|
Hello, I'm making an arcane archer. The build goes:
Elf
Zen archer monk 8 levels
Wizzard 2 levels
Arcane archer 10 levels
Using kung fu genius as a base feat makes using a monk vastly superior to a fighter or rogue. Now here is my question, does anyone know of a way to allow my arcane archer to use touch spells through his bow. I know for a fact I have seen this some where but I can't remember where. I know its in the D&D 3.5 system but I'm having serious builders block.
Thanks in advance for any help.
I' thinking to create a magic bow for a cleric archer character that allows him to use the reach spell metamagic feat 3/day. Just like a metamagic rod.
Still working on the details though.
That's a cool build. Just in case you haven't thought of it, I'll throw out the fairly typical gold-standard Arcane Archer build:
Fighter 1/Wizard 5/Eldritch Knight 3/Arcane Archer 3/Eldritch Knight +7/Arcane Archer +1
If I wanted to allow touch spells through a bow, I would just ask my DM to either ok that to go with Imbue Arrow (which usually is only area of effect spells), or ok the Spellstoring weapon enhancement (which usually is only melee weapons) or something like it for a bow. I don't see either as a huge problem. You could be willing to take some house-ruled feat that has Imbue Arrow as a pre-req that allows you to also cast touch spells through the arrow as well as area spells. That might get a reluctant DM to agree since you're trading a feat for the ability.
That's a cool build. Just in case you haven't thought of it, I'll throw out the fairly typical gold-standard Arcane Archer build:
Fighter 1/Wizard 5/Eldritch Knight 3/Arcane Archer 3/Eldritch Knight +7/Arcane Archer +1
If I wanted to allow touch spells through a bow, I would just ask my DM to either ok that to go with Imbue Arrow (which usually is only area of effect spells), or ok the Spellstoring weapon enhancement (which usually is only melee weapons) or something like it for a bow. I don't see either as a huge problem. You could be willing to take some house-ruled feat that has Imbue Arrow as a pre-req that allows you to also cast touch spells through the arrow as well as area spells. That might get a reluctant DM to agree since you're trading a feat for the ability.
No offense but that's an Eldritch Knight build with a few Arcane Archer levels, not an Arcane Archer build. Too many people keep calling it an AA build when that is the second least number of levels.
The only way to be able to cast touch spells through your bow will be via the good graces of the GM. Sylavnite's Spellstoring weapon choice seems as good an idea as any. Even then there are certain spells I think I would disallow from that situation, vampiric touch is a big one that comes to mind.
It's an AA build because more AA than that makes a worse Arcane Archer.
It literally does an Arcane Archer's shtick better than an Arcane Archer.
Of course, you are right, levels wise. But functionality wise and character concept wise, it is an Arcane Archer.
And yet, if you have 10 levels of Eldritch Knight then it's an Eldritch Knight build. Yes, it can accomplish things better than a fully built Arcane Archer but at best your build is an arcane archer. All of this is, of course, just my humble opinion.
Perhaps I'll rephrase then:
That's a cool build. Just in case you haven't thought of it, I'll throw out the fairly typical gold-standard magic using archer build:
Fighter 1/Wizard 5/Eldritch Knight 3/Arcane Archer 3/Eldritch Knight +7/Arcane Archer +1
Arcane Archer is a really good idea poorly executed its a horrible class.
all those area of effect spells you would use normally got farther than the dang bow can to begin with.
we PLAY (always) that you can use touch spells through the bow as an AA.
otherwise its pointless.
all those area of effect spells you would use normally got farther than the dang bow can to begin with.
Agreed. I don't really see the usefulness of Imbue Arrow. The last sentence especially makes no sense: "If the arrow misses, the spell is wasted." How can an arrow not land somewhere? Does it really have to hit a target for the spell to go off?
we PLAY (always) that you can use touch spells through the bow as an AA.
otherwise its pointless.
As long as it's understood that that isn't RAW there's no problem with that. And by pointless I assume you mean just that Imbue Arrow is pointless.
