Amuny's page

I'll be the first to admit PF has its fair share of problems, and poor balance is one of them... But when someone complains about game balance and then cites Alchemists and Ninjas as being abusive, I instantly assume they have no idea what they are talking about.

Ninjas are abusive by the fact that they completely killed the Rogue. Rogue is a pale shadow of the Ninja, who does everything the rogue can do, but better. This is ignoring the fact that quite early in the game they have a "ninja trick" to get greater invisibility for themselve, thus dealing free sneak attack all day long.

And if you think Alchemist is not broken, you probably got the wrong Alchemist. Vivisectionnist+Beastmorph is basically a barbarian on crack with sneak attacks.

What promise did Paizo break, exactly?

From Pathfinder own Wiki page

Design Goals

Jason Bulmahn, Lead Designer for Paizo's Pathfinder brand, began work on the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game in October 2007. Because of the flaws in the 3.5 rules set were now being acknowledged by both fans and the developers at Wizards of the Coast, Jason set out to develop a revised version of the existing rules available under the OGL to fix these problems and improve play without starting from scratch and negating three decades of Dungeons & Dragons history.[2] Bulmahn kept several goals in mind when creating the Pathfinder RPG to maintain a focus in the daunting task.

Honorable task. And a very honorable start with the Core Rulebook.

Improve the Game
One primary goal of designing the Pathfinder RPG was to make the game easier to play for anyone continuing with the current rules set. While the 3.5 rules set is arguably the most thorough incarnation of the world's most popular roleplaying game, it is not without its inherent design flaws. Whether it is game imbalance between classes, confusing mechanics or complicated spells, there seemed to be plenty of room for improvement without throwing everything away and starting from scratch.

CMB/CMD was the only great addition to make the system easier. And that's my first point; the system is now as clustered and complicated then 3.5 was. Classes are everything but balanced, they are even more confusing than before with the archetypes AND prestige class systems living side by side, spells have countless FAQs... Nope.

Add Options
Due to the various supplementary rules released since 3rd Edition was first announced, many of the core classes became relatively underpowered. Since the Pathfinder RPG would be limited to Open Gaming content, many of these options simply wouldn't be available for inclusion in the revised rules. In order to give players the incentive to use the core classes, and to promote backwards compatibility (see below) additional build options and power increases were provided to all 11 core classes.

If you go with the 11 core basic classes without archetypes... well... they are better than their 3.5 version. But they are completely outshined by their archetyped/prestiged version. And not to take in account just other classes (Ninja vs Rogue... who would seriously do a rogue now?)

Backwards Compatibility
One of the primary inspirations for creating the Pathfinder RPG in the first place was to prevent existing gamers from finding shelves of 3rd Edition materials suddenly obsolete. To wit, the new system had to be compatible with the products released previously by Wizards of the Coast, Paizo, and any other publisher operating under the OGL. While conversion would be inevitable for almost any pre-Pathfinder RPG source, making this process as simple and seamless as possible was also a major goal of Bulmahn and the Paizo development team.

Everyone knows that if you use 3.5 material, you're in for some intense puzzling and even more game-breaking mechanics. Every fight have to be recreated, hence not being much more compatible than a 2nd edition adventure. Only decent point is that you *might* not have to recreate a spell list for a spellcaster NPC. But... if you don't, he'll probably be mostly useless.

I've ran the full Shackled City campaign in Pathfinder, and needless to say, I recreated every single monster. Some "epic vilains" weren't as strong as a generic monster at this level, and would have been completely destroyed by any PC of this level in Pathfinder.

Compatible ? Somehow. But Pathfinder just raised the stake and basically buff everybody. So be prepared for some intense rework.

There was also some discussion about being less "money consuming" than Wizard of the Coast, and offering more adventures than compendiums. There is more adventure, but as many books as Wizards. So, 1-1 on that one.

@Crank: To be honest, I'm doubtful about 5th edition as it looks to be a Pathfinder 2.0. They are clearly challenging Paizo on this one, making the same Adventure Paths principle with the "subscription" and such, and playtests are... scary to read about. We'll see with the official release, but as for now, I'm really, really confused about this move. The Vancian spellcasting is probably one of the most looked aspect of 3rd vs 4th, and the return it does in 5th makes a lot of people angry. The whole "combat advantage" system looks terrible, and the basic classes just look sooo complicated.... I'll give it a try for sure, but I'm just... skeptical.

Been a while since I posted here. I think a lot of things got cleared out of my mind while playing Pathfinder, and our party is now really proficient in the rules. But let's get to the point.

