Argothe's page

Originally I was considering Evocation because really who does not like to blow things up.

Evocation is a weak choice. Direct damage magic is underpowered relative to physical attacks, your party fighter will always outdamage your spells, and is far less effective than Save or Suck style spells - it is much better to take multiple targets out of a fight without killing them than it is to deal a small amount of damage. I would suggest Conjuration, Necromancy or Divination.

I did read another thread that mentions Conjuration as being quite fun and powerful as well.

Conjuration would be my first choice.

So - whats the game plan to make me uber-wiz.

Max INT? What secondary stat? Dex for AC or Con for HP?

Max your Int; get it as high as you can. Your casting ability modifier affects saving throws and you really want those to be as high as possible. As for Dex vs Con both are valid choices, however, since you will probably play an Elf you will be virtually railroaded into going the higher Dex route.

If I play an elf I can wield a sword and bow - should I be swinging/shooting stuff? Maybe with that high dex...

Pick up a bow and stay out of melee unless you went with a Necromancer or a Transmuter. If you go with a Conjurer and you maxed out your Int you will get enough uses of Acid Dart to get you through most days and if you run out of those your Level 0 ranged touch attacks will still probably be more reliable as they ignore armor.

Any familiar worth taking or are the bonded items the obvious way to go?

Bonded item. All the way. The ability to toss out any spell you could normally cast once per day is just too good to pass up.

You can not disarm a shield. Pathfinder only allows you to disarm items that are wielded or carried and a shield is neither wielded nor carried it is worn. In 3.5 you could use disarm to remove worn items so long as they were loosely secured but I am not sure that a shield would be thought of as loosely secured even if Pathfinder had retained that interpretation of disarm.

If you want to remove an opponent’s shield you need to sunder it. Recall that sunder does not have to destroy an item but can simply disable it so that it is unusable until repaired. In this case your sunder would break the straps that hold the shield in place without otherwise ruining the shield. If you repair those straps that shield is usable again.

I would suggest a pure Bard. A significant dip into Rogue costs you a lot of caster levels and bardic music abilities; a shallow dip costs you +1 BAB as well as caster levels and bardic music uses. I don’t think that the +3 to Disable Device and 1d6 sneak attack outweigh those impacts.

You are looking for a build that excels at knowledge checks, trap removal and party support. The Bard is far superior at the knowledge and support roles and each level of Rogue reduces the potency of those abilities. The Bard is missing two abilities versus the Rogue when it comes to trap removal:

1) Disable Device as a class skill and

2) The ability to use Disable Device to disable magical traps.

You can take a feat that recovers the +3 bonus to the skill; you can not take a feat that recovers the loss to BAB or Caster Level that a dip into Rogue will cost you.

As for magical traps, the Bard gets unlimited uses of Detect Magic to help with detecting magical traps and is a full caster capable of using Dispel Magic to disable magical traps.

I would suggest an Elf for the useful stat bonuses and the Longbow Proficiency with the following distribution for a 20 point buy:

S: 11
D: 14 (16)
C: 12 (10)
I: 12 (14)
W: 10
Ch: 16

If you want to be combat focused put your stat bumps into Dexterity and pick-up Archery feats (my recommendation). If you want to be caster/buffer focused put your stat increases into Charisma and pick up Extra Music and Spell Focus feats.

Let's say you use the Intimidate skill to demoralize an opponent and successfully make them shaken. Then the next round you use it again on the same opponent.

Is that opponent now frightened since you have imposed a shaken status on someone who already has it, thus moving them up the chain of fear conditions? Or is this meant to be a non-stackable use? If anyone knows of a solid rules reference here I would appreciate it.

It will be very difficult to use Intimidate to create the Shaken condition for more than 2-3 rounds since you have to beat your opponent's check by 5 for each additional round of effect. Even if you can stack the affect to force the frightened condition, that condition is unlikely to persist for more than 2 rounds at which point the target is back to shaken and ceases to flee.

Thanks HA that lets me look at the issue another way. Only the Bardic Performance effects of Countersong and Distraction depend on actual Skills checks, and the skills used Sing, String, etc. are specifically defined in the effects description.

So there are no “ranks required” even for these two effects since Perform can be used untrained and the DCs for all other Bardic music effects are not based on the Perform skill.

Does this mean that a player could have a Bard PC with no ranks in Perform and just be bad at Countersong and Distraction and make no use of Versatile Performance?; suffering no other drawbacks from the lack of ranks in the Perform skill?

I ask this for clarification reasons only. I will have some player try this eventually if it is not addressed in the Errata.