I have faith the class will get better with Ultimate Magic. Advanced Players Guide tried a few archer oriented spells and failed. They can do better. Some feats specifically for arcane classes, including PrC's would be nice to. A feat with Imbue Arrow as a Pre-Req that allowed other spells to be imbued would be AWESOME. Just sayin'. Hope yer readin' this Paizo.
all those area of effect spells you would use normally got farther than the dang bow can to begin with.Agreed. I don't really see the usefulness of Imbue Arrow. The last sentence especially makes no sense: "If the arrow misses, the spell is wasted." How can an arrow not land somewhere? Does it really have to hit a target for the spell to go off?
we PLAY (always) that you can use touch spells through the bow as an AA.
otherwise its pointless.As long as it's understood that that isn't RAW there's no problem with that. And by pointless I assume you mean just that Imbue Arrow is pointless.
no i mean the class is pointless and in effectually, especially compared to eldritch knight.
There are a couple nice tricks with Imbue Arrow at high levels, and in mid levels, getting the extra 1d6 elemental enhancement for free at level 3 is pretty sweet when you attack as many times per round as an archer does. Plus AA gets 4 + Int skills off a decent list for a Dex/Int character. It's always nice to be able to grab Perception as a class skill.
That said, there is no reason to go beyond 3 levels in Arcane Archer, except that level 4 grants a BAB and a Caster Level if you need those.
You could always go Fighter 2/Wizard 8/EK 10, but it's just not as strong of a build overall as Fighter 1/Wizard 5/EK 10/AA 4.
So the class has soooooooome use. It just fails to deliver on what it really should be able to do. Really just a missed opportunity by the designers.
And don't even get me started on the Elf/Half-Elf only requirement. UGH. Especially when you explain in the fluff that the abilities aren't even a closely guarded secret and sometimes even get turned against elves...Seriously, you need certain genetics to learn the (crappy) skills involved?!?!
|
|
Arcane Archer is a really good idea poorly executed its a horrible class.
all those area of effect spells you would use normally got farther than the dang bow can to begin with.
we PLAY (always) that you can use touch spells through the bow as an AA.
otherwise its pointless.
I will say that the AA is a great fluff class but can hit like a truck. I just WISH I could shoot a baleful poly arrow lol.
There are a couple nice tricks with Imbue Arrow at high levels, and in mid levels, getting the extra 1d6 elemental enhancement for free at level 3 is pretty sweet when you attack as many times per round as an archer does. Plus AA gets 4 + Int skills off a decent list for a Dex/Int character. It's always nice to be able to grab Perception as a class skill.
That said, there is no reason to go beyond 3 levels in Arcane Archer, except that level 4 grants a BAB and a Caster Level if you need those.
You could always go Fighter 2/Wizard 8/EK 10, but it's just not as strong of a build overall as Fighter 1/Wizard 5/EK 10/AA 4.
So the class has soooooooome use. It just fails to deliver on what it really should be able to do. Really just a missed opportunity by the designers.
And don't even get me started on the Elf/Half-Elf only requirement. UGH. Especially when you explain in the fluff that the abilities aren't even a closely guarded secret and sometimes even get turned against elves...Seriously, you need certain genetics to learn the (crappy) skills involved?!?!
They changed the racial requirement in an errata. Now any race can be an Arcane Archer. I agree that the class is not a total waste, there are some good features in there but not worth going all 10 levels through.
I've looked for the errata for the required race change and haven't been able to find it at all. I've heard it mentioned on the boards, but would love to see it as it will avoid a discussion I'd rather not have in my gaming group.....
Does anyone have a link?
|
I have a player in my game who's planning on doing the Arcane Archer Prestige class. He's playing an elf (because he always plays elves) and getting his archery from levels of Ranger (because he always plays rangers). So far he's got three levels of ranger and 1 of wizard. The party just hit 5th level and I'm not sure what he's going to do next.
Of my five players, only one of them min/maxes to any great degree, but I have a feeling that this guy's character is the most inefficient build in the party. Any ideas on suggestions I can make to him or things I can do as DM to help him out?
Ranger 6/Wizard 2/Arcane Archer 4/Eldritch Knight 8
Isn't terrible. 6th level spells, Improved Precise Shot early at Ranger 6...he should still be able to pump some damage out.
IIRC when one shoots at a spot on the ground the AC is 5 (standard 10 everything gets -5 for 0 DEX), modified by the distance from the spot. It's a -2 penalty for each increment beyond the maximum range, and a bow has ten maximum range increments allowed. That's 100 ft x10 maxing at 1000 ft and -20, giving the spot on the ground 25 AC. Considering some of the ACs of the stuff you may be fighting, the 25 AC may be easier to get then the foe and you are less likely to lose the spell that way. Add in the abilities and it's not so bad.
