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

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

RPG Superstar 2015

[Radiance House] Secrets of Pact Magic Open Playtesting Month


Compatible Products from Other Publishers

51 to 100 of 233 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>

I'm certainly interested as I'm always interested in other forms of magic and I like the thought of binding spirits to do your bidding. It makes for interesting roleplay opportunities!

Marathon Voter 2013

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Infinite healing has been shot down almost everytime it's come up in PF, usually by Jason Bulmahn. Something to keep in mind.


I see your point about the organization; you are correct. There's not really anything to be done about a bit of confusion the first time through a new set of rules.

A minutes or rounds/day fast healing would certainly work. But I think that since all the other augmentations are constant, for consistency's sake, just drop it entirely. It's something to be left to different pacts.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I am interested. I bought the previous book and it would be very good for saving time updating it.


I'm not going to be updating your playtest document much (if at all) because Dario and I need to get started on the final layout, so I am going to produce an errata document with a list of the changes to the final product that have been made.

Here's the Errata Document.

Also, I'm not sure if the changes to Demos and Serapith that are listed in the errata are in your version of the playtest document or not; if they are, just ignore them.


Daniel Gago wrote:
I am interested. I bought the previous book and it would be very good for saving time updating it.

Just wanted to point out that this book isn't a simple rehash and release of the original; the rules are different, the spirits changed, most of the classes from the original became archetypes, etc.

If you're looking for a simple port of the 3.5 rules, this may not be what you're looking for.

If you're looking for an epic pact magic experience that is heavily based on Dario's original work and maintains the "spirit" of the original Secrets of Pact Magic (pardon the pun), then you are probably going to love this.

Probably; I'm not guaranteeing it. I'm clutching my seat waiting for the reviews to start trickling in!


Cheapy wrote:
Infinite healing has been shot down almost everytime it's come up in PF, usually by Jason Bulmahn. Something to keep in mind.

Refer to the new errata for my thoughts on your comment.

Also, I think I got everyone into the playtest; if you didn't receive your document, let me know and I'll hit you up.


I'm so glad to hear about this. i bought both the 3.5 pact magic books you made, and loved them all. My only problem with them was choice (having over 100 spirits to choose from made things so difficult...)

I'm actually welcoming the idea of a 'bitesize' version i can memorize, and thus not take up half the game session deciding who i'm bound to! (Playing a Soul Weaver made things even worse. If spirit selection was long, spell selection was painful!)


Banatine wrote:
I'm so glad to hear about this. i bought both the 3.5 pact magic books you made, and loved them all. My only problem with them was choice (having over 100 spirits to choose from made things so difficult...)

If this book does well, my eventual goal is to have 1 spirit per constellation per level. 13 x 9 = 117.

I'd like to make that happen someday, but I suppose breaking it up helps you learn it in chunks, eh?

Quote:
I'm actually welcoming the idea of a 'bitesize' version i can memorize, and thus not take up half the game session deciding who i'm bound to! (Playing a Soul Weaver made things even worse. If spirit selection was long, spell selection was painful!)

Soul Weaver is still in the game; I *think* reweaving is a little bit easier now, but no one's playtested / theorycrafted the soul weaver yet. I think it still makes brains explode.


I'm wondering if the nerf to Ubro's healing surge and vestigial companion was too severe. I'd like to hear some feedback on that in particular.


Well I guess I'll be the one to take a look at the Soul Weaver then.

Well lets see what we got: Diminished Spellcasting, three opposed spell schools, and no bonus feats. Well no one said life was easy...

OK, so the loss of the spell schools means where going to need to pick something and stick with it. Therefore, I humbly sujest AM CONJUERER.

Play as an Elf and push intelligence (even more important now with the diminished spellcasting), and then grab conjuration as your main school and go with Illusion, Necromancy, and Evocation as opposition schools.

Feats should be Scribe Binding Tattoo, followed by Spell Focus (Conjusration), Augmented Summoning, Superior Summoning, and at 12 level I would go with the true name discovery to have a friend at the ready.

Grab Planar binding and the best on the summoning spells and make sure to prepare the spells to aid you in you planar binding (geas is very useful). Also, don't forget the uses of reweave spellcasting. Take the Muse Istago and drop his bonus to craft painting and profession painter for a 24 hour shield or mage armor spell? yes please. All this combines to have your 2 best friends from true name and planar binding, along with their 1d3+1 augmented summons helpers, and a wizard going with a 24 hour shield spell. Add in a party of mildly competant adventurers and a little more reading on my part, and then I would say the DM is in trouble. (short of an Anti-magic Field that is.)

At any rate that is what I would look into as a Soul Weaver.


But on a more serious note I would suggest dropping Muse Isatgo's bonus to craft (painting) and profession (painter) as a Soul Weaver is simply going to abuse it and trade it out for a shiled/mage armor/protection from spells.