You must have at least one rank in a perform skill to use that perform type for a bardic music effect. However, if you don't not care about countersong/distraction saves or versatile performance options, there is no need to take more than one rank in a perform skill. That being said, given the two for one nature of versatile performance it is hard to imagine a bard not wanting to put multiple ranks in at least one if not two perform types.

Why can you wield a shield in your primary hand? That just seems goofy. What prevents you from then wielding a Heavy Shield in your primary hand and a Light Shield in your off-hand to avoid all TWF penalties?

Argothe wrote:

What made the bard feel more useful?

The free action to maintain the bardic performance, mainly. The bard made a fair use of their cantrips, running around dazing goons, while maintaining the inspiration.

The player commented quite a bit, feeling like they had more of a role in the party with the small changes to the bard.

So it was the change to allow casting while maintaining an inspiration? Other than casting or using a spell completion item the bard has always been able to maintain inspire courage while taking other actions, the only change in Pathfinder is the addition of the ability to cast spells or use spell completion items.

On the player side, the party bard felt more useful, the extra hit points made characters a bit more durable, cantrips were used a fair amount, and the party was able to go through a fair number of encounters before retreating to rest.

What made the bard feel more useful?

Argothe wrote:

You don't need to use Dazzling Display, you only have to take it to get access to Shattered Defenses. You can take a move action and then use a standard action to intimidate a single opponent into shaken status. If you beat their counter check by 5 or more the target is shaken into the following round meaning once your first attack hits you now have two full rounds to full attack with each additional attack producing sneak attack precision damage.

You are correct that this combo doesn't start to pay off until level 9 whereas Improved Feint can start to pay off as early as level 3. It would be nice, however, if the rogue had more than one feat tree option for setting up sneak attacks.

I do think it's good to have options, and this is a good option but I think improved feint is still going to be the preferred route for most rogues. By 9th-11th level rogues start getting better access to magic and improved invisibility which sort of defeats both these options.

In a game world where rogues have easy access to improved invisibility, why don't opponents have easy access to one of the many options available for detecting invisibility?

Perform (Legerdemain): Consider it in. Versatile performance is tied to sleight of hand and disable device.

I'd even argue that it is different from sleight of hand and thus a viable performance category because those stage magicians are as much about their shows and how they present things as they are about deceiving people.

I thought about disable device. I was worried that it would be too powerful at that point. I can also see arguments for Sleight of Hand and Bluff. I ultimately suggested Sleight of Hand and Escape Artist as I imagined daring escapes as part of this type of act - the magician who can always seem to get out of manacles.

Don't forget that such a rogue could take a couple of feats as his rogue talents too.

Combat Trick would be a free feat.
Finesse Rogue gives weapon finesse.
Weapon Training gives Weapon Focus as a bonus feat too.

At level 10 a rogue may instead take a feat as an advanced talent.

So we have the possibility of 3 extra feats before ninth level and another one at 10th level.

Only "Combat Trick" can be used to grab a feat from the Feint chain and it can only be taken once.

Argothe wrote:

Except that a melee rogue would be better off with the Dazzling Display/Shattered Defenses tree which can allow for multiple rounds of full attack sneak attacks and is available at level 9 for the same number of feats and skills and the early pre-req, weapon focus, is a more useful feat than CE.

If you wanted to compare the two then why didn't you bring it up in this light to begin with?

Combat Expertise -> Improved Feint is available at 1st level or 3rd for non-human non-fighters

Weapon Focus -> Dazzling Display -> Shatter Defenses isn't available until 9th level

Dazzling Display - Dazzling Display is a full round action don't plan on going anywhere. Based on HD which are generally 25% higher than BAB. This difference gets higher as you level.

Dazzling Display also has penalties and bonuses based on size and these are pretty significant.

I think both approaches have their advantages. I don't know if my rogue will be taking Greater Feint but he will likely take Improved Feint.

You don't need to use Dazzling Display, you only have to take it to get access to Shattered Defenses. You can take a move action and then use a standard action to intimidate a single opponent into shaken status. If you beat their counter check by 5 or more the target is shaken into the following round meaning once your first attack hits you now have two full rounds to full attack with each additional attack producing sneak attack precision damage.

You are correct that this combo doesn't start to pay off until level 9 whereas Improved Feint can start to pay off as early as level 3. It would be nice, however, if the rogue had more than one feat tree option for setting up sneak attacks.

To your attacks.

How much of a team player are you?

The group is more than the sum of its parts, remember.

True, but denying dex bonus is ok but not fantastic. It helps the team a little but doesn't help the character who invested in the chain. In the end the team would be better served if rogue went for the Dazzling Display/Shattered Defenses combo and was able to triple their damage output.

Argothe wrote:

stardust wrote:

Not to mention the overall reduction of AC. Confusing a person enough with a feint so he's not sure how to defend himself is a huge tactical advantage.