I may be wrong, I'm also writing this after being up all night... FWIW.
You could come up with an Archetype style thing that ditches ranger spellcasting for a cool benefit. Allow him to choose it at Ranger 4. That way it doesn't cost him a precious feat (archers have so many good ones they need to take already). Something like Kyrt suggested, maybe like Arcane Ranger....and every other level from 4 on advances Wizard casting. That'd get the eventual build to 14 CL, netting 7th level spells instead of maxing at 6. That's substantial.
(I'm basically only slightly tweaking Kyrt's suggestion...it's not real original on my part : )
Ranger 6/Wizard 2/Arcane Archer 4/Eldritch Knight 8
Prestige Classes are for life, not just for Christmas... ;)
Prestige Classes are for life, not just for Christmas... ;)Ranger 6/Wizard 2/Arcane Archer 4/Eldritch Knight 8
Maybe in your games, but I try to stick to the rules when posting on the boards ;) Makes things easier for everyone involved.
Maybe in your games, but I try to stick to the rules when posting on the boards ;) Makes things easier for everyone involved.
It's a horrible left-over from 3.5 that's metagaming. You may wrap it up any way you like but it doesn't change what it is! :)
Prestige Classes are mechanical features which the character might never even know he took.
Rubbish, you have to qualify for them.
Prestige has to mean something... dipping is just cheese.
IIRC when one shoots at a spot on the ground the AC is 5 (standard 10 everything gets -5 for 0 DEX), modified by the distance from the spot. It's a -2 penalty for each increment beyond the maximum range, and a bow has ten maximum range increments allowed. That's 100 ft x10 maxing at 1000 ft and -20, giving the spot on the ground 25 AC. Considering some of the ACs of the stuff you may be fighting, the 25 AC may be easier to get then the foe and you are less likely to lose the spell that way. Add in the abilities and it's not so bad.
I may be wrong, I'm also writing this after being up all night... FWIW.
im still loosing you why not just cast the spell its self? why attach it to an arrow? for example fire ball 400 plus 40 per level.
your at least 5th just to cast the spell, so thats 600 feet...so your saying the class feature benefit is i can get an extra 400 feet by rolling a 25?
lets say this guy is a wiz 1/ ftr 6/ AA 7 (just to get caster level to be abel to even CAST fire ball)
thats a 14th level character folks.
all that so he can get a fire ball to go 400 feet farther??
and still need a 25 to do it?
a 14th level wizard could shoot that thing (40x14+400) 960 feet without needing a roll to hit it like that.
your AA would have a BAB of 12, so with out dex or magic...its still a 50/50 to even DO it!
stupid.
can you show me a circumstance where the AA build is worth this minuscule range thing?
and WHY not allow touch attacks with the bow? that would be the OBVIOUS point to make such a class.
how many adventures are ever even really dealing with anything LIKE this kids of ranges? when does this actually come in handy?
One big example is Anti-Magic Field. Putting that on an arrow and then putting the arrow where you want it is a really nifty trick. There aren't many others that I can think of, but that alone might make the dip worth it. If a prestige class explicitly allowed you to drop Anti-Magic Fields a couple times per day wherever you wanted to, it would certainly get some talk on these boards....and AA can do that.
As for the PrC thing: I'm with Kyrt. I don't see the issue with dipping however many classes you ever want to. You should see all the different things I've tried in my life! I've dipped in quite a few classes, if we were to try to break life down that way (which is kind of what DnD is attempting to mirror). I think of my character as a character when I play it, not as a different set of class levels. If that's what I have to do to make the character the way I want, then I see nothing wrong with it.
ninjaed by Sylvanite.
|
As for the PrC thing: I'm with Kyrt. If that's what I have to do to make the character the way I want, then I see nothing wrong with it.
+1. Given the multi-classing system introduced in 3e, D&D is in all but name a skill-based system now, where you get skill-packages by taking "classes". But the overall effect of you choices defines a character and that can be quite unique made up of a sum of 'classes' for sure, but not really any class as such.
S.
