Arch_Bishop's page

I think it's more about having both the eidolon and your summons at the same time. At least that is what I've been told before.

I think biggest + to Initiative I've seen is + 26 at level 1.

You could also use a ring of spell knowledge (although that makes it a 2nd level spell), use UMD with a wand or get an Ember Staff.

This is actually a very complicated matter.

I remember someone, back in 3.5 days, evaluating caster levels, spells etc. and reaching the conclusion that each spell known might actually worth a feat (arguably more).

Since spellcasting is the most powerful mechanism in the game, it would be safe to assume that losing caster levels(and spells/day/known) is never worth it (from an optimization's point of view) and is always worth it if you can get them back, by any means.

Just to make a comparison, back in 3.5, some of you might remember it, there was the Greater Draconic Rite of Passage feat that gave kobolds +1 Sorcerer caster level beyond your maximum character level(essentially giving you wizard spell progression). IIRC it required 2 feats, some HPs loss and a few gold. Someone might argue that this isn't the same case but it's the closest thing I can think to compare to.

With all that being said, if practised spellcaster/magical knack worth 1/half a feat, while only raising caster level, I could easily say that esoteric training effects, would require many feats.

A class with archetypes named "Celebrity" and "Diva"...
What's not to like?

When in doubt, I usually recommend boosting saves.

Skill focus /knowledge(arcana) is remarkably in character, however.

Is "Divine Protection" not allowed in PFS?

Arch_Bishop wrote:

What I wanted to ask is, is there any other way to get double 9's besides esoteric/eclectic training?

That depends heavily on your GM's interpretation of the Evangelist archetype from Inner Sea Gods. Under one of the... more liberal interpretations of the prestige class, you can continue progressing both arcane and divine spellcasting gains beyond the normal 10th level limit for Mystic Theurge. If you used the entry method A, this would result in you having lost 2 and 3 levels of progression in either class, respectively, effectively gaining 9th level spells in both classes.

However, it has been hotly debated as to whether or not this is intended, or even how it actually works. If this is something you intend to do, talk to your GM ahead of time and make certain that they understand the debate and approve of the build. I intend to cover both sides of the debate fairly neutrally when I cover Inner Sea Gods to allow people to keep their debates to the evangelist threads, rather than the mystic theurge ones.

Oh my...This is a very liberal interpretation of the class ability!

And yes, should the esoteric/eclectic training is approved by the GM, it only works for the "9th lvl spells at 17th level" classes.

What I wanted to ask is, is there any other way to get double 9's besides esoteric/eclectic training?

In 3.5 yes, it did half damage to secondary targets IIRC, but the save was the same for all I think.

Witches of PF and Warlocks of 3.5 are two very different things.
The only common element, up to a point, is the "unlimited" recource mechanism of Eldritch Blast/Invocations and the Hexes. Although the later is sometimes limited to once/creature/day.

As a question of power, the witch, as a 9th lvl prepared caster with a solid spell list, comes way ahead.

As far as theme goes, I dont really know if the witch is the offspring of the warlock. Witches study with their familiars and are guided by their patrons. The 3.5 warlock was a descendant of an X supernatural being that gave him an "unlimited power", that he had to control.

Human flexibility makes them "not bad for any class" but they are also not the best at every class. Many have argued that dwarves are the best race and they make valid points. The feat is not overpowering IMO. If I were to modify the races I would help halflings.

"Steel soul" and "Glory of Old" would be two of these points for me to play a dwarf.

I think this reputation is something that followed them from 3.5. Back in 3.5 when feats were 1-3-6-9...and many classes were feat starved and some races were simply not worth it... yeah that feat was a really big deal. And humans didn't even get +2 to any stat too. You could never go wrong with humans (not that you can now).

Now that feats are 1-3-5-7-9... with all these extra ways to get feats and powers(bloodlines, new paladin stuff, favored class bonuses etc) I think not so much. Sure its an extra feat and it's a good thing, but you will not think again (and maybe regret it) when you pick a race that is not human.