Is it worth 80% of your feats and a skill point per level as well as imposing greater multiple ability dependence?

Let me put it this way. If you're a melee-based rogue, you're taking those feats anyway. If you aren't a melee-based rogue, then why did you take Improved Feint in the first place? Besides, all you really need is Intelligence 13 and a decent Charisma, and you can probably skip Skill Focus(Bluff).

EDIT: Alright, you need three feats to really do this, all of which a melee rogue want to take anyway, and a skill which most rogues would probably want anyway.

Except that a melee rogue would be better off with the Dazzling Display/Shattered Defenses tree which can allow for multiple rounds of full attack sneak attacks and is available at level 9 for the same number of feats and skills and the early pre-req, weapon focus, is a more useful feat than CE.

Shatter Defenses (Combat)

Your skill with your chosen weapon leaves opponents unable to defend themselves if you strike them when their defenses are already compromised.

Prerequisites: Weapon Focus, Dazzling Display, base attack bonus +6, proficiency with weapon.

Benefit: Any shaken, frightened, or panicked opponent hit by you this round is f lat-footed to your attacks until the end of your next turn. This includes any additional attacks you make this round.

Argothe wrote:

...a very steep cost.

Improved Feint and Greater Feint add up to two feats. Bluff is a skill you want anyway, and CE is a very common prerequisite which will also open up other feat chains for you.

I think you may be overblowing the costs just a hair here.

CE isn't likely to be part of any non-CMD build other than for the feint tree and it requires at least a 13 Int. You'll also need a decent Cha and Skill Focus: Bluff to have a reasonable chance of success. I'm assuming you need 4 feats to make this combo work, 80% of a rogue's allotment at level 9.

There are lots of little benefits to this feat, though most have to do with the rogue being a team player. Have an enemy that is hard for your spellcasters to hit? Use a move action and drop his touch AC to 10.

That is an incredibly situational benefit for a very steep cost.

Not to mention the overall reduction of AC. Confusing a person enough with a feint so he's not sure how to defend himself is a huge tactical advantage.

Is it worth 80% of your feats and a skill point per level as well as imposing greater multiple ability dependence?

Argothe wrote:

stardust wrote:

I believe the foe loses his Dexterity bonus to all attacks until the beginning of your next turn, not just the ones that you make.

That is fairly minor considering the character with the feat gets no benefit and that the trick requires a lot of feat and skill investment.

I edited while you all were posting, and if you've got three people ganging up on an enemy, making it so the enemy doesn't have dexterity bonus for a round or so is a good thing.

If you have three people ganging up on a single target that target is already flanked... I have a hard time imagining any class other than a rogue investing in the Feint chain and if the rogue picks up Greater Feint the rogue will never benefit from the feat themselves unless the target provokes an AoO - pretty situational. It seems even less likely that the party will encounter enough high Dex opponents to justify the significant feat and skill costs required to get this chain working.

I believe the foe loses his Dexterity bonus to all attacks until the beginning of your next turn, not just the ones that you make.

That is fairly minor considering the character with the feat gets no benefit and that the trick requires a lot of feat and skill investment.

Balabaskar's enchanted coin-plucking and juggling routines struck a chord of supernatural fear into the hearts of his foes...

How about no.

Considering Frightening Tune requires audible components, I don't think you have to worry about explaining coins tricks inspiring fear. However, I agree that making weapons appear and disappear, backed up by the magic of a supernatural ability, could inspire some fear...

Greater Feint (Combat)

You are skilled at making foes overreact to your attacks. Prerequisites: Combat Expertise, Improved Feint, base attack bonus +6, Int 13.

Benefit: Whenever you use feint to cause an opponent to lose his Dexterity bonus, he loses that bonus until the beginning of your next turn, in addition to losing his Dexterity bonus against your next attack.

Normal: A creature you feint loses its Dexterity bonus against your next attack.

I don't understand the point of this feat. Is it designed to allow for sneak attacks as part of an AoO? It seems that the feat should cause the target to lose their dexterity bonus until the end, not the beginning, of your next turn. Otherwise the feat is basically useless for rogues. It seems reasonable to me that a rogue should be able to setup a full attack of sneak attacks every other round at the cost of 80% of their class feats by level 9 (Combat Expertise, Feint, Greater Feint, Skill Focus: Bluff) not to mention the need for decent Int and Cha.

Under the Sleight of Hand skill on page 105 the text offers the following use for Slight of Hand:

You can also use Sleight of Hand to entertain an audience as though you were using the Perform skill. In such a case, your “act” encompasses elements of legerdemain, juggling, and the like.