Never thought of anti-magic field but thats a 6th level spell... 12 caster levels...6 BAB to qualify for class....youre going to be really high level before you can do it.
surely not the saving grace for this PrC
im not sure where the above posts are going, there nothing wrong with multi classing im saying AA as a PrC is just a lame duck.
|
|
I suppose when you combine the Imbue arrow thing with some of the other archery tricks: things like seeking arrow or phase arrow, or the fact that at a certain level the arrow gains "distance" as well... that might make the imbue thing more interesting, at least. Phase shoot a fireball arrow into the stone tower from outside? You could also combine it with true strike to hit a target at extreme range.
Kind of a specialized situation, but there you go.
Fighter 1/Wizard 5/Eldritch Knight 3/Arcane Archer 4/EK +7
gets 6th level spells at 14th. Not thaaaat high. But you are right that it is more of a higher level trick.
I suppose when you combine the Imbue arrow thing with some of the other archery tricks: things like seeking arrow or phase arrow, or the fact that at a certain level the arrow gains "distance" as well... that might make the imbue thing more interesting, at least. Phase shoot a fireball arrow into the stone tower from outside? You could also combine it with true strike to hit a target at extreme range.
Kind of a specialized situation, but there you go.
You can't use them together. They are each their own kind of standard action. It's another part of the problem with the class.
yea see thats why all these abilities are either 'meh' or hoky.
arrows shooting around corners? stupid
phase is better than seeking, even trying to visualize it.
plus now with APG there are some archer feats dangerously close to calss abilites of the AA
AA needs to be stripped down and totally re-worked.
its NOT a viable class AT all.
|
|
yea see thats why all these abilities are either 'meh' or hoky.
arrows shooting around corners? stupid
phase is better than seeking, even trying to visualize it.plus now with APG there are some archer feats dangerously close to calss abilites of the AA
AA needs to be stripped down and totally re-worked.
its NOT a viable class AT all.
You say not at all but I can hit you at level 20 at a +35 for 20D6 + 35 damage using my build. 2 spells used simo and the zen archers ability to use melee damage over standard for your bow. I could only do that as an AA. Eldrich knight will have better casting but much lower physical damage. And I don't have to sacrafice my RP concept to do it :-)
You say not at all but I can hit you at level 20 at a +35 for 20D6 + 35 damage using my build. 2 spells used simo and the zen archers ability to use melee damage over standard for your bow. I could only do that as an AA. Eldrich knight will have better casting but much lower physical damage. And I don't have to sacrafice my RP concept to do it :-)yea see thats why all these abilities are either 'meh' or hoky.
arrows shooting around corners? stupid
phase is better than seeking, even trying to visualize it.plus now with APG there are some archer feats dangerously close to calss abilites of the AA
AA needs to be stripped down and totally re-worked.
its NOT a viable class AT all.
what build..you havent posted any specifics, all ive seen is a list of character levels you intend to take.
post a AA build that works good.
what your are talking about im sure breaks some rules.
So post it.
i was thinking of a zen archer with some levels of AA myself... but i dont see what you are getting out of 10 levels of AA or where you are getting that damage from?
and where are you getting the ability to use to spells simo (does that mean simultaneously?)
There are spells that can be fun. If the bow used is a +1 Distance Composite Longbow (I can't see how this would be too expensive for an AA) then the range increment becomes 220 ft. Use a spell like Deep Slumber that is limited to Close, you could combine it with a sneaky thief nearby and shoot it from 440 ft and the bow's bonus makes it so you need a 5 to hit the AC. Knocking a creature helpless from that far away could be extremely useful. There are other examples... at a high level what about a ranged Mage's Disjunction? If the minimum BAB to go AA is +6, you should be able to shoot 660 ft safely unless you roll a one and in some games that's fail anyhow.
I know... sleep effects at higher levels are not useful, but if you can pull it off then that helpless status effect versus a fireball? Sleep all the way!
EDIT: Wouldn't it be fun to use the ability to Transmute Rock to Mud from afar? At a good distance I doubt they'd even hear you casting... >:D Even better if you can pull it off underground or while they're sleeping. An arrow hits the ground with a faint thump and suddenly it's a rude awakening.
|
|
Be happy I don't like you or I wouldn't post this, I'm. On a cell phone right now.