Even now though, humans are quite versatile and have good racial features.

Although no less feat intensive as your example, you could have a Summoner base class with one of those "natural" archetypes, for a fey (i think) eidolon, summon nature's ally, instead of summon monster, for an even more nature love theme.

As for the Witch you mention, she has the beast bonded archetype to boost your familiar should you wish to. Also keep in mind that your character sheet affects greatly the power of your familiar/improved familiar. Classes with good base saves/ BAB/ and hit points are important for a more battle oriented familiar.

Oh, I haven't really seen that part from the SRD. Thanks!(for all the extra info on how to counter too)

EDit: Although...Someone might argue that there is a difference between attacking/touching and crossing the line. Anyone else's opinion on this??

Drawn from

First of all how do you handle the above situation. We have lets say an evil Synthesist with his "suit" on and a creature with a Magic Circle against evil on it.

What happens when he tries to go in the circle without having SR to beat the caster? Does he stop at the edge and cannot attack him?Does the eidolon become suppressed while he is in?

And while we are on it. What are the best options to counter a Synthesist? Dismissal or Banishment?

Worst I've heard was Female Paladin named "Jay Law".

Then there were things like Bards named John Lemon and Justin Beaver.

I like the class, I just don't get some major blessings. Some of them go like:

At 10th level, you can touch an ally...

Does that mean you cannot use it on yourself?

Sacred weapon, if I got this correctly, is nice for those people who always wanted to carry a weapon like the sling for example, while later it's a damage upgrade for all weapons I guess. Free buffing is the signature of the class, while the bonus feats and all the rest is just icing on the cake.

Vanish!

Would you rather "actually meet" one of the characters you created and played and live with him a week or see your best PF/DnD/RPG scenario ever, you played and finished, as a movie with you and your friends (or your cherry-picked actors in each role)in it?

I've always thought of the rogue's main role as melee support. The one who plays nice with the fighter/barbarian/ranger/etc. and works in tandem with them to get lots of flank. Turn the melee advantage of the dedicated fighter into an even more unfair advantage by adding sneak attack, basically.

Rogue sucks if you try to go lone-wolf. You really need to coordinate with at least one other party member. Ideally with the whole party. The boards here generally don't like teamwork though, and classes are assessed mostly based on what they can do on their own.

I do wish we had better rogue talents available, admittedly.

Why people still don't get how that(bolded part) works is something I can not understand. It's been like that since ages.

100% agree with everything you said, especially the "more/better talents".

Well in that case...eldritch knight will fix many of the problems people mentioned above. From what I see, this is mostly a thematic character so the spell levels lost might not bother you. If you do mind about them, stick to wizard.

The only thing that I would change, would be the magical lineage selection. I mean...what's more thematic than vampiric touch through a bite attack?Plus the temporary HP you get are very good.

Anyway, self buffs are going to help you a lot with your focus on the bite and melee range. Mage armor, Defending bone, False life, stunning barrier, shield, protection from evil etc are all there to help you early. Too bad Illusion is prohibited because there is greater Invis and Mirror image. Chill touch, shocking grasp, ghoul touch, vampiric touch, stricken heart can go through your bite as well. Sooner or later you will have to quicken them in order to cast them and use your bite to deliver them in the same round.

Command undead (spell) can get you nice pets, instantly if they are mindless. You better have company if you are going melee as a wizard.

Any feat that will strenghten the spells you deliver(metamagic)would be good I guess. As for your bite, you could try Improved natural attack at some point, in order to get it to 1d8 if enlarged(optional).

Does taking improved familiar and replacing your armadilo counts as changing the core build? Cause eldritch knight familiars are much better in combat than the rest. Plus you could pass him wands to buff you up in battle. If you consider it a change in the core build, ignore this.