Or change how the reweaver ability of the Soul Weaver works so as to avoid that. (unless that is what you intended in which case ignore me)


It's unclear with some of the archetypes (monk, cleric, druid, wizard, ranger) what level of spirits they can know. I assume the same as an occultist, but as far as I can tell, that's never explicitly stated. The general rule seems to be half binder level, max ninth, but the bind spirits description just says to refer to the table. It should say the rule above, if that' correct. This would clear things up. And I question allowing a ranger to get full spirit level progression when fighter and barbarian both have lowered progression. The trading of abilities for binder levels seems strange and inconsistent across the board. Sometimes nothing is being replaced, other times it's major class features like channel energy or arcane bond. How powerful is one spirit supposed to be?


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber

What's the starting gold for the occultist base class?

EDIT: I'm also a bit confused by the wording of the totemic alignment power of the totemic sage barbarian archetype. The power says "...and when selecting totem rage powers, the totemic sage is restricted to totems associated with that constellation unless he or she possesses the totemic warrior archetype (see totemic study, below)."

This seems to imply that the list of rage powers associated to the various constellations in the totemic study power are the ONLY rage powers that the totemic sage can select, despite the totemic study power saying that that list is intended to be a list of bonus rage powers gained at 3rd level and every 6 levels thereafter.

Are these contradictory? Or is the totemic sage limited to rage powers that fit into the categories introduced under totemic study, while also gaining periodic bonus rage powers from those same lists?

Also, there is no totemic warrior archetype that I can see.

DOUBLE EDIT: The soul muse bard achetype's muse's inspiration has some potential problems.

For one thing, does the casting of the selected spell count as a supernatural ability, thanks to this ability's tag, meaning that it can't be countered or dispelled? Also, the wording of the power should specify that the expended spell slot is of a level equal or higher to the level of the spell cast.

Further, the spell is cast "instantly" regardless of its casting time? Do any necessary material components and/or foci need to be present? Can metamagic feats be used in conjunction with the cast spell (presumably they require a higher-level spell slot to be used)?

TRIPLE EDIT: For "The Matrix" sidebar on the cleric's page, it's worth considering adding language to discuss possible subdomains (I'd recommend all of the associated subdomains for the listed domains) and inquisitions.

I'd also like to mention that, personally, I really dislike using the term "the matrix" to refer to the nebulous reality where spirits come from. Most gamers I know will be making Keanu Reeves jokes endlessly as soon as the term comes up in play. Why not just call it "the Beyond" or something similar?

Also, the Occult Priest cleric archetype doesn't say what class features its Domain Lore and Domain Mastery features replace.


Kitsune Knight wrote:

Play as an Elf and push intelligence (even more important now with the diminished spellcasting), and then grab conjuration as your main school and go with Illusion, Necromancy, and Evocation as opposition schools.

Feats should be Scribe Binding Tattoo, followed by Spell Focus (Conjusration), Augmented Summoning, Superior Summoning, and at 12 level I would go with the true name discovery to have a friend at the ready.

Grab Planar binding and the best on the summoning spells and make sure to prepare the spells to aid you in you planar binding (geas is very useful). Also, don't forget the uses of reweave spellcasting. Take the Muse Istago and drop his bonus to craft painting and profession painter for a 24 hour shield or mage armor spell? yes please. All this combines to have your 2 best friends from true name and planar binding, along with their 1d3+1 augmented summons helpers, and a wizard going with a 24 hour shield spell. Add in a party of mildly competant adventurers and a little more reading on my part, and then I would say the DM is in trouble. (short of an Anti-magic Field that is.)

At any rate that is what I would look into as a Soul Weaver.

Going to add a line to Soul Weaver that states that the duration of all rewoven Major Granted abilities is equal to 4 rounds. That'll stop most of your summoning shennanigins. I'm also going to break the Augment Summoning thing as well; I'll figure that out after I come back from my birthday dinner (the first change was just an easy one).

24-hour shield / mage armor isn't a huge deal, but I think I'll also add that rewoven spells are still subjected to effects that counter, dispel, and negate magic.

Finally, I don't think I'm going to break the ability to trade out skill bonuses as much as I am going to buff Mute Istago's bonus. It appears to be too specific in scope and is therefore not a REAL choice.

Also note that if you plan to stick with Mute Istago till end game, you'll never get more than 4th level spells onto him.

RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32

Definitely count me interested. I've used pact magic before in campaigns and would love to add it to my pathfinder campaigns. I also review game material for Renaissance Magazine and will email my editor to see if he'll let me review the product when you're ready for it to be reviewed.


Jackissocool wrote:
It's unclear with some of the archetypes (monk, cleric, druid, wizard, ranger) what level of spirits they can know. I assume the same as an occultist, but as far as I can tell, that's never explicitly stated. The general rule seems to be half binder level, max ninth, but the bind spirits description just says to refer to the table. It should say the rule above, if that' correct. This would clear things up. And I question allowing a ranger to get full spirit level progression when fighter and barbarian both have lowered progression. The trading of abilities for binder levels seems strange and inconsistent across the board. Sometimes nothing is being replaced, other times it's major class features like channel energy or arcane bond. How powerful is one spirit supposed to be?