Pathfinder RPG came basically at the same time than D&D 4th. No need to say, D&D 4 came with a ton of hate. And I was first in line. I followed Paizo through their path(finder, ohoh!) and enjoyed what they did for the community. I was super happy to see an active forum of players AND designers working together to bring the best out of the OGL.

When the first official Pathfinder RPG book came out (Core Rulebook), I bought it immediately. I enjoyed the read, and it was clearly the "3.5" we all wanted. I ditched my 4th edition books, and dive into Pathfinder for 6 years straight.

6 years have passed.

Pathfinder now have a whole bunch of compendiums with Advanced and Ultimate everything. Wasn't exactly what we were blaming on Wizard of the Coast, 6 years ago ?

But hey, Pathfinder did indeed bring a huge focus on their adventures paths. Which are absolutely amazing.

But the Adventure Paths... changed.

Through a lot of talking with my multiple groups of playing, we came to notice that APs are now... blend into the bunch of compendiums added to Pathfinder. And by this I mean that they evolved so much that someone with the core book only basically can't play the last APs.

More, it looks like Paizo... know that their game is broken. Because yes, it is. And any person with a few "power gamers" know it is. There is absolutely no way to balance a group of experienced adventurer in combat past lvl6-7. And the DMing forums are all about that.

And so are the Adventure Paths.

There is some epic starts on all of them. Some great encounters, with a lot of life around them. The first 2 or 3 books are all amazing, both for the DM and the players. But then... then... oh god. Caravan rules, ship rules, realm rules, whatever they can use to fill this huge gap where the DM absolutely lose control on his players. There is nothing to do but dodge the mishap of the compendiums; Pathfinder is now as broken as 3.5 was.

Then, APs that used to end lvl20 now end lvl17, even 15 for a few. They avoid these lvl9 spells like hell. They know there's nothing to do. Nothing to do to make something balanced for everyone. Every group need his special adjustment, because every group is broken to a different level.

There's a whole lot of things that are directly abusive in this game. Litany of Righteousness, or how to deal 1000 damage to the BBEG in 1round, come to my mind. Synthesist Summoner. Oh god why. Gunslingers. Alchemists. Ninjas. Witch. Feats, spells, abilities and archetypes from book to book just bring the thing worst to worst.

6 years later, I don't enjoy Pathfinder that much anymore. It became clustered with sub-par rules, impossible for a newbie to be to the same level (too much research needed), and just need as many books as 3.5. And that's if you don't allow the use of 3.5 material, which absolutely destroys everything you may love.

So after all the hate, 6 years later, we started a few games of 4th edition. And well. I enjoy it. A lot. And I'm already planning to use some Pathfinder Adventure Path and change the encounters to be 4th edition. Because well... encounters are easy to create, to balance, and to play.

In the end, the only things Paizo respected from their starting promises was the regular adventure paths, and the proximity of their community. They destroyed the OGL the same way Wizard did, and it's now a clustered unplayable system.

tl;dr: 6 years later, 4th edition > Pathfinder.

Actually I just check the whole Monstrous Humanoid list on the SRD, and there's nothing like a Tiny Monstrous Humanoid, and even less diminutive. Which makes Monstrous Physique 2 and higher useless in their "smaller" version ???

No since it's a Large Creature. Interesting one for Strength Build though!

All in title, I was seeking for some cool forms but couldn't find any list anywhere else than searching the whole bestiairies books...

For a 13th Level Magus!

Edit: Forgot to specify. I'm looking for the 5th level spell more precisely, so Monstrous Physique III and Undead Anatomy II. Or even Beast Shape III ?

Edit2: I'm also looking for small size with a Dext Magus.

Amuny

Thanks for the quick answers, it seems clear enough.

@Marthian: There's always ventriloquism I guess... ;)

Title says it all again.

Does using an Hex is considered an "offensive action"? What about Cackle specifically?

I tend to touch the said target often, considering I'm building an Hexcrafter Magus ;)

It indeed seems there's nothing against this in RAW, but wonder how it would deal in PFS ?

Title say it all...

Could I use Evil Eye to give a -2 or -4 saves depending on my level, and than casting a Bestow Curse giving another -4 all saves, on the same target?

Same question could be ask with Disfiguring Touch ?

bump? ;p

Blade Barrier is a classic that we never get used off.

Firestorm as said, is a really great one.

Spell Resistance is always nice, as is Holy Aura. But Spell Resistance is a bit lower and efficient against all alignement.

Than it also depend of your Domain, some domain grant terribly good spells at high levels. Likewise, your War Domain grant the Power Words Blind/Stun/kill which are some really potent no-save spells.

I don't know your domains really, but there's also Strength Domain that gives Grasping Hand which is a great battlefield control that allows no Saves... it's CMB time!