Check out if there is anything interesting for you in the Sorc bloodlines since you have 14 CHA (Eldritch Heritage feat). Dont remember if there is something for you there right now.

Favored class bonus go to HPs.

Thats a few things on top of my heard right now...

Do you have to stay a pure Necromancer or you could go for a Prestige Class like Eldritch knight?

We roll two and take the better one

That's what we do. You either take "max first - average rest" , or the GM and the player each roll once and take the better one (first one is still max).

You know your GM is desperately out to get your

Isn't Arcane Thesis just Magical Lineage+Spell Specialization? Ok, cheaper, but with Wayang Spellhunter, the combo you get is above and beyond arcane thesis.

Arcane thesis had a very bad writing when it first came out in 3.5 PH2. IIRC, according to the way you read it , it allowed the reduction of the initial spell level, after the metamagic feat application. Meaning you could take a bunch +0 metamagic and and cast f.e. fireball as a 0 level spell.

No we were meant to fight this dragon. When we get a quest to go kill this dragon, I'm pretty sure we're meant to fight it.

I don't know if your DM would go that far but have you considered that it might have been a "death trap" by an evil, phenomenaly good, guy,that you had to evade somehow, or a reason to meet that particular dragon for plot reasons, as someone before me said?

"Honestly it feels like someone who thought that spells were insanely valuable, while also not understanding the value of melee combat, designed it. Nothing's clearer about that to me than the decision that being able to dimension door 1/day is worth 1/4 the entire evolution pool - when, for that same price, you could add 3 more claws and also a pounce (on a creature that can just be resummoned if it dies/falls into lava/gets crushed/whatever, anyways)."

THIS. 1000 times this.

Like many people said, I too would like to see a re-evaluation of the evolution costs. That way I could build my little spellcasting eidolon. Right now I feel that the costs are way too high. Maybe make them 3/Day without the extra cost.

As far as the other abilites go, I really dont mind with the numbers of the DPR, the faster access of some spells (except maybe the Samsaran interaction), the SLA etc. I would rather see all the other classes buffed (the ones that really need it)than to see Summoner (or any other class) nerfed.

The Eidolon is by far the coolest aspect of this class and should really stay as is. As a concept at least. Maybe adjust the numbers of the table or rework properly the prerequisites of some evolutions like level required, evo-cost etc.

Self Sacrifice (or at least what they will be thinking of what they are going through) will always make the PCs feel like heroes. At least from my experience. The "battle" of the event (if there is any) shouldn't be something you put too much emphasis on , I think, it's the description of the tragic events and conditions around it that should be really well-detailed and described. (really, it can be anything)

Epic music always helps especially if you can time it well with the events.

This one has worked for me, while closing the session and describing the final sequence, leaving them unsure of being alive or not.

And since you too are of the music-type:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHPYOcgde98

In around 1:50-1:58 of the song you should be starting your last sentence/comment of the session.

Just be sure to end the session before they know what happens next, so as they are full of questions and eager to see what happens next.

If you want, I can share what they went through back then.

I've always liked to

Kudos for his idea and the level of coolness of throwing yourself in front of the fireball to protect your friends. I wish players in general were as creative as that guy especially with a martial character.

I don't understand all this negativity either...

Hero points was the best idea to both defend AND limit these kinds of heroic actions if we HAVE to go by a "legal" system here. Which we don't because, you know, these things happen once in a campaign in a decade - although they should happen more often.

Cool, thanks for the answer Davor, I suppose "Bookish Rogue" fell in the same category - Not by RAW but could as well be used for - .

Greetings all, I hope you are all doing well!

I wasn't sure if this topic was supposed to be here or the "Advice" section so forgive me if I'm wrong.

My question resolves around this feat and the advanced talents the Eldritch Raider gives you, specifically Minor Eldritch Magic and Major Eldritch Magic that basically follow the Minor/Major Magic talents.