Level 8 monk uses 1 D10 base damage
Improved natural weapon +1d10 = 2D8
2D8+ enlarge person = 3D8
3D8+ gravity bow= 4D8
4D8+ greater vital strike = 4D8 x 4
16D8 + AA energy class feature+ frost+thunder+shock=16D8 + 1D8+ 3D6
+str+ dead eye (dex damage)+ focused shot= one hell of a shot. Completely legal
:-P so suck it
The only issue I'm having with the build is if focused shot and vital strike can be use at the same time.
Maybe in your games, but I try to stick to the rules when posting on the boards ;) Makes things easier for everyone involved.It's a horrible left-over from 3.5 that's metagaming. You may wrap it up any way you like but it doesn't change what it is! :)
I'm pretty sure the height of metagaming - as in the literal definition - is using in-game mechanics to alter or force things on characters. OoC knowledge used ICly. Which is, well, what you're doing.
"You have to keep taking this class" "Uh, what class? I left the wizard academy long ago." "No I mean your prestige class" "Yes, I was at the top of my class, but that was long ago."
Also, if they really wanted to "cheese," they'd be wizard 20.
Be happy I don't like you or I wouldn't post this, I'm. On a cell phone right now.
Level 8 monk uses 1 D10 base damage
Improved natural weapon +1d10 = 2D8
2D8+ enlarge person = 3D8
3D8+ gravity bow= 4D8
4D8+ greater vital strike = 4D8 x 4
16D8 + AA energy class feature+ frost+thunder+shock=16D8 + 1D8+ 3D6
+str+ dead eye (dex damage)+ focused shot= one hell of a shot. Completely legal
:-P so suck itThe only issue I'm having with the build is if focused shot and vital strike can be use at the same time.
Improved natural attack cannot be used with a Monk's unarmed strike damage:
http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/paizoPublishing/pathfinder/pathfinderR PG/rules/monksAndMonsterFeats&page=1#45
@SideKick
Enlarge Person is a full round action to cast and doesn't last long enough to be considered always up, unless you are able to permanency it and are always going to be large, in which case that should be stated. Also, if you are using permanency you are level 20 (if going with 10 levels of AA).
Gravity Bow is another standard action to cast that doesn't last long enough to claim you always have it on. Good combo, though. I'll give it to you that MOST of the time you might have it on.
The AA energy enhancement won't stack with the shock, frost, or flaming abilities, so your bow would need corrosive. Also, it does not do 1d8, it does 1d6.
Vital Strike doesn't work with focused shot. Focused Shot is its own standard action, vital strike requires the attack action. Also, when are you taking Greater Vital Strike? It requires BAB 16, which you don't get till 19th (Presuming Monk 8/Wizard 2/AA 10), leaving you unable to grab it.
I'm not familiar with Dead Eye. Where is that from? I would suggest Deadly Aim to up damage as long as you still can hit.
All said and done, you're at right about 100 avg. damage, using a Ki point and a swift action. Gettin' close to about 110 if you get to add Dex to damage with Deadly Aim, but I haven't heard of that. That's giving you enlarge person and gravity bow, along with assuming you somehow find a way to get greater vital strike at some point in your build. Essentially, giving you the benefit of the doubt on everything except Focused Shot (but that's really only another 6 damage really).
The benefit is that this is one attack, so DR isn't as big of a deal....but if you roll poorly you've totally wasted a turn. I say that's about a wash.
Just to put that in perspective..
At level 20, Fighter 1/Wizard 5/Ek 3/AA 4/EK +7:
Does about 50 damage per attack, but gets 7 (counting manyshot as one) attacks per round (Even if only his 4 attacks at max hit he's sittin around 200 with 3 chances to crit for LARGE damage). He also has 9th level spells as opposed to 5th.
Some of the tricks the EK/AA uses your monk could also use, so I will give you getting up to 125 on your attack on average, but still it lags behind. You still do better getting out of AA and into EK if you can as an archer character.
Edit: Just realized that you're using 3.5 as well for your build. Must be where this Kung Fu Genius and Dead Eye are from. However, with the EK's ability to get higher level spells, if you are using 3.5, that actually makes him more valuable as the high level spells get gross. The build I'm using for Damage is PF only (using core and APG only). If I open that up to feats like Dead Eye and such it only gets better.