Ok, so there was a debate few days ago on the Rules Boards that ended into nothingness. I really like the whole idea of the Sound Striker, and I'd really like it to be clear and efficient.

Since the official description still really unclear, I think it's the moment to deal with some house rule to make it balanced.

First, description of the spell:

Weird Words (Su): At 6th level, a sound striker can start a performance as a standard action, lashing out with 1 potent sound per bard level (maximum 10), each sound affecting one target within 30 feet. These are ranged touch attacks. Each weird word deals 1d8 points of damage plus the bard’s Charisma bonus (Fortitude half ), and the bard chooses whether it deals bludgeoning, piercing, or slashing damage for each word.

The question on the rule board:

So here are my own suggestion, and I'd like to have your opinion on which is best and why, and if you feel so, your own suggestions.

Weird Words (Su): At 6th level, a sound striker can expand a performance as a standard action, lashing out with 1 potent sound per 3 bard level (maximum 3). Each sound affects one target within 30 feet. These are ranged touch attacks. Each Weird word deals 3d8 points of damages plus the bard's Charisma modifier, and the bard chooses whether it deals bludgeoning, piercing or slashing damages for each word.

Weird Words (Su): At 6th level, as a standard action, a sound striker can unleash a potent sound. This Weird Word deals 1d8 per bard level (Maximum 10) plus the bard's Charisma modifier (Fortitude Half). This sound can hit his target as far as 30 feet. The bard chooses whether it deals bludgeoning, piercing or slashing damages for each word. The bard can use this ability 3 times plus charisma modifier each day.

Weird Words (Su): At 6th level, a sound striker can start a performance as a standard action, lashing out with 1 potent sound per bard level (maximum 10), each sound affecting one target within 30 feet. Each weird word deals 1d8 points of damage plus the bard’s Charisma bonus (Fortitude half ), and the bard chooses whether it deals bludgeoning, piercing, or slashing damage for each word. If the bard choose to send multiple words on the same target, he applies his charisma modifier only once per target.

Weird Words (Su): At 6th level, a sound striker can start a shrieking performance. Each round the performance is maintained, it's lashing out with 1 potent sound per bard level (maximum 10), each sound affecting one different target within 30 feet. Each weird word deals 1d8 points of damage plus the bard’s Charisma bonus (Fortitude half ), and the bard chooses whether it deals bludgeoning, piercing, or slashing damage for each round.

Amuny,

Yes, everything you change to your mutagens are stacking, getting your mutagen more and more "special", and that makes a surprisingly good character for meleeing, especially in low to mid level, with a single feral strength mutagen ^^

Just get to any base class in pathfinder srd and scroll to the bottom, there is a list of Archetypes with everything they C(hange) or X(remove) in form of a table. You can easily check which one is compatible and which is not.

And yes, the problem in my head with that is exactly the fact that it is "changed", but the songs changed does not affect themselves so I guess it's ok... would be like if you remove the 2nd mercy of a paladin and the other archetype only replace the 3rd... would work!

When the Dawnflower dervish uses the inspire courage, inspire greatness, or inspire heroics bardic performance types as battle dances, these performance types only provide benefit to the Dawnflower dervish himself. All other types of bardic performance work normally (affecting the bard and his allies, or the bard’s enemies, as appropriate).

This does not affect Inspire Competence, neither it does for Suggestion.

Therefore, would you still be able to take the Sound Striker archetype on that same bard?

The Dawnflower archetype is a good choice to start indeed, even if it's way more selfish way to play a bard!

Plus, there is nothing telling that your bard MUST be using Dervish Dance. You could be a Dawnflower Dervish and still using a bow.

That way, you can put some seriously good damages with your bard. Just a little sample:

Lvl6 Bard, 14str, 16dext, could easily do:
4 (BAB) + 3 (dext) + 4 (dance) : +11 to-hit
4 (dance) + 2 (str) + 1 (arcane strike) : +7 damages

while Fighter would do:
6 (BAB) + 1 (Weapon Focus) + 1 (weapon training) + 3 (dext): +11...
2 (str) + 2 (Weap. Specialisation) + 1 (weapon training) : +5 on damages!

Only thing is that fighter will have an additional attack on this level due to his BAB. But hey... next level, you will be able to cast Haste...

Other option is Arcane Duelist which leaves you your inspire courage, or the ability to be a bit more selfish but get some more awesome bonuses on your weapon. And a few great feats that might be useful.