Do you think the feat intentionally left out these talents as it would be too strong to include those two too? Do you think that allowing them to get 1 extra use too, would be ok? Would an extra feat be necessary?

Your opinions matter!

Thank you in advance!

"Activation: Staves use the spell trigger activation method, so casting a spell from a staff is usually a standard action that doesn't provoke attacks of opportunity. If the spell being cast has a longer casting time than 1 standard action, however, it takes the full casting time to cast the spell from a staff. To activate a staff, a character must hold it forth in at least one hand (or whatever passes for a hand, for nonhumanoid creatures)."

Apart from using your own casting stat for DCs and caster level and everything else everyone else before me said, I also liked the bolded part.

Don't think it's what you are looking for but there was also the Draconic Feats (and maybe other "Kind" Feats,don't really recall)that interacted with each other. The more you had, the bigger the benefits you got. There was Draconic Toughness that gave you 2 HPs + 2 for every other Draconic feat you had or would have in the future.

Was it a 3.X feat?

Edit: Also it reminds me of an "alternative class feature" (or w/e it was called then) Stalwart Sorcerer or something, that the way it was written, it could be misinterpreted to give HPs in the way you are describing at each level.

In PF not yet (I'm hoping that I will someday) but back in 3.5 I did got the chance to play one, not for too long though.

His name was Terrastrix, he was a dragonwrought kobold Sorcerer of the green variety, had wings and was specializing in acid spells to fit his nature. Come to think of it, kobolds were kinda cheesy back then with that feat.

I think all the "yordle" races are really fun if you are into them and can RP them.

Actually, the best way to deal with a FB was to have a half elf bard with that Racial Substitution Level ability which duplicated a "calm emotions" effect (IIRC) with a DC equal to your diplomacy roll.

Dread Necro wasn't that bad for a 20 levels class. At least you got something at every level. Sorcerer only had...summon familiar..as a Core Class.

As for the 3.5 PrC, I just miss the variety. Because they were many a feats and prestige classes. The difference between some of them might have been huge, in terms of power level, but you had such great variety.

As far as I can remember, the majority of the PrC I liked back then were considered very bad.

I can't tell for sure if the archetypes was the best way to go, though I do agree that having to dip 5 PrC was something that did bothered me too.

I think you can make the character you like, either way, and if you're not into minmaxing anyway, you might not even care if your character is a bit (or quite) weaker than he should be.

And, really, you can't compare the "overpowerness/imbalance" of 3.5 with that of PF (don't get me wrong that's a good thing).

*Edit: Fighter also had , as most of the base classes in the later books, an alternative class feature, a thing like minor archetypes one might say, that had to do with crashing your foes into walls for extra damage. I think you exchanged feats for that. Come to think of it, fighter was one of the base classes used for a 1-2 levels dip.

* Of course when you add some unbalanced PrCs or combos, they can become broken very easily, as opposed to a martial class, where you have to work very hard for it to be OP.

+1

Back in 3.5 (besides what Aelryinth said) I remember:

Planar Shepherd PrC for Druids
Tainted Scholar for ...dirty tricks

Ur-priest was one of those PrC with 9thlvl spells within 10 lvls o.O
Caster bards were Sublime Chords most of the time (turned you into Sorcerer like caster with 9lvl spells).

Sovereign Speaker was the one with the domains.

Wasn't there a PrC that gave you +2 str each level instead of BAB???Don't know about being OP but i think that one had its uses.

Oh...and Soul eater with -2 negative levels per attack was for monks i think.

Huh...
That reminds of, "the goat from hell". A creature I have created for later use in my campaign, as a "special session" kind of.

It really depends on how "deep" you want to go with your familiar.
If you are going to replace it with a mephit, then things are easier. For the mephit-route I would suggest crafting a circlet of persuasion and putting ranks in UMD for wands. Then, the familiar spell feat is like a cheaper quicken.