My question is why isn't this listed under the Perform skill and why isn't it a valid Bardic Performance type, especially considering that there are so few visual performance skills that Oratory(!?!) is required to be a visual performance so that there are more than three options for creating a Distraction?

It seems reasonable to me that Juggling/Legerdemain should be part of a bard's repertoire. I would also imagine that this mundane "magic" would include Houdini like escapes. I would suggest that the versatile performance substitutions for the skill be Sleight of Hand and Escape Artist.

That's the hitch for me, I think. There's no NEED for a bard. Every other class brings something vital to bear, but even the other posters have said that they wouldn't pick a bard to be in the core of an adventuring party, but rather would take him as a support element. It doesn't seem right to me that a class would be so esoteric that it wouldn't have a place at the table ALL the time under it's OWN merits.

Several of us have also posted that we would choose a bard for a four player campaign. The bard can be extremely effective as a stand alone class, that the bard's buffs happen to assist the party as well is pure gravy. Even if the bard's buffs only affected the bard the class would still be versatile and effective in nearly all situations:

1)The class can self buff to where it is getting the same number of attacks, but at a better bonus, than a full BAB class.

2)The class can self heal.

3)The class can cast arcane, battle field or crowd control spells while wearing armor and using a shield.

4)The class can fill any or all of the skill monkey roles: social, stealth or knowledge.

5)The class gets the most mileage out of the Arcane Strike feat allowing for extra damage and cheaper weapons or weapons that focus on other enhancements like flaming or shocking.

With the changes Pathfinder made to the rules for traps one can very easily argue that you do not "NEED" at rogue either. Rangers, Barbarians and Bards can all easily fill the role of finding and disabling non-magical traps. The bard can also take care of magical traps via the use of detect and dispel magic. Meanwhile, in order to be effective in combat the rogue needs the support of another player to setup flanks or needs to spend a significant number of feats to setup a chain that will allow the rogue access to their sneak attack ability with out a partner. Absent sneak attacks the rogue is less effective in combat than the bard and the bard doesn't need to spend as many rounds setting up to be effective.

If there is a paladin or a druid at the table the party doesn't need a cleric and might benefit more from the superior buffing, combat and arcane casting abilities of the bard.

If the party has a lot of divine or nature based magic but is feeling short on physical damage potential a bard may be a superior choice to a wizard or a sorcerer. The bard has a good list of spells and can dish out far more dps than the other arcane classes.

If the party has fewer than 4 players the bard is the most obvious choice as it is the only class capable of filling multiple roles effectively.

Someone that can buff where it's needed, heal well, and do damage in the same fight as the need arises is better then a dedicated buffer.

Here-in lies the crux of your misunderstanding. The bard is the best buffer in the game, however, that doesn't mean they are a "dedicated buffer" or that all of their utility comes from their buffing. Yes, a bard can kick out effective buffs, they can also dish out physical damage better than most if not all of the 3/4 BAB classes, they can heal reasonably well, and they can cast battle field or crowd control spells. If a bard is not contributing effectively in every round of every encounter, blame the player, not the class.

This thread confuses me. It seems as if most posters come to this discussion with a preconceived notion of what a Bard is or should be with out reference to the functional mechanics of the class as provided by PfRPG.

I will do my best to address the major themes I have identified, if I miss one that is important to you please don't hesitate to bring it to my attention.

1) There is always another class more capable of filling a specific niche than the bard.

2) The bard is not the best at anything.

3) There is no place for a bard in the classic four player group.

4) The bard is only a support character, which gets old pretty fast for most players.

1) Specialized Niches - The problem with this argument is that it looks at the class from only one facet and does not view the class holistically. For example, the bard is not as good at dealing out physical damage as the full BAB classes. This is true. However, that argument ignores that fact that the bard is almost as good as the full BAB classes and is simultaneously able to heal, use crowd control magic, and has enough skill points to fill social/stealth/knowledge roles. Can the bard deal as much physical damage as a fighter? No. But it can get very close to the fighter's output while retaining all of the other options its magical and skill based abilities provide at no additional experience or gold cost. In fact, the bard is more likely than the fighter to succeed at any given task because the bard employs a greater diversity viable of tactics.

2) The bard has no niche - The bard is hands down the best buffer in the game. The Inspire bardic music abilities are unmatched. Additionally, thanks to the changes in PfRPG, the bard can provide the best in game buffs while also attacking with an effective BAB equal to that of a full BAB class minus the final iterative attack or while casting crowd control or healing spells.