(PS: In that case, I would greatly consider the Halfling. You could take a medium mount if it's only the move that hurts you. +2dext/cha is just perfect for a bard, despite the -2 str on composites bows)

Edit @PS2: Also, at this same level, you could cast Heroism on yourself and overcome the Fighter even more. Not to mention Cat's Grace or Bull Strenght. Never forget that while you might passively be less effective than a true fighter (and still very close to my eyes), you will be WAY more versatile.

We are playing Jade Regent actually and are now in the end of Book 2, with the caravans rules.

To answer your last post, yes it's a very fun AP, and as the DM, I already read book 3, and it looks awesome.

The critics seems to be really split, some really loves the caravan rules and some hate them. I guess it's all in the way you really apply it. But if your goal is to build a caravan, I think that Jade Regent AP is indeed a perfect start. I would also suggest you to look forward this excel sheet that might really help you despite a few minor bugs left.

For my part I enjoy these rules and I think my players also do. Just thought that the merchant part with selling / buying is a bit to general, but it's to keep it simple I guess!

http://paizo.com/pathfinder/v5748btpy8ilz

it's lvl1, but worth the shot. This is a good way to have an awesome "one-night game"!

Mixing ideas, but you could make the kami, or another kami if you want to keep things up with Ameiko, to enter his blades after he defeats some evil creatures lurking in Brinewall Castle. The spirit might be watching them for a while, and considering them as allies cleansing the evil from the castle, decided himself to join them this way?

Then the soul would just decide to continue along the PC after these good fights and events

I thought this might already been answered but I could find any.

Could I, per example, be Fighter(Polearm master) 2/Fighter (two-weapon fighter) 5?

One question still on my mind though, is DR applies.

What is the "limit" of this for by-passing DR?

I mean, if a creature have DR 5/Magic, I can hardly believe a Weird Word wouldn't word.

Or would it?

What about a DR 5/cold iron? DR 5/adamantium? What would stop it?

And yeah I agree with you on the scorching ray thing. But a Sorc can Empower/Maximize his scorching ray fast enough to completely outdamage this ;) and AFAIK I don't remember any spell allowing a Touch-Attack AND a Save. It's usually one or the other. May be just a Fort Save like most of damage-spells would be an option?

Yeah, Lillend is very high level, not sure it worth it, even less with Shadowbard.

Well, thanks for all your input. We usually don't allow 3rd Party Publishing in our games, but we'll see what we'll do on that if the need continues.

I did some work on this archetype to fix some of the issues. Didn't really take off though.

This should become official.

Only thing I might change is kicking off the Fort Save (I mean hey... you have a ranged touch attack...!)

And you get something really, really similar to a scorching ray, but with physical damages.

And this way, I like it, and would be ready anytime to allow this in my games.

Ok so you would play 10 touch-attack, than 10fort saves, and than roll your single d8 for each fort save played one by one?

In itself it shows how non-sense it is.

Nothing in this game act like this, you save vs the damages or you don't, you dont save at 3/10th of the effect. C'mon. Would take 10min playing your single standard action every times. How convenient! You couldn't even just roll 10D20 and check how many save you got since you would therefore need to check each D8 to compare.

And yeah Magus have high crit range, but the simple fact that a Protection from Lightning would just counter him nearly completely is a major point. You can do nothing against SoundStrike

they could have replace sound by "solid note" in the descriptive, it would have been the same. The damages are slashing, bludgeonning or piercing, not sonic.

The only thing I see in the fact that it's "sounds" it's that even if the bard is not in a silence, if the target is... well, it fails, as it might be on deaf targets. (And yet again, I'm not completely sure since they do physical damages)

And I'm really open with the whole idea, just not with the maths of it. The Sound Striker would become the #1 single-target exploder in the mids level without any specials buffs/items/preparation needed, and against which even a full-prepared wizard that knows the bard couldn't really get ready and would just die on the first round.

I'm not even sure if a Summoner, vivisectionnist or barbarian with pounce could manages that much damages in the same levels. And a wizard/sorc clearly can't even with empowered/maximized spells.

I think this need a ruling, because the SoundStriker is an awesome idea, but as I said... maths blows the thing and it's clearly unbalanced.

...

Your magus doing 15d6+30 at best on lvl10 is doing it using a Sorcerer Dip, maximizing his traits, and using minimally a 3rd level spell slot (would be 4th but I guess your Magus have that trait reducing the cost of metamagic shocking grasp by 1)

Daily, your magus might be able to do this something like 3 or 4 times at best unless you really focus on doing only this in your day and use all your Arcane Pool in this idea. Let's say around 10 times at best.

So your totally optimized magus is doing average 82damages no save with his Shocking Grasp, more in the way with spell combat if he gets his full-attack action.

Your totally not optimized bard who just said "hey I'll take this archetype" is doing 125damages on average with save for half... 30 times per day.