Rapid Shot -2 (1 extra shot)
Manyshot (1 extra shot)
Haste +1 (1 extra shot)
Deadly Aim -5
Point Blank +1
Magic Weapon +5
Dexterity +12
Weapon Focus +1
Greater Weapon Focus +1
Heroism +2
Greater Bracers of Archery +2
Total: 7 attacks, +35(manyshot)/+35/+35/+30/+25/+20
Gravity Bow: 2d6 (7 avg)
4 Elemental Enchants: 4d6 (14 avg)
Magic Weapon: +5
Point Blank Shot: +1
Weapon Specialization: +2
Deadly Aim: +10
Arcane Strike: +5
Strength: +7
Greater Bracers of Archery: +1
Total: Avg = 52 damage x 7 attacks = 364 damage if all hit
|
|
I never said it would be up all the time, you ass-um-ed that :-):-P
With craft ring you can make constant effect items with those spells, nd guess which feat I'm going to take. And 125 damage "after moving" is not my damage if I use a full attack.
I didn't not know improved natural attack didn't work with that, but I will research that and if so I have a feat that I can use as a back up lol ;-).
I see about 259 on average with clearity acessable would bump that up 55 more. And I haven't usd a single spell yet.
Eldrich knight will not fit into the build a all. I've tried, but I would have to sacrafice damage for that to work and I concider magic damage to be less effective over all vrs physical.
I'm typing on a phone, its pissing me off lol. So I'm done for the time being.
I never said it would be up all the time, you ass-um-ed that :-):-P
With craft ring you can make constant effect items with those spells, nd guess which feat I'm going to take. And 125 damage "after moving" is not my damage if I use a full attack.I didn't not know improved natural attack didn't work with that, but I will research that and if so I have a feat that I can use as a back up lol ;-).
I see about 259 on average with clearity acessable would bump that up 55 more. And I haven't usd a single spell yet.
Eldrich knight will not fit into the build a all. I've tried, but I would have to sacrafice damage for that to work and I concider magic damage to be less effective over all vrs physical.
You included it in your calculation. That's you ass-um-ing it's up : )
What is your feat breakdown per level? You're naming an awful lot of things here, and I'm curious how they fit. I'm also not familiar with Clarity, as I'm only using PF here. Let me know what books they're in, as I own most of 3.5...I'll check em out, just haven't used em for a while.
Also, I don't know if you're including Vital Strike stuff along with a full attack, but a full attack action is different than an attack action. You only get Vital Strike if you attack only once in a round. If you are full attacking, to max your damage you will also want Rapid Shot and Many Shot and Haste. That's two more feats plus Forge Ring (which you also can't take until 17th level, meaning your 18th level feat goes to that....which means there is no way you're getting greater vital strike).
|
|
In patthfinder you get a feat ever odd level... so I have a feat at 19 and 17.
Also reading the wording on the feat improved natural weapon, I cant Actually add that feat into my list for this toon. That speaker on behalf of the company said no, the wording says (not n unarmed attack) I don't understand it but that's what it says.
Also I fully under stand how the feat works. 4D8 x 8 attacks plus all other damage is what I was referring to.not that I wold.be hitting for vital strike damage during a full attack.
Thread closed (Jk :P)
Pathfinder has been kind to the Arcane Archer. I played one in 3.5 after PF had been released, and our friend convinced the GM to give me the 7/10 spell progression, since 3.5 gave zero. What in the world did they think a 7th level character would want to do by adding long range to a first level spell? Seems more like silly 3.0 logic to me. I applaud any veteran gamers who were able to figure out some fun or powerful combinations with such abilities, but I'm not one of them.
The spell progression was useful and made sense to have, but didn't fundamentally power up the class due to being lower level casting. This part of the fix in Pathfinder isn't what I would call making the Archer viable, but rather simply making it a coherent prestige class.
I did rather enjoy the free magic enchantments on my arrows in 3.5, though. By the end of the game I think I was at a +4, allowing me to funnel my money into Str and Dex boosting items instead (though I can imagine some people would rather upgrade at their own pace, or if they stumbled upon a +4 bow they might kick themselves).
The GM also designed a bow for me that would transform its +1 bonus into a flaming, frost or shock so that my +3 arrows and +1 bow wouldn't be redundant. The new bonuses in PF circumnavigate that redundancy, which is nice. IMO, nothing bites like getting a class feature you already had access to, and thus getting nothing instead. Overall a good fix by Paizo again.