In the original document, all classes use their binder level as their occultist level to determine their maximum spirit level; unless specifically mentioned otherwise, they get the full 9 level's worth. New wording has been squeezed in to make this more obvious.

As a general rule, the full spellcasters usually give up more than the martial classes for their spirits. Also, the amount the class gives up for the spirit determines how strong their binding is in return (as well as thematics). For example, the barbarian only gives up Uncanny Dodge and Improved Uncanny Dodge alongside Fast Movement for their spirits. That's why theirs is restricted.

I didn't want to have all the classes just being stuff like "Okay, trade away a lot of stuff and get the full nine levels of pact magic!" That's not fun or interesting. If I was going to give full pact magic progression to every class, why have an occultist archetype in the first place?

Jason, your comments are up next, but its game time so I'll get to them in a few hours.


Jackissocool wrote:
It's unclear with some of the archetypes (monk, cleric, druid, wizard, ranger) what level of spirits they can know. I assume the same as an occultist, but as far as I can tell, that's never explicitly stated. The general rule seems to be half binder level, max ninth, but the bind spirits description just says to refer to the table. It should say the rule above, if that' correct. This would clear things up. And I question allowing a ranger to get full spirit level progression when fighter and barbarian both have lowered progression. The trading of abilities for binder levels seems strange and inconsistent across the board. Sometimes nothing is being replaced, other times it's major class features like channel energy or arcane bond. How powerful is one spirit supposed to be?

Unless the class gives a different progression (such as barbarians, rogues, fighters, etc.) all classes treat their full binder level as their occultist level when determining their maximum spirit level.

And in regards to the trading of abilities, are archetypes ever consistent in their trades? Classes that trade more get better binding potential; for example, the ranger gives up four of his five favored enemies and the remaining favored enemy is limited to whatever their bound spirit's enemy is. They also lose the ability to cast ranger spells, which are much more powerful then people give them credit for.

The barbarian, on the other hand, only loses fast movement, uncanny dodge, and improved uncanny dodge.

The power level of spirits varies as well, but luckily most archetypes trade out and around more than just one class feature for their powers.

I am not interested in merely making a cookie cutter mold in which every core class gets the same progression in the same way at the same exact trade. I like to keep the options varied and interesting. So if you want to play a barbarian who binds with King Mutaros, sorry. You can't do it with totem sage.


Alzrius wrote:
What's the starting gold for the occultist base class?

1d6 x 35 (average 35 gp.) While their are exceptions, most occultists are commonfolk who come from poor or meager backgrounds.

Quote:

EDIT: I'm also a bit confused by the wording of the totemic alignment power of the totemic sage barbarian archetype. The power says "...and when selecting totem rage powers, the totemic sage is restricted to totems associated with that constellation unless he or she possesses the totemic warrior archetype (see totemic study, below)."

This seems to imply that the list of rage powers associated to the various constellations in the totemic study power are the ONLY rage powers that the totemic sage can select, despite the totemic study power saying that that list is intended to be a list of bonus rage powers gained at 3rd level and every 6 levels thereafter.

Are these contradictory? Or is the totemic sage limited to rage powers that fit into the categories introduced under totemic study, while also gaining periodic bonus rage powers from those same lists?

Also, there is no totemic warrior archetype that I can see.

I highlighted the key word in the sentence, totem rage powers. The class feature only restricts what totem you can take (if you remember in the Advanced Player's Guide, you are only ever to have one totem unless you have the totem warrior archetype, which is also found in the Advanced Player's Guide. The final version will have this archetype and all rage powers cited.

Quote:

DOUBLE EDIT: The soul muse bard achetype's muse's inspiration has some potential problems.

For one thing, does the casting of the selected spell count as a supernatural ability, thanks to this ability's tag, meaning that it can't be countered or dispelled? Also, the wording of the power should specify that the expended spell slot is of a level equal or higher to the level of the spell cast.

Further, the spell is cast "instantly" regardless of its casting time? Do any necessary material components and/or foci need to be present? Can metamagic feats be used in conjunction with the cast spell (presumably they require a higher-level spell slot to be used)?

1. The spell is cast as a spell-like ability. Muse's Inspiration will have its tag changed to (Sp) to reflect this.

2. The wording has been changed to specify that the spell slot must be a bard slot of equal or greater spell level.

3. Class abilities, feats, and similar alternations do not affect the spell-like ability. All components (verbal, somatic, foci, and material) must be present for the spell to function.

Quote:

TRIPLE EDIT: For "The Matrix" sidebar on the cleric's page, it's worth considering adding language to discuss possible subdomains (I'd recommend all of the associated subdomains for the listed domains) and inquisitions.