3) No place in the classic group - With the changes to the rules for traps the bard can easily fill in for a rogue in any group - it can detect and disable non-magical traps with skills and detect and dispel magical traps with spells. The bard gives up sneak attack dice in exchange for an effectively superior BAB, crowd control, and the ability to heal. Especially in a group where setting up flanks might be difficult or where healing is less available because the cleric slot is filled by a druid, a bard makes more sense than a rogue. A bard could also fill in for the arcane class especially if the group is lite on physical damage potential. A bard could replace a cleric if the party already has decent healing or turning thanks to the presence of a paladin. If you are playing with fewer than four players the bard is a superior choice because it is able to fill multiple roles. If you are playing in a group with more than 4 people the bard makes sense as it significantly boosts all other classes and can back-fill any of the 4 traditional roles.

4) Support character - The bard is far from a support character. Yes, the bard's abilities can significantly boost other classes, but those boosts also apply to the bard. With Inspire Courage running the bard's chance to hit is boosted to the equivalent of an uninspired full BAB class, making it more likely to succeed in physical combat than any 3/4 BAB class other than the monk. It is reasonable to argue that the bard can be the most martial of the 3/4 BAB classes. On top of which the bard gets the most mileage out of the Arcane Strike feat. The bard is a significant threat in the physical damage realm. They make excellent archers, Abraham Spalding posted and excellent power attack build, the class can also do well with sword and board or dual wielding finesse style combat. Additionally, the bard is a decent caster with a great spell list and a full caster CL. The bard can cast arcane spells in light armor with no ASF chance with out the need of additional feats and is the only class that can cast arcane spells with out ASF chance while using a shield. Just because the bard can boost other players doesn't mean the bard isn't also contributing themselves every round of every encounter. If the bard isn't contributing blame the player not the class's mechanics.

So why am I planning to play a bard in my next campaign?

1) 3/4 BAB that self boosts to nearly a full BAB and actually exceeds a full BAB once haste is in the mix.

2) Full CL caster with good spell list for performing crowd and battle space control.

3) Extra healing is never a bad thing; self-healing mage-tank ftw.

4) Great skills list.

5) Arcane Strike.

6) Bardic Music boosts for the rest of the party.

Build: Dex, Cha, Int priorities
Human: Point Blank Shot
1: Precise Shot
3: Rapid Shot
5: Song of the Heart - game is set in Eberron
7: Arcane Strike
9: Manyshot
11: Deadly Aim
13: Martial Weapon Proficiency - Composite Longbow
15: Weapon Focus - Composite Longbow

Honestly, this thread confuses me. How is it that people genuinely believe all a Bard can do in combat is use Bardic performance? The Bard is a 3/4 BAB and 3/4 Caster class with decent weapon choices and a decent spell list.

Bardic Music has always been sustained as a free action, you have always been able to be an effective physical combatant and maintain your Inspire Courage. Pathfinder has made this even better by accelerating the progression of Inspire Courage and allowing Bards to cast while maintaining a performance.

The only decision you need to make is whether you want your Bard to focus more on physical attacks or spell casting - either path is a viable option. A physical bard will focus on stats like Strength or Dexterity and will take combat feats while a casting Bard will focus on Charisma and take spell focus feats.

I am personally planning to play a Bard in my upcoming campaign that will focus on archery. Inspire Courage provides enough of a bonus that my chance to hit will equal that of an uninspired full BAB class while also providing a decent bonus to damage. Arcane Strike is built for Bards and it gives me a damage bonus that no full BAB class can garner. Archery got even better in Pathfinder making a dex based build a viable combat option - the changes to Manyshot and the addition of Deadly Aim are great boons for the archer. And, unlike full BAB counterparts I can take a round off to toss out a battlefield control spell to help ensure enemies don't close to melee or a dispel magic to get rid of any archery prevention spells/wards.

For a pure Pathfinder game:
Human: Point Blank Shot
1) Precise Shot
3) Rapid Shot
5) Arcane Strike
7) Deadly Aim
9) Manyshot

Nethys wrote:

The last line of each type of Bardic Performance clears this up. For example, the last line of "Countersong" states that "Countersong relies on audible components."

...
In the case of Distraction, you would reference the line at the end. "Distraction relies on visible components."
...
See above. All Bardic Performances explain which type they are in the last line of each entry's text.
...
As for Perform (Sing), this will likely be included in the errata as well.

The OP is asking which specific perform skills cualify for having visible components and which for audible components.

Only Countersong and Distraction list which perform skills must be used. Then, if for ex. you want to Fascinate (Visual and Audible components), which perform skill could you use? Anyone?

This is correct, I was asking for clarification on which Perform Skill Variants produced Audible, Visual or Both types of performance, not which performances required audible, visual or both - the latter is clearly stated in the rules.