This is SIMILAR assuming the fort save and the weapons damages of the Magus.

Now:
1) Magus need do use his full-round action in doing this
2) Magus will cry under DR/SR/Energy Resistances.
3) Magus will cry against any creature that is lightning immune.
4) Magus is born to DPR. AFAIK, that's not the bard's role.

You have 10 ranged touch attacks. Each one deals-

1d8 (4.5 damage on average)
+8 damage (from 26 Charisma)
+3 damage (arcane strike)
+1 damage (point blank shot)
+2 damage (good hope)

I don't see how Arcane Strike would apply, this is definitly not a weapon. If each words apply differently, at best you could apply Arcane Strike on ONE word.

I don't see anywhere where Weird Word is considered ray either. So no Point Blank Shot,

Again, I don't see how Weird Word is a weapon, so no Good Hope.

You just got from 22 to 16 max damage per word with a bit of good sense.

doing 125 damages on average ((4.5+8)x10), even with a fort save, still extremely powerful. Even more since you can't protect from it with resistances or anything.

If I was asked about it as a DM, I think I'd rule that Charisma modifier applies only once if you focus on one target, doing 10d8+8 instead of 10d8+80. But I still think that RAI doesn't allow focus on one single target.

"Virtuoso performance does not stack with any other method of maintaining simultaneous bardic performances."

So there is other ways? Or it's just a "in case" quote?

Title said most of it...

I'm looking forward an Arcane Duelist Bard with an Archery oriented-build.

I'm a bit sad to see that Bloodthirst is actually a Performance, and therefore can't be used in conjunction with Inspire Courage.

So I was wondering if there was anyway I could actually build a toon and make him able to do such a thing?

Grappling, pinning, using Combat Maneuvers can be a major weakness against these guys as well, as most players do not think about buffing their CMD (or focusing on Combat Maneuvers in general).

That's why Strength Surge is here I guess ^^

But the other advices are sweet indeed. Constructs seems a good way to avoid the "Oh I can't melee, here's a Destruction Spell", may be all the casters in the campaign might suddenly have golem-friends ;)

And yes, actually the only time I really switch the odd was with an Anti-paladin that had Corruption Resistance cast on himself before (which basically negates the smite evil damages),

@Mage Everything: I'd be curious to have your inquisitor build, could make a though enemy. And the rage domain, he already spoke of it... the fact that you can't cast while raging is a very, very big downside to a high level cleric.

Thanks for all your inputs guys, I'll look forward a few things!

So yeah, let's explain a little.

We have Melee Cleric and Paladin here in our group.

And with the buffings and shared things... how to tell this... well... let's say AM BARBARIAN better not be evil because he would just fear the Cleric as my cat fear the vacuum cleaner.

Ok, so here are the details:

The cleric has 20 strength with belt of strength and a +3 Greatsword. (Nothing exceptional for a level15 character, let's say we don't follow the rulebook trail for wealth by level... hopefully.)

He casts himself Divine Power, giving him +5 Luck Bonus on to-hit and damages rolls.

Then he casts Righteous Might , giving him +4 SIZE bonus to strength and constitution, plus giving him reach and a 3d6 Greatsword.

Now we have a 24 Str Cleric (still not exceptional) with divine power. Makes his BASE damages going like this:

3d6 + 3 (magic) + 5 (luck) + 10 (str, 2handed) + 12 (power attack)
Or 3d6 + 30.

He than can add 10 times per day 7dmg to any attacks with Ferocity Subdomain

He usually keeps True Seeing close to avoid any Invisibility / Illusions / Displacement, and also have Weapon Master allowing him to Cleave, Lunge, Blind-fight, Improved Manoeuver, or anything he could need on the fly.

So we have some kind of powerful divine fighter hitting like a truck and perfectly versatile. Not to mention that he is a Cleric lvl15: Blade Barrier, Flame Strike, Firestorm, Destruction, Heal, Dispel Magic, Spell Turning, Energy Resistances, Spell Resistance, .... you see the point.

But a truck isn't enough for our dear Cleric, hail to the all mighty pathfinder paladin.

Paladin share smite evil.
Paladin use Litany of Righteousness

Undead? oh fine, cleric uses Channel Smite.

So here how the lich died:
3d6 (large greatsword) + 7d6 (channel smite) + 10(24str x1.5) + 5 (luck, divine power) + 15 (smite evil) + 12 (power attack) + 7 (ferocious strike) + 3 (magic)

For an awesome total of... 10d6 + 52... X2 thanks to the litany!