I'd also like to mention that, personally, I really dislike using the term "the matrix" to refer to the nebulous reality where spirits come from. Most gamers I I'd also like to mention that, personally, I really dislike using the term "the matrix" to refer to the nebulous reality where spirits come from. Most gamers I know will be making Keanu Reeves jokes endlessly as soon as the term comes up in play. Why not just call it "the Beyond" or something similar?[/quote[

1. Added. It says that the GM picks what subdomains are appropriate. Subdomains are added to the game far too frequently for me to ever care to try to stay on top of them.

2. This (or something similar) is the first definition of the word Matrix that I have gotten in three different dictionaries: something that constitutes the place or point from which something else originates, takes form, or develops. That is what Dario and I intend the matrix to be. I do not like Keanu Reeves in the slightest, so I have no plans to acknowledge his existence by changing terminology that has been in Secrets of Pact Magic for 5 years because of him. As the GM, you have the right to change the name if you wish. I will not.

Also, I use the phrase "Dark Beyond" to refer to a constellation, so that wouldn't work anyway (too similar / confusing).

EXCEPTION: I like the Conspiracy Keanu meme. Makes me laugh every time!

Quote:
Also, the Occult Priest cleric archetype doesn't say what class features its Domain Lore and Domain Mastery features replace.

That's because they don't replace anything. However, the final version of this archetype will have gained Diminished Spellcasting, as the Soul Weaver archetype.

Ugh, its day three and I already have SO much errata to document ....


Alexander Augunas wrote:

I highlighted the key word in the sentence, totem rage powers. The class feature only restricts what totem you can take (if you remember in the Advanced Player's Guide, you are only ever to have one totem unless you have the totem warrior archetype, which is also found in the Advanced Player's Guide. The final version will have this archetype and all rage powers cited.

It should be noted that the totem warrior barbarian archetype does not actually allow more than one totem type be selected. There are no requirements, no abilities traded, and no abilities gained from the archetype. It is entirely flavour.


Alzrius wrote:
I'd also like to mention that, personally, I really dislike using the term "the matrix" to refer to the nebulous reality where spirits come from. Most gamers I...

I don't like the matrix as a magic term either. It sounds to computery. I plan on calling it the spirit world.


Many of the constellation aspects do not have ranges. Obviously many do not require ranges or duplicate spells, but the rest need some sort of guideline.

Not that it will matter much, but the granted spells need a (sp) tag and a means of determing caster level.

In the same section, some of the skill bonuses are +3 while others are +4.

Several of the abilities provide DR or an AC boost for only part of a round "until you take damage, or until you are attacked". This is clunky at best and doesn't serve any purpose except to deny an ability when it is needed most.

Nowhere is 'poor pact' or 'good pact' defined. I believe I understand these from the context they appear in. There is a lot going on with those two phrases and an actual definition would go a long way. Rules text should not read like a jigsaw puzzle.

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Zaister wrote:
I own the original books, and a player for my upcoming "Way of the Wicked" campaign is interesting in playing a pact magic user, so we would love to playtest the new version!

The new material still makes room for the old material if you like. For example, the new book heavily emphasizes archetypes over base classes. Some of the old classes aren't quite up to snuff power wise or list the right skills, etc. But others like the unbound witch are probably still quite playable if for some reason one prefers that.

Perhaps closer to my heart, the original books have the legends in their original length. The new book simply couldn't keep to a 64-page supplement and include all those legends, from Azazati to Prince Oszen and Vandrea. I really want to put the better stories into an anthology, a kind of binders companion book that also happens to be accessible to non-gamer friends and loved-ones.

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Banatine wrote:

I'm so glad to hear about this. i bought both the 3.5 pact magic books you made, and loved them all. My only problem with them was choice (having over 100 spirits to choose from made things so difficult...)

I'm actually welcoming the idea of a 'bitesize' version i can memorize, and thus not take up half the game session deciding who i'm bound to! (Playing a Soul Weaver made things even worse. If spirit selection was long, spell selection was painful!)

Yes. I have a tendency to be overly complete. I suppose my students don't mind it, as I cover everything that's going to end up on the test, for example. But it can mean too many options!

In practice, a GM might introduce different supplements as a binder PC "unlocks" them during the course of a campaign.

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Alzrius wrote:

Best news EVAR! I was a huge fan of the original Secrets of Pact Magic and the Villains of Pact Magic expansion, and I'm thrilled to see this!

I'm starting a new campaign next week with my group, and I'd love to introduce pact magic options from the get-go, so please sign me up for the playtest! I also love a good round of theorycrafting (though I have less time than I'd like for it these days) so I'll do my best to help out!

Also, Dario, congratulations on the recent release of the Radiance RPG. I haven't had time to look it over as thoroughly as I'd like, but it looks fantastic.