What I want to know is how to define each of the following:

Act: Visual, Audible or Both?
Comedy: Visual, Audible or Both?
Dance: Probably just Visual
Keyboard: Visual, Audible or Both?
Oratory: Visual, Audible or Both?
Percussion: Visual, Audible or Both?
String: Visual, Audible or Both?
Wind: Visual, Audible or Both?
Sing: Probably just Audible

Also, if a Perform Skill, like Oratory, is both audible and visual, does that mean it only functions when the bard can be both seen and heard? Could one Orate in a silence spell to inspire courage? Could one Act in a darkness spell to inspire courage?

Unless otherwise stated, penalties, even from the same source, now stack with each other - Page 12.

Ray of Enfeeblement specifies that it does not stack with itself, but spells like Bane and Crushing Despair will self stack.

Penalties are numerical values that are subtracted from a check or statistical score. Penalties do not have a type and most penalties stack with one another.

So bonuses from the same source or of the same type do not stack unless otherwise stated, but penalties do stack unless otherwise stated. The Ray of Enfeeblement entry specifically states that this penalty does not stack, but other spells like Bane and Crushing Despair have no such clause, meaning that multiple Bane spells even from the same caster now stack with each other.

Tieflings are not listed as a core race. However, they are listed in the DM section as a possible playable race along with creatures like orcs, kobolds and goblins.

I like the fact that more classes have Medium armor now without also having Heavy Armor right out of the gate. Sort of adds some difference to classes.

This

Overall this is a great change; good job Jason.

Other Bardic Music Questions:

"Each bardic performance has audible components, visual components, or both."

I can't find any reference to which perform types correspond to audible, visual or both. Is this meant to be left up the the DM?

"At 1st level, a bard can use his performance to counter magic effects that depend on sight. Each round of the distraction, he makes a Perform(act, comedy, dance, or oratory) skill check."

Does this mean Oratory is considered visual? Both?

"A bard must have a minimum number of ranks to use his Bardic Performance abilities. Consult the Bardic Performance section of the bard class description in Chapter 3 for more details."

The Bardic Performance section referenced does not address minimum skill requirements; all requirements are listed as simply level dependent.

Many Bardic Performances require audible and visual performance to function. Does this mean that a bard may use two perform skills - sing and dance for example - or that the bard must use a skill that is both audible and visual. If the bard is required to do something that is both audible and visual, which performance types qualify?

"Each bardic performance has audible components, visual components, or both."

I can't find any reference to which perform types correspond to audible, visual or both. Is this meant to be left up the the DM?

"At 1st level, a bard can use his performance to counter magic effects that depend on sight. Each round of the distraction, he makes a Perform(act, comedy, dance, or oratory) skill check."

Does this mean Oratory is considered visual? Both?

"A bard must have a minimum number of ranks to use his Bardic Performance abilities. Consult the Bardic Performance section of the bard class description in Chapter 3 for more details."

The Bardic Performance section referenced does not address minimum skill requirements; all requirements are listed as simply level dependent...

Many Bardic Performances require audible and visual performance to function. Does this mean that a bard may use two perform skills - sing and dance for example - or that the bard must use a skill that is both audible and visual. If the bard is required to do something that is both audible and visual, which performance types qualify?

There is no versatile performance entry for Perform(sing). Is that intentional?

Uh oh.

Anyone know of any other weapons that still allow for reach and nearby?

If S.C. is nerfed, then why bother taking it? You had a spend a feat to be proficient in it.

Monks can always wield a reach weapon and threaten up close with their unarmed kicks.

Could someone clarify the new Necromancy School abilities? The Wizard preview hinted at the option for a White Necromancer, I would really appreciate some additional details on this subject.

The odds are reasonable that this is a Psionics book. If it is, the 4 classes are the 4 Psionic classes.

Assuming this isn't a Psionics book I would say that an Artificer and Blackguard are probably no-brainers.

I think there is enough push that you will see some sort of spontaneous Divine caster, although in the spirit of fun, I am going to posit that their list will come from the nature side of the Divine house. I'll also guess that this class will look more like a Bard and less like a full progression caster, if we are lucky it will somehow focus on debuffs, maybes hexes or curses, as its core mechanic.

As for the fourth? No idea. But I can hope against hope for some sort of Mastermind.

Kevin-Éric Bouchard wrote:

You can also make the Eldritch Knight into the ranged specialist. Swap that sword for a bow, and there you go! (Hey, it rhymes!) For some extra weirdness, swap those Fighter levels for Barbarian levels!

For even more weirdness, use bard levels to qualify.

Bard 8, Arcane Archer 2, Eldritch Knight 10

BAB: 18
CL: 17

Conjuration as a prohibited school? Really? No Grease, Glitterdust, Web, Stinking Cloud, Black Tentacles, Solid Fog, Cloudkill, Teleport, Acid Fog, Incendiary Cloud, Maze, Gate or Teleportation Circle? Really?