And of course, the cleric has Improved Critical, so critic 17-20 with his greatsword, which happens quite enough to be disturbing with these damages. A full-attack round usually mean 200-300 damages. So it's usually overkill for any "standard" monster... Oh yeah, and he bypass any DR with Smite Evil.

Plus, he is even more unlikely to be killed than an invulnerable barbarian, since he's a freaking cleric lvl15 with all of the spells included in it and has the highest will save around the world. (High wisdom + high base save...)

So, first, my question would be: Is anything broken in this?
And my second: How would you deal with that? Of course neutral evil enemies come at first, but 3d6 + 37, not to mention spellcasting abilities, still very overwhelming. Multiple lower CR enemies? Ahah... perfect moment for Blade Barrier, Firestorm and Holy Word!

Amuny,

Question asked by my player I killed tonight in order to create a new character... :p

It's clear you can't take two archetypes if they changes the same ability since it would enter in conflict. But what is the other ability is not changed, but just "dependant" from another?

As example here, Ranger Infiltrator.

At 3rd level, an infiltrator learns how to copy the unusual abilities of his prey. He chooses one type of creature he has selected as a favored enemy,

So, the Infiltrator does not alter in any way the Favored Enemy class feature.

So I could, RAW, take Guide as second Archetype. But Guide removes Favored Enemy. Therefore... what happens to my infiltrator ability?

By pure logic, I'd say it doesn't work, but I'd be curious to ear what you think about this.

If the victim of such a death attack fails a Fortitude save (DC 10 + the assassin's class level + the assassin's Int modifier)

So if I have a Rogue 6 / Assassin 1 and I'm reading fine, the DC of the death attack would be 11 + Int Mod?

Any ways to increase that? It's even weaker than poisons :/

It's not even possible to compare a Death Attack to any Death-Effect spells unless you manage to have more int than your wizard buddy... and that you still have enough str to be able to actually hit and land that death attack that you prepared 3rounds.

Is it just me or... ?

Extracts are the most varied of the three. In many ways, they behave like spells in potion form, and as such their effects can be dispelled by effects like dispel magic using the alchemist’s level as the caster level. Unlike potions, though, extracts can have powerful effects and duplicate spells that a potion normally could not.

[...]

An extract is “cast” by drinking it, as if imbibing a potion

? :p

Hey folks,

May be it's something "broken", but I thought about something here:

Let's say I have a lvl10 Alchemist (in my case, Vivisectionnist). As a 4th lvl Formulae, I have Greater Invisibility.

I have the Infusion discovery, allowing me to "keep" my Greater Invisibility up as a potion.
(http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/base-classes/alchemist/discoveries/paizo-- -alchemist-discoveries/infusion)

I then use Alchemical Allocation
(http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/a/alchemical-allocation)
and drink my Greater Invisibility.

Would it works?

Cause if so, I could "recast" a 4th lvl spell with a 2nd level one a few times, and instead of choosing any 3-4th level spell twice, I could just get Alchemical Allocation a few times ?

Hey there,

So I'll go right through the point. SRD quote:

For the purpose of these attacks, the monk's base attack bonus from his monk class levels is equal to his monk level. For all other purposes, such as qualifying for a feat or a prestige class, the monk uses his normal base attack bonus.

When your base attack bonus reaches +4, and every 4 points thereafter, the penalty increases by –1 and the bonus to damage increases by +2.

I understand that for qualifying for Power Attack, the monk couldn't at first level.

But about the use of Power Attack...

If a Lv4 Monk uses power attack, would it does:
1) -1/+2 since he has 3 BAB as Monk.
2) -2/+4 since he is considered having a BAB of 4 for his flurry of blows

? ^^

Ranger, archetype Guide.

Is for me the best TWF overall, no worries about those so called favored ennemies you cross the blade with once every three months. Just focus on one target, seek&destroy.

Plus, he won't need lvl8 to be efficient against any target.

And overall, I think ranger is better for:
1) Better access to feats (no need epic dext AND strength)
2) Low spells. You could trade them with an archetype, but hey, those are just awesome. Lead Blade, Life Bubble... !
3) Way more damages overall with favored ennemies. Weapon Training is like +1/2 somewhere around. Fav ennemies grows very fast and very strong. Plus, you will be able to spend every points in strength since you will need way less dext than the fighter. So only stats-wise you should overcome the Weapon Training.
4) Skills. Not a terrible bet but hey... it makes a difference.
5) Style. Ranger is just way more awesome than a brute fighter.

Extra Channel tend to be a trap option since it will get useless in higher levels.

Combat Casting is always nice, even more for a cleric that tends to be in melee, and undoubtly a good choice.

Toughness... That's what Bear's Endurance is for, right?