(And one more thing, are the materials you posted on the now-defunct forums from the Radiance House website gone for good? I remember you had some new pact spirits there - one based loosely on the Twilight series, for example, that let you seduce vampires, succubi, and similar monsters - and it'd be great if you could bring them back somehow.)

Thanks for congrats on Radiance RPG. I haven't quite officially launched her yet, advertising wise. Still need to really set up a nice website and forum and... well, you all can imagine. It acts as sort of a gift for my spouse to consider acting as a GM. Maybe maybe! I also wanted to do something philanthropic. That's why the entire players guide PDF is free.

From the old Forum, some of those spirits are available in a PDF form here:
http://www.pactmagic.com/download.htm
(scroll down to the bottom)

Specifically, the downloads include the rookblade class, malebolge devil, a new spirit and epic spirit, a prestige class, new feats, the vatic stirge (um, stirges are awesome Con killers, so why not give them supernatural pact magic!) and ...

Look under "Anima of the Outer Darkness" for 6 anima and a description of "Lilith’s Midnight Travelogue: A Guide to All That’s Left Behind".

I had to take down the forum due to constant assault by Turkish hackers who claimed they were against the use of magic. Really? Y'all turkeys know it's a game, right? :-p

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

PaizoCon anyone?
Who here is interested to meet up for some pact magic at the upcoming PaizoCon?


Caedwyr wrote:
Alexander Augunas wrote:
I highlighted the key word in the sentence, totem rage powers. The class feature only restricts what totem you can take (if you remember in the Advanced Player's Guide, you are only ever to have one totem unless you have the totem warrior archetype, which is also found in the Advanced Player's Guide. The final version will have this archetype and all rage powers cited.
It should be noted that the totem warrior barbarian archetype does not actually allow more than one totem type be selected. There are no requirements, no abilities traded, and no abilities gained from the archetype. It is entirely flavour.

Well, actually ...

Ultimate Combat wrote:
Totem rage powers grant powers related to a theme. A barbarian canot select from more than one group of totem rage powers; for example, a barbarian who selects a beast totem rage power (see the Advanced Player's Guide) cannot later choose to gain any of the dragon totem rage powers (any rage power with "dragon totem" in its title), unless she has the totem warrior archetype.


The Terrible Zodin wrote:

Many of the constellation aspects do not have ranges. Obviously many do not require ranges or duplicate spells, but the rest need some sort of guideline.

Not that it will matter much, but the granted spells need a (sp) tag and a means of determing caster level.

In the same section, some of the skill bonuses are +3 while others are +4.

Several of the abilities provide DR or an AC boost for only part of a round "until you take damage, or until you are attacked". This is clunky at best and doesn't serve any purpose except to deny an ability when it is needed most.

Nowhere is 'poor pact' or 'good pact' defined. I believe I understand these from the context they appear in. There is a lot going on with those two phrases and an actual definition would go a long way. Rules text should not read like a jigsaw puzzle.

1. Line 1, paragraph 1 clearly states that all constellation aspects are supernatural abilities, even if they mimic spells, extraordinary abilities, etc.

2. Skimming through, it only looked like one bonus had the +4 instead of the +3. That's been fixed.

3. Constellation aspects function as cantrips. They're not meant to be ridiculously powerful.

4. Chapter 3 defines these terms. As I explained to Jackiscool, its exactly like how the Core Rulebook throws around phrases like standard action or caster level in Chapter 3 (classes) and doesn't define them until Chapter 5 or 6 (combat and magic, respectively).


Just to be clear, I wasn't suggesting every class get the same progression. I was just making sure the progression they got was equivalent to what they lost. I was still a little foggy on the power of a spirit, but I'm starting to get a better idea. Now time for a bunch of questions/comments/concerns.

A sorcerer with the ravaged bloodline can't bind any spirits until third level?

What ability score is used on binding checks when someone has binder levels from classes that use different ability scores, for example, foe reaver and occultist?

How do binder levels stack for maximum known spirits? Particularly ones with different progression? The ravaged bloodline is again a concern here. If they multiclass, it seems like their bonus spells are basically totally wasted, because they won't get to a high enough leve to access spirits that they don't already get from occultist/soul weaver/foe reaver/pactsworn pagan/empyreal friar/occult priest, etc. Yes, they get a better binder level, but that's not worth it on its own. I would suggest letting them bind to any spirit of a level equal to their highest spell level. They should start with one known, and gain a new known spirit of the appropriate level (1st at level 3, 2nd at level 5, and so on) instead of a bonus spell. If this seems too powerful, maybe combine it with the bloodline arcana or 1st level power. I'm sure other multiclassed characters could face similar issues when they have a set progression.

What is an untouchable's binder level? The description says it's half for determing known spirits, but the spirit lore rogue talent is worded a little strangely. You should give it a look. I think I can figure out what it means, but the wording is throwing me off a bit.

Can anyone with a binder level bind constellations if they can make the check?