If you want a flank buddy, you should instead get an imp or a quasit. I think these two are more combat oriented.

Should you stay with the mighty goat, be sure to check the Evolved Familiar feat that gives it a 1-point evolution of your choice (and can be taken multiple times). Spells that improve its mobility and defences are all nice. Also check out the equipment you can give it and know your options.

To the OP's question...

I will not take into account specific concepts/builds/rp-reasons and a GM's habit of being negative towards a wizard.

To me it has always been the earlier/easier spell level/spell access. Supposedly you are after the "early power". That's the number one reason to pick the wizard over the sorcerer,I believe. "The sooner the better" saying applies here so if that's what you are looking for, you shouldn't be picking a Sorcerer. Unless of course you are starting at 18 level or something. Ok maybe even the "I can learn ALL magic" too. A detail can make the difference.

2 were the points I "hated" most as the Sorcerer I play right now, and that was without a wizard or other prepared caster, to make the painful comparison, at the table (I'm kinda a generalist). The first one was having to wait until 4th level to get second level spells. And believe me, later , it's not so bad because it's only every other level. But, boy, a 2 levels gap was a big pain in the @ss! The second was advancing to 2nd level and getting...a...single...0...lvl....spell....known....Oh yeah right...were I a human, I would have an extra 0 lvl spell known. woohoo!!!A wizard will not suffer from these, ever. And, he will be able to add extra spells to his spellbook apart from the 2/level. I'm not saying he will go crazy, I'm talking about a reasonable amount here.

I wont comment on casting stats since they are not standard for the Sorcerer (I might as well give him this one as a pro,that is, being able to select his casting stat.)

Class features are also greatly varied for each one with stronger and weaker choices for both so...no comments on these as well.

A Mystic Theurge I suppose...

Couldn't find the right time (or the excuse) to make one back in 3.5 and I'm more than up to do it sometime in Pathfinder now. Especially with the SLA as spells rules for the entry.

The concept would be similar to that of an Archivist and: a mage who , besides casting his own magic and searching for magic, his "faith" in magic gives him ever more magic (he will not have an actual deity or god). magic-magic-MAGIC!!!!!

here is the thread i was referring to

As to fireball like I said I think you roll the 10d6 (lets say you get 40), then you take 50% of that (20) and add it to 60, for 80. I think a lot of DM's just shorten that to 60 + 5d6 for simplicity, but in burning arcs case its important to find out if you get the dice, or merely enhance the dice.

Thats what I assume though, dangerous as that is.

I see...

So, Empowered Burning Arc (Cstr lvl10)should be 10d6(+1/2 of what you rolled), then 5d6(+1/2 of what you rolled) then 2d6(+1/2 of what you rolled and 1d6(+1/2 of what you rolled)?

And as for your first question, the spell description needs some things I believe. Things like "For every additional target the discharge arcs to, reduce the number of damage dice by half (rounded down minimum 1d6) or "one primary target plus one additional target/3 levels (maximum 4). Since it doesn't say and its rounded down, you have to assume the later.

Also this was pointed out to me in that thread

All variable, numeric effects of an empowered spell are increased by half including bonuses to those dice rolls.

So an empowered magic missile does 1d4+1 + 50% not 1d4 + 50% +1. Which I assume a Draconic bloodline Sorc's 10d6+10 fire ball is fully enhanced by empower.

That's what I read anyway.

The thing is when you maximize a spell there are no variable numeric effects anymore. So a maximized empower fireball, for example, does 60+5d6 (at caster level 10).

An intesified empowered Burning Arc would do 10d6+5d6(intesified)+5d6/7d6 (depended on where you think the empower goes) resulting in 20d6/22d6
So 1st target 20/22 d6, 2nd 10/11d6, 3rd5d6, 4th2d6, 5th 1d6.

Do you a link of said thread? Cause every one I've read go by what i said.

