handed weapon option does really make a difference. Especially if it's reach, then carry a backup dagger if you have to. But the strength boost and reach can make flanking much easier. Plus, it opens up other tricks later down the line too like stacking a Vital Strike on a sneak attack in a surprise round from reach distance. I've seen it happen once, and it was completely worth it.


Karse wrote:

Does all this stacks?

Lets say the sorcerer have Spell Focus and Greater Spell Focus. I know it stack with School Power (Lv15 from Arcane) to make a total of +4 DC. But will it stack with the Bloodline Arcana that increase the DC by 1 when using a metamagic for a total of +5 DC? (this ability doesnt really state it.

Since they're all untyped bonuses, then yes, they stack. The Spell Focus feats specifically just state that they don't stack with themselves and the Arcana power specifically states it also doesn't stack with itself or Heighten Spell. So, it should be all good.


I don't think they have gotten there yet. So far I think they've done a pretty good job of keeping the number of books down and the power creep from getting too bad. 3.5 suffered quite a bit from a thousand books that each had on average about 10 useful things. These books are pretty highly saturated with useful info.

Additionally I hated how reliant 3.5 was on Prestige Classes. It meant that your character didn't really hit that thematic stride for you until about 6-7th level. The first few levels were so chock full of meeting requirements that it hurt. With the proliferation of Alternate Classes/Abilities, I think this has allowed them to give more options, but since they alter your character from the beginning, they still add some flavor and roleplay to it, which was greatly needed.


I will admit to having built and played more thematic builds on sorcerer, but I don't think that's anything truly inherent to the class. Back in the day (3.0 that is), I played a very theme-based, roleplay heavy wizard and enjoyed it very much. And it worked out with the party.

I think both are viable and it's just about which idea suits you better. Sorcerers limited spell selection does tend to make them a little less focused for me, but that's usually because i'm the only arcane caster in the bunch at those moments.


Another option might be Extend Spell. It's certainly not the Quicken option, but depending on what spells you have might not be a bad choice as extra duration can help offensive and defensive spells. Just depends on selection of spells.


From the DM perspective, my thoughts on level dipping go like this. Okay, you want to take a level of Oracle to get Awesome Display, no problem. However, since you're doing it in play, not at character creation, you need to explain how exactly you get chosen as an Oracle when that would normally be the DM's job.

AKA You better give me a good story to go with this since your character has been established and now the gods/divine powers need a reason to choose you specifically to be have a margin of the power of the Heavens. Why would they do that? Give me a very convincing reason/story and then play it out otherwise your level of Oracle is denied.

We standardly kind of play that you can make whatever decisions you want with characters until you try to add stuff that just doesn't go with established flow, like adding another class, prestige classes, stuff of that nature. Then you have to have a reason it works (training, story, downtime to do whatever you need to qualify).


I think the way it's worded it does happen to gain other benefits in albeit odd situations. Take this one,

Guard - hears noise from you moving on your turn invisibly, but can't see anything, has access to a See Invisibility spell (scroll, wand, is a spellcaster, whathaveyou) and casts it.

Mage - moves behind guard and casts Memory Lapse

Guard - probably wastes action casting See Invisibility again because he knows there's someone out there.

Yes, not a perfect example in any way, but there are always those moments when the enemy has to waste a turn doing something that they have already done but don't remember that might not be so effective anymore. Just sayin', for a first level spell it has some interesting potential in just the right situations. And if you're a talking skill based Bard, you might have it around anyway and it might just be a neat combat spell a few times.


I am particularly interested in Vengeful Comets and Martial Marionette. The temptation to get to scream "DANCE, PUPPET, DANCE!" is almost overwhelming.


zmanerism wrote:
I am wondering if it is a good enough direction to sink feats into. We have a melee based paladin, an archery ranger, a alchemist and me the nature oracle. I do not know if we can use the ultimate magic yet so some of the buffing feats might not be available.

I find the Nature oracle to be better at the weird buff type caster. Sure you can take Friend to the Animals and Augment Summoning to be a pretty good summoner for more battlefield chaos/control.

But taking Nature's Whispers to defend yourself, Spirit of Nature to keep yourself moving and Transcendental Bond to keep in touch with the party and eventually drop touch spells on them from a distance makes you an unpredictable target. And Undo Artifice can really mess things up when you start using it on weapons, armor or later magic items that your enemies have or want to use. Really lets you mess with the battlefield in ways that you wouldn't necessarily expect from the divine caster.


Another example is from the APG. Not as good as an example as Horrid Wilting, but just another one.

Stormbolts
It's a 30ft burst from you of electric damage that deals 1d8 per level and you can exclude targets. Fort save for half. But on a failed save the targets take that 1d8 electricity per level and are stunned. Stunning is much better than 1d4 Dex damage. One round of stunning can be all you need to win a fight.


I was the player playing the Orc bloodline normal sorcerer. So far from watching the interactions between the words available for playtesting and the normal allotment of spells (which we just used Corebook and APG spells), I'd say that so far they feel about balanced.

The normal sorcerer has an advantage at 1st and probably through 4th would be my guess. The lack of 2nd level spell slots seems more limiting to the Word caster than the normal one.

However, once that 2nd level slot is open, I think the advantage (in flat out combat, at least) shifts to the Word caster. Their ability to spam damage very carefully to groups starts to kick the normal caster's abilities.

