BeatenPinata's page

Charon Onozuka wrote:

MaxAstro wrote:

I feel like the question Paizo really needs to answer is "what IS a sorcerer?"* How is a divine sorc different from a cleric? How is a primal sorc different from a druid? And more importantly, why are those two sorcs the same class?

I feel like the answer to this should be Bloodlines. Sorcerers really need to double down on the bloodline mechanic and make their powers really exciting and distinct. I don't think there'd be as much of a big issue of overlap with other classes if they had a real class feature beyond spellcasting.

I think I'd like it if sorcerers dropped spells slots entirely and only kept spell points. Then any spell cast by sorcerers would be automatically cast at the highest they can.

If they had Cha +(1/2 lvl) points they would start with a few more spells than their peers, at the cost of only having one pool for spells and powers, and overall about a third of the final spell casts. But, they would always be casting at full power. That would really separate sorcerer's from other casters.

Since sorcerers seem to be the more diverse casters, being able to pick any list at 1st level, how about doubling down on that and let them pick a few spells off of 1) a secondary list or 2) any list.

Something like; On even levels, when a sorcerer adds to his/her spell repertoire, he/she may add that spell from another list.

They'd have one spell of each level from a list other than their own, excluding tenth level spells.

This is part of the reason I'm against the +1/lvl. I don't like that a high level character can wade through a sea of low level zombies and not get touched. Villains using a quantity over quality method goes out the window.

Also, if you don't add your level to everything, it makes the proficiency system mean more. That +1 means more now because the percentage raised is larger.

Joining in just to agree that this is a great idea and would like to see it implemented.

Instead of doubling on a crit, you could add an additional die for every X (maybe 5) over the AC. This may make spikes more frequent but much less severe and easier to predict.

I'm all for removing magic items from the math of the system!

Seconded.

There have been a few discussions I've seen centered around Animal Companions and how they act in battle. I had an idea that I thought could be a good medium between losing an action every turn and the Companion not acting.

Basically, have stances or tactics to issue during a command action.

When issuing a command the player controls the companion as the rules already dictate, and states a tactic for the companion to use until another command action is given.

Examples of tactics:

Guard: The companion stays close to the player (or the target such as an ally/item/etc) and attacks anything that comes within a certain distance. Prioritize keeping enemies out of melee range of target.

Heel: Companion stays within 5 feet of player and awaits another command.

Hide: Companion attempts to find shelter nearby and avoid combat.

Hunt: Companion attacks and harries a specific target.

If the player is knocked unconscious the tactic defaults to guard unless told otherwise beforehand.

A Ranger using a Hunt Target action can issue a Companion tactic as part of the action.

This would need a subsystem to automate all the specific decisions of the companion such as if it would avoid rough terrain and which enemy to single out within range. This frees up the player to use all three of their actions but does not let them directly control the Companion which could be risky as the Companion will only follow its own set of rules which may not be optimal in the current situation.

Any thoughts and opinions are welcome.

Forgember wrote:

Since 3.0 Ranger has been my favorite class, I don't understand why folks want spell less rangers, just play a fighter or rogue if that's your thing.

I would like to see a return of Favored Enemy as a class feature or feat choice. Rangers aren't just folks out hunting game in the woods, they are specialized combatants against creatures and or specific "ancestries" they have trained to fight. Its really part of the meat of what has been such a wonderful class for so many years.

Would like to see an ability to heal their animal companion especially if spell less pans out in the end.

Lastly it would be nice to see extra feat options for bows, crossbows and even single/two handed weapons, two weapon fighting is a cool option but that should not be the focus.

Favored enemy is worst idea for a ranger.

It's metagamey to a fault.

It depends on DM's charity for you to use it or you need to read the adventure in advance so to make some use of it.

Either FE need to have broad effect or it need to be cut out.

Examples of broad effects:

FE dragons; bonuses on reflex and fear, arcana
FE undead; bonuses on religion and resist energy drain/negative energy, fortitude
FE humanoids; bunus languages, bonus deception, society
FE animals/beasts; bonus nature/survival
FE demons; bonus will, religion, occult,

I completely agree with everything said here. I generally don't like favored enemy but these kinds of broad effects are actually pretty cool if they decide to bring it back.

Yeah, I'm in agreement with what's being said here as well. I've always thought of rangers as being really cool and adaptable but most of the feats seem underwhelming.

I theorycrafted a goblin ranger and found myself looking into multiclassing any time there wasn't a feat option around the animal companion.

Having something useful to use a reaction on would be nice. One requires your target to be hunting you and the other is later levels and has a prerequisite.

Leaning into snares I think would be a fun magicless route. Combat deployment of them and upgrades to make them 4X4 or a line of 4 squares would be very useful. Maybe jury-rig one on the end of an arrow?