Depends on how your table runs, some DM's would make an intensified, empowered burning arc 22d6, but I think by RAW it's actually 15d6 X 1.5 (say the result was 45 for the d6's, then 67 is the result), so the 4th target is still 1d6.

I think by RAW it's quite the opposite. Empower gives 50% to the variable numeric effects (dice rolled) not the total damage.

That's also why:

From Maximize Spell feat:

"An empowered, maximized spell gains the separate benefits of each feat: the maximum result plus half the normally rolled result."

Glutton wrote:

Here is Burning arc for reference;

** spoiler omitted **

My question is, the caster is now level 15, and deals 10d6 to the first target, 5d6 to the second, 2d6 to the third, 1d6 to the fourth. Does the caster deal 1d6 to the fifth (and sixth at 18) target, or does the caster not deal any damage to targets past the fourth because of rounding down?

No more than four targets, due to rounding down. Even an intensified burning arc is going to cap at four targets (15, 7, 3, 1).

Intensify + Empower can get you a 5th target.

Rob Godfrey wrote:

aceDiamond wrote:

I seem to think that most of these threads circle around over- and underpowered classes, abilities, etc. You have people saying all casters are overpowered, martials are underpowered, and the monk, the fighter, and the rogue give leprosy upon reading their class abilities. If I might, I'd like to derail things for a second to get a look at the bigger picture.

What class is balanced? What, in everyone's mind is the perfectly balanced class in the game? I'm just so confused by these sorts of threads, I no longer have a baseline.

well, thats the problem, casters are so powerful that they do not need any other classes around at all. Seriously, do a mid level adventure with a 50/50 mage/cleric split, then do it with a fighter/rogue split party. Then tell me if you see the issue.

Perfect balanced classes?

Alchemist, Bard, Ranger

Balanced but on the powerful side
Druid, cleric, wizard, summoner, Paladin

Unbalanced but not OP
Barbarian

S~$! tier
Fighter, Monk, Rogue

Well, most of these threads ,at least IMO, are a mix of reality-issues, whining-for good reasons and somewhat "complains" about the theoretical(actual) game balance. It's sort of like "Why they have all the options while the others have so much less."

nate lange wrote:

Jiggy wrote:

And honestly, I'm not sure which I'd prefer: the one-tweak reboot or the embrace-the-difference build. :/

it seems (to me, at least) like that's the most important thing for you to figure out... every school has at least one spell you are going to miss, pick your schools for the feel you want for the character instead of pulling your hair out trying to figure out how to get all the spells

Yeah, I think you're right, that is what I need to figure out. Hrm...

Btw, I don't know if you have already seen it, I've PM'ed a few things.

Non-evocation blasts/touch spells:

Chill Touch
Acid Arrow
Acidic Spray
Ice Spears
Pellet Blast
Boneshatter
Vampiric Touch
Horrid Wilting
Touch of Slime

Fiery Shuriken

Meh, i think you'll be fine...!

Detect Magic is one of the most frequently used spells i think, along with cure light wounds (wand or not).

Skorn wrote:

You also have to pick which school you will have spell focus in, as you get that in place of Scribe Scroll in PFS.

Any suggestions on that?

-------------------------------

Regarding opposition schools: what spell(s) is/are the most painful to lose from each of the four schools in the running?

Dropping schools was never easy, especially back when you actually "dropped" the school and was prohibited. Nowadays its not so painful.

Enchantment and Evocation are the easiest to drop IMO, along with Necromancy maybe (although it has some nice buffs and kind of nice variety).

19. The PCs are given some quantities of X,Y,Z materials (wood,stone etc)which they have to use for enforcing/building/repairing an old abandoned fortress/watch tower/anything similar from a massive invasion of (enter creatures you'd like here). Their building options can include extra walls,traps etc, but they have to make choices, since the materials aren't enough for everything and they have a few days/weeks before the invasion. Each one of their choices have different effects on how the battle works out later.