As an example, for area damage spells, one of the better ones for normal casters is Stone Call. 2d6 bludgeoning damage to a 40ft wide cylinder with no save and no spell resistance. However, the Word caster was able to spam fire damage to each enemy (only 4 of them) without endangering my character. They got save for half but it was 5d6, which even halved will be more than the 2d6 on average.

I have a distinct feeling how this will break down is that there will be certain level slots where the Word sorcerer has quite distinct advantages and the other levels will be pretty on par. The question will be "How many of those levels are there?". So far, only testing at either 1st or 5th, I'm seeing a definite advantage to normal sorcerers at 1st, but an advantage to Word sorcerers at 5th in sheer damage output.

As for supplemental spells, that would take some extra looking at.


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

Okay, I sort of agree with Ice Titan, but I'm looking for some official clarification, if possible since this could affect some other things. Here's the relevant text I feel:

Combat section of the Corebook wrote:
"Full Attack - If you get more than one attack per round because your base attack bonus is high enough, because you fight with two weapons or a double weapon, or for some special reason you must use a full-round action to get your additional attacks."

and

Fast Bombs wrote:
"The alchemist can prepare and throw additional bombs as a full-round action if his base attack bonus is high enough to grant him additional attacks. This functions just like a full-attack with a ranged weapon."

So this is my guess, and it is just a guess at this point. That because you must activate an ability to get your multiple bombs, this means that you cannot use the full attack action for it's other uses, like 2 weapon, since you were granted your full attack only by the ability since the bombs are normally a standard action for one. Whereas, daggers or holy water (if you had Quick Draw) do not require an ability to make a full-attack with them.

Edit: because I can't spell


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

So, I have a question.

Because of the phrasing of Fast Bombs in Alchemist says that it's a full-round action to prepare and throw bombs based on your base attack bonus, if you have two-weapon fighting, does that grant you the ability to throw bombs as a full-round action that includes two-weapon throws?

Essentially, if your base attack is +6 and you have two-weapon fighting, do you get to throw 2 bombs with Fast Bombs or 3?

Edit: to correct my math there


There's always the double-switch. Have two spies. One is working for org Y, but is in fact just infiltrating org Y to help crush them and make better opportunities for org X. Spy B is actually working for org Y and trying to destroy org X. Both can act suspicious and do things that are obviously out of character because neither really want to get caught. It helps if spy A (the double-agent) is helping org X because of an outside allegiance (like a noble house of somewhere that wants to support org X).

The party can catch one or both of them. If they catch one, they either succeed (by catching spy B) or catch spy A and end that mission, thus angering the outside allegiance and set up a new potential enemy/opposition. If they catch both, they get all kinds of options and still may end up with an enemy/ally from the outside allegiance.

If they're only 3rd level, that will help reduce the magical interference, but still be careful to set up something where a simple enchantment effect won't break everything down. Higher level outside interference like bigger, badder enchantment spells can help somewhat if you need to go that far.


Just to let you know about what one of my former characters did (mind you this was waaaay back in 2nd edition, but it still applies for situations like this).

I had a character with no magical abilities and who got rocked a couple times by magicians with tricks and I came up with ways around it. My character had Cooking, which now you could take as Profession (chef) or whatever sounds interesting as a backstory. She constantly carried pepper, salt, flour, water and other stuff around with her. Cast iron skillets are good emergency weapons. Flour is one really good way to find invisible stuff. If you can figure out about where they are, explode a bag of flour and they'll suddenly be visible. Pepper is a good backup distraction. Blow it in somebody's face and they'll be annoyed usually long enough to get away with something small (breaking a captive situation, make them sneeze, gets in their eyes, etc). And never forget how useful water can be besides drinking. If you can make an earthen surface really wet and somebody moves through it, you'll see footprints and they may leave a trail for you.

Hope that comes in handy at some point in the future.


Zurai wrote:

A Summoner without an Eidolon is a very poor class. Medium BAB and Medium Casting already puts it a step behind Druids and Clerics. An almost completely non-offensive spell list puts it even further behind them. No martial weapon proficiencies and no shields puts them behind Clerics, Druids, and Bards. A complete lack of class features aside from summon monster spells as spell-like abilities seals the deal.

The Eidolon is slightly better than a Fighter or Barbarian at offense at levels 1-3, but quickly slides into "much worse" afterwards as long as the excessive build options (20 tentacles and so on) are reigned in. It's much worse than a Fighter or Barbarian (who get medium armor, not just light) at level 1 and gradually rises to better as it levels up (although it cannot wear armor at all, ever).

However, you can give the Eidolon weapon use and that combined with another primary attack can get a little scary. I built a 10th level fighter, trying to build something that has decent HP, AC and dishes out hurt quickly and an eidolon at 10th level for the summoner.

The fighter is actually still behind the eidolon on base damage, bonus to hit and about even on AC and HP. The only way the fighter can catch up is "getting lucky" on things such as Cleave. However, these differences can be made up with the fact that the eidolon also gets feats. So, if you allow the eidolon to pick up Cleave (for example) means the eidolon goes back ahead. Since the fighter also usually has a lower intelligence, not necessarily 7-10, means that their skill points end up about even too, if not favoring the eidolon if you spend points there. The d10 on the eidolon and built in stat-ups seem to be the biggest unbalancer towards the eidolon from what i've seen.


©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.