Improved Initiative... well... I always thought as a min/maxer that this is a waste of feat for mostly every character.

Weapon Focus... 5% to-hit is not negligeable, but you have way other things to get, and any buff will bump it in fast.

Fiend Sight: You told everything, need to be taken twice... argh.

So my advice would be Combat Casting. Weapon Focus in 2nd and Imp Initiative way more far in 3rd.

Channel Smite is an awesome choice for melee cleric to burst undeads out with a sword hit. ;)

Yes, it does give a "free attack".

When you use Spell Combat, it allows you, with a -2 penalty, to cast a spell while doing a full attack action.

If that spell is a Touch Attack Spell, you can therefore use spell strike to deliver your spell (in this case, shocking grasp), and have a "free" weapon attack.

And actually, many Magus came with spaming 0th level spell that allow a touch attack to always have that "additional attack".

I've been a long defender of Battle Cleric, and still do.

In one of our games, we have a group where I am battle cleric, and we have the luck of having a real "healer cleric". The group goes like this:

-Battle Cleric
-Paladin
-Healer Cleric
-Ranger
-Magus (ex sorcerer, converted Magus when UM got out)

We are progressing on Low XP Table, and the DM make it extra-slow. This game been running for 5years now, playing around 1night/2 weeks.

We are now lvl15, and I have a clear look on my old pure brute fighter, the actual ranger and the paladin. Not to mention Magus.

Well, things are easy as this: If we have time to buff ourselves, which we usually have assuming all tools a lvl15 party can have... well... I really don't see any reason a Fighter would have to exist.

I can crush ennemies with some 2-300DPR, I can cast HEAL for 150HP once or twice without much problem, I have True Seeing, Spell Resistance, Spell Turning, Air Walk, and Righteous Might to be even more OP than your casual Enlarge Person.

I have the best Will Save around with the Paladin, (26wisdom, meh), I can blast a Flame Strike, Blade Barrier or Firestorm, and for the mean of it, can make wizards rage with their weak Disintegrate while I have that awesome and terrible spell named Destruction.

Finally, as a cleric, I have one of the highest Diplomacy of the party, and usually get on the first line with the pally when it comes to Roleplay.

So actually, I'm more than a "Jack of all trades". I just do everything. I can heal like a boss, I can do melee damages a fighter could hardly dream of, I can challenge the spellcasters like nobody does, and I can OMFGWTFBBQ destroy any undead coming my way with Channel Smite and shared smite evil.

What could you more possibly dream of? I have Strength and War domains, with subsequent Subdomains, I have numerous calls to increase my damages and grant myself some combat feat I need on the fly (Blindfight, Cleave, Improved <insert manoeuver name>, ...), and can overcome any strength check that could be asked in the game.

So yes, as more as the levels increase, I think the "pure fighter" in Pathfinder is as it was in 3.5: Completely behind hybrids.

The only flavor I can give to the fighter is that he doesn't need a few rounds of buffs to be ready. That's all of it.

Sadly, I have to admit that the so called "oldest rpg game" and their wtf-4th edition had the way of doing it with the fighter. Those who played might understand what I'm saying. The fighter in 4th Edition was a real "tank" as you are used to see in MMORPG. For the best or the worst, you still had a real feeling of being useful on the battlefield, no matter who your allies were.

Thanks for keeping this sheet alive, we are currently using it in our game, good work, we'll update with the fixes ;)

Hey there,

So we had a debate in my last gaming session, and I thought I could share and get more detailed answer here.

We have a Tiefling Alchemist in our game, who has the Prehensile Tail alternate racial feature, giving him the possibility to use his tail as an hand.

It clearly says it can't give additional attacks, but... how about "action management"?

Even more since he's alchemist. Why could he, and why couldn't he, drink a potion with his tail while throwing a bomb with his hands?

For this game, we quick-houseruled that he could take his move action to do another standard action requiring his hands. Therefore, he could drink his potions and throw a bomb, but couldn't do a full-attack action and still drink his potion.

What do you think? Is there anywhere where I could find more detailed rules about this?

I also have a few problems with Excel 2010. Don't have 2007 close.

1) Can't apply any feats either like Krell

2) Can't choose what Scout and Spellcaster will do

3) as Waruko mentioned, I think the cook also have to eat something.

4) Doesn't seems to add Scouts and Spellcasters PC correctly. Hirelings are added but still can't choose between hunting and scouting.

Think that's all for now, still trying it a little but since it doesn't really works in 2010, will look further if I can find a 2007 version somewhere.