The soul muse's constellation alignment can really mess things up for them. If they choose tree, seer, scholar, angel, or dark beyond, they can't bind any level one spirits. I'm sure problems like this persist for different constellations at different levels, but early on, not being able to bind at all is pretty crappy for the muse.

Despite all these issues and questions above, I'm quite liking the system. I'm just focusing on the flaws right now so I can help make it better. I will be playing as a crossblooded rakshasa-ravaged sorcerer (my DM and I are working on something to fix the abysmal spells known from this situation) and the party I'm DMing will soon be involved in a gang war, and one gang's main shtick will be their occult binding. The archetypes are great for this, and I'd love to see more later on for the other base classes. Witch and Oracle should be particularly interesting, I'm sure.

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8 , Star Voter 2013

Just saw this... Too late to get involved?


Has anyone found any Spirit combinations that seem out of line yet. I've just finished my read through of the spirits and the errata document. I will review the spirits and their combinations again, but I was wondering if someone had already found a flagged combo.


Jackissocool wrote:
A sorcerer with the ravaged bloodline can't bind any spirits until third level?

Correct. They don't suffer a penalty to their caster level when they get the ability, however. Think of the knowledge of pact magic being a part of who they are (see Percy Jackson knowing how to read ancient Greek without ever having studied it), but they aren't able to tap into that knoweldge without sufficient force of personality (aka 3rd level).

Quote:
What ability score is used on binding checks when someone has binder levels from classes that use different ability scores, for example, foe reaver and occultist?

Use the higher score. I'll add that into Chapter 3.

Quote:
How do binder levels stack for maximum known spirits? Particularly ones with different progression? The ravaged bloodline is again a concern here. If they multiclass, it seems like their bonus spells are basically totally wasted, because they won't get to a high enough leve to access spirits that they don't already get from occultist/soul weaver/foe reaver/pactsworn pagan/empyreal friar/occult priest, etc. Yes, they get a better binder level, but that's not worth it on its own. I would suggest letting them bind to any spirit of a level equal to their highest spell level. They should start with one known, and gain a new known spirit of the appropriate level (1st at level 3, 2nd at level 5, and so on) instead of a bonus spell. If this seems too powerful, maybe combine it with the bloodline arcana or 1st level power. I'm sure other multiclassed characters could face similar issues when they have a set progression.

This is a very good question. It took some fighting with the page limit, but I did manage to squeeze it into the final copy. Here's your answer:

Barbarian - A multiclass barbarian treats 1/2 their binder level as their occultist level for determining their spirits known.

Bard - As barbarian; note that muticlassing nerfs their spirit progression. I don't have a problem with having to give stuff like this up in multiclassing.

Fighter - Fighters had their progression removed. Its as a Barbarian now (see above).

Rogue - See barbarian (it was like that in the opening document, however).

Sorcerer - Sorcerer had their wonky progression removed. They can make pacts straight from the get-go.

Quote:
What is an untouchable's binder level? The description says it's half for determing known spirits, but the spirit lore rogue talent is worded a little strangely. You should give it a look. I think I can figure out what it means, but the wording is throwing me off a bit.

Fixed for release. The untouchsble's binder level is equal to their rogue level; it is equal to 1/2 their rogue level for determining spriits known. (that's the quickie version; the real version uses the full, appropriate text). You can also take a rogue talent to improve the max. spirits known part to their full level.

Quote:
Can anyone with a binder level bind constellations if they can make the check?

No. It is an occultist class feature that is separate from the bind spirits class feature.

Quote:
The soul muse's constellation alignment can really mess things up for them. If they choose tree, seer, scholar, angel, or dark beyond, they can't bind any level one spirits. I'm sure problems like this persist for different constellations at different levels, but early on, not being able to bind at all is pretty crappy for the muse.

The barbarian suffers from this as well. Its an unfortunate side effect of only having 64 pages to work with. The 1at level spirits I have in mind for this book's sequel (if this one does well) have been selected to attempt to remedy this. Ultimately, the goal is for one spirit per constellation per spirit level. It'll just take some time to get there :).

Until then, I'm afraid that the totemic sage and soul muse simply have to deal with it. If I were GM, I would allow my player to repick their constellation aspect each time a new spirit level became available until there were more spirits released. But that's just me.

Quote:

Despite all these issues and questions above, I'm quite liking the system. I'm just focusing on the flaws right now so I can help make it better.[/quote[

The hardest part of being an author is throwing your work to the wolves like this :). I have think skin and it doesn't bother me. Most of the changes I've done in the past week I would have never dreamed of adding. So there's that.

Don't worry about it; I want to hear what everyone has to say. However, I will debate and discuss opinions I don't agree with. I hope I've also shown that I'm willing to reconcile and reconsider things as well, however.

Quote:
I will be playing as a crossblooded rakshasa-ravaged sorcerer (my DM and I are working on something to fix the abysmal spells known from this situation) and the party I'm DMing will soon be involved in a gang war, and one gang's main shtick will be their occult binding. The archetypes are great for this, and I'd love to see more later on for the other base classes. Witch and Oracle should be particularly interesting, I'm sure.