Again, why did the at will level 1 abilities need to be limited? What were they breaking? Do the changes to Hand of the Apprentice apply to all level 1 school abilities? If so, what impact does that have on level 1 Sorcerer abilities or level 1 Domain abilities? Does Seoni only get her familiar for 3 + Cha modifier rounds per day?

Arbitus wrote:

1. Ray of Enfeeblement was powerful indeed, but it does violate the long held rule of thumb - Ranged touch or Saving throw, very rarely both. Is it at least not subject to Spell Resistance?

2. Universalists got a huge hit with the nerf bat.

• Hand of the Apprentice suddenly being subject to all of the ranged attack modifiers, PLUS having the damage nerfed down by using Strength, PLUS having the times per day limited.
  
• Metamagic Mastery - Three fewer uses per day, and adding the spell level cap so you can't use metamagic on higher level spells.
  
• No more bonus spells.
  
• Decreasing the penalty for specialists by allowing them to memorize opposition school spells (not really prohibited anymore is it?)
  

1. I think I have already covered this. There are a number of iconic spells in the game that require an attack roll and a save (see disintegrate and harm). This is no different for a spell that is very good.

2. They did get scaled back a bit. I think if you check the playtest logs, most folks agreed that they were way too good. They had a lot of versatility and none of the drawbacks of a specialist. To top it off, their powers were better than most of the specialist powers. Now things are a bit more balanced. Once you get a chance to play with all of them, I am confident that you will change your mind.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

I don't think Arbitus was complaining about any of the changes so much as asking what about this preview was supposed to get us excited for Pathfinder and Wizards? It seems the whole preview is taken up discussing balance issues with little to no "check out this cool new ability/mechanic" that we saw in most other previews.

Prempted

I'm not sure if I'm reading this correctly. It seems a little powerful for a first level necromancer to be able to control 8 HD worth of undead. Is this only applicable with the use of certain spells? It's a little ambiguous.

Thanks.

As for the Beta rules; normally Animate Dead allows you to control 4HD of Undead per level. The Necromancy School ability doubles that amount, it does not, however, give you any way to animate undead under your control in the first place. You will not be able to use that ability until you are level 7 and can cast Animate Dead at which point you will be able to control 56 HD of Undead as opposed to 28 HD that a non-specialist can control.

The glass is half empty...

Come on, it's only a save for half, you'll still be lowering the monsters chances to hit and damage output.

The glass is half full...

Now I can pick Necromancy as a prohibited school without the pain of losing The Ray!

It is still a ray, so you have a chance to miss and then the target gets to make a save for 1/2 using what it probably their best bonus against the DC of a level 1 spell. Moreover, because of the way ability bonuses work you already had to apply 2 points of penalty to get one point of affect on the game's mechanics, so this isn't so much a save for 1/2 as it is a save for 1/4. If you get to save then the spell shouldn't be a ray and it should deal strength damage rather than apply a strength penalty so that multiple applications of the spell would stack.

Quote:

He can also enchant his cane as if he had the feats required, so long as he is of the minimum level to get the feat (such as 11th level for a staff using Craft Staff, or 7th level using Forge Ring).

Is it safe to assume that in Ezren's case its Craft Magic Arms and Armor at 5th level since his "cane" is treated as a club?

I also assume this means weapons can still be Arcane Objects ...

The Arcane Bond allows you to enchant the item as if you had the feat required, you don't actually need to take the feat you only have to be high enough level to be able to take the feat.

1) Yay for White Necromancy

2) Yay for Universalists NOT getting bonus spells

3) Yay for Web changes

4) Why the loss of at will abilities? It doesn't break the game either way but it seems unnecessary and is contrary to Paizo's goal of eliminating the 15 minute adventuring day.

5) Meh on changes to Hand of the Apprentice and Metamagic Mastery. The abilities were good but not overpowering in beta and the loss of bonus spells was enough to balance Universalists against Specialists. These nerfs were probably unnecessary.

6) Boo on the changes to Ray of Enfeeblement. Maybe this spell could have used some balancing, but giving it a Fort save is just adding insult to injury. In one stroke this goes from being one of the best level one spells, one of the few that held up in higher level play, to virtually worthless. Note: Balancing a spell does not mean nerf said spell into oblivion.

I noticed you want to make Transmutation a prohibited school in my opinion bad idea. The school of transmutation has way too many utility spells that are too useful to give up. Spells like message, mage hand, Feather fall, Bear endurance, owls wisdom etc...Rope trick fly and haste are just too invaluable to give up. If you are going human conjurer you might want to take Extend Spell. Your conjured creatures will have their times doubled, in addition mage armor will be doubled so wont have to worry every so often about recasting it and expending precious energy. If you have rope trick an extended rope trick can pretty much guarntee a restful night for the party.