Arcane Strike is also a godsend to the AA. The fact remains, though, that Arcane Strike is just as nice, if not a bit nicer, on the Eldritch Knight, who sadly seems to edge out the AA for the most part.
In the end, Paizo did a good job taking the old AA and making it more viable. The problem is the old AA is still not all that ideal in gameplay. What can one Phase or Seeker Arrow do? In a movie or comic book or something, it'd let you hit some escaping villain, but in Pathfinder, the chance that that single arrow will actually stop someone is fairly poor. If it could be combined with spells, or the APG's Archer's Trick Shot, perhaps it could be more useful.
Question: in any of your experiences, do you/your GMs allow Enhance Arrows (or the Paladin's Divine Bond) to exceed a +10 enhancement total? I think that could be a deal-breaker for the Arcane Archer, particularly at 20th level.
Pathfinder has been kind to the Arcane Archer. I played one in 3.5 after PF had been released, and our friend convinced the GM to give me the 7/10 spell progression, since 3.5 gave zero. What in the world did they think a 7th level character would want to do by adding long range to a first level spell? Seems more like silly 3.0 logic to me. I applaud any veteran gamers who were able to figure out some fun or powerful combinations with such abilities, but I'm not one of them.
The spell progression was useful and made sense to have, but didn't fundamentally power up the class due to being lower level casting. This part of the fix in Pathfinder isn't what I would call making the Archer viable, but rather simply making it a coherent prestige class.
I did rather enjoy the free magic enchantments on my arrows in 3.5, though. By the end of the game I think I was at a +4, allowing me to funnel my money into Str and Dex boosting items instead (though I can imagine some people would rather upgrade at their own pace, or if they stumbled upon a +4 bow they might kick themselves).
The GM also designed a bow for me that would transform its +1 bonus into a flaming, frost or shock so that my +3 arrows and +1 bow wouldn't be redundant. The new bonuses in PF circumnavigate that redundancy, which is nice. IMO, nothing bites like getting a class feature you already had access to, and thus getting nothing instead. Overall a good fix by Paizo again.
Arcane Strike is also a godsend to the AA. The fact remains, though, that Arcane Strike is just as nice, if not a bit nicer, on the Eldritch Knight, who sadly seems to edge out the AA for the most part.
In the end, Paizo did a good job taking the old AA and making it more viable. The problem is the old AA is still not all that ideal in gameplay. What can one Phase or Seeker Arrow do? In a movie or comic book or something, it'd let you hit some escaping villain, but in Pathfinder, the chance that that single arrow will actually stop someone is fairly poor. If it...
I think with all prestige classes Paizo's stance remains the same. They didn't want them to outshine the base classes and they wanted to make the choice between staying or going prestige a hard one. I can appreciate this as a GM since in 3.5e all of my players felt that mechanically it was inferior not to prestige and wanted to pick up splash levels of this and that (much to my chagrin).
The biggest improvement to all prestige classes however IMO was when Paizo declared that they did not want race to be a qualifying factor and that it was an artifact left over from 3.5e.
Perhaps we will see more stylish tricks coming are way with ultimate magic? One can only speculate... :D
In patthfinder you get a feat ever odd level... so I have a feat at 19 and 17.
Also reading the wording on the feat improved natural weapon, I cant Actually add that feat into my list for this toon. That speaker on behalf of the company said no, the wording says (not n unarmed attack) I don't understand it but that's what it says.
Also I fully under stand how the feat works. 4D8 x 8 attacks plus all other damage is what I was referring to.not that I wold.be hitting for vital strike damage during a full attack.
Thread closed (Jk :P)
Hahaha...wow. Thinking of 3.5 somehow made me go back to the feats every 3 levels platform in my head. Good call, sir.
Honestly, as a DM I'd give you improved natural attack, I have no issue with that and am not really familiar with the ruling.
As for the rest of the stuff I'm assuming it's 3.5. Go for the gold, man.
Edit: Kyrt is so dead on about how the PrCs are in Pathfinder at this point. As I've said before, they are really only useful to hybrid characters building towards a specific concept. Other than that, you are almost never better off taking them, and especially for all ten levels. The real need is to find the medium ground Kyrt was talking about, where there is an actual choice other than fluff. Neither staying Base nor PrC should be overtly more powerful, but is it so bad to ask for them to be balanced? At least then there's a choice.