I actually finished writing my brainstorm concepts for all of the other Paizo baseclasses last week. Oracle's is basically a "Mystery of the Matrix" while Witch is going to drop patron spells for the ability to bind a spirit into your familiar; basically, your familiar is the binder and the witch is the vestigial companion!


That witch one sounds pretty awesome, I can't wait to see it. Where can I find the actual product information for this? Price and release date, primarily?

EDIT: I see the release date is PaizoCon. Still wondering about price.


How does the Capstone Binder Feat interact with the Warshade's Sealed Lore?

Sealed Lore: A warshade does not gain their bound spirit’s major granted ability by default. A warshade that wishes to gain their bound spirit’s major granted ability must beat the spirit’s binding DC by 10 or more, including any modifications to the binding DC (such as the DC increase for attempting to bind constellation aspects). In addition, a warshade never gains the major granted ability’s capstone empowerment. A warshade with levels in another class with the bind spirits class feature reduces the penalty for trying to gain their spirit’s major granted abilities to 5 and can gain its capstone empowerment by beating the binding DC by 15 or more instead of the usual 10.

Capstone Binder (Occult)
You are able to coax additional power from your spirits.
Prerequisites: Bind spirits class feature.
Benefit: Whenever you forge a good pact with a spirit, you gain its capstone empowerment ability if your binding check exceeds its binding DC by 5 or more.
Normal: Your binding check must exceed the spirit’s binding DC by 10 or more in order to gain its capstone empowerment ability.

I would think that the feat would allow the fighter to act as if he had multiclassed without multiclassing, but I wanted to hear your opinion on it. Honestly, I would rather have Sealed Lore name the Capstone Binder feat instead of the multiclassing option for getting the capstone ability.

Dark Archive

I just returned from a business trip. Am I too late to receive playtest material? I am starting a game as soon as my players finish with their characters, but I can use Ocultist as a new and cool antagonist/NPC. I would be grateful for the opportunity to be a part of the playtest.


Also, I second dropping the matrix name. It makes it feel far too much like technology since the movie by the same name is so identafiable.

Personally, I would go with the spirit realm and make it part of the infinite of the outer planes. That way at least the spirits have some home within the excepted pathfinder setting and an identity when compared with other creatures in the game, given that they now have the outsider creature type.

I feel that latter keeps with the theme of what your doing and gives it more of a fantasy feel and home within pathfinder itself. But that is just my 2 cents on the matter.


Yeah, I'm also for dropping the matrix. Although I think it should be something more evocative than the spirit realm. I'm not sure what, though.


Alexander Augunas wrote:
Caedwyr wrote:
Alexander Augunas wrote:
I highlighted the key word in the sentence, totem rage powers. The class feature only restricts what totem you can take (if you remember in the Advanced Player's Guide, you are only ever to have one totem unless you have the totem warrior archetype, which is also found in the Advanced Player's Guide. The final version will have this archetype and all rage powers cited.
It should be noted that the totem warrior barbarian archetype does not actually allow more than one totem type be selected. There are no requirements, no abilities traded, and no abilities gained from the archetype. It is entirely flavour.

Well, actually ...

Ultimate Combat wrote:
Totem rage powers grant powers related to a theme. A barbarian canot select from more than one group of totem rage powers; for example, a barbarian who selects a beast totem rage power (see the Advanced Player's Guide) cannot later choose to gain any of the dragon totem rage powers (any rage power with "dragon totem" in its title), unless she has the totem warrior archetype.

Yeah, but that is contradicted by the latest errata version of the Advanced Player's guide:

Advanced Player's Guide wrote:

Totem Warrior

A barbarian often has a special totem that is the patron of her tribe. While individual totems vary, those in the tribe that call upon a totem receive similar abilities. Totem warrior barbarians can select from the following rage powers.

Rage Powers: The totem warrior is based entirely upon his totem rage powers. In addition to the totem powers themselves, the following rage powers complement the totem warrior archtype (depending on the totem chosen): animal fury*, low-light vision*, night vision*, raging climber*, raging leaper*, raging swimmer*, and swift foot*.

If ultimate combat is right, then every barbarian is a totem warrior (since it doesn't cost anything to gain the archetype), and if the APG is right, then totem warrior doesn't do anything.


Jackissocool wrote:

That witch one sounds pretty awesome, I can't wait to see it. Where can I find the actual product information for this? Price and release date, primarily?

EDIT: I see the release date is PaizoCon. Still wondering about price.

1. The witch one will be in the second book. NOTHING is certain about that.

2. As you discovered, the release date is PaizoCon. That is a Dario question (he is the publisher). Hopefully we'll see him floating around soon. I don't think we'd charge more than $20 for the final product (its comparable to the 64-page Campaign setting books after all), but I'd assume that it depends on the amount of resources we need to spend to get the art made and the book printed.