Mage Armor doesn't stack with his Conjurer Armor bonus. At level 6 he only gets an extra +1 to AC for Mage Armor, at level 10 he'll get no benefit at all.

As always, play what you want to play. As far as the advice about "don't bother with a longbow" ... well, I've seen and run plenty of fights that open up at 100 yards or so. When that happens and you're out of fireballs, guess what that means?

At a paltry 5 or 6 pounds' encumbrace, a longbow and a quiver of arrows for any one proficient in them is never a bad investment. As you pointed out previously, with a combination of ranged attack feats, spells (true strike, guidance as examples) and your trusty longbow, you retain the option to dictate the range of engagement.

Naturally, your wizard does not want to end up in a shooting match with bona-fide archers. But packing a long ranged attack weapon is rarely a fatal flaw - not packing one far more often is.

Having a longbow isn't a bad idea. Spending feats on using said longbow probably is.

What do you all think of my newest build here?

Dump your Charisma to 8 to get your Dex up to 14 while maintaining your Con at 14.

As a Conjurer of your level you don't really need the longbow. You get a ranged touch attack at level 1 which will be a better option as long as you are within 30'

You should put some skill points into knowledge skills; you will need them to determine the strengths and weaknesses of your foes.

In the end I don't think I would go with point blank shot or precise shot. I understand that you are thinking about your bow and ray spells, but the reality is that will be the least common action you take in combat and it probably isn't worth the two feats you are required to spend. I would suggest Spell Focus: Conjuration and Augment Summoning or Greater Spell Focus: Conjuration instead. As a Save or Suck style caster you want to do everything you can to ensure that your opponents do not pass their saves.

Your AC is calculated incorrectly; as a level 6 Conjurer you have a +3 Armor Bonus to your AC.

I would suggest that you pickup a Headband of Intellect to increase your DCs and pick up an extra spell slot. I would also suggest an amulet of natural armor or a ring of protection to increase your AC - 14 AC, 18 with Shield, is very low for level 6. Also, and others will disagree with me, don't take the wand of magic missiles. 1d4+1 is far less than the 1d6 +3 you get from your level 1 ability and again damage is not going to be your primary role. Your job is to take enemies out of the fight, let the non-casters stack up the damage dice.

You also want to think about your bonus spells. I would suggest Grease at level 1, Glitterdust or Web at level 2, and Stinking Cloud at level 3.

Argothe wrote:

In all seriousness I would suggest something other than an Evoker; in my opinion Evocation and Enchantment are the weakest schools. Direct Damage magic doesn't keep pace with the damage output capabilities of non-casters and in general Save or Suck is far more effective. For a good aligned character I would play a Conjurer and for a neutral aligned character I would play a Necromancer.

Cross-bow, if you stick with Evoker you won't need the cross-bow, you get an unlimited use ranged touch attack at level 1. Conjuration, Transmutation and Universal also get ranged attack options at level 1.

As for feats, if you are going to focus on rays you should go with:

Point Blank Shot
Precise Shot
Combat Casting

If you are going to play any other sort of caster you should go with:

Improved Initiative
Combat Casting
Spell Focus

In either case you get a bonus feat at 5th level that must be a metamagic or item creation feat. I would go with Craft Wand, Craft Wondrous Item or Craft Magic Arms and Armor; I am not a fan of the metamagic feats, I would only suggest them if you end up as a universalist.

So, for a neutral good aligned character, you would suggest I go with School Focus Conjuration, Argothe?

That is what I would play; conjuration has a lot of great battlefield control spells. You should play what looks fun to you. Illusionist is also very interesting if you are the creative type.

In all seriousness I would suggest something other than an Evoker; in my opinion Evocation and Enchantment are the weakest schools. Direct Damage magic doesn't keep pace with the damage output capabilities of non-casters and in general Save or Suck is far more effective. For a good aligned character I would play a Conjurer and for a neutral aligned character I would play a Necromancer.

Cross-bow, if you stick with Evoker you won't need the cross-bow, you get an unlimited use ranged touch attack at level 1. Conjuration, Transmutation and Universal also get ranged attack options at level 1.

As for feats, if you are going to focus on rays you should go with:

Point Blank Shot
Precise Shot
Combat Casting

If you are going to play any other sort of caster you should go with:

Improved Initiative
Combat Casting
Spell Focus

In either case you get a bonus feat at 5th level that must be a metamagic or item creation feat. I would go with Craft Wand, Craft Wondrous Item or Craft Magic Arms and Armor; I am not a fan of the metamagic feats, I would only suggest them if you end up as a universalist.