![]() ![]()
![]() KaeYoss wrote:
Good point, there are other things that don't work out so well. The monk in a low point buy campaign struggles more than other classes. That doesn't invalidate my point though. As it's not possible to discuss and fix everything at once, can we focus on one thing at a time? Thanks. ![]()
![]() Gilfalas wrote:
Most of them do because the bonuses from the character's ability scores stack with them and so improve them. Spells are harder to save against, melee combatants hit more often, do more damage, or have longer lasting power (AC and hit points), etc... Gilfalas wrote: Natural bond is a specific druid class power. Weapon Training would be a specific Fighter class power. Should the Weapon Training abilities increase in a high point buy campaign? No Weapon Training abilities already increase in effectiveness because the ability score improvements all stack with it and make it more powerful and stay effective longer. Gilfalas wrote:
Most character class abilities benefit and stack with ability bonuses except for the animal companion, which doesn't benefit if any of my stats increase. Extra spell buffs? Just the idea that I have to spend them on the animal companion, whereas the cleric, sorcerer and wizard don't have to, is proof that the animal companion doesn't scale. ![]()
![]() wraithstrike wrote:
If the animal companion is appropriately powerful for a 25 point build campaign, then it's too powerful for a 10 point buy one and will dominate the party, I would think. It follows that animal companions should have weaker stats in a 10 or 15 point buy campaign. I see the animal companion more as a part of the druid character itself that has been separated, leaving the druid alone weaker. Think Adam, rib and Eve, metaphorically speaking. It would make sense to me that the stats of the companion should scale with the point buy in the campaign, because he's part of the druid (or ranger). ![]()
![]() wraithstrike wrote:
But there are "Epic Fantasy" Pathfinder campaigns with 25 points to buy stats, and that's what I'm talking about in comparison to low, standard and high (respectively 10, 15 and 20 points). My question has nothing to do with 3.5, sorry about the ambiguous use of "epic". ![]()
![]() Purple Dragon Knight wrote:
Thanks, but I'd trust your answer more if you didn't just directly contradict the rules about darkvision. Either that or the rules are remarkably ambiguous. The way it's written, I read them to mean that darkvision and scent depend on your form so you automatically lose them when wild shaping. Although I guess they could be read as you say. Gahh. The Pathfinder rulebook is driving me nuts. ![]()
![]() Does anyone else think that animal companions are less attractive in epic campaigns than others with fewer build points, and therefore the classes that have them don't scale up? I'm obviously thinking of the animal companion as a "shard" of the character. The power relationship between characters and animal companions gets skewed. ![]()
![]() Kosivo0121 wrote:
It applies (PF core rulebook): "Add any bonuses you currently haveon attack rolls due to spells, feats, and other effects." ![]()
![]() lostpike wrote:
I'm starting to feel really dense. I don't get it. ![]()
![]() lostpike wrote:
I'm sorry, I can't find the text you're talking about for #1. I also did a word search for "racial" in the pdf. The section for polymorph on p. 212-213 (Chapter 9, magic) only mentions the loss of armor bonuses in the context of items, which aren't the same as natural armor anyway. "Each polymorph spell allows you to assume the form of
I can't find anything about losing racial natural armor, would you be so kind as to quote it or explain your statement?
![]()
![]() My character has racial natural armor (not a bonus from a magic item). 1. Is that lost when using wild shape? I'd think so, but the mechanics as described for the spell and the polymorph section suggest that it's kept. 2. If I have the feat improved natural armor, does it apply to my new form? I'm confused on that one, I'd like to think it does; it would be fair anyway. |