-----------------
EDIT: Running the expanded one (Roots)
1) Feats are OK
2) Still can't choose for scout and spellcasters
3) Cook still not eating.
4) Still can't add spellcaster. Scout PC is counted but I can't choose what he is doing.

Not exactly an illusion, but I already saw a player dealing with the DM between two games to use a Dream spell on a player.

That dream was showing him his god (he was paladin) asking him a favor... which you could guess, was definitly in the advantage of the Dream's caster. In this case, freeing a criminal that promised to help the wizard.

The player learned it was a Dream spell only years after it happened!

About the thing of throwing multiple alchemist fire in a round...

What if I'm a Tiefling with Prehensile Tail racial ability, and use it to keep an alchemist fire close?

And what if you hold two Alchemist fire at the beginning of your turn?

I understand the limit is the fact that you can't get them off your backpack fast enough, but if you already have them in hand... it seems to be a normal attack. And the tail give a free action to retrieve things. ?

I've read through every post. I'm still pretty much confused about the long-term efficiency of the Alchemist. May be I'll have to try it, and I'll surely do in a near or far future. The "beast"chemist seems WAY more viable all-day long than the "bomber" one though. Even lvl10, you will have like... let's say 15-18bombs per day depending of your int score.

If you throw 2-3bombs per round, you still run out of bombs after... 5-6rounds !? And I totally doubt about the efficiency of the extracts to save the day.

The Targeted Bomb Admixture with Cognatogen (as discovery or mindchemist) still look interesting and appealing to me. I can easily see something around 5d6+20 on lvl10, which seems fair enough assuming the fact you bypass all SR and potentially most of resists with some Discoveries.

Overall, it's not the efficiency of the Alchemist that I doubt, but his ability to... ensure total working all day long. And by that I mean at least 2-3fights/day.

May be my fear comes from the fact that I'm used to play main casters (Sorc, Cleric) or melee, I guess we will have to see it in action.

Thanks for all your comments, advices and feedback. I'll definitly have to give it a try one day!

Hi there.

So here I go. I've been playing, as DM or Player, around every class existing in Pathfinder at least one or two game, taking the time to create and evaluate it before.

I'm usually a min/maxer, not even close to some pure powergamer around here, but still.

I'm trying to get the point with the Alchemist. Many people around the forums seems to love this class. I have my book in hands, but I turn it on every side, and can't still see the point of Alchemist.

All I see is a toon that say "Hey, I have low spells, a weak bomb that doesn't even match a fireball, and few so-so self buffs."

Plus, the bomb are not only weak, but they are EXTREMELY limited in number. So when I see all these Rapid Shot or TWF templates throwing bombs everywhere... I'm like... well cool story, but after 2rounds you're out?

So I'm just here pondering: Did I miss something?

I even took the time to create a fully working Alchemist Character Sheet lvl1, 5 and 10... and still can't see in which case this toon would worth another character of this level. Even my bards are doing way better fighter / caster ... ???

The best way to control power gamer?

If you are the DM, speak with the so called power gamer, ask some of his techniques, search a little here around Advice Forums (where there is many min/maxing post), settle everything.

Than make the PC encounter a group of NPC... you know, power NPC.

I'm a min/maxer myself. I've been DM a few times. I still remember the look on the face of the PC when the so-called unkillable Invulnerable Rager barbarian fell in one round against a min/maxed antipaladin.

Shaken your players, show them fear, show them what min/maxing means. They can't completely remake their character, and they can't adapt each fight. You can adapt the ennemies to them.

Nothing is dangerous as a fully prepared wizard. Make a powerfull wizard, explain them how long it been since he scries the party. Than make the encounter, with a full-prepared and buffed min/maxed wizard.

I had some fight with a single wizard with only 1-2 levels over the party that handled them and even killed one or two players. Min/maxed players.

As a DM, you control the game, players don't. Min/maxers... have MIN. Use these to your advantage, and you will enjoy the fear in their eyes when they'll see some perfectly done recurring NPC. My antipaladin still one of my favorites. So was the illusionist wizard.

You can easily min/max a character so he will instant-win against THAT player, and will be perfectly normal against other. Even easier with a spellcaster.

If you are not used to powergaming yourself... invite that powergamer player with you to help you create the NPC. He'll surely enjoy the experience, and you will learn AND enjoy from it!

Cheers!

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/traits/race-traits/rapscallion-gnome

this.

So yeah, wouldn't stack. Thanks for fast answers ;)

Hey there,

Simple quick and easy question I guess, but I wasn't certain.

If a player take, let's say, Reactionnary Trait (APG), that gives +2 Initiative.

And also have a Gnome Racial Trait that gives +1 Initiative and something else.

Would he gain +3 Initiative, or only +2 since they would not stack together?