I want to stress, however, that my word is only the word of god when it comes to game mechanics. Lawyer things and business things are Dario questions. ^_~

Kitsune Knight wrote:
Stuff about Warshades and capstone binding.

I like the change. It is implemented.

I also want to mention that Constellation Focus and Spirit Focus lost their +1 bonus to your binder level with the spirit. This is partially because I think the effect was too powerful and partially because I needed to make room in the feats section for the extra lines about how the Capstone Binding feat interacted with the warshade. (>.>) ... (<.<)

But it was mostly the former! I promise! :-P

Caedwyr wrote:
Stuff about Totem Warrior archetype.

This is a good point. Could you check the dates on the APG and UC errata and check to see which is newer? Worse to worse, I drop that line about the totem warrior archetype and have an extra line or two of space for art. Oh no.


Announcement:

At some time during next week (Sunday / Monday probably) I am going to release the updated manuscript. Don't forget that the playtesting period doesn't end until May 31st; until then, I will still be sending out documents, so give a post if you're still game.

So far, no comments on the spirits. That doesn't surprise me a whole lot, to be honest. I had a feeling a lot (not all) of the stuff that would need tweaking would be in those archetypes.

Dario thinks I should start a pact magic blog where I talk about pact magic-y things. I'm skeptical that people want to hear what I have to say, he thinks you might. What do you people think?


I am interested in the continued playtest and I'd probably read a pactblog.

Dark Archive

Well, my email address is i.jovanovich@gmail.com - so please send me the document when you can. Thanks.


ok I'll take a look through the spirits when I get the chance. Its just that the archetypes caught my eye first. Also, I would be interested in a pact blog/some continued playtest. Communication is a two way street and I personally would enjoy to hear more of your thoughts on things as well.


Kitsune Knight wrote:
ok I'll take a look through the spirits when I get the chance. Its just that the archetypes caught my eye first.

Considering they're first in the document, I'm not horribly surprised by that. :)

Quote:
Also, I would be interested in a pact blog/some continued playtest. Communication is a two way street and I personally would enjoy to hear more of your thoughts on things as well.

Blah. I might have to do a blog now! Maybe I'll see if I can't get Dario to give me a soapbox on his pactmagic.com site to stand on or something.

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Alexander Augunas wrote:
Blah. I might have to do a blog now! Maybe I'll see if I can't get Dario to give me a soapbox on his pactmagic.com site to stand on or something.

I'm planning to launch a site using tools from Ning.com. It's really secure and looks pretty. It will be for the whole publishing company though, with several forums for the relevant topics. Alas, I spent much of the day preparing for my gaming group tomorrow! And I still need to read up about submarines and underwater explosives....


Dario Nardi wrote:
I'm planning to launch a site using tools from Ning.com. It's really secure and looks pretty. It will be for the whole publishing company though, with several forums for the relevant topics. Alas, I spent much of the day preparing for my gaming group tomorrow! And I still need to read up about submarines and underwater explosives....

Because nothing ever goes wrong when adventures jump onto a submarine!

Tell Dagon I said, "Hey."

Star Voter 2013, Dedicated Voter 2014

I think this sounds interesting. We never got the 'Secrets of Magic' book but I always thoguht it sounded interesting. And I *love* more options.

Spoiler:
email: Lynx412 @ verizon.net

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Regarding the term "Matrix"...

I used that term once in Secrets of Pact Magic, albeit right at the start, when describing the many ways people view the spirit realm. I hoped GMs would pick one (of the nine ideas) or make up their own.

Spirit Realm, Gray Realm, After Realm, the Waste... terms like these are a little more my personal preference in my own settings with regard to the spirits' lonely existence. But those are just mine. I imagine different groups would view the place differently.

The benefit of a term like Spirit Realm is that it's general and allows a GM to fit the material to a setting. Likely, many GMs will be using Golarion or something close, so my tendency to go with a neutral term.


Right now, I'm leaning towards calling it "The Between," as its sort of an in-between state of existing and not existing. I'd rather not tie it to any ideas like death or dying, because in most campaign settings you don't become a spirit just by dying. You have to die under truly extraordinary or spectacular ways.

I also like calling it "The Gray," and "The Waste." A one-word term that sounds uncomfortably familiar and ominous at the same time. In my home campaign setting, I call it the Path of Black Leaves*, the Path for short.

This all, of course, assumes that DMs want me [read, us] to name this place for you in the first place.

Thoughts on any of these names?

Spoiler:
* (Yes, this is a blatant reference to the Slender Man mythos. This will probably not surprise Cheapy in the slightest.)


I like both the between and the waste.

51 to 100 of 233 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Publishing / Pathfinder® / Pathfinder RPG / Compatible Products from Other Publishers / [Radiance House] Secrets of Pact Magic Open Playtesting Month All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

©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.