Also, while I'm fine with rangers being magicless, a way to heal your companion would be nice. They're supposed to be in the thick of it with you and I'd be worried to have to replace a companion a few times at lower levels. Though, I haven't played it yet.

Eigengrau wrote:

My main attack schtick is casting Shillelagh on my Great Club. And using the Work Together Bear benefit of 1d8 slashing damage from the bear getting 2d10 Shillelagh and 1d8 slashing per hit. Next comes in Savage Slice to grant me another attack doing 3d10 Shillelagh and 1d8 slashing, this routine can last for about a minute.

Is this a loose interpretation of Savage Slice where the Work Together Bear Benefit makes your Weapon strike Slashing? I took it as the 1d8 was additional damage but not the strike itself, which is still blunt. Pretty sure Savage Slice has that specific requirement to prevent any use with Shillelagh.

Also really curious to where it states that you and your pet share the same multi-attack penalty.

Multiple Attack Penalty applies to a Mount during mounted combat. Page 315. That must be what confused me.

Hi all,

Juste want to know if i'm right...

"Sword The target is made off-balance by your attack, becoming
flat-footed for 1 round."

My understanding is the target is now flat-footed for the rest of the round (I can try to hit it again with my remaining action if i have some) then as soon i get to act the next round he is no longer flat-footed.

Thank!

Yes, I believe that is how it works. It seems to mostly be for helping teammates but can also help you if you have any attacks left.

Quote:

You want to keep a Cover Tracks mechanic in the game? Great. Just give Ranger's something else that's actually useful more than once a decade in real time.

I think your mistake was not starting the thread with this, which I agree with emphatically.

I agree as well. If it was a feat I'd never bother taking it. If it was possible to cover tracks for the whole party and it resulted in a +1 to survival or stealth, I'd be excited to take it though. Even if the bonus was just for the rest of the party and not for me. And it still fits, as the ranger already has a number of feats designed to help out other party members.

Kodyboy wrote:

Mergy wrote:

Other characters are going to have 3 actions total. Let's stick close to that number so everyone has a chance to shine.

If so the animal companion then needs to be far better than it is.

Is this based on playtesting or theory crafting?

I've created (NOT yet played) a druid with bear companion. It looks like together they'll be doing LOTS of damage. The bear is fairly fragile but that is what heal animal is for :-).

Sure, as a practical matter once they're actually IN combat they're likely to only get 1 attack each (my druid will ready his shield, command the bear, and whack. The bear will Work Together and whack). But that is 2 attacks at no penalty, one of which does an extra dice of damage.

Its all theory crafting at this point but that looks QUITE adequate to me.

With spells etc as gravy on top :-) :-)

A companion cant attack and use work together on the same turn.

Rangers don't have heal animal.

I'm pretty okay with losing an action to gain two for a companion. Trading an action to let a companion get into flanking position AND get an attack seems like a good trade, even if it doesn't do quite as much damage as you would. The ones without a dex boost are pretty vulnerable early on due to low AC but that should even out as they grow.

The skills seem off to me though. I understand certain species being better at certain things, but they're wild animals. They should all be able to survive in the wild. And since when are wolves not stealthy? Maybe just pick a skill for each that they are expert in instead of just trained.

BeatenPinata wrote:

Also, does a level one wolf companion have 7hp and 13ac? This seems frighteningly fragile for something that is supposed to fight with me. I thought maybe I was supposed to add my class hp as well?

Quote:

Hit Points

Your animal companion has ancestry Hit Points from its type, plus a number of Hit Points for each of your levels equal to 6 plus its Constitution modifier.

The wolf starts with 6 and then gets 6 for a level 1 PC= 12. I think there is some info missing. The entry for the wolf says "Abilities: Dex,Con" I'm under the impression that this means the animal gets +2 Dex/Con boost to start. If not, I don't know why that entry is there.

The Armor Class would be +1 as the animal is only Trained in unarmored defense so a total of 11. If there is an AC boost, it goes up to 12, and goes up +1 with every level.

Thank you! I missed that.

I got the AC by adding Trained Proficiency with what I thought the Dex mod would be.

Do you think the Dex/Con boost is to the ability score or the ability modifier? The base stats are listed as modifiers so I’d be inclined to say the latter.

I was building a Goblin Ranger with a plan to ride a wolf as a mount and either snipe from its back or eventually ride up and get flanking bonuses at later levels.

The ranger Animal Companion not getting the free one action at later levels slows this down some but trading an action for the 40ft movement of the wolf isn't too bad of a trade.

This seems pretty doable, though repetitive. No unique and cool feats to make use of, especially if you want to take the companion feats.

Also, does a level one wolf companion have 7hp and 13ac? This seems frighteningly fragile for something that is supposed to fight with me. I thought maybe I was supposed to add my